(fas T73 5^ Book _H_3 , /9/0 cu American Jlfetorical Series! GENERAL EDITOR CHARLES H. HASKINS Profesior of History in Harvard University t EUROPE SINCE 1815 BY CHARLES DOWNER HAZEN WITH FOURTEEN COLORED MAPS NEW YORK HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY COPYKIOHT, 1910, BY HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY THE QUINN A BOOEN CO. PRESS KAHWAT N. J PREFACE The purpose of this book is the presentation of the history of Europe since the downfall of Napoleon. Needless to say, only the broader lines of the evolution of so crowded a cen- tury can be traced in a single volume. I have, moreover, omitted many subjects, frequently described, in order to give a fuller treatment to those which, in my opinion, are more important. I have endeavored to explain the internal development of the various nations, and their external rela- tions in so far as these have teen vital or deeply formative. I have also attempted to preserve a reasonable balance be- tween the different periods of the century and to avoid the danger of over-emphasis. The great tendencies of the century, the transference of power from oligarchies to democracies, the building up of nations like Germany and Italy and the Balkan states which was the product of long trains of causes, of sharp, decisive events, and of the potent activity of commanding person- alities, the gradual expansion of Europe and its insistent and growing pressure upon the world outside, shown in so many ways and so strikingly in this age of imperialism and world-politics, the increasing consciousness in our day of the urgency of economic and social problems, all these and other tendencies will, I trust, emerge from the following pages, with clearness and in just proportion. The problem of arranging material covering so many dif- ferent countries and presenting such varieties of circumstance and condition is one of the greatest difficulty. It arises from the fact that Europe is only a geographical expression. The author is not writing the history of a single people but of a dozen different peoples, which, having much in common, are v vi PREFACE nevertheless very dissimilar in character] in problems) in stages of development, and in mental outlook. If he adopts the chronological order (and events certainly occurred in chronological sequence)) it he attempts to keep the histories of a dozen different countries moving along together as they did in fact) lie must pass continually from one to the other and bis narrative inevitably becomes jerky, spasmodic, and confused. If on the other hand he takes each nation in turn, recounting its history from starting point to point ol conclusion, he i^;i ins the great advantage o( continuity) which begets understanding) but lie writes a dozen histories, not one. He therefore compromises, perforce) with his intractable problem ami works out a method of presentation of whose vulnerability he is probably quite as acutely conscious as any reader could be. My method has been to bring down more or less together the histories of those countries whieh have so intimately and significantly interacted upon each other) Austria, Prussia, France, and Italy, that the evolution of one cannot be, even approximately, understood apart from a knowledge of the current evolution of the others. I then return to my starting point, 1815, ami trace the histories of England, Russia, Turkey and the lesser states separately, gaining the advantage of being able to show their continuous development. 1 hope that this method has at least the merit of rendering clearness of exposition possible. My narrative is based to some extent upon an examination of the sources, although, considering the vast extent of the original material available, this has been necessarily com- paratively limited. It is based chiefly, as probably any Synthetic work covering so large a field must be, on the elaborate general histories of different periods or countries, on biographies, and on the special monographic literature. These are indicated in the bibliography at the end of the volume which 1 have attempted to make critical and descrip- tive rather than extensive. It has been impossible for me to employ footnotes freely and consequently 1 am restricted to PREFACE vii a general recognition of my great and constant indebtedness fo the authorities used, a recognition winch I wish to make as explicil and as grateful as it must be brief and comprehensive* C. D. H. NOKT ; r A M 9T0 W , M ASHA C I 1 r.'SKTTH, December Sl f 1909. CONTENTS CHAPTER I PAGE THE RECONSTRUCTION OK EUROPE The Overthrow of Napoleon -Tin- Great Coalition— The Prohlem of the Government of Prance Treaty of Paris- Congress of Vienna — 'Hie Great Powers — The Division of the Spoils — Prin- ciple of Legitimacy Demands of Russia— Demands of Prussia — The Pate of Poland and Saxony — Russian Acquisitions — Austrian Acquisitions- English Acquisitions — The Future of Italy — Italy a " Geographical Expression " — Criticism of the Congress — The Indignation of the Germans — Defiance of the Principle of Nationality Denunciation of the Slave Trade — The "Hundred Days" Second Treaty of Paris — The Holy Alli- ance — The Allies Promise Aid to Each Other — Unusual Charac- ter of the Alliance— Quadruple Alliance Precautions Against Prance — The Concert of Powers Quadruple Alliance and Met- ternich— Alexander I— Francis I of Austria — Metternich — His Diplomatic Skill- His Self-esteem — His Historical Importance — Doctrine of Immobility 1 CHAPTER II REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY Lack of Unity in the Austrian Empire Racial Differences — Not a German Empire Policy of Krancis I and Metternich — Austria a Land of the Old Regime — Local Government — The Police .System — The System of Espionage — Application of the Met- ternich System in Other Countries — Germany a Loose Confedera- tion-Varieties of States — The Diet — Its Powers not Defined — Germany not a Nation The International Character of the Con- federation Dissatisfaction of the Germans with This System — Why the Problem of German Unity was so Difficult — 'Hie States- right Peeling Dualism the Outcome of German Evolution — The Demand for Constitutional Government Met ternich's Suc- cessful Opposition — Various Forms of Government in the Dif- ferent German States — Popular Sovereignty Nowhere Recog- nized Constitutions Granted in Certain States The King of Prussia Becomes Reactionary Indignation of the Liberals — Ferment in the Universities — The Warthurg Eestival — The Mur- der of Kotzebue — The Holy Alliance Converted into an Engine of Oppression — The Carlsbad Decrees — Provision Concerning Constitutional Government — Control of the Universities — Pro- hibition of Student Societies — The Censorship of the Press — Reaction the Order of the Day in Germany — The Persecution of Liberals— Prussia a Docile Follower of Austria .... 23 x CONTENTS CHAPTER III PAGE REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY Spain — Spanish Constitution of 1812 — Ferdinand VII, Abolition of the Constitution — Persecution of Liberals — Inefficiency of the Government — Disintegration of the Spanish Empire — Neglect of the Army and the Navy— Revolution of 1820-1823— Italy— Napoleon on Italian Unity — Significance of Napoleon's Activity in Italy — The Awakening of Italy — The Decision of the Congress of Vienna — The Ten Italian States — The Dominance of Austria — The Lombardo- Venetian Kingdom — The Kingdom of Sardinia — The States of the Church — The Kingdom of the Two Sicilies — Uni- versal Reaction — The Carbonari — The Revolution of 1820 in Naples — The Powers Prepare to Suppress These Revolutions — The Doctrine of the Right of Intervention — The Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle, 1818— The Congress of Troppau, 1820— The Congress of Laibach, 1821 — The Revolution in Piedmont — Reasons for the Failure of the Movements of 1820 — The Congress of Verona, 1822 — Reaction in Spain — The Triumph of the Holy Alliance — The Monroe Doctrine — The " Metternich System " Checked 45 CHAPTER IV FRANCE UNDER THE RESTORATION The Profound Effects of the French Revolution — The Restoration of the Bourbons not a Restoration of the Old Regime — The Constitutional Charter— The Form of Government — The Re- stricted Suffrage — Provisions Concerning Civil Rights — Recog- nition of the Work of the Revolution — Louis XVIII — The Diffi- culties of His Situation — The Ultras — The Center Parties — The White Terror— Louis XVIII Checks the Ultras— A Period of Moderate Liberalism — The Liberation of the Territory — Re- organization of the Army — The Electoral System — The Press Law of 1819 — Activity of the Ultras — Election of Gregoire — Murder of the Duke of Berry— Electoral Law of 1820— The Double Vote — The Censorship Restored — French Invasion of Spain — Triumph of the Ultras — Death of Louis XVIII — Charles X — Policy of the New King — The Nobles Indemnified for Property Confiscated During the Revolution — Method of Paying the Indemnity — The Law Against Sacrilege — Clerical Reaction — Attempt to Re-establish the Principle of Primogeniture — Attempt to Destroy the Freedom of the Press — Disbandment of the National Guard — Attempt to Stamp Out the Opposition in Parliament — The Martignac Ministry — The Polignac Ministry — Widespread Opposition to the Ministry — Conflict Between Charles X and the Chamber of Deputies — The Ordinances of July — Charles X's Interpretation of the Charter — The King's Mistaken Judgment — The Opposition of the Liberal Editors of Paris— The July Revolution — The Character of the Fighting — The Ordinances Withdrawn — The Candidacy of Louis Philippe — Abdication of Charles X — Louis Philippe King — The End of the Restoration 66 CONTENTS xi CHAPTER V TAGE REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE Wide-spread Influence of the July Revolution — Powerlessness of the Holy Alliance — The Congress of Vienna and the Kingdom of the Netherlands — A Union of Two Fundamentally Dissimilar Peoples — The Spirit of Nationality Awakened Among the Bel- gians — Difficulties in the Drafting of the Constitution — Friction Between the Belgians and the Dutch — The Influence of the July Revolution — The Belgians Declare Their Independence — Inter- vention of the Holy Allies Prevented by Events in Poland — Recognition of the Kingdom of Belgium — The Restoration of the Kingdom of Poland in 1815 — Alexander I Grants a Constitu- tion to Poland — Friction Between the Poles and the Russians — Influence of the July Revolution — The Polish Expectation of Foreign Aid Disappointed — The Failure of the Insurrection — Italy After the Revolutions of 1820 — Revolutionary Movements in 1831 — The Italians Receive No Help from France — Austrian Intervention — The Results of the Insurrections — Revolution in Germany — New Measures of Repression — Metternich Supreme in Germany 100 CHAPTER VI THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE The Career of Louis Philippe — His Liberalism — His Legal Title to the Throne — The Constitution Revised — The Franchise Lowered — The Character of the July Monarchy — Insecurity of the New Regime — A Period of Storm and Stress — The Progressive Party — The Conservative Party — Popular Unrest — Casimir- Pe>ier and the Policy of the Conservatives— Foreign Policy — Op- position Parties — The Legitimists — The Duchess of Berry — Re- publican Insurrections — Vigorous Measures of the Government — The Prosecution of Journalists — Attempts upon the Life of Louis Philippe — The September Laws, 1835— The Press Law — The Bonapartists — Lfluis Philippe and the Napoleonic Legend — Louis Napoleon Bonaparte — The Second Funeral of Napoleon I — The Boulogne Fiasco — Ministerial Instability — Rivalry of Thiers and Guizot — Louis Philippe Intends to Rule — Personal Government — Thiers and the Eastern Question — Resignation of Thiers— Guizot, Prime Minister — Guizot's Political Principles — The Go% r ernment Scrupulously Parliamentary — How the Gov- ernment Obtained Its Majorities — The Manipulation of the Voters — The Manipulation of the Deputies — The Servility of Parliament — Demand for Electoral and Parliamentary Re- form — Rigid Opposition of the Guizot Ministry — Rise of Radi- calism — Economic Distress — Introduction of the Factory System — Condition of the Working Classes — Growth of Socialism — Louis Blanc — Wide-spread Opposition to the Policy of the Gov- ernment — Fusion of the Opposing Parties — The " Reform Banquets " — Emergence of Lamartine — The People Support the Demand for Reform — The Revolution of February, 1848 — Resignation of Guizot — The Overthrow of Louis Philippe — The Rise of the Second Republic 114 xii CONTENTS CHAPTER VII PAGE CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN TWO REVOLUTIONS The February Revolution a Signal for Other Revolutions — The General Character of the Period between 1830 and 1848 — Evolu- tion of Prussia — Great Intellectual Activity — The Achievement of Prussian Unity Imperative — Revision of the System of Tax- ation—The Question of the Tariff— The Zollverein— The Ad- vantages of the Zollverein — Death of Frederick William III — Frederick William IV — The Demand for a Parliament — The Let- ter Patent of February 3, 1847 — Popular Dissatisfaction — Con- flict Between Frederick William IV and the United Landtag — Austria not a Homogeneous State — Political Stagnation — The In- dustrial Revolution — The Development of Nationalities Within the Empire — Bohemia — Hungary — The Hungarian Constitution — The Importance of the Nobility — The Prevalence of Feudalism — Szechenyi and Reform— The Policy of the Diet — The Language Question — Rise of a Radical Party — Louis Kossuth — The De- mands of the Hungarians in 1847 — Italy After 1831 — Importance of a Group of Writers — Joseph Mazzini — His Intense Patriotism — His Imprisonment — Founder of " Young Italy " — The Methods of the Society — The Aims of the Society — Unity, a Practicable Ideal — Mazzini as a Conspirator — Gioberti — D'Azeglio — Balbo — The Risorgimento— Pius IX, Pope, 1846-1878— Charles Albert, King of Piedmont — Italy on the Brink of Revolution . . . 145 CHAPTER VIII CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT The Great Mid-century Uprising — Vienna the Storm-center — The Decisive Intervention of Hungary — The Overthrow of Metter- nich — The March Laws — Hungary Practically Independent — Revolution in Bohemia — Revolution in the Austrian Provinces — Revolution in Lombardy-Venetia — Italy renounces Austrian Control — Revolution in Germany — The National Movement — The Parliament of Frankfort — The March Revolutions Everywhere Triumphant— Austria Begins the Work of Restoration — Bohemia Conquered — Italy Partially Conquered — Civil Dissension Within Hungary — The Croatians Rise Against the Magyars — Austria Exploits the Situation — Radical Party in Hungary Seizes Control — Abdication of the Emperor of Austria — Accession of Francis Joseph I — Hungary Declares Francis Joseph a Usurper — War Between Aurtria and Hungary — Hungarian Declaration of In- dependence, April 14, 1849 — Hungary Conquered — The Conquest of Italy Completed — Abdication of Charles Albert — Overthrow of the Roman Republic — Fall of Venice — The Parliament of Frankfort — Leadership in Germany Offered to the King of Prussia — Rejection of the Work of the Frankfort Parliament — The " Humiliation of Olmiitz " — Results of the Revolutions of 1848 169 CHAPTER IX THE SECOND REPUBLIC AND THE FOUNDING OF THE SECOND EMPIRE The French Revolution of 1848— Stages in the History of the Second Republic — Two Elements in the Provisional Government — CONTENTS xiii PAGE The Republicans — The Socialists — Louis Blanc's Theories — Achievements of the Provisional Government — The Question of the Flag — The Labor Commission — Its Impotence — The National Workshops — Their Rapid Growth — The National Constituent As- sembly — The Assembly Hostile to the Socialists — Abolition of the National Workshops — The June Days — A Military Dictator- ship — Growing Opposition to the Republic — An Unpopular Fi- nancial Measure — The Framing of the Constitution — The Powers of the Executive — Discussion Concerning the Presidency — The President to be Chosen by Universal Suffrage — The Voters to be Untrammeled in Their Choice — Louis Napoleon Bonaparte's Opportunity — His Previous Career — A Member of the Constit- uent Assembly — A Candidate for the Presidency — Causes of His Triumph — Louis Napoleon Elected President, Dec. 10, 1848 — The Legislative Assembly — President and Assembly Opposed to the Constitution — They Combine to Crush the Republicans — The Franchise Law of 1850 — President Demands the Revision of the Constitution— The Coup d'Etat— Events of December 2d— The "Massacre of the Boulevards" — The Plebiscite — Napoleon III, Emperor, Dec. 2, 1852 — The Programme of the New Emperor — The Political Institutions of the Empire — Parliament Carefully Muffled — Its Legislative Power Limited — The Senate — The Coun- cil of State— The Emperor— The Press Shackled— The Empire Both Repressive and Progressive — The Emperor's Activities — Economic Development — Paris Beautified — General Prosperity — The Congress of Paris, 1856 — The Emperor's Policy of Peace —The Italian War of 1859 187 CHAPTER X CAVOUR AND THE CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Reaction in Italy After 1848 — Victor Emmanuel II — Piedmont a Constitutional State — Count Cavour — His Interest in Political and Economic Questions — Becomes an Editor — Cavour Prime Minister, 1852 — Policy of Economic Development — Cavour Seeks a Military Ally — Why Piedmont Participated in the Crimean War— Cavour at the Congress of Paris — Discussion of the Italian Question — Moral Victory for Cavour — Army Strengthened — Founding of the National Society — Cavour and Napoleon — The Interview of Plombieres — A Conspiracy to Bring About a War — The Conditions Agreed upon — Difficulties and Dangers of Cavour's Position — Cavour's Diplomacy — The Austro-Sardinian War — The Campaign of 1859 — The Preliminaries of Villafranca — Reasons for Napoleon's Action — Austria Eager for Peace — Resignation of Cavour — Piedmont Acquires Lombardy — Central Italy — Impossibility of Restoring the Old Order — England's Par- ticipation in Affairs — Cavour Returns to Office — Annexations to Piedmont — Cession of Savoy and Nice by the Treaty of Turin, March 24, 1860— Effect upon Napoleon III— The Sicilian Insur- rection — Giuseppe Garibaldi — The Defense of Rome — Leader of " The Hunters of the Alps " — Determines to go to Sicily— Cavour's Dilemma — The Expedition of " The Thousand " — Conquest of the Kingdom of Naples — Garibaldi Plans to Attack Rome — Inter- xiv CONTENTS PAGE vention of Piedmont — The Annexation of the Kingdom of Naples and of Umbria and the Marches — Siege of Gaeta — The Kingdom of Italy Proclaimed — The Kingdom Still Incomplete — The Question of Rome — Death of Cavour 215 CHAPTER XI BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY Reaction in Germany After 1819 — Prussia a Constitutional hut not a Parliamentary State — The Police System — Control of the Press — The Privileged Class — Economic Transformation— Indus- trial Development — Rise of a Wealthy Middle Class — Intellec- tual Activity — Influence of Events in Italy upon German Thought — The National Union — William I — The Prussian Army — The Obligatory Service not Enforced — Army Reform — Op- position of the Chamber— Determination of William I — Otto von Bismarck-Schonhausen — Bismarck's Previous Career — Bismarck's Political Opinions — His Attitude Toward Parliamentary Institu- tions — His Hatred of Democracy — Bismarck in the Diet — The Period of Conflict — Army Reform Carried Through — " Blood and Iron" Policy — Prussia's Three Wars — The Schleswig- Holstein Question — Action of Denmark Concerning Schleswig — Bismarck's Handling of the Question — Prussia and Austria at War with Denmark— Treaty of Vienna, Oct. 1864— The Future of the Duchies — Friction Between Prussia and Aus- tria — Prussia Acquires Laueriburg by Purchase — The Meeting at Biarritz— Treaty of Alliance with Italy— Bismarck Pre- pares for a War with Austria — Bismarck Proposes a Reform of the Confederation — Prussia Withdraws from the Confedera- tion — The Austro-Prussian War — Hellmuth von Moltke — Prussia Conquers North Germany — The Battle of Kdniggratz or Sadowa — Causes of Austria's Defeat — Results of the Austro-Prussian War- Annexations to Prussia — The North German Confedera- tion, 1867-1871 — The Buiulesrath — The Reichstag — Alliance with South German States — Consolidating the New System . . . 240 CHAPTER XII THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE SECOND EMPIRE Disastrous Effect of the Italian War upon Napoleon III — The War Approved only by the Democratic Party — Napoleon's Va- cillation — England Offended — Treaty of Commerce Offends Protectionists — Napoleon Turns to the Liberals — Powers of Par- liament Increased — Revival of Interest in Politics — Rise of a Republican Party —The Mexican Expedition — Napoleon's Pur- poses — Napoleon Overthrows the Mexican Republic — Disastrous Outcome of this Adventure Intervention of the United States — Discomfiture of Napoleon III — Additional Concessions to Liberal- ism — The Right of Interpellation Granted — Dramatic Emergence of Leon Gambetta — Bitter Attacks upon Napoleon III — The Third Party — The Transformation of the Empire Completed — Popular Approval— The Plebiscite of May, 1870— Sudden Col- lapse of the Empire ~72 CONTENTS xv CHAPTER XIII PAGE THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR Napoleon's Unwise Adherence to His Doctrine of Nationalities — The Meeting at Biarritz — Napoleon's Failure to Use His Oppor- tunity in 1866 — The Year 1866 a Turning Point in Modern His- tory — " Revenge for Sadowa " — Failure of Napoleon's Diplo- macy — Bismarck Regards a War with France as Inevitable — The Spanish Candidacy of Leopold of Hohenzollern — The Candidacy Withdrawn — Folly of the Duke of Gramont — The Ems Despatch — The War Party in Paris — France Declares War upon Prussia — South German States Join Prussia — France Isolated — The French Army — The Numerical Inferiority of the French — The Germans Invade France— The Battle of Sedan — The Fall of the Empire — The Government of National Defense — The Fall of Metz— The Siege of Paris — Election of a National Assembly — Thiers Chosen Chief of the Executive— Treaty of Frankfort- Fall of the Temporal Power — Completion of Italian Unification — Completion of German Unification 285 CHAPTER XIV THE GERMAN EMPIRE Growth of National Feeling in Germany Since 1815 — Constitution of the New German Empire — The Emperor — The Bundesrath — The Reichstag — A Confederation of Monarchical States — Reign of Emperor William I — Bismarck's Commanding Position — A Religious Conflict — Causes of the Kulturkampf — Formation of the Center Party — Dogma of Papal Infallibility — The Old Catholics — The Falk Laws — Conflict of Church and State — Bis- marck's Retreat — Financial and Industrial Questions — Adoption of the Policy of Protection — Its Advantage Proved by the His- tory of Other Nations — Germany Should Imitate the United States — The Syster* Gradually Applied — The Growth of Social- ism — Alarm of the Ruling Classes — Attempts upon the Life of the Emperor — Severe Measures Against the Socialists — Their Failure — Continued Growth of the Socialist Party — The Imperial Government Undertakes Social Reform — Various Forms of In- surance Proposed — State Socialism — The Measures Carried — Bis- marck a Pioneer — Not Supported by the Socialists — The Begin- ning of a Colonial Empire — A Result of the Adoption of the Policy of Protection — Energetic Intervention in Africa — The German Colonies — The Triple Alliance — Isolation of France — Austro-German Treaty of 1879 — Entrance of Italy into the Alliance— Death of William I— Accession of William II— The Resignation of Bismarck — The Anti-Socialist Policy Abandoned — Remarkable Expansion of German Industry — Germany a Naval Power — Continued Growth of Socialism — The Social Democratic Party Numerically the Largest — The Demand for Electoral Reform — The Demand for Parliamentary Reform — The Demand for Ministerial Responsibility — The Present Situa- tion 303 xvi CONTENTS CHAPTER XV FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC The National Assembly — Paris and the Assembly Mutually Sus- picious — Versailles Declared the Capital — Distress of the Work- ing Classes — Revolutionary Elements — The Idea of the Commune — The National Guard — The Government of the Commune — The Commune and the National Assembly Clash — The Second Siege of Paris — The " Bloody Week " — The Government's Revenge — France at Peace — The Government of Thiers — The Rivet Law — The Cost of the " Terrible Year " — The Liberation of the Terri- tory — Reform in Local Government — Army Reform — The Ques- tion of the Permanent Form of Government— Thiers and the Republic — The Monarchist Parties — Resignation of Thiers — The Count of Chambord — Establishment of the Septennate — Assembly Reluctant to Frame a Constitution — The Assembly Active Against Republicans — Growth of the Republican Party — The Constitution of 1875— The Senate— The President— The Ministry — France a Parliamentary Republic — Dissolution of the National Assembly — The Republic and the Church — MacMahon's Con- ception of the Presidency — Victory of the Republicans — Resigna- tion of MacMahon — Grew Chosen President — Republican Legis- lation — Creation of a National System of Education — Public Works — Revision of the Constitution — Colonial Policy — Increase of the National Debt — Death of Gambetta — Discontent with the Republic — Boulanger — The Republic Weathers the Crisis — The Dual Alliance — The Dreyfus Case — Dreyfus Degraded and Im- prisoned — Picquart — Zola Attempts to Reopen the Case — Speech of Cavaignac, Minister of War — Court of Cassation Orders a Re- trial of Dreyfus — Dreyfus Again Declared Guilty — Dreyfus Pardoned — Dreyfus Vindicated — Significance of the Case — Formation of the " Bloc " — Question of Church and State — Growth of Religious Orders — The Law of Associations — Reli- gious Orders Forbidden to Engage in Teaching — The Concordat of 1801 — Anti-clerical Legislation — The Clergy in the Dreyfus Affair — The Abrogation of the Concordat — Associations of Wor- ship — Opposition of Pius X — Law of Jan. 2, 1907 — Separa- tion of Church and State — The French Colonial Empire — Algeria — Other African Conquests — Cochin-China — Expansion Under the the Third Republic — Western Africa — Madagascar .... 329 CHAPTER XVI THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Difficulties Confronting the New Kingdom — Piedmont Alone Ac- customed to Constitutional Government — The Constitution — The Question of the Papacy — The Law of Papal Guarantees — The Curia Romana — The " Prisoner of the Vatican" — Death of Vic- tor Emmanuel II — The Educational Problem — Extension of the Suffrage — The Triple Alliance — Francesco Crispi — Ambitious Military and Colonial Policy — The Resultant Distress — Policy of Repression— War with Abyssinia — Assassination of Humbert I — Victor Emmanuel III — Industrial Expansion — Advent of the Age of Electricity — Increase of the Population — Problem of Emigration — Italia Rediviva! 376 CONTENTS xvii CHAPTER XVII PAGE AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 Austria's Punishment of Hungary — Failure of the War in Italy — Francis Joseph Reverses His Policy — Federalism or Centraliza- tion? — Austria Becomes a Constitutional State — Hungary Re- fuses to Co-operate — Reasons for Her Refusal — The Hungarians Assert Their "Historic Rights" — And Demand the Restoration of Their Constitution — A Deadlock — Francis Joseph Yields — The Compromise of 1867 — The Dual Monarchy — The Delega- tions — The Compromise Satisfactory Only to the Dominant Races — Constitution of Austria — Constitution of Hungary — The Dominant Races — Divisive Effect of the Principle of Nationality in Austria-Hungary— Austria Since 1867 — Liberal Legislation — Demands of the Czechs — The Em- peror Prepares to Concede Them — Opposition of Germans and Magyars — Triumph of Dualism — Electoral Reform — The Taaffe Ministry— The Slavs Favored — Growth of Radical Parties — Division Among the Czechs — Electoral Reform — Universal Suffrage— Hungary Since 1867— The Magyars— The Croatians— The Policy of Magyarization — Race Questions — Struggle over the Question of Language — Territorial Gains and Losses . . . 388 CHAPTER XVIII ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 England in 1815— The Industrial Revolution— A New Motive Force —The Steam Engine — The Industrial Primacy of Great Britain — Advantages Derived from the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars— The Renown of Parliament— England a Land of the Old Regime— Commanding Position of the Nobility— The House of Commons— The System of Representation— The County Suffrage —Scotland— The Suffrage in Boroughs— Nomination Boroughs — Rotten Boroughs— Unrepresented Cities— Bribery— The Estab- lished Church— Dissenters— Abuses Within the Church— The People Neglected-4-Adam Smith — Jeremy Bentham — Effect of The French Revolution upon England— Economic Distress After 1815— Lack of Employment— The Demand for Reform— William Cobbett— Parliamentary Reform— Popular Disturbances— Suspen- sion of Habeas Corpus— The Massacre of Peterloo— The Six Acts — Death of George III— The Dawn of an Era of Reform— De- fiance of the Holy Alliance— Economic Reforms— The Penal Code— Reformed by Sir Robert Peel— Religious Inequality— The Religious Disabilities of Dissenters— Repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts— Catholic Disabilities— Catholic Emancipation —Daniel O'Connell— O'Connell Elected to Parliament— Emanci- pation Carried— The Restriction of the Suffrage in Ireland- Tory Opposition to the Reform of Parliament— Influence of the French Revolution of 1830— The Duke of Wellington on Reform —Fall of the Tory Ministry— The First Reform Bill— Provisions —Lord John Russell's Speech— Sir Robert Inglis's Speech— Rep- resentation Never Better— Hunt's Speech— Sir Robert Peel's Criticism— Macaulay on the Bill— Ministry Defeated, Parliament Dissolved— Second Reform Bill— Defeated by the House of Lords xviii CONTENTS PAGE —Third Reform Bill— The Bill Passed— Redistribution of Seats — The County Franchise — The Borough Franchise — Not a Demo- cratic Reform 406 CHAPTER XIX ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO GREAT REFORMS (1832-1867) An Era of Whig Government — Slavery in the Colonies — Abolition of Slavery — Child Labor — Previous Attacks Upon the System — The System Defended— The Factory Act, 1833— The Decay of Local Self-government — The Necessity for Reform — Municipal Governments Notoriously Corrupt — The Reform of Municipal Government — Accession of Queen Victoria — Her Political Edu- cation — Hanover — The Radicals and the Reform Bill — The Radi- cals Agitate for Further Reform — The People's Charter — Char- acter of the Chartist Agitation — The Lack of Able Leadership — The Petition of 1848 — The Significance of the Movement — Eng- land's Policy of Protection — The Corn Laws — Huskisson's Re- forms — Sir Robert Peel's Ministry — The Anti-Corn-Law League — The Arguments for Free Trade — The Irish Famine — Repeal of the Corn Laws- -Remaining Protective Duties Gradually Removed — Labor Legislation— Regulation of Labor in Mines— ^Factory Laws — Morley on the Labor Code — Growth of Trades-Unions — The Growth of Collectivism — Jews Admitted to the House of Commons — Gladstone Chancellor of the Exchequer — Postal Sav- ings Banks — State Insurance — Industrial and Scientific Progress — The Demand for a Wider Suffrage — Effect of the Civil War — Gladstone Introduces a Reform Bill — The Bill Defeated — Re- form Carried by Disraeli — Provisions of the Bill — Redistribution of Seats 439 CHAPTER XX ENGLAND UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI The Great Ministry — William Ewart Gladstone — Entrance into Parliament — Leader of the Liberal Party — Gladstone's First Ministry, 1868-1874 — Dominance of Irish Questions — Ireland a Conquered Country — The Agrarian Question — The Reli- gious Question — The Political Question — Catholic Emancipation — The Repeal Movement — The Irish Famine — Decline of the Population — The Fenian Movement — The Irish Church — The Tithe War — Disestablishment of the Irish Church — System of Land Tenure — The Land Owned by a Few — Tenants-at-will — No Compensation for Improvements — Industry and Thrift Penalized — Misery of the Peasantry — Deeds of Violence —The Ulster System— Land Act of 1870— The Bright Clauses— The Bill Denounced as Revolutionary — The Land Act a Disap- pointment — Its Principles Important — Educational Reform — Church Schools — The System Inadequate — The Question Becomes Urgent — The Forster Education Act of 1870 — Church Schools In- corporated in the System — Board Schools Established — The Ques- tion of Religious Instruction — The Conscience Clause — The Cowper-Temple Amendment — Education Neither Free, nor Com- CONTENTS xix PAGE pulsory, nor Secular — Army Reform — Introduction of Short Service — Abolition of the Purchase System — Civil Service Reform — The Universities Thrown Open — Introduction of the Ballot — Reasons for Secret Voting — Gladstone's Waning Popularity — The Irish University Bill — The Religious Difficulty — General Dissatisfaction with the Bill — Unpopularity of Gladstone's For- eign Policy — The Alabama Award — The Elections of 1874 — The Disraeli Ministry — Imperialism — Importance of the Colonies Emphasized — Purchase of the Suez Canal Shares — The Queen Proclaimed Empress of India — Re-opening of the Eastern Ques- tion — Fall of the Disraeli Ministry — The Second Gladstone Min- istry, 1880-1885— Failure of Land Act of 1870— The Land Act of 1881 — Rents to be Judicially Determined — Denounced as Con- fiscation of Property— The Reform Bill of 1884— The County Franchise Widened — Redistribution of Seats — Single Member Districts — Various Qualifications for Voting 465 CHAPTER XXI ENGLAND SINCE 1886 The First Salisbury Administration— The Home Rule Movement — Charles Stuart Parnell — Adoption of the Policy of Obstruction — Gladstone Unable to Pacify Ireland — The Third Gladstone Ministry — The Home Rulers Hold the Balance of Power — Home Rule or Coercion? — Introduction of the Home Rule Bill — Shall the Irish Sit in Westminster? — Land Purchase Bill — Opposition to the Bills — The Union in Danger ! — English Dislike of the Irish — John Bright's Opposition — Disruption of the Liberal Party — The Bill Defeated— The Conservatives Returned to Power —The Second Salisbury Ministry, 1886-1892— The Policy of Coercion — Land Purchase Act — County Government Reformed — Social Legislation — Increase of the Navy — The Fourth Glad- stone Ministry, 1892-1894— The Second Home Rule Bill— Funda- mental Objections — Bitterness of the Opposition — Passed by the Commons, Defeated by the Lords — Parish Councils Bill — Resig- nation of Gladstone — The Rosebery Ministry — The Conservatives Returned to Power — The Third Salisbury Ministry — War in South Africa — Irish Local Government Act — Death of Queen Victoria— Education Act of 1902— The Abolition of the School Boards — Decline of Illiteracy — The Liberal Party in Power — Old Age Pensions Law — An Irish University 497 CHAPTER XXII THE BRITISH EMPIRE IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY The Expansion of Europe — The Growth of Colonial Empires — Vast Growth of the British Empire Since 1815 — Overthrow of the Mahratta Confederacy — Annexation of the Punjab — The Indian Mutiny — Change in the Government of India — The Vast Popula- tion of India — The Population not Homogeneous — Annexation of Burma and Baluchistan — American Colonies — Upper and Lower Canada — Constitutional Difficulties in Upper Canada — In Lower Canada — The Colonists Desire Self-government — The Rebellion xx CONTENTS PAGE •f is:?7 Lord Durham's Reporl The Executive Irresponsible — Durham Proposes Ministerial Responsibility — Durham Favors Federation Ministerial Responsibility Finally introduced — Founding of Dominion of Canada, 1861 — British North America Aet —The nonunion Parliament Growth of the Dominion — The Canadian Pacific Railway Australia Early Explorations — The Voyages Of Captain Cook A Convict Colony Abandoiuent of this System The Discovery of Cold The Six Australian Colonies Reasons for Their Federation Creation of the Aus- tralian Commonwealth The Federal Parliament New Zealand — Advanced Social Legislation System of Taxation Old Age Pensions Africa England Acquires Cape Colony — Friction with the Boers The Great Trek -Founding of the Transvaal — The Transvaal Annexed to Great Britain Majuba Hill Policy of the Gladstone Administration 'The Pretoria Convention The London Convention The Boers Desire Unqualified Independence — 'The Boers The Citlandcrs 'The Jameson Paid Sir Alfred Milner's Reports The South African War — Victory of the English Annexation of the 'Transvaal and the Orange Free Slate The Union or South Africa, L909 The Par Flung British Empire The Problem of Imperial Federation The Increasing Importance ot' the Question The Difficulties in the Way — The Problem of Government -Commercial Union — Colonial Con- ferences Confederations Within the Empire olS CHAPTER XXIII THE PARTITION OF AFRICA The Period of Discovery Situation In 1815 'The French Conquest Of Algeria The Sources of the Nile David Livingstone Stanley Stanley's Explorations of the Congo Africa Appropriated by Europe The Congo Free State Its International Origin — The Berlin Conference Leopold II and the Congo Free State — Criticism of Leopold's Administration The Congo Free State Made a Colony of Belgium— Egypt Mehemel Ali Founds a Semi-royal House Ismail and the Rapid Growth of the Egyp- tian Debt Intervention of England and France Revolt of Arabi Pasha English Expedition Crushes the Insurrec- tion England Assumes the Position of "Adviser" — The English "Occupation" loss of the Soudan— Death of Gordon — Recovery of the Soudan 550 CHAPTER XX1Y SPAIN AND PORTUGAL SINCE 1893 Spain Revenge of Ferdinand VII after IS. 1 :? -" Subversive " Cries — 1 oss of the American Colonies The Question of the Succession — The Pragmatic Sanction Isabella Proclaimed Queen — The Carlist War The Royal Statute. 1834 Disturbed Political Life The Constitution of 1831 Isabella II Declared of Age— The Mexican Expedition The Overthrow of Isabella II — The Regency of Marshal Serrano Amadeo of Savoy Chosen King — Abdication of Amadeo The Establishment of the Republic — The CONTENTS xxi Causes of Us PaU Alfonso \ll Recognized as King — The Constitution of 1878 Death of Alfonso XI] The Spanish- American War Loss of Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippines — Alfonso XIII Assumes Power Portugal -Flight of the Royal Family to Brazil, 1807 — Portuguese Revolution of 1820 Loss of Brazil — Donna Maria da Gloria — Death of Maria — Recent Events in Portugal 564 CHAPTER XXV HOLLAND AND BELGIUM SINCE 1830 Holland— The Fundamental Law of 1815— The Constitution of 1848 —Extension of the Franchise The Dutch Colonics Belgium — The Reign of Leopold I — The Reign of Ixopold il — The Suf- frage—Education 579 CHAPTER XXVI SWITZERLAND The Constitution of 1815— The Importance of the Cantons — The " Bra of Regeneration "-The Sondcrbund — The Constitution of 1848 — The Federal Government Lowers of the Federal and Cantonal Government The Chief Significance of Switzerland — Important Contributions to Democratic Government — The Landesgemeindc Cantons The Referendum — The Initiative — Spread of the Referendum and the Initiative — Proportional Representation — The Population of Switzerland — The Neu- trality of Switzerland 584 CHAPTER XXVII Till: SCANDINAVIAN STATES Denmark Loses Norway— Consultative Assemblies — Constitution Granted Schleswig-^I Iolstein Treaty of Vienna Revision of the Constitution— Growth of Radicalism — Denmark's Colonies — Sweden and Norway — The Constitution of Kidsvold Sweden and Norway Separate Nations Under the Same King — The Reign of Charles XIII — The Constitution of 1866 — Friction Between Sweden and Norway — Abolition of Norwegian Nobility — Dis- solution of the Union — Treaty of Carlstad — Death of Oscar II — Suffrage in Norway 592 CHAPTER XXVIII THE DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND THE RISF OF THE BALKAN STATES Decay of the Ottoman Empire Turkey in Process of Dismember- ment — The Ruling class The Eastern Question — Treatment of Subject Peoples- The Revoll of the Servians The Condition of the Greeks — Intellectual Revival — The Ilctairia Philike — The Greek War of Independence — The Ferocity of the Conflict — Fac- ai CONTENTS TAOB tional Quarrels Among the Greeks Foreign intervention- Why England Intervened Why Russia intervened Why Prance Intervened Treaty of London The Battle of Navarino— War Between Russia and Turkey (.'nation of the Kingdom of Greece The Principalities Ambitions of Nicholas l The Holy Places War Between Russia and Turkey Coalition Against Russia — Piedmont Joins the Coalition Invasion of the Crimea The Siege of Sebastopol Fall of Sebastopol Treaty of Paris - Turkey Admitted to the European Concert Results of the Crimean War Moldavia-Wallachia The Roumanians and the Crimean War The Union of the Principalities — Couza — Charles I of Roumania Reopening of the Eastern Question — The Insurrection of rlersegovina Accession of Abdul Hamid II The Bulgarian Atrocities Gladstone's Denunciation of the Turks Servia and Montenegro Declare War Russia Declares War The Siege of Plevna Treaty of San Stefano Opposition to the Treaty England Demands its Revision— The Congress of Berlin Independence of Montenegro, Servia, and Roumania — Union of the Two Bulgarias Macedonia Bulgaria since 1S7S — Alexander of Battenberg Friction Between the Bulgarians and the Russians Breach of the Treaty of Berlin Servia Attacks Bulgaria^ Nov. 1885 Abdication of Prince Alexander— Ferdi- nand of Saxe-Coburg Dictatorship of Stambuloff — Murder of Stambuloff Roumania and Servia since isis — Roumania Pro- claimed a Kingdom Agrarian Disturbances Greece since 1833 — Reign of Otto l Overthrow of Otto — The Ionian Islands — Annexation of Thessaly Aspirations of the Balkan States — Revolution in Turkey The Young Turks — Revolution of July. 1908 — Restoration of the Constitution— Apparent Unanimity of this Movement- A Modernized Turkey— Attitude of Foreign Powers Austria-Hungary Annexes Bosnia and Herzegovina — Bulgaria Declares Her Independence 'The Powers Do Not Prevent 'These Breaches Of the Berlin Treaty — Servia — Opening of the 'Turkish Parliament The Counter-revolution of April, 1900— The Young Turks Regain Control— Deposition of Abdul Hamid II- Accession of Mohammed V 601 CH \PTF.K XXIX RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN The Reign of Alexander 1 Russian Conquests 'The Nobility — The Peasantry \le\amler I 'The Corruption of the Government- Poland Alexander's Progressive Domestic Policy— Liberal For- eign Policy Alexander Becomes Reactionary Friction with the Poles Heath of Alexander 1 The Reign of Nicholas I — Sys- tematic Repression The Poliee System— The Censorship — Safe- guards Against the Ideas of Western Europe — A Brilliant Native Literature Religious Persecution The Evil of Serfdom — The Foreign Policy of Nicholas 1 The Crimean War — The Humiliation of Russia 'The Reign of Alexander II — Prevailing System of land Tenure 'The Mir 'The Sett's Serfdom Con- demned— The Crown Sert's The Edict of Emancipation— The Land Problem Division of the Land State Aid Disappoint- ment of the Peasantry 'The Land Question not Solved — Establishment of the Zemstvos— Duties of the Zemstvos — Work CONTENTS xxiii PAGE Accomplished by the Zemstvos- Reform of the Judicial System Educational Reform- -End of the Era of Reform — The Polish Insurrection of L808 -The Aims of the Poles — The Poles Receive no Foreign Aid — The Deep-seated Divisions of the Poles— Russia Resolves fo (rush the Polish Nobility — A Policy of R iissifie.it ion— Effect of Polish Insurrection upon Alex- ander II — Alexander's Policy Becomes Retrogressive — Wide- spread Disillusionment — Rise of Nihilism — Persecution of the Nihilists — Bakouninc — Nihilist Propaganda — A Policy of Terror- ism — Activity of the Police — Attempts upon the Emperor's Eife — Alexander II and Loris Melikoff — Assassination of Alex- ander II — The Reign of Alexander III — Rigorous Policy of Re- action — Influence of Pohyedonostseff — Opposition to the Ideas of Western Europe — The Terrorists Hunted Down — Persecution of the Jews — Great Jewish Emigration— Progressive Features of the Reign of Alexander III — The Industrial Revolution — Sergius de Witte, Minister of Finance— Witte's Industrial Policy — Ex- tensive Railway Construction — Rise of Labor Problems — Rise of a Rich Bourgeoisie — The System of Privilege Menaced — Acces- sion of Nicholas II — Continuance of Autocratic Government — Increasing Disaffection — Wretched Condition of the Peasantry — Persecution of the " Intellectuals " — Attack upon the Finns — Abrogation of the Finnish Constitution — Despair of the Finns — Rise of the Far Eastern Question 645 CHAPTER XXX THE FAR EAST England, France, and Russia, in Asia — Russian Expansion — Russia Seeks Access to the Sea — Conquest of Turkestan — China — The Civilization of China — The Government of China — Isolation of China — The Opium War — The Treaty Ports — Entrance of Various Powers into Commercial Relations — Treaties of Tien- tsin — Russia Annexes the Maritime Province — Japan — Descrip- tion of Japan — Japanese Civilization — The Mikado — The Shogun — The Daimios, 'the Samurai — Advent of Europeans — Japan Adopts a Policy of Isolation— Commodore Perry — Policy of Iso- lation Breaks Down — Overthrow of the Shogunate — The Mikado Recovers Power — Rapid Transformation of Japan — Abolition of the Old Regime — Adoption of European Institutions — Reform in Education — Japan Becomes a Constitutional State — Wars with China and Russia — Cause of the War with China — Treaty of Shimonoseki — Intervention of Russia, France, and Germany — Japan Relinquishes Port Arthur — Russian Entrance into Man- churia — German Aggression — Russia Secures Port Arthur — The "Boxer" Movement — Rescue of the Legations — Japan Indignant and Apprehensive — Russian Activity in Manchuria — Diplomatic Negotiations Concerning Manchuria — The Anglo-Japanese Treaty of 1902 — Japan Makes War upon Russia — Russo-Japanese War, 1904-1905— Siege of Port Arthur— Mukden Captured by the Japanese — Destruction of the Russian Fleet, May 27th, 1905 — The Treaty of Portsmouth — Reaction of These Events upon China — China in Process of Transformation — China Promised a Constitution 681 xxiv CONTENTS CHAPTER XXXI PAGE RUSSIA SINCE THE AVAR WITH JAPAN Unpopularity in Russia of the War with Japan — Open Expression of the Popular Discontent — Von Plehve*s Iron Regime — Assassi- nation of Von Plehve — A Russian Defense of Assassination — Nicholas II Enters upon a More Liberal Path— Demands of the Liberals -Not Granted by the Tsar- Widespread Disorder — The Tsar Announces His Intentions— Popular Dissatisfaction and Continuance of Disorder — The Manifesto of August 19, 1905 — The Resort to the General Strike — The Manifesto of October, 1905 — The Popular Demand for a Constituent Assembly Refused — The Government Makes Concessions to Finland— The Council of the Empire — The "Organic Laws" -Opening of the Duma, May 10, 1 !>()(> Demands of the Duma — The Impotence of the Duma — The Duma Dissolved Stolypin Appointed Chief Minister — The Viborg Manifesto 'The Second Duma— The Tsar Alters the Electoral System The Third Duma — The Autocracy Asserts Its Supreme Authority — The Transformation of the Mir — The Restoration of the Liberties of Finland — The Finnish Parlia- ment Altered— Renewed Troubles in Finland 706 CHAPTER XXXII CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS Literature — Musie— Seienee— The Age of Steam— Rise of the Fae- tory System- Steam Navigation— The Invention of the Railroad — Importance of Railroads— Electricity— Standard of Living — Popular Discontent— Spread of Militarism — Cost of Modern Instruments of War- Nicholas II and the Limitation of Armaments — The First Peace Conference at the Hague — Ad- dress of M. de Staal — Address of General von SchwarahofF— Address of M. Bourgeois— Establishment of a Permanent Court of Arbitration— The Twentieth Century Opens with Wars — The Second Peace Conference at the Hague— Work of the Con- ference- Cost Of the Policy of Blood and Iron— Significance of the Peace Conferences -Arbitration 719 Bibliography 787 1 N DEX ' ' * LIST OF MAPS PAGE Europe in 1815 Frontispiece^ Distribution of Races in Austria-Hungary 25 The German Confederation, 1815-18G6 31 Italy, 1815-1859 53 The Unification of Italy 237 The Growth of Prussia Since 1815 267 The German Empire 305 Colonial Possessions of the European Powers in 1815 . . . 523 Africa. European Possessions in 1884 555 Africa, 1910 561 The Rise of the Balkan States 625 Asia 703 Contemporary Europe 721 Colonial Possessions of the European Powers at the Present Timk 733 ' CHAPTER I THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE In March 1814, the enemies of Napoleon entered his cap- ital and bivouacked in triumph in the streets. The long struggle was over which had forced the Emperor back step by step from the plains of Russia through Germany, and was now sweeping him from France. Slowly the states of Europe had come to see that Napoleonic domination could be ended only by a generous and unswerving co- operation. Reading this useful lesson in the defeats of many fields, they had built up the Great Coalition, and finally the political system, fashioned with such a varied display of talent by the Emperor of the French, had given way beneath the impact of a united and resolute Europe. But the overthrow of Napoleon brought with it one of The over- the most complicated and difficult problems ever presented throw oi to statesmen and diplomatists. As all the nations of Europe had been profoundly affected by his enterprises, so all were profoundly affected by his fall. For nearly a quarter of a centftry the Continent had been harried by war, involving, directly or indirectly, all the powers, great and small. During that period boundaries had been changed and changed again with bewildering rapidity, old states had been destroyed, or cut up, or re-fashioned arbitrarily, several historic dynasties had been swept from their thrones, new legal and social systems had been established, largely after French models, and now the power that had led in this vast transformation had been humbled, its sovereign forced to strike arms. The destruction of the Napoleonic regime must be followed by the reconstruction of Europe, and it is with this difficult work that this history begins. 2 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE This reconstruction was foreshadowed more or less clearly The Great in the treaties concluded with each other by the A'arious Coalition. states as they entered the Great Coalition. Particularly important, however, were the Treaties of Paris and Vienna, to the making of which the powers now directed their attention. The first step, naturally, was to determine the future status of France. What should be done with this arch- enemy of Europe, now that the decision no longer lay with her but with her conquerors? What should be her future government, how large her territory, how severe her punishment ? The problem The question of the government was the first to arise, e f " and had agitated the Allies for weeks before they entered eminent of , ° * France. Paris. There were several possible solutions. One was the continuance of Napoleon in power, but only after having given sufficient guarantees for good behavior. Such an out- come was possible up to the middle of March, when the conditions were presented him for the last time. After he rejected them the Allies determined to have done with him forever. There were the alternatives of a Regency for the little King of Rome, Napoleon's son, or of a successful French general as the new monarch, such as Bernadotte, now patronized by the Tsar. Some proposed to leave the whole matter to the French people, others to the determina- tion of the legislative chambers sitting in Paris. But as the discussion went on it gradually became clearer and clearer that it must be either Napoleon or Louis XVIII, the founder of the new royal family or the representative of the old. Bernadotte upon the throne would mean an undue influence of Russia in the affairs of France ; a Regency, an undue influence of Austria. An appeal to the French people, it was said, would let loose the Revolution once more, the very thing to which it was proposed to administer a definite and complete quietus. Gradually the cry of the French royalists in favor of Louis XVIII, " the legitimate king is TREATY OF PARIS 3 there," to restore him is imperatively necessary, " all else is intrigue," carried all before it, and the first step in the reconstruction of Europe was taken by the restoration of the Bourbons to the throne from which they had been ab- sent twenty-two years. On May 30, 1814, the Treaty of Paris was concluded Treaty of between the Allies on the one hand, and France, under Louis Pans< XVIII, on the other. The boundaries of France were to be those of January 1, 1792, with slight additions to- ward the southeast in Savoy and in the north and north- east. On the other hand she was to relinquish all her con- quests beyond that line, which meant the extensive territories of the Netherlands, Italy, and parts of Germany, contain- ing in all a population of about thirty-two millions. The distribution of these territories was to be determined later, but it was already decided in principle, and so stated in the treaty, that the Netherlands should form a single state by the addition of the Belgian provinces to Holland, that Lombardy and Venetia should go to Austria, that the Re- public of Genoa should be incorporated in Sardinia, that the states of Germany shoulu be anitecl in a federation, that England should keep Malta and certain French colonies, returning others, that the German territories on the left bank of the Rhine, united to France since 1792, should be used for the enlargement of Holland, and as compensation to Prussia and other German states, and that Italy, out- side those regions that were to go to Austria, should be " composed of sovereign states." The definite elaboration of these intentions of the Allies was to be the work of a general international congress to be held, later in the year, in Vienna. The Congress of Vienna (September 1814- June 1815) was Congress of one of the most important diplomatic gatherings in the ienna * history of Europe, by reason of the number, variety, and gravity of the questions presented and settled. The worldly brilliancy of its membership was remarkable even 4 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE for an age accustomed to the theatrical diplomacy of Napoleon. There had rarely been seen before such an assem- blage as gathered in Vienna in the autumn of 181 -A. There were the emperors oi' Austria anil Russia, the kings of Prussia, Bavaria, Wurtemberg, Denmark, a multitude of lesser princes, ami all the diplomats oi' Europe, of whom Metternich and Talleyrand were the most eonspicuous. All the powers were represented except Turkey. So brilliant an array merited consideration, and partly because men needed relaxation after the tense and desperate years through whieh they had just passed, and partly to oil the wheels of iliplo^ macy, the COUrl of Austria was most profuse and ingenious ii\ its entertainment. Gaiety was the order of the day. It lias been estimated that this Congress COSt Austria about sixteen million dollars, spent for pageantry and amusement, and this when the state was virtually bankrupt. Slowly the work for which these men had come together was accomplished. The Congress oi' Vienna was not a eon- gress in the ordinary meaning oi' the word. There was never any formal opening nor any general exchange of creden- tials. The representatives ot' the powers did not assemble day after day and deliberate upon the many problems press- ing for solution. There were no general sessions of all the powers. A large number of treaties were made between the Various states and these were brought together in their es- sential features in the so-ealled Final Aet of June 9, 1815, a kind oi' codification oi the work of the Congress. Every- thing was arranged outside in special committees, ami in the intimate interviews of sovereigns and diplomats. The Ureat Particularly important were the agreements of the Great Powers. Towers with each other. Russia, Prussia, Austria, and Eng- land, the Allies who had conquered Napoleon, for their de- cisions were the main work of the Congress, and were forced upon the lesser states, which were simply expected to ac- cept what they could not themselves arrange. The dramatic interest oi' the Congress lies in the fact that these Great CONGRESS OF VIENNA 5 I'owers were not in harmony with each other 4 that their interests at times were 10 divergent, their ambitions SO in- tense and conflicting, that at one moment wax seemed likely to be the outcome of this meeting called to give peace to Europe. liy the first Treaty of Paris of May 80, 1814, France The division had renounced all rights of sovereignty and protection over . . . spoils, thirty-two millions of people. The diplomats of Vienna re- served the right to distribute these millions as they saw fit. This was the main work of the Congress as it was also the one which occasioned the greatest discord. The division of the spoils was a troublesome affair. The territories which France had renounced were widely scattered. They included what are now Belgium, certain Swiss cantons, large parts of Italy, extensive regions of Germany on both sides of the Rhine, and the Duchy of Warsaw, a creation of Napoleon out of former Poland. In addition to these, Saxony, an independent kingdom, which had remained faithful to Napoleon when the other German states had turned against him, and the Kingdom of Naples, of which Napoleon's brother-in-law, Murat, was still sovereign, wen- also con- sidered properly at the disposal of the powers, by reason of their connection with the fallen star. Certain questions had been decided in principle in the first Treaty of Par*, and needed now but to be carried out. The King of Piedmont, a refugee in his island of Sardinia during Napoleon's reign, was restored to his throne, and Genoa was given him that thus the state which borders France on the southeast might, be the stronger to resist French aggression. Belgium, hitherto an Austrian posses- sion, was annexed to Holland and to the House of Orange, now restored, that this state might be a barrier in the north. It was understood that, in general, the doctrine of Principle legitimacy should be followed in determining the re-arrange- ot le S it_ ment of Europe, that is, the principle that princes deprived of their thrones and driven from their states by Napoleon 6 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE should receive them back again at the hands of collective Europe, though this principle was ignored whenever it so suited the interests of the Great Powers. Thus many of the German and Italian princes recovered their authority- But in the determination of the legitimacy of a govern- ment great elasticity prevailed. In general, those states which' in Germany had been destroyed before 1803, and in Italy before "171)8, were not restored. This alone meant that the map of Europe was far more simple than at the outbreak of the French Revolution. Demands of The Allies who had, after immense effort and sacrifice, Russia. overthrown Napoleon, felt that they should have their re- ward. The most powerful monarch at Vienna was Alex- ander I, Emperor of Russia, who, ever since Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Russia, had loomed large as a lib- erator of Europe, lie now demanded that the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, whose government fell with Napoleon, be given to him. This state had been created out of Polish terri- tories which Prussia and Austria had seized in the partitions of that country at the close of the eighteenth century. Alexander wished to unite them with a part of Poland that had fallen to Russia, thus largely to restore the old Polish kingdom and nationality to which he intended to give a parliament and a constitution. There was to be no incor- poration of the restored kingdom in Russia, but the Russian emperor should be king of Poland. The union was to be merely personal. Demands of Prussia was willing to give up her Polish provinces if Prussia. on jy sne cou ]j ^ e indemnified elsewhere. She therefore fixed her attention upon the rich Kingdom of Saxony to the south, with the important cities of Dresden and Leipsic, as her compensation. To be sure there was a King of Saxony, and the doctrine of legitimacy would seem clearly to apply to him. But he had been faithful to his treaty obligations with Napoleon down to the battle of Leipsic, and thus, said Prussia, he had been a traitor to Germany, THE CLAIMS OF RUSSIA AND PRUSSIA 7 and his state was lawful prize. Prussia preferred to re- ceive her increase of territory in Saxony rather than in the west along the Rhine, hecause Saxony was contiguous. She would thus consolidate and become more compact, whereas any possession she might acquire along the Rhine would be cut off from the rest of the kingdom by inter- vening states, and would only render more straggling and exposed her boundaries, already unsatisfactory. Moreover, she wished no common boundary with France, feeling that she would always be weak along the Rhine. Russia and Prussia supported each other's claims, the The fate of one to the Duchy of Warsaw, the other to the Kingdom of Poland and . & Saxony. Saxony. But Austria and England were opposed to the demands of the northern courts, Austria not only because she was reluctant to give up her own Polish territory, her own part of the Duchy of Warsaw, but because she feared the power of Russia, and the growth of Prussia in north- ern and central Germany, England because she desired to prevent Russia from increasing in strength, and Prussia from threatening Hanover. The Polish and Saxon ques- tions, thus closely connected with each other, formed the most thorny subject before the Congress, the very pivot on which everything turned. So heated did the discussion become that Talleyrand, utilizing the opposition of the Great Powers to each other, succeeded in forming a secret al- liance between England, Austria, and France, to resist these pretentions by arms if necessary (January 1815). The situation into which the powers had come over this Polish-Saxon question was manifestly so full of danger for all concerned that they began to recede from their extreme positions. This prepared the way for concessions, but the concessions were forced largely from Prussia. The oppo- sition to Russia was much less vehement, owing to her great military power. With three hundred thousand men ready for action she spoke with emphasis, and moreover, in the general state of exhaustion, Europe had no desire to go 8 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF ETJBOPE to war on account of Poland. The final decision was thai Russia should receive the lion's share of the Duchy of War- saw, Prussia retaining only the province of Posen, and Cracow being erected into ■ free city; that the King of Saxony should be restored to bis throne; thai he should retain the important cities of Dresden and Leipsic, but should Cede to Prussia about two-fifths of his kingdom; that, as further compensation, Prussia should receive ex- tensive territories on both banks of the Rhine. Prussia also acquired Pomerania from Sweden, thus rounding out her coast line on the Baltic. Russian ac- Russia emerged from the Congress with a goodly number o( additions. She retained Finland] conquered from Sweden during the late wars, and Ressarabia, snatched from the Turks; also Turkish territories in the southeast. Rut, most important o\' all, she had now succeeded in gaining most o( the Grand Duchv o( Warsaw. Russia now extended farther westward into Europe than ever, and could henceforth speak with greater weight in European affairs. Austrian ac- As Vienna was honored by being ehosen the seat of the quisitions. great Congress the House o\' Hapsburg profited greatly by the arrangements concluded there. Austria refused to take back her former possessions in southern Germany and Belgium, considering them too distant ami too difficult to defend, and preferring to consolidate her power in south- ern and central Europe. She recovered her Polish posses- sions ami received, as compensation for the Netherlands, northern Italy, to be henceforth known as the I.ombardo- Yenetian Kingdom, comprising the larger and richer part of the Po valley. The lllvrian provinces along the eastern eoast oi the Adriatic were erected into a kingdom and given to her. This enlargement of her eoast line increased her importance as a maritime power. She also extended west- ward into the Tyrol and Salzburg, planting herself firmly upon the Alps. Thus, after twenty years of war, almost ARRANGEMENTS CONCERNING ITALY 9 uninterruptedly disastrous, she emerged with considerable accessions of strength, and with a population larger by four or five millions than she had possessed in 1792. She hod obtained, in lieu of remote and unprofitable possessions, territories which augmented her power in central Europe, flu- immediate annexation of a part of Italy, and indirect control over the other Italian states. The policy followed by Austria in the negotiations was indicated by Metter- ' nich, who said, " We wished to establish our empire with- out there being any direct contact with France." This was accomplished. England, the most persistent enemy of Napoleon, the English ac- builder of repeated coalitions, the pay-mistress of the Allies luisitions. for many years, found her compensation in additions to her colonial empire. She retained much that she had con- quered from France or from the allies or dependencies of PVance, particularly Holland. She occupied Heligoland in the North Sea, Malta and the Ionian Islands in the Mediter- ranean ; Cape Colony in South Africa ; Ceylon, Isle of France, Demerara, St. Lucia, Tobago, and Trinidad. It was partially in view of her colonial losses that Holland was indemnified by the annexation of Belgium on the Con- tinent, as already stated. Another question of great importance, decided at Vienna, The future was the disposition of Italy. The general principle of ac- °* Ital y« tion had already been laid down in the Treaty of Paris, that Austria should receive compensation here for the Nether- lands, and that the old dynasties should be restored. Aus- trian interests determined the territorial arrangements. Austria took possession, as has been said, of the richest and, in a military sense, the strongest provinces, Lombardy and Venetia, from which position she could easily dominate the peninsula, especially as the Duchy of Parma was given to Marie Louise, wife of Napoleon, and as princes con- nected with the Austrian imperial family were restored to their thrones in Modena and Tuscany. The Papal States 10 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE Italy a " geograph- ical expres- sion." Criticism of the Congress. were also re-established. Austrian influence was henceforth substituted for French throughout the peninsula. No union or federation of these states was effected, as in Germany, largely because Austria feared that she would not be allowed the presidency of two confederations. It was Metternich's desire that Italy should simply be a col- lection of independent states, should be only a " geographical expression." The doctrine of legitimacy, appealed to for the restoration of dynasties, was ignored by this congress of princes in the case of republics. " Republics are no longer fashionable," said the Tsar to a Genoese deputation which came to protest against this arrangement. Genoa and Venice were handed over to others. Romilly mentioned in the English House of Commons that the Corinthian horses which Napoleon had brought from St. Marks to Paris were restored to the Venetians, but that it was certainly a strange act of justice " to give them back their statues, but not to restore to them those far more valuable posses- sions, their territory and their republic," which had been wrested from them at the same time. Other changes in the map of Europe, now made or ratified, were these: Norway was taken from Denmark and joined with Sweden: Switzerland was increased by the addition of three cantons which had recently been incorporated in France, thus making twenty-two cantons in all. The fron- tiers of Spain and Portugal were left untouched. Such were the territorial re-adjustments decreed by the Congress of Vienna, and which were destined to endure, with slight changes, for nearly fifty years. It is impossible to dis- cover in these negotiations the operation of any lofty prin- ciple. Self-interest is the key to this welter of bargains and agreements. Not that these titled brokers neglected to attempt to convince Europe of the nobility of their endeavors. Great phrases, such as " the reconstruction of the social order," " the regeneration of the political sys- tem of Europe," a " durable peace based upon a just di- THE DISAPPOINTMENT OF THE GERMANS 11 vision of power," were used by the diplomats of Vienna in order to reassure the peoples of Europe, and to lend an air of dignity and elevation to this august assembly, but the peoples were not deceived. They saw the unedifying scramble of the conquerors for the spoils of victory. No ignominy was spared the people of Germany. The dip- lomats quarreled over the question whether some of the subjects of certain princes, who were not to be restored (the mediatized princes), subjects who paid small taxes, were to be reckoned as " whole souls," or " half souls." Germans were indignant as they saw themselves considered The indig- merelv as numbers and articles of taxation. A German na xon ° . . . the editor denounced this " heartless system of statistics," and Germans. glorious Bliicher grimly compared this congress to the an- nual cattle fair. The doctrine of legitimacy was one of the rhetorical shibboleths, but, as already said, it was ap- plied only capriciously as suited the Great Powers. Re- publics need not invoke it, and even kings were curtly ex- cluded from its benefits. Gustavus IV, of Sweden, de- throned, claimed in vain his restoration. The King of Denmark was forced to acquiesce in the grievous dismem- berment of his kingdom. For years the monarchs of Europe had denounced Napoleon for respecting neither the rights of princes nor those of peoples. They now paid him the flattery of hearty imitation. They ignored as cavalierly as he had done the prescriptive rights of rulers, whenever it seemed to them advantageous to do so. The principle of nationality which Napoleon had contemned to his own un- doing, they treated with similar disdain. It was in de- Defiance fiance of this principle that Austria was given a command- • ti -».t lit* principle mg position m Italy, that Norway was handed from of nat i on . Denmark, whose language she spoke, to Sweden, as com- ality. pensation for Finland, which the latter was forced to re- nounce to Russia, and for Pomerania, which she was forced to cede to Prussia, that the Belgians were united with the Dutch. 12 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROrE Europe generally acquiesced willingly in the work of -this Congress, ardently desirous as it was after the long, sickening wars, for peace at almost any price, and that work proved reasonably durable. Yet the settlement of Vienna had pronounced enemies from the start, anxious to overthrow it. Among the disaffected were the French, who saw what they regarded as their natural boundary taken from them. They alone, among the important nations, came forth from this international liquidation with no accessions of territory. Prussia, Russia, Austria, ami England, all received additions and important ones. Rut not so France, ami thus relatively to the others France was weakened. For Frenchmen these treaties id' 1815 were " odious," and to be torn up when the propitious time should come. Multitudes, also, of Ger- mans and Italians were embittered as they saw their hopes of unity and liberal government turn to ashes. The Rel- gians resented being handed about without even being con- sulted. They rose in revolt in 18S0, and destroyed this artifice of 1815. The arrangements concerning Germany and Italy were demolished in the great decade of I860 to 1870. Benuncia- Though the division of territories and the determination tion of the f f n0 m% p f p; uro p constituted the main work of the Congress of Vienna, other subjects were passed upon as well. Though it ditl not abolish the slave trade, it con- demned it in a solemn utterance M as contrary to the prin- ciples of civilization and human right." It was something to have the traffic thus officially branded. The Congress also established a federal form of government for Germany, which will be described in a succeeding chapter. It adopted certain articles concerning the future organization of Switzerland. The Final Act, codifying the work of the Congress during its many months of activity, was signed dune {). 1815, a few days only before the battle of Waterloo. All the governments of Europe accepted its provisions, except Spain and the Papacy, whose SECOND TREATY OF PARIS 13 opposition was treated by the others with easy-going indifference. While the Congress of Vienna was slowly elaborating the The " Hun- system that should succeed the Napoleonic on the basis of Days, a certain balance of power, Napoleon escaped from Ellba, made straight for Paris, seized the government of France from the hands of the fleeing Louis XVIII, and entered upon a reign of a " Hundred Days." The Allies once more forgot their wranglings, indignantly gathered themselves together to end this menace once for all, and Waterloo was their reward. The sudden flash had, however, proved the necessity of legislation supplementary to that of the Congress before peace could be considered secure. The first Treaty of Paris had not proved a solid basis for a reconstructed Europe. A restored Bourbon had not been able to keep his throne. Now France must give sufficient bonds that in the future she would not disturb the tranquillity of the Continent. The result was the second Treaty of Paris (November 20, 1815), Second concluded, like the first, between Louis XVIII, restored once treaty ° . . . Paris, more, and the Allies, but unlike the first, imposing heavy and humiliating burdens upon France. Her territory was reduced, involving a loss of about half of a million in- habitants, though it was still larger than at the outbreak of the Revolution. She was forced to cede a number of strategic posts on her northern and eastern frontier. She was to pay a war indemnity of 700,000,000 francs and eighteen fortresses w,ere to be occupied by 150,000 troops of the Allies for a maximum of five years, a minimum of three, these troops to be supported by the French. It has been estimated that the total cost of the " Hundred Days " to France, resulting from these stipulations and certain addi- tional claims of the Allies, amounted in the end to 1,570,000,- 000 francs, the equivalent in purchasing power of about 6,000,000,000 francs to-day. Before quitting Paris in the fall of this eventful year of 1815, the Allies signed two more documents of great [14 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE significance in the future history of Europe, that establish- The Holy ing the so-called Holy Alliance, and that establishing the Alliance. Quadruple Alliance. The former proceeded from the in- itiative of Alexander I, of Russia, whose mood was now deeply religious under the influence of the tremendous events of recent years and the fall of Napoleon, which to his mind seemed the swift verdict of a higher power in human destinies. He himself had been freely praised as the White Angel, in contrast to the fallen Black Angel, and he had been called the Universal Saviour. He now submitted a document to his immediate allies, Prussia and Austria, which was famous for a generation, and which gave the popular name to the system of repression which was for many years followed by the powers that had conquered in the late campaign, a document unique in the history of diplomacy. Invoking the name of " the very holy and indivisible Trinity," these three monarchs, " in view of the great events which the last three years have brought to pass in Europe, and in view, especially, of the benefits which it has pleased Divine Providence to confer upon those states whose governments have placed their confidence and their hope in Him alone," having reached the profound convic- tion that the policy of the powers, in their mutual relations, ought to be guided by the " sublime truths taught by the eternal religion of God our Saviour " solemnly declare " their unchangeable determination to adopt no other rule of conduct, either in the government of their respective countries, or in their political relations with other govern- ments than the precepts of that holy religion, the precepts of justice, charity, and peace"; solemnly declare, also, that those principles " far from being applicable exclusively to private life, ought on the contrary to control the resolutions of princes, and to guide their steps as the sole means of establishing human institutions, and of remedying their im- perfections." Henceforth, accordingly, " conformably to the words of Holy Scripture " the three monarchs will con- THE HOLY ALLIANCE 15 sider themselves as brothers and fellow citizens, " united by Tne Allies the bonds of a true and indissoluble fraternity," and will P ron "' lend " aid and assistance to each other on all occasions and eacft other, in all places, regarding themselves, in their relations to their subjects and to their armies, as fathers of families." Hence, their " sole principle of conduct " shall be that " of rendering mutual service and testifying by unceasing good will the mutual affection with which they should be animated. Considering themselves all as members of one great Chris- tian nation, the three allied princes look upon themselves as delegates of Providence called upon to govern three branches of the same family," namely, Austria, Prussia, and Russia. " Their majesties recommend, therefore, to their peoples, as the sole means of enjoying that peace which springs from a good conscience and is alone enduring, to fortify themselves each day in the principles and practice of those duties which the Divine Saviour has taught to men." " All those powers who wish solemnly to make avowal " of these " sacred principles shall be received into this Holy Alliance with as much cordiality as affection." 1 This document, born of the religious emotionalism of the Unusual Tsar, has no parallel. Written in the form of a treaty, it . .. imposes none of the practical obligations of a treaty, but Alliance, is rather a confession of faith and purpose. Diplomatists were amazed at its irhworldly character. Ultimately, nearly all the powers of Europe signed it, more out of com- pliment to the Tsar than from any intellectual sympathy, y Metternich pronounced it a " sonorous nothing," a " philan- thropic aspiration clothed in a religious garb," an " overflow of the pietistic feelings of the Emperor Alexander " ; Castlereagh, a " piece of sublime mysticism and nonsense " ; Gentz, a bit of " stage decoration." Yet for a generation this Holy Alliance or " diplomatic apocalypse " stood in the mind of the world as the synonym for the regime of 1 Extracts from University of Pennsylvania Translations and Reprints, Vol. I, No. 3. Edited by J. H. Robinson. 16 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE absolutism and repression which prevailed in Europe. But that regime was not the outcome of the treaty of the Holy Alliance, but rather that of the treaty of the Quadruple Alliance concluded in the same year. The former was a dead letter from the moment of issue, and did not influence the policy, either domestic or foreign, of any state. Its author, Alexander I, was, moreover, in 1815 a liberal in politics who had been largely instrumental in forcing the restored Bourbon, Louis XVIII, to grant a constitution to France, and who was himself about to grant one to Poland. He was certainly at this moment far from thinking of inaugurating a system of repression. But the latter, the treaty of the Quadruple Alliance, became under the manipu- lation of Mettemich a stern and forbidding reality, as we shall see. The liberal newspapers of the Continent confused the two treaties, naturally enough, as Russia, Austria, and Prussia were signatories of both, and they came to speak with hatred of the Holy Alliance. The name excepted, however, the Holy Alliance is much less important than the Quadruple Quadruple Alliance concluded November 20, 1815. Napoleon had been overthrown only by collective Europe, bound together in a great coalition. The episode of the " Hundred Days," occurring while the Congress of Vienna was laying the foundations of the new Europe, proved the necessity of the prolongation of that union. Hence, there appeared the " Concert of Powers," which for the next few years is the central fact in the international affairs of Europe. In the eyes of the victorious monarchs there were two dangers menacing the system they were resolved to re- store: France as a military power; and "French ideas," the ideas of the Revolution, of the rights of peoples and individuals which, operating upon the masses of the differ- ent states, might lead them to attempt to remold the dif- ferent governments along French lines. Against the first danger ample precautions had been taken. France was now surrounded by a ring of states sufficiently strong in THE QUADRUPLE ALLIANCE 17 a military sense to hold her in check temporarily, and to prevent any such invasions of the French as had occurred during the previous years. Moreover, many of her fron- tier fortresses had been taken from her, leaving weak spots in her line of defense, particularly toward Germany. She had also been forced to consent to the occupation of her territory for several years by a large army under the com- mand of the powers that had just humbled her. As if this were not enough, she was herself to pay for the support of those troops, and also to pay a large indemnity. It was believed that all this would be sufficient to compel her to keep the peace, that she would have domestic problems severe and exacting enough to absorb her entire attention. The control or extinction of the so-called " French Precautions ideas " was a more baffling and" subtle problem, but one which the Allies felt it necessary to attack. For this pur- pose they, Russia, Prussia, Austria, and England, signed a Treaty of Alliance on November 20, 1815, engaging to employ all their means to prevent the general tranquillity from being again disturbed, binding themselves " to main- tain in full vigor, and should it be necessary, with the whole of their forces," the permanent exclusion of Napoleon and his family from the throne of France, promising to con- cert necessary measures " in case the same Revolutionary Principles, which upheld the last criminal usurpation," should again, " under other forms, convulse France." Ex- pressing themselves as " uniformly disposed to adopt every salutary measure calculated to secure the tranquillity of Europe by maintaining the order of things re-established in France," they agreed, in order " to consolidate the con- The Concert nections, which at the present moment so closely unite the of Fowers « four Sovereigns for the happiness of the world," to renew their meetings " at fixed periods, either under the im- mediate auspices of the sovereigns themselves or by their respective ministers, for the purpose of consulting upon their interests, or for the consideration of the measures which, 18 THE RECONSTRUCTION OF EUROPE at each of these periods, shall be considered the most salu- tary for the repose and prosperity of Nations and fox the maintenance of the Peace oi Europe*" ' Tins was virtually an assertion thai the four Great Powers would henceforth control Europe in the interests of the ideas thej represented. The Alliance] whose object had been to overthrow Napoleon] was to be projected into the time of peace. There v».»s thus started that series of con- gresses which] for the next eight years] exercised s rigid inquisition into the political movements o( Europe) and ■ pitiless repression of such as appeared dangerous. This alliance was contracted with a view particularly to keeping France harmless. The important provision is that eon* cerning future congresses] and it was the manipulation o( these congresses in the interest of reaction] the conversion Quadruple <-^' this alliance into an engine o( universal repression) larger? alUaaes . », v { \ w adroit diplomacy of Metternich, that made the three ami Mfttfr- ... • , ., , , , , h powers wlucl. consistently co-operated) and had first signed the Treaty o( the Holy Alliance, Russia, Prussia, and Austria, so odious to the Liberals oi the Continent. In 1818 this Quadruple Alliance appeared as a warning only to Prance, hut the tirst congress hold under the a gr ee m ent sclosed ■ compact union of the three eastern states against the spirit of reform everywhere, England's policy rapidly diverged) as we shall see, from that of her allies. The fate of Europe in the period after 1818 was largely controlled by the powers that had thus proclaimed the prin- ciples o( the Christian religion their favorite rule o( duet, vet the probable character of their policy could be more ao foretold by ■ study of the character of their rulers rather than of the bihlieal principles to which they were amiably inclined to append their signatures. Each was an absolute monarch, recognising no trammels s ire from V-.- -\ of \" Friendship. Signed Paris, No ombei .v. 181S! Hertskt, Map of Baxops bj tasty, I. SnVStt THE MEMBERS OF THE HOLY ALLIANCE L9 upon his power, save such m he bimfelf might be willing to concede. To each the fundamental idea of the Revolu- tion, the sovereignty of the people, was incomprehensible and loathsomei Each had suffered repeatedly and griev- ously from thai. Revolution. Each was sur*; to \>>- its enemy, should it. break forth again. Y<-t there irere variations. The Emperor of Russia, Alexander I, appeared, in 1815, the Alexander I, most powerful monarch of Europe. Young, imaginative, 1777-182 5. impressionable, he had received in hie early education a tincture of w< -stem liberalism which, in the years immediately after- Waterloo, seemed likely t r j deepen. This al first made Mettemicli regard him as little less than a Jacobin, all the more dangerous because erowned. Yet lie was known as changeable, as egoistic, ai influenced by fear. Frederick William III, King of Prussia, slow, timid, conceiving gov- ernment in a parental, patriarchal sense, was a weak ruler, but a ruler whose views wo-€/y?a/,s Slovaks L I Jta/mtis&ladmes I 1 /fotev I J fteumanians I", J Ritfhenicm.9 L. I Mt/gyetxy. POLICY OF FRANCIS I 25 as the balance between the German and the non-German elements had been altered since, considerably in favor of the latter. The Germans were in a decided numerical minority, but by reason of their greater wealth, intelligence, and general advancement they remained the leading element in the state. But the nineteenth century was to see their leadership contested and gradually weakened by the rise of strong national and race movements in Hungary and Bo- hemia. The Slavs formed the majority of the population of the entire empire, but they were not homogeneous, were geographically scattered, were in civilization inferior, and were for the time quiescent. To rule so conglomerate a realm of twenty-eight or Policy of twenty-nine million people was a task of great difficulty. Francls This was the first problem of Francis I (1792-1835) and n e tternich. Metternich. Their policy in the main was to keep things as they were. To innovate was to enter a lane that might know no turning. They made no attempt to reform the government. They allowed the various parts of the political machine to continue, lacking as it was in symmetry and in efficiency. This machinery was both chaotic and unscien- tific. There was no central, coherent cabinet, or group of ministers. There were, of course, various departments, but some had jurisdiction over the whole empire, some only over parts. In any case the boundaries were not carefully de- fined. Government was exceedingly slow, cumbrous, dis- jointed, inefficient. Austria was now the classic land of the old regime. Her Austria a boundaries had been repeatedly changed at the hands of M . „, . r J & Old Regime. Napoleon, but the internal structure of the state and of society had remained unaltered. The people were sharply divided into classes, each resting on a different legal basis. Of these the nobility occupied a highly privileged position. They enjoyed freedom from compulsory military service, large exemptions from taxation, a practical monopoly of the best offices in the state. They possessed a large part of the 26 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY land, from which in many cases they drew enormous revenues. Upon their estates they exercised many of the same feudal rights as had their ancestors, such as those of the police power and of administering justice through their own courts. They exacted the corvt'r and other services from the peasants. The condition of the peasants, indeed, who formed the immense mass of the population, was deplorable. It has been stated that in Bohemia, for instance, they owed half of their time and two-thirds of their crops to the lords, and in certain parts it was not uncommon for human beings and cattle to be sheltered by the same roof. The peasants had indeed been refused the right to purchase release from their heaviest burdens. These were the two classes into which Austrian society was divided, for the bourgeoisie, or middle class, was only slightly developed and of little importance. Industry was in a backward state, hampered at every point by official regulations. Local There were throughout the empire various local bodies government. ca \\ eL \ estates, which, however, constituted no real check upon the absolutism of the central government. They in no sense constituted local self-government. They were com- posed almost entirely of nobles, and their powers were slight. Their sessions were brief, perfunctory, and furnished no political training. Hungary occupied a somewhat special position. She had a central diet or parliament and long- established county governments. They, however, were no great barrier to the working of the central government, which, indeed, for thirteen years, from 1812 to 1825, re- fused in spite of the law to call the Diet together. Moreover, these Hungarian assemblies did not represent the Hungarian people but merely the privileged classes. Absolutism in gov- ernment, feudalism in society, special privileges for the favored few, oppression and misery for the masses, such was the condition of Austria in 1815. The police It was the fixed purpose of the Government to maintain system. things as they were and it succeeded largely for thirty-three REPRESSION IN AUSTRIA 27 years, during the reign of Francis I, till 1835, and of his successor, Ferdinand I (1835-48.) During all this period Metternich was the chief minister, the accomplished and re- sourceful representative of the status quo. His system, at war with human nature, at war with the modern spirit, rested upon a meddlesome and ubiquitous police, upon elaborate espionage, upon a vigilant censorship of ideas. The head of this department boasted that he had " perfected " the system of Fouche, an achievement similar to that of painting the lily. Censorship was applied to theaters, newspapers, books. The frontiers were guarded that foreign books of a liberal character might not slip in to corrupt. Political science and history practically disappeared as serious studies. Spies were everywhere, in government offices, in places of amuse- ment, in educational institutions. Particularly did this Gov- ernment fear the universities, because it feared ideas. Professors and students were subjected to humiliating regu- lations. Spies attended lectures. The Government insisted on having a complete list of the books that each professor took out of the university library. Text-books were pre- scribed. Foreign scholars might not be appointed to pro- The fessional positions, nor even become tutors in private families. esD i ona ~ e Students might not study in foreign universities, nor might they have societies of their own. A clerical inquisition was added to that of the police. Students must attend church and go to confession at stated times. Confession papers were required at all examinations. Confession became a regular business for poor students, who sold their papers to comrades needing them on such occasions. As examination periods approached such papers rose and fell according to supply and demand, like stocks and bonds. Obviously, under a system where there was no freedom of teaching or of learn- ing, science withered. It was accordingly perfectly appn>- priate for a friend of Metternich to congratulate him on the entire exclusion of the scientific spirit from the universi- ties of Austria. Austrians might not travel to foreign B8 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY countries without the permission of the Government, which \\:is rarefy given. Austria was sealed as nearly hermetically as possible against the liberal thought of Europe. Intellec- tual stagnation was the price paid. A system like this needed careful bolstering at every moment and at every point. The best protection for the Austrian system was to extern! it to other countries. Having firmly established it Application at home, Metternich labored with great skill and temporary of the success to apply it in surrounding countries, in Germany . through the Diet ami the state governments, in Italy through other interventions and treaties, binding Italian states not to fol- countries. ] ow policies opposed to the Austrian, and in general by brinffinff about a close accord of the Great Powers on this illiberal basis. We shall now trace the application of this conception of government in other countries. This will serve among other things to show the dominant position of the Danubian em- pire in Europe from 1815 to 1848. Vienna) the scat of rjgid conservatism, was now the center of European affairs, as Paris, the home of revolution, had been for so long. GERMANY Germany a ("hie of the most remarkable changes of the nineteenth loose con- lTU t uvv ] ias been the transformation of Germany, from a federation. * . . . * f . loose and inefficient federation mto an imposing, powerful empire. Germany, like Italy, was long a geographical ex- pression rather than a nation. The map of Germany was for centuries the wonder of the world. It was a tangle of lilliputian and irrational states, many of them " archeo- logical curiosities." Since the outbreak of the Revolution- ary Wars these had disappeared in large numbers, greedily absorbed by their more powerful neighbors. Thus the knights o\' the empire, the ecclesiastical states, ami nearly all the free cities, had disappeared, SO that between 1798 and 1815 the number of German states had decreased to less than forty. This work of simplification had been largely THE STATES OF GERMANY 29 furthered by the spirit of aggrandizement of the German princes themselves, who were anxious to increase their dominions, no matter by what means, and who eagerly co- operated with Napoleon, the purpose of whose manipula- tions was not the welfare of Germany. The German states of 1815 were of all shapes and sizes and of various denomina- tions. There were free cities, electorates, margravates, Varieties duchies, grand duchies, and five kingdoms, Prussia, Hanover, ' states. Saxony, Wiirtemberg, and Bavaria. The last three had been raised to regal rank by the all-powerful Napoleon, and at his fall it was found impossible to reduce to duchies again what he had so greatly exalted. Down to 1806 the German states had been bound together in a loose union called the Holy Roman Empire, about which clustered the brilliant, but rather airy, unsubstantial mem- ories of centuries. That had been succeeded from 1806 to 1813 by the Confederation of the Rhine, a creation and instrument of Napoleon, which included ultimately nearly all Germany except the two great states, Prussia and Austria. This confederation fell with its creator and the question of the future organization was one much discussed at the Con- gress of Vienna and settled there, not by the restoration of the Holy Roman Empire, which many advocated, but by the erection of the so-called German Confederation, composed of thirty-eight states. 1 The central organ of the govern- ment was to be a Diet, meeting at Frankfort. This was The Diet, to consist not at all of representatives chosen by the people, but of delegates appointed by the different sovereigns and serving during their pleasure. They were to be not deputies empowered to decide questions, but simply diplomatic repre- sentatives, voting as their princes might direct. Austria was always to have the presidency of this body. The method of procedure within the Diet was complicated and exceed- 1 Made 39 by the admission of Hesse-Homburpr in 1817, remaining such only until 182.5, when the line of Saxe-Gotha died out. Reduced by sub- sequent extinction of other houses to 33 before its dissolution in 1866. 80 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY inglj cumbrous. It sal sometimes as an Ordinary Assembly, sometimes as a General Assembly or Plenum. The differ- ence was mainly in the character of the business transacted] and in the method of voting. In the former only ordinary business was considered and mat tors were decided by ■ ma- jority vote. Bach of the eleven large states had one vote, while the remaining Btates were divided into six groups, called curissj each group having ■ sint^K' vote. There were thus seventeen votes in all. In the Plenum wore considered all questions of greater importance. Hero a two-thirds vote was necessary for a decision. The total number of votes ■was sixty nine, divided among the different states. Austria, Prussia] Saxonvj Bavaria, Hanover, ami Wiirtembergj hail four each] others three, two, ami eaeli state hail at least one. The distribution was grossly unfair if it was intended to show the relative importance of the several states. Prussia ami Austria, great European powers, hail no more weight than Saxony, a small state, ami only four times as mueh as Liechtenstein] a state of a few thousand inhabitants. Thus it came about that the seven larger states, having five-sixths of the population of liormanv, could bo outvoted decisively bv the smaller states representing one sixth. Its powers The Congress of Vienna, having thus created an assembly, not denned, ^jj no j proceed to define its powers. The jurisdiction of the Diet was left to be decided bv the Diet itself. It was decided that the first business of the Diet should be the framing of the fundamental laws of the confederation and the establish- ment of the organic institutions. This might seem to be Unduly elastic and to be giving to the assembly an oppor- tunity to claim the largest powers for itself. Hut tins was not to be feared, as in the adoption and in the change of any fundamental law. a unanimous vote was required, and all the delegates were dependent upon homo governments which were averse to a strong union ami which had now the absolute power to prevent the rise of one. This Federal Act did not create a fatherland. There '•'«<■» H THE GERMAN CONFEDERATION 31 was no king or emperor of Germany. There was no German flag. No one was, properly speaking, a German citizen. He Germany was a Prussian, or Austrian, or Bavarian citizen, as the not a case might be. The federal government had no diplomatic representatives in the other countries of Europe, but each state had, or could have, its own diplomatic corps. The German as German had no legal standing abroad, — only as a citizen of a separate state that might, but generally did not, command respect. Each state had the right to make alliances of every kind with the others or with non-German states. The only serious obligation they assumed toward each other was that they should enter into no engagement that should be directed against the safety of the Confedera- tion or that of any individual state within the union ; that they should not make war upon each other upon any pretext, but should submit their contentions to the Diet ; that if the Confederation should declare war, all the states should sup- port it, and that none should negotiate separately with the enemy or alone make peace. Such was the constitution given to Germany by the Con- gress of Vienna. It created a government in which obstruc- tion was easy, positive action very difficult. Each state possessed powers of delaying decisions of the Diet inter- minably, even, in many cases, of rendering them impossible. Moreover this government, weak as it was, was not even purely German. Three rulers of foreign states were mem- bers of it and could influence its deliberations, particularly in those cases where an individual veto would prove decisive, that is, in all the most fundamental and organic matters. The king of England was represented for Hanover, a pos- session of the English royal family, the king of Denmark for Holstein, the king of the Netherlands for Luxemburg. Prus- The inter- sia and Austria too might be influenced to look upon the Con- national federation in the light of their international position and in- C a ™° er terests, Austria particularly, as only one-third of the Aus- Confeder- trian Empire was within the bounds of th« Confederation, ation. 32 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY The other two-thirds, mainly non-German, were not included, yet their interests might dictate the policy of the Austrian delegates. Thus Hungarians, Poles, and Italians might in- directly influence the determination of purely German ques- tions in the German Diet. The international rather than national character of this Confederation was further mani- fested in the fact that the chief articles of the Federal Act establishing it wore inserted in the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna, and as such were under the collective guaranty of the powers and therefore presumably not to be altered with- out their consent. It is clear that a Germany so organized was not a nation but only a loose confederation of states expressly declared to be independent and sovereign, a confederation designed simply for mutual protection, and poorly adapted even for that. " Judged by the requirements of a practical political organization," says von Sybel, " this German Act of Con- federation, produced with so much effort, possessed about all the faults that can render a constitution utterly useless." He adds that it l "' was received by the German nation at large, partly with cold indifference, and partly with patriotic indignation." Dissatisfac- This indignation was vehemently felt by the Liberals, who, tion of the unc ] or the influence of the tremendous struggles with Napo- G tr* T 111 cl n s ... ... Icon, had come passionately to demand a close and firm union system. of all Germans that thus they might realize in their institu- tions and in the face of all the world the greatness which they felt was in them. The exaltation of the final struggle with Napoleon had only heightened the demand of the more pro- gressive spirits for national unity, that thus Germany might never henceforth be subjected to the humiliations of the past at the hands of foreigners. This longing for unity and strength, which in the patriotic atmosphere of the late wars had seemed so near realization, was now seen to be a hope deferred. German unity was, according to Metternich, an " infamous object," and the views of the diplomats at Vienna THE PROBLEM OF GERMAN UNITY 33 irerc more those of Metternich than of the Liberals. The latter wen-. Indignant at what, they called the great deception of Vienna, -uif) their bitterness was to be a factor in the later development of* Germany. That they wen- from the rery force of circumstances, the Wn y tne very nature of existing conditions, inevitably destined to ^ ro . . ° J German disappointment ire can see more clearly than did they, swept unity was along as tiny v. ere by the strong patriotic current of the »° difficult. Iionr, little appreciating the bewildering, baffling complexity of their problem. The object they aimed at was one of su- preme difficulty. German unity was not simply a matter of sentiment, however fine and just, but was a hard, practical question only to be answered, if at all, by ripe political sense and irisdom. It involved the adjustment of many conflicting and perhaps irreconcilable interests. Traditions, centuries old, must be overcome. Merc inertia was a powerful ob- stacle. And another was the fact that the future of Ger- many was not left for the Germans to work out alone. It was a part of the work of the Congress of Vienna, of the general settlement of Europe. This brought it about that the Act of Federation was hastily framed and that, too, partially by powers careless of German interests or hostile to them. It was no desire of neighboring states to have a strong and united Germany. Hut the main obstacle lay in one of the oldest, most persistent facts of German political life and history, the strong states-rights or particularist feeling. No effective union could be established unless the various members would surrender some of their authority. Not one of the German princes was willing to pay the price. Austria, more non-German than German, could not for that very reason hope to be the supreme power in a really united Germany, therefore she favored a loose union wherein she might, by playing upon rival passions, enjoy a lesser leader- ship. Prussia could not be given the leadership in a new empire, as Austria would not. consent and the lesser states would be alarmed. Obviously, none of the smaller states 84 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY The states- right feeling. Dualism the out- come of German evolution. could hope to exercise a power they would not grant to either of the greater. Moreover, they believed that any sacrifice of sovereignty would only leave them exposed to the aggrandiz- ing passions of the great. At first these lesser states, indeed, wished to be entirely independent, to have no union at all, even that of a loose confederation. The conclusive argu- ment against this was that Germany must at least be strong enough so that no second series of events like that of the Napoleonic invasions and conquests should again occur. Thus it is seen that the radical evil of the German situ- ation was the particularism or excessive individualism of the states. This was nothing new, but had been for centuries the most powerful fact. This feeling was now even more pronounced than ever, for the reason that the lesser states had latterly grown stronger by their absorption of their neighbors in the period just elapsed. National unity had been wrecked by it. It could only be restored, says Sybel, by the further extreme development of this spirit — till one state should become so large that it would overshadow all the rest and force them to recognize its ascendency — then the selfishness of one would end in the unity of all. Now the unity of England and France had been brought about in precisely this way, by the absorption by one state of all its rivals, but the outcome of German evolution had been peculiar, in that it had seen the rise of two great powers, not one, Prussia and Austria, neither able to con- quer or push the other aside, and each most jealous of any increase of the other's power. Such was the play of am- bition and interest, baffling the ingenuity and ability of those who desired a real and fruitful union of all Germans. A Prussian field marshal, Clausewitz, wrote at about this time: " Germany can achieve political unity only in one way, by the sword; by one of its states subjugating all the others," a thought put later into a more resounding phrase by Bis- marck, and expressing approximately the method by which unity was finally achieved. But so hard a doctrine lay be- THE DESIRE FOR CONSTITUTIONS 35 yond the range of understanding of the early nineteenth century. The Liberals of Germany, eager for national unity, thus The demand suffered a severe defeat at Vienna. They were given a con- for consti " . tutional federation, looser than that of the Holy Roman Empire, and government with none of the glory and luster of the latter, a union only nominal, inefficient, and prosaic, containing no vital force. The Liberals were also eager for reforms within the states, for constitutional government, for parliaments with real powers, for the end of absolutism. Here again they were disappointed. They had hoped to get a mandatory pro- vision in the Federal Act establishing representative legis- latures in each one of the states of Germany. In appealing to his people to rally around him in the war against Napo- leon, the King of Prussia had very recently promised his people a constitution and had urged at the Congress of Vienna that the Federal Act should require every mem- ber of the Confederation to grant a representative con- stitution to his subjects within a year. Metternich, even Metter- more opposed to free political institutions than to a strong nicn ' s 3UC ~ central government, succeeded in thwarting the reformers at DOS j t j on this point also, by having this explicit and mandatory decla- ration made vague and lifeless. Thus the famous Article XIII of the Federal Act was made to read: " A constitution based upon the system of estates will be estabished in all the states of the union." The character of the new constitu- tions was not sketched ; and the time limit was omitted. A journalist was justified in saying that all that was guaran- teed to the German people was an " unlimited right of expec- tation." The future was to show the vanity even of expecta- tion, the hollowness of even so mild a promise. The Liberals had desired something more substantial than hope. Austria and Prussia, the two leading states, governing the great mass of the German people, never executed this provision. Nor did many of the smaller states. Germany, then, in 1815, consisted of thirty-eight loosely 36 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY connected states. Some of these were very large, some ex- ceedingly small. Prussia and Austria ranked with the greatest powers of Europe. Some of them were old, had their individual history, traditions, and prestige. Others were new, or had recently undergone such sweeping changes as to be practically new. Their future was highly problem- atical. Their boundaries were intertwined and complicated. Some were what are called enclaves, that is, were entirely surrounded by another state, having no egress to the out- side world save through the neighbor's territory. Economic life could not flourish owing to the tariffs and change of coinage that met merchant and trader at every border, and owing also to the wretched means of communication and transportation. These states presented many varieties of Various governments. There were some where absolutism prevailed, forms of where the prince was the law-giver, the executor, and the governmen j U( jg e , ruling without the aid of any assembly, without out- ferent Ger- slc ^ e restraints. Such were the two greatest, Austria and man states. Prussia, and such were several of the smaller. There were others where the prince was assisted in his work by assemblies, bodies which the people had no right to claim, but which the ruler in his condescension saw fit to call about him, in no sense popular bodies, chosen by the people, but composed mainly of nobles. These exercised little control over the acts of the prince, but were at least in a position to present grievances. Most of the states of Germany, as Hanover, Mecklenburg, and Saxony, were of this kind. There were other states where the prince granted a written constitution, somewhat after the French model, providing for an elective assembly to which was given some power over the government's pro- posals for taxes and laws. Such an assembly was not to con- trol the Government, as did the English Parliament, by forc- ing the ruler to choose his ministers from persons satisfac- tory to it. The prince was the government in every instance but he preferred to ask the co-operation of his people up to a certain point, and he granted them rights, such as free- CONSTITUTIONS IN THE MINOR STATES 37 dom of the press and of speech, which were coming to be more and more demanded by Europeans generally. Saxe- Weimar was the most prominent state of this class. Its prince received the sincere laudation of the Liberals and the sincere aversion of Metternich. In none of these systems was the principle of popular Popular sovereignty recognized. Germany was thoroughly monarch- ' o j & j o j nowhere ical. The only question was whether monarchy should recognized, undergo a change of nature more or less extensive, or should assert its old prerogatives in all their fulness. After the disappointments of the Vienna Congress the Liberals of Ger- many pinned their hope to the increase of states of the Saxe- Weimar class. It was clear that Germans were not to have unity. Might they not have political and civil liberty? There seemed some ground for optimism. Constitutions were Constitu- granted in the states of southern Germany in the next s ii- • • granted in few years, in Bavaria and Baden in 1818, in Wurtemberg in certa j n 1819, and in Hesse-Darmstadt in 1820. It matters not states. whether the princes granted these for selfish reasons in order to gain popular support for a struggle which they felt was imminent with their more powerful colleagues, Prussia and Austria, for the advantage to their peoples remained the same. But it soon became evident after 1815 that while there were signs of progress there were more signs of a menacing reaction. Austria having set her house in order, having put a Chinese wall about her empire, marked innovation in the neighboring lands for special hostility when the favorable moment should arrive. Metternich's programme was stated in one of his confidential reports to his Emperor : " We must lead Germany to adopt our principles without our appearing to impose those principles upon her." This could not be done abruptly and harshly. Two personages were too powerful to be treated summarily, Alexander I of Russia and Frederick William III of Prussia. The former was in 1815 nothing less than a " Jacobin " in Metternich's opinion, as 38 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY he was himself granting a constitution to Poland and favor- ing constitutionalism in Germany and Italy and elsewhere. Reaction could not be successful unless he should come to see The King the error of his ways. The King of Prussia had promised of Prussia a constitution to his country as explicitly as a man could. becomes re - actionarv Metternich was pre-eminently a man who knew how to bide his time, and who knew how, when the proper moment arrived, to strike hard. His time was not long in coming. Fred- erick William III was both procrastinating and timid. Moreover, the reactionary party shortly after 1815 won ascendency at his court. Two years went by before he ap- pointed the special committee to undertake the preparation of the promised constitution. Its report after a long and slow investigation was unfavorable to the project, which was finally allowed to drop. The Prussian Government slipped back easily into the old familiar autocratic grooves. Ac- cording to Metternich the king's chief mental trait was " the repressive," and this gradually reasserted itself. More im- portant was the change in Alexander I, who by 1818, for reasons that are somewhat obscure, had gone over to con- servatism. With the rulers of Russia and Prussia in this state of mind Metternich's course was made easy. He was able to use certain current events to render himself incon- testably the dominant personality in Europe, and to secure the prevalence of the Austrian principles of government far beyond the confines of Austria itself. Indignation The years immediately succeeding 1815 were years of rest- of the lessness and uncertainty. The German Liberals were, as we liberals. » • • have seen, indignant at the " great deception " of Vienna. But they hoped that at least the various states of Germany might be reformed along constitutional lines. Article XIII of the Federal Act rendered this possible, though it did not, to their great regret, ensure it. Here again was hope de- ferred, for as the years went by the signs that little had been gained in the direction of larger liberty multiplied. Only a few states entered the new path. The large ones stood aloof, THE BURSCHENSCHAFT 39 and in many of the small ones the old regime was restored in its entirety by the returning princes and with a lamentable lack of humor. The disappointment of Liberals was intense, their criticism trenchant. The chief seat of disaffection was found in the universities and in newspapers edited by uni- versity men. As the subjection of these centers of agitation was to be the main object of Metternich's German policy, it is well to describe their activity. The students of Jena had during the Napoleonic wars Ferment founded a society called the Burschenschaft, whose purpose in tne uni ° vcrsitics was the inculcation of an intense national patriotism, the constant exaltation of the ideal of a common fatherland. Societies were nothing new in German universities, but the previous ones, the Corps, had included in their membership only those coming from the same state or province. They thus preserved that sense of localism which was the bane of German life. The Burschenschaft was based on the opposite principle of membership derived from all the different states, thus ignoring local lines, and teaching a larger duty, a larger devotion, a larger idea of association. Glowing pa- triotism was the characteristic of the new organization. It soon succeeded in establishing chapters in sixteen universities. It was decided to hold a meeting of representatives of all the chapters and to give it the character of a patriotic cele- The bration. The place chosen was the Wartburg, a castle famous Wartfeur £ . Festival, as the shelter of Luther after his outlawry at the Diet of Worms, and the date chosen was October 18, 1817, famous as being the fourth anniversary of the battle of Leipsic, and ap- proximately the three hundredth of the posting of Luther's Theses. Several hundred students met. Their festival was religious as well as patriotic. They partook of the Lord's Supper together and listened to impassioned speeches com- memorating the great moments in German history, the libera- tion from Rome and the liberation from Napoleon. In the evening they built a bonfire and threw into it various symbols of the hated reaction, notably an illiberal pamphlet of which 40 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY the King of Prussia had expressed his approval. They then dispersed, but their deed lived after them. This student performance had unexpected consequences. What was ap- parently a harmless and exuberant jollification seemed to conservative rulers and statesmen evidence of an unhealthy and dangerous ferment of opinion, and the rumors that gained currency about this celebration made it famous. It enjoyed a reputation altogether out of proportion to its real importance, which was slight. Metternich described it to the German rulers as a portent of far greater dangers sure to come. Shortly an event much more alarming occurred which The murder seemed to justify this prognostication, the murder of Kotze- of Kotzebue. hue, a journalist and playwright, who was hated by the students as a sp}- of Russia in Germany. A divinity student, Karl Sand, went to his house in Mannheim and stabbed him in the heart, March 23, 1819. Later an attempt was made to assassinate an important official of the Government of Nassau. These and other occurrences played perfectly into the hands of Metternich, who was seeking the means of establishing reaction in Germany as it had been established in Austria. They gave him what he most needed, a weapon whereby to dissuade Alexander I and Frederick William III from all further toying with liberalism and to convert the The Holy Holy Alliance, hitherto a mere trumpet for biblical phrases, Alliance ^ Q an on n- me f oppression. Were not all of these oecur- into an rences manifestations of the same anarchical spirit, the de- ;ngine of sire to overthrow monarchical institutions? All were in- oppression. discriminately ascribed to the Burschenschaft, whereas it had only been responsible for the Wartburg festival. The steps now taken to combat liberalism, which was charged with such unequal misdeeds, form a landmark in German history. Metternich, having previously had an interview with Fred- crick William III, in which he was assured of the hitter's sup- port in the policy to be outlined to silence the opposition, called the ministers of those German governments of which he felt sure to a series of conferences at Carlsbad. In these THE CARLSBAD DECREES 41 conferences was fashioned the triumph of reaction in Ger- many. By the decrees which were adopted Mettcrnich became the conqueror of the Confederation. Only eight states were represented, those upon which Mettcrnich could count. The The decrees there drawn up were then submitted to the Diet. Carlsbad at Frankfort, all the customary modes of procedure of that body were cast aside, and a vote with no preceding debate was forced, so that the representatives of the states who had not been at Carlsbad did not have time to ask instructions of their Governments. Thus the decrees, rushed by illegal and violent methods through the Diet, became the law of Ger- many, binding upon every state. They were the work of Austria, seconded by Prussia. The small states resented the indignity to which they had been subjected but could do nothing. Carlsbad signifies in German history the suppres- sion of liberty for a generation. As these decrees really determined the political system of Germany until 1848, they merit a full description. It was stated once for all that the famous Article XIII of Provision the act establishing; the German Confederation, namely, that concernm £ b J ... constitu- " a constitution based upon the system of estates will be tional gov- established in all the states of the union " should not be inter- ernment. preted as meaning constitutions of a foreign pattern, but representation of estates such as had been customary in German states even earlier. It was the earnest desire of the Liberals to get away from such old and useless assemblies. The great forces active against the prevalence of Met- ternich's system were free parliaments, free speech, and a free press. It was hoped that the first of these was thus prevented. It was next provided that there should be at every uni- Control of versity in the land a special representative to watch both the uni " professors and students. The function of these agents should be " to see to the strictest enforcement of existing laws and disciplinary regulations ; to observe carefully the spirit which is shown by the instructors in the university in 42 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY their public lectures and regular courses, and, without di- rectly interfering in scientific matters, or in the methods of teaching, to give a salutary direction to the instruction, having in view the future altitude of the students." It was provided that all teachers who should " propagate harmful doctrines hostile to public order or subversive of existing governmental institutions," that is, all who should not hold absolutism, as Metternich understood it, to be the only legi- timate form of government, should be removed from their positions ami that once so removed they should not be ap- pointed to positions in any other educational institution in Prohibition ;mv state. Other provisions were directed against secret or . ., unauthorized societies in the universities, particularly that societies. ■ "association established some years since under the name" ol the Burschenschaft, "since the very conception of the society implies the utterly unallowable plan o( permanent fellowship and constant communication between the various universities." Furthermore "no student, who shall be ex- pelled from a university by a decision of the University Senate which was ratified or prompted by the agent of the government, or who shall have left the institution in order to escape such a decision, shall be received in any other university." ' The By these provisions it was expected that the entire censorship academic community, professors and students, would be re- o e piess. j Ut . 0l | j.q silence, r phe universities had become the centers of political agitation. That agitation would now cease under compulsion. There was one other enemy, the press, and drastic provisions were adopted to smother its independence beneath a comprehensive censorship. Finally, a special commission was created to ferret out all secret revolutionary societies and conspiracies that might threaten the nation, and this commission was to have full powers to examine and arrest any German, no matter of what state he might 1 Quotations are from University of Pennsylvania Translations and Re- prints, Vol. 1, No. 3. Edited by J. 11. Robinson. THE PERSECUTION OF THE LIBERALS 43 be a citizen. It discovered very little, but it pursued for years a policy as vexatious as it was petty. The Carlsbad Conference is an important turning point Reaction in the history of central Europe. It signalized the dorni- the order or nance or Metternich in Germany as well as in Austria. Its Q ermany most important feature is the surrender of Prussia to Austrian leadership. Down to 1819 there was ground for hope that Prussia might be a leader, though a cautious one, in the liberalization of Germany. That hope now vanished. Reaction was henceforth the order of the day in this great state. Frederick William III. shortly abandoned definitely all idea of granting the constitution which he had promised in 1815. In the period of national humiliation from 1807 to 1813 a notably liberal spirit had characterized the actions of the Prussian Government. Many reforms had been ef- fected at the instigation of such men as Stein. But the period was too brief and the reforms remained incomplete. It was expected that they would be perfected after 1815, but now it was clear that they would not. Indeed, in some respects, though fortunately not in all, the liberal achievements of those years were curtailed. But after 1819 the period of full reaction came in. In many respects this period was more odious in Prussia than in any other state. The persecu- The tion of " demagogues " was a sorry spectacle, as it was persecution in reality largely a persecution of men who should have had all honor shown them as national heroes. Jahn, the founder of gymnastic societies, wheh had been most effective in nerving the young men of Prussia to heroic action, was for five years subjected to the inquisition of the police and to severe imprisonment, only to be discharged because nothing could be found against him meriting punishment. Arndt, whose impassioned poems had intensified the national patriot- ism in the wars against Napoleon, was shamefully treated. His house was searched, his papers were ransacked. The charges against him show the triviality of this petty police inquisition. One official discovered revolution in the expres- b4 REACTION IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY sion kv I li.it lies beyond my sphere." Sphere meant a ball, a ball a bullet. Was not that a summons to insurrection and murder? Arndt indignantly protested that he hated " all secret intrigues like snakes of hell." Nevertheless he was removed from his professorship and for twenty years was pre- vented from pursuing his vocation. Private letters were sys- tematically opened by the police in the search for some trace of revolution. Even Gneisenau, despite his brilliant record as a soldier, had Cor years to experience this invasion of his private rights. Spies went to hear the sermons of the most popular preacher in Berlin, Sehleiermaeher, and re- ported it as a highly suspicious circumstance that he had said that we owe to Christ the liberation of all spiritual forces and that every true Christian must believe that the kingdom of truth will conquer the kingdom of darkness. A publisher was forbidden to bring out a new edition of Fichte's Addresstothe German Nation, which had so splendidly stirred the youth of Prussia in the years of Napoleon's supremacy. Prussia This was, in the opinion of all Liberals, the great treason a docile f Prussia, this abdication of independent judgment, this . . . docile surrender to the leadership of Austria. " Prussia," Austria. ■ said Metternieh to tin- Russian ambassador, "has left us the place which many Germans wished to give to her." The situation, was much the same in the other German states. With Austria and Prussia hand in glove, there was little opportunity for the lesser states. The spirit of the Carlsbad Decrees hung heavily over all Germany. Made even stronger the following year by the Vienna Conference of 1820, this system remained in force until the decade beginning with IS 10. The revolutions of 1830 brought forth additional decrees in 1832 and 1834 intensifying the persecution of the academic world and of politicians sus- pected of liberalism. Metternieh had succeeded in extending his system over the German Confederation. We shall now see how other countries were affected by the same system, how its influence expanded still further. CHAPTER III REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY SPAIN The fundamental purpose of the rulers of Europe after 1815, as we have seen, was to prevent the "revolution," as they called it, from again breaking out; in other words, to prevent democratic and constitutional ideas from once more becoming dominant. The precautions taken by these con- servatives passed in the political language of the time as the Metternich system. Sufficient precautions had been taken, as we have seen, in central Europe. France was powerless to disturb for a long while to come. England was stiffly loyal fo her old regime. But just as order seemed solidly re-established events occurred in the two southern peninsulas of Europe, Spain and Italy, which showed that a system of repression to be successful must be Argus-eyed and omnipresent. It is necessary, therefore, at this point to trace briefly the history of southern Europe that we may understand the events of 1820, the first real challenge of the Metternich system. In 1808 Napoleon had by an act of violence seized the Spanish crown of Spain, and until 1814 had kept the Spanish king, Constitution Ferdinand VII, virtually a prisoner in France, placing his own brother Joseph on the vacant throne. The Spaniards rose against the usurper and for years carried on a vigorous guerilla warfare, aided by the English, and ending finally in success. As their king was in the hands of the enemy they proceeded in his name to frame a government. Being liberally minded they drew up a constitution, the famous 45 46 REVOLUTION IN STAIN AND ITALY ('oust it ut ion of 1812, a document thoroughly saturated with the principles of the French Constitution of 1791. It assort rd the sovereignty of the people, vesting the execu- tive power in the king, the legislative in the Cortes or Assem- bly, a body consisting of a single chamber and elected by indirect universal suffrage, the citizens of the colonies having the same right to vote as did those of the mother country. Some of the features of the French Constitution which had worked badly were nevertheless adopted. Deputies were to be chosen for two years and to be ineligible for re-election. Ministers mighl not be members ol' the chamber. Henceforth the Cortes were to be the central organ of* government, the king being very subordinate. lie might not leave the country without their consent, nor marry, nor might he dissolve or prorogue I lie Assembly, and in the intervals be- tween sessions a committee of the Cortes was to watch over the execution of the Constitution and the laws. The Consti- tution proclaimed the principles of liberty and equality before the law, thus abolishing the old regime. The extreme liberality of this Constitution is explained by the fact that it was tin' work of deputies coming in the main from tlvc coast provinces, which were more democratic than the others. The classes hitherto dominant in Spain, the nobility and the clergy, for the time being lost their supremacy. The Con- stitution was the work of a small minority, was never sub- mitted to the people for rat itieat ion, ami its durability was Ferdinand therefore problematical. Indeed, its doom was sealed by the reappearance in Spain, on the downfall of Napoleon, of the legitimate king, Ferdinand VII. This prince, now restored to his throne, was ill-fitted for rule, both by temperament and training. Cruel, suspicious, deceit fid, unscrupulous, his character was odious, his intel- lect lacked all distinction. His education had been woe- fully neglected, nor had experience taught him anything of statesmanship, lb- had not used his leisure as Napoleon's prisoner for reading or the study of political questions. VII 1784-1833 REACTION IN SPAIN 47 But, instead, he had embroidered with his own hands a robe of white silk with ornaments of gold for the Madonna of the altar in the church at, Valcncay, a fact which was made known to the Spanish people by his confessor. Indeed, the pamphlet which contained this edifying announcement went through seven editions in a short time, — a fact that not only paints the King but his people as well. There was every reason to expect that such a man would Abolition thrust aside the paper constitution that so greatly limited of the his power, if he felt able to do so. The boundlessly enthusi- .. astic, even hysterical manner in which the Spaniards re- ceived him convinced him that he could go to any length. The Constitution of 1812 had the support of only a very small minority of the educated people. The nobility, the clergy, many of the leaders of the army, and the ignorant and fanatical populace wanted a king of the old type. The King, seeing Hie way made plain, promptly took action. Be- fore he reached his capital he declared the Constitution and the decrees of the Cortes null and void, " as if these things had never been done." By this stroke and the rapturous acquiescence of the people absolutism was restored. A furious reaction began, a wild hunt for everyone in any way connected with the recent history of Spain. Liberals Persecution and those who had adhered to Joseph, Napoleon's brother, Liberals, uiic persecuted. The Inquisition was re-established; the Jesuits returned in triumph. The press was gagged once more. Liberal books were destroyed wherever found, and particularly all copies of the Constitution. Thousands of political prisoners were punished with varying severity. Ferdinand would probably have been forced into a re- actionary policy by his own people and by the other powers of Europe, even had his personal inclinations not prompted him to it. But this reaction was much too furious, lasted too long, and in the end weakened the King's position. Inefficiency The Government of Ferdinand, vigorous in punishing Lib- f th Goy _ erals, was utterly incompetent and indolent in other matters, ernment. IS REVOLUTION IN STAIN AM) ITALY Spain, a country of aboul eleven million people, was wretch- edly poor and ignorant. Agriculture was primitive. Com- merce and industry were shackled by monopolies and un- reasonable prohibitions upon exportation ami importation. Industrial activity was further lesssened by the large num- ber of saints' days, which were carefully observed. What education there was was in tin- hands of ecclesiastics. The Government of Ferdinand made no attempt to improve these deplorable conditions. Bui in addition to all this it failed to discharge the most fundamental duty of any government, that is, to preserve the integrity of the empire. The vast Dlsiategra- transatlantic possessions of Spain had risen in revolt. The tion ol th0 reasons lor this revolt, which presaged the downfall of the Spanish . , . . Empire. proud Spanish Empire, were: the continued and varied miS- government of the home country which regarded the colonies as simply sources o\' wealth to he ingeniously exploited for the benefit of the home government, the taste of relative freedom they had enjoyed between 1810 ami 1815 when the home government was otherwise occupied, the example of the United States and its successful war of Independence, and the encouragement oi' England, seeking wider markets. Ferdinand could probably have kept Ins empire intact had he been willing to make the concessions demanded by the Americans, larger commercial liberty ami considerable political autonomy. This he would not do. lie would rule his empire as it had always been ruled, his colonies as he ruled the mother country. The result was revolution from Mexico to the southern tip of South America. Ferdinand's task was to reconquer this vast region by force. This force he dill not have. lie hoped for the support of the Holy Alliance, which, however, was not forthcoming. lie, there- tore, was thrown upon his own resources. By 1819 he had collected an army of over twenty thousand men at Cadiz. Suddenly the army rose in revolt against the Government, ami the first o\' those revolutions of southern Europe against the restored monarchs occurred. GROWTH OF THE IUTOLTTTIONARY SPIRIT 49 Willi singular lacl< of perspicacity, the restored Bourbon "■' lect of of Spain had neglected or insulted the army, the very army weapon which reaction in the other countries of Europe )1;ivy had taken every means to conciliate and win. Many of the ablest officers had been degraded; poor rations, poor bar- racks, insufficient pay, in arrears at that, had created a feel- ing of deep irritation in the army, which became the breeding place of conspiracies, the real revolutionary element in the state. The navy, too, so essentia] for the preservation of a transoceanic colonial empire, had been allowed to fall into the most, shameful decay until it consisted of bu1 little else than the king's own pleasure yachts. The officers were utterly poor. The only relief the Government granted them was pel-mission to support themselves by fishing. Under such conditions military outbreaks were natural. Ensurrections occurred repeatedly, in 1814, 1815, 18HJ, 1817, 1818 and 1819. The failure in each case only increased the severity with which the Government pursued all those sus- pected of liberalism. In 1820 the army rose again, driven to desperation by the stories of horror told by soldiers re- turning from America, and believing that they were about to be sent to certain death. On January 1, 1820, Riego, a colonel in the army, pro- Revolution claimed the Constitution of 1812 and led a few troops * 1820, through the province of Andalusia,, endeavoring to arouse the south of Spain. lie was unsuccessful. His force grad- ually dwindled away, attracting no popular support. But it had served its purpose. As the revolution was dying out in the south it kindled in the opposite end of the peninsula, under the Pyrenees and along the Ebro. The Constitution of 1812 was proclaimed there and the flames spread eastward to the great cities of SaragOSSa and Barcelona. Shortly riots broke out in Madrid itself. The King, learning that he could not rely upon his .soldiers even in his capital, and thoroughly frightened, yielded to the demands of the scat- tered and incoherent revolution, and on the evening of 50 REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY March 7, 1820, proclaimed the Constitution of 1S1^, prom- ised to maintain it, and declared that he would harry out of the country those who would not support it. "Let us ad- vance frankly," he said, " myself leading the way, along the constitutional path." The text o( the Constitution was posted in every city, and parish priests were ordered to expound it to their congregations. Thus revolution had triumphed again, and only five years after Waterloo. An absolute monarchy, based on divine right, had been changed into a constitutional monarchy based on the sovereignty of the people. Would the example be followed elsewhere? Would the Holy Alliance look on in silence? Had the revolutionary spirit been so carefully smothered in Austria, Germany, and France, only to blaze forth in outlying sections of Europe? Answers to these questions were quickly forthcoming. ITALY Napoleon on In the leisure of St. Helena, Napoleon I wrote, concern- Italian . Italv: «jt a ], i s surr ounded by the Alps and the sea. unity. . .* . Her natural limits are defined with as much exactitude as it' she were an island. Italy is only united to the continent by one hundred and fifty leagues of frontier and these one hundred and fifty leagues are fortified by the highest barrier that can be opposed to man. Italy, isolated between her natural limits, is destined to form a great and powerful nation. Italy is one nation; unity of language, customs and literature, must, within a period more or less distant, unite her inhabitants under one sole government. And Home will, without the slightest doubt, be chosen by the Italians as their capital." l Napoleon was now in a position where he was powerless to aid in this achievement, even had he been so disposed. But the time was very fresh in men's minds when they believed that the great commander was to use his talent and oppor- 1 Cesaresco, The Liberation of Italy, 3. NAPOLEON'S INFLUENCE UPON ITALY 51 I unity to give them unity and freedom. He had not done so. Yet in a very real sense modern Italy began under his empire. He took the country a long step forward toward its ideal. Napoleon's activity in Italy had been most revolutionary. Significance He had driven all the native princes from the peninsula. ° apo " ill- • • • leon's Only the kings of Naples and Piedmont still retained some ac ti V ity in semblance of authority, for each fortunately had an island Italy, to which he could flee, whence the French could not drive liim, as the British controlled the sea. The former spent B( vcral years in Sicily, the latter in the island of Sardinia. Napoleon did not formally unite all Italy, but he annexed a part directly to the French Empire, a part he made into the Kingdom of Italy, with himself as King and his step-son, Eugene Beauharnais, as Viceroy, and the remainder consti- tuted the Kingdom of Naples, over which Murat, brother-in- law of Napoleon, ruled. Thus, though there was not unity, there were only three states where formerly there had been a dozen. Yet, in an important sense, there was unity, for it was the directingmind of the FrenchEmperor that permeated and largely controlled the policy of all three. The French did much for the regeneration of Italy. They abolished feudalism, they gave uniform and enlightened laws, they opened careers The to talent, they stimulated industry. New ideas, political and awakenm S . . . of Italy, social, penetrated the peninsula with them. Italians hence- forth would never be the same as they had been. Barriers, physical, material, intellectual, had been thrown down, and could never be permanently set up again. Of course there was the reverse. The burdens imposed in the place of those removed were heavy. Napoleon made the Italians a part of his general European system and forced them to give freely of their money and their men for purposes that con- cerned them only slightly, if at all. Sixty thousand Italians perished in his wars in Spain and Russia. His shameless robbery of their works of art gave deep offense. His treat- ment of the Pope wounded many in their religious sensibilities, and he ignored the national sentiment whenever he chose. 59 REVOLUTION IN STAIN AM) ITALY Yet the later achievement of unit? and liberty was made much easier heeause Napoleon had passed that way. He shook the country out ol its century old somnolence. Ser\ ice in his armies increased the strenuousness of the Italians and taught them the art oi war. The very fact that they had witnessed and participated in great events imparted an unknown energy to these easy going sons of the south. Napoleon hail exiled every one oi the Italian prinees. They might he restored, hut their prestige was irrevocably gone. lie luul even driven the Pope from his states, ami had abolished the temporal power. What hail been done once might perhaps be ilone again. There hail been for a few- years a state bearing the name Kingdom oi' Italy. The memory of that fact Could not be uprooted by all the num- archs oi Christendom. It was an augury full oi' hope, a beacon pointing the sure ami steadfast way. The decision Of all this the Allies, at their famous Congress oi Vienna, ot tlu " took no note. They were playing the short polities of the Congress of , .,„ . , * , . , . . Vl .„ ui hour. 1 hey pan! no attention to the impalpable forces Ol the human spirit. They looked upon the future of Italy as a matter quite at their disposal and they reconstructed the peninsula without asking its opinion or consent. A people numbering more than seventeen million had nothing to >i\ about its own fate. The mighty men oi' lairope sitting in Vienna considered that their affair. And thev arranged it by returning Italy to the state of a geograph- ical expression. Thev did not give it even as mueh unity as thev gave Germany, not even that oi a loose confedera- tion. They made short shrift oi all such suggestions and The ten restored most of the old states. There were henceforth ten Italian f ti, oni; Piedmont, Lombardy-Venetia, Parma, Modena, Lucca, Tuscany, the Papal States. Naples, Monaco, and San Marino. Genoa and Venice, until recently independent re- publics, were not restored, as republics were not M fashion- able." The one was given to Piedmont, the other to Austria. These states were too small to be self-sufficient, and as AUSTRIA DOMINATES ITALY 53 a result Italy was for nearly fifty years the sport of for- eign powers, dependent, henceforth, not upon France but upon Austria. This is the cardinal fact in the situation and is an evidence, as it is a partial cause, of the commanding position of the Austrian monarchy alter the fall of Napo- The domi- leon. Austria was given outright the richest part of the Po nance ot A.ustri.3. valley as a Lombardo-Venetian kingdom. Austrian princes or princesses ruled over Modena, Parma, and Tuscany, and were easily brought into the Austrian system. Thus was Austria the master of northern Italy ; master of southern Italy, too, for Ferdinand, King of Naples, made an offensive and defensive treaty with Austria, pledging himself to make no separate alliances and to grant no liberties to his subjects beyond those which obtained in Lombardy and Venetia. Naples was thus but a satellite in the great Austrian system. The King of Piedmont and the Pope were the only Italian princes at all likely to be intractable. And Austria's strength in comparison with theirs was that of a giant compared with that of a pigmy. Thus the restoration was accomplished. Italy became again a collection of small states, largely under the domi- nance of Austria. Each of the restored princes was an absolute monarch. In none of the states was there a parlia- ment. Italy had neither unity nor constitutional forms, nor any semblance of popular participation in the govern- ment. The use which the princes made of their unfettered liberty of action was significant. Of these several states the four most important were: the Lombardo-Venetian Kingdom, the Kingdom of Sardinia or Piedmont, the Papal States, and the Kingdom of Naples. The first was ruled by a viceroy, who carried out orders The received from Vienna. It paid into the Austrian treasury ^ombardo- taxes far out of proportion to its population or its extent. „. , Here French laws were largely abrogated, and an attempt was made to make the people forget that they were Italians, and to consider themselves Austrians. Children were tauffht 54 REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY in their text-books of geography that Lombardy and Venetia were geographically a part of Austria. Industries wire repressed in favor of Austrian manufacturers. Austrians were appointed to the university professorships, and they and their students, as well as other persons, were watched by numerous and proficient spies. It was even considered nec- essary to edit Dante that he might he read with safety. The The King of Piedmont, Victor Emmanuel I, had been for Sardinia many years an exile in the island of Sardinia, and his states had been annexed by Napoleon to France. He returned to Turin enraged against the author of all his woes. Say- ing jokingly that he had slept fifteen years, he resolved that Piedmont should regard the interval as a dream. Most of the laws and institutions introduced by France were abol- ished by a stroke of the pen, almost the only ones retained being those which the Piedmoritese would gladly have seen go, the heaviest taxes and the police system. Most of those connected with the government and the army during the French period were removed from their positions, thus con- stituting at the outset a disaffected class. Religious liberty was narrowly circumscribed; political liberty did not exist, nor did liberty of education. The universities were shortly placed under the control of the Jesuits, and professors and students were spied upon. Some of the deeds of reaction were so absurd as to become classical illustrations of the stupidity of the restored princes. Gas illumination of the Turin theater was abandoned because it had been introduced by the French. French plants in the Botanic Gardens of Turin were torn up, French furniture in the royal palaces destroyed, and a certain custom house oflicial would let no merchandise be brought over the new Napoleonic road over the Mont Cenis pass, lest revolutionary ideas might thus be smuggled in. But, however unwise and retrogressive this government might be, it followed in foreign affairs a policy of independence of Austrian influence as far as this was possible. Piedmont was a military state, having an army THE PAPAL STATES 55 altogether disproportionate to its size. Indeed, three-fourths of the revenues of the state went to the support of the army and navy. The Papal States were peculiar among the governments The States of Europe. The Pope was their ruler. The Government of tne was in the hands of the priests. Over each of the provinces and legations was a prelate. All the higher officials were of the clergy. The laity were admitted only to the lower positions. Taxes were high, yet papal finances were badly disorganized, and the Government had difficulty in meeting running expenses. An important source of income of this Christian, priestly state was the lottery, which was adminis- tered with religious ceremonies, and was even kept running Sundays. The Government could not even assure the per- sonal safety of its citizens. Brigandage was rife, and the Pope was forced finally to make a formal treaty with the brigands, by which they were to give themselves up as prisoners for a year, after which they were to be pensioned. Though bigoted and corrupt, the Government had a keen scent for the evils of the French regime. It repealed most of the French laws, and even forbade vaccination and gas illumina- tion, as odious reminders of that people. The police were numerous and vexatious, paying particular attention to what one of their documents characterized as " the class called thinkers." The Inquisition was restored and judicial torture revived. Education was controlled by the clergy. Even in the universities most of the professors were ecclesiastics and the curriculum was carefully purged of all that might be dangerous. This excluded, among other subjects, modern literature and political economy. Niebuhr, the German his- torian, thus recorded his impression of that state: " No land of Italy, perhaps of Europe, excepting Turkey, is ruled as is this ecclesiastical state." Rome was called " a city of ruins, both material and moral." e , Kingdom of In the south, covering three-eighths of the peninsula, the Two was the Kingdom of Naples, or the Two Sicilies. The king, Sicilies. 56 REVOLUTION IN SIWIN AM) ITALY Universal reaction. Ferdinand I, was of tin- Spanish Bourbon lino. He was incredibly ignorant, and in character detestable. Return- ing from Sicily, however, he did not imitate his contempo- raries In abolishing everything French. "Civil institu- tions," says a recent historian, " had advanced four cen- turies in the nine years of French rule." ' But while in theory much of the work of those years was allowed to remain, in practice the Government was hopelessly corrupt. The King's treatment of the army was such as to raise up in it many enemies to his power. Many who had served under Murat were cashiered. Whipping was restored, which angered the common soldier. Thus there grew up rapidly a military fact ion rifie for revolt. Obviously the policy of the various princes, as just de- scribed, made many enemies: all the progressive elements of the population who believed in freedom in education, in relig- ion, in business, and who saw special privileges restored, obsolete commercial regulations revived, arbitrary and igno- rant government substituted lor the freer and more intelli- gent administration of the French; and all those thrown out of employment in the civil service or the army. The malcon- tents joined the Carbonari, a secret society which first rose in the Kingdom of Naples, spreading thence over Italy and to other European countries. Their weapons were con- spiracy and insurrection. In a country where no parlia- ments, no political parties, no public agitation tor political ends were permitted, such activity was necessarily driven into secret channels. The Carbonari had an elaborate but Carbonari. | ose and ineffective organization. Their rules and forms were frequently childish and absurd. Their purposes were not clear or definite. They were a vast liberal organiza- tion much better adapted for spasmodic movements of de- struction than for the construction of new institutions. Into this society poured the dissatisfied o( every class. It was a revolutionary leaven working in Italian society, spread- The 1 Kim:, History of Italian Unity, T. ST. REVOLUTION IN NAPLE^ 57 iii^ abroad a hatred of the restored princes, a desire for change. Among n people living under such depressing conditions Tlie (lie new.-; of the successful and bloodless Spanish Revolution . , onn 1 of 1820 of 1830 spread quickly. II was the spark to the tinder, in Naples. In Naples a military insurrection broke out, of such apparent strength that the King yielded at once. The revolutionists demanded the Spanish Constitution of 1812, not because they knew much about it save that, it was very democratic but. be- cause it possessed the advantage of being ready-made. The King conceded the demand, saying that hi' would have been glad to have granted a constitution before had lie only known there was a general desire for one. He was appar- ently as enthusiastic as were the revolutionists. He went out of his way to show this in a most extraordinary fashion. On July 13, 1820, having heard mass in the royal chapel, he approached the altar, took the oath, and then, fixing his eyes upon the cross, lie added of his own accord, " Omni- potent God, who with infinite penetration Iookest into the heart and into the future, if I lie, or if I should one day be faithless to my oath, do Thou at this instant annihilate me." It seemed as if the era of constitutional government had come for more than a third of Italy. Till'; CONGRESSES Thus in 1820 the Revolution, so hateful to the diplomats of 1815, had resumed the offensive. Spain and Naples had overthrown the regime that had been in force five years, and had adopted constitutions that were thoroughly saturated with the principles and mechanism of Revolutionary Prance. Then' had likewise been a revolution against the established regime in Portugal. There was shortly to be one in Pied- mont. A matter of greater importance than the attitude of these peoples toward their governments was that of the governments toward the peoples. The powers had united 58 REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY The powers prepare to suppress these revo- lutions. The doctrine of the right of inter- vention. to put down Napoleon. They had then taken every precau- tion to check the activity of so-called French principles. They had been in the main successful, but now those principles were asserting themselves triumphantly in outlying parts of Europe. It had been thought that future trouble would come from France; but, instead, it was coming from Spain and Italy. Metternich, the most influential personage in Europe, had very clear views of the requirements of the situation. " The malady," as he called it, the unrest of the times, was not local or peculiar to one part of Europe, to any single country. To suppress this malady the Great Coalition had been built up which, after endless suffering and sacrifice, had overcome it, though it had not extirpated it. What it had cost so much to check, must be kept in check. The vitality of these subversive revolutionary principles was evi- dent to all. Energetic measures were necessary and, to be successful, they must be applied everywhere and at all times. If a monarch in one state yielded to revolution the effects were not limited to that state or that monarch, but the revolutionary parties everywhere were encouraged and the stability of every throne, of the established order everywhere, was threatened. This was conspicuously shown by the recent events. A revolution in Spain encourages a revolution in Naples. The movement may spread northward sympa- thetically, may reach the Italian possessions of Austria, may reach Austria itself, France, and the other countries, and the world, supposed to have been quieted at Vienna, will riot once more in anarchy. Metternich thus showed that no state can in the modern age lead an isolated life. The life of Europe henceforth must be collective and anything that threatens its peace is a very proper subject for the dis- cussion of Europe, collected in congresses. Metternich in this way developed the doctrine of the " rjgiit- of intervention," a doctrine new in international law, yet one to which he succeeded in giving great vitality for many THE CONGRESSES 59 years. The doctrine was that, as modern Europe was based upon opposition to revolution, the powers had the right and were in duty bound to intervene to put down revolution not only in their own states respectively but in any state of Europe, against the will of the people of that state, even against the will of the sovereign of that state, in the inter- ests of the established monarchical order. A change of government within a given state was not a domestic but an international affair. This doctrine did not originate in 1820. The principle The Con- was clearly laid down in the treaty of Quadruple Alliance & ress of of 1815 as far as France was concerned. It had been chapelle elaborated at the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle in 1818. 1818. There the five Great Powers had declared their purpose to maintain the general peace which was " founded on a religious respect for the engagements contained in the Treaties, and for the whole of the rights resulting therefrom." The phrase was vague because the powers could not agree on anything more definite. How much did it mean or might it be made to mean? Would revolutionary movements in any country be considered as justifying intervention in the in- terests of the sacred treaties? The opportunity to test the matter had now arisen. Metternich, as usual, was quite equal to the occasion. A congress was called at Troppau to consider The Con- the affairs of the Kingdom of Naples. Austria, Russia, Prus- & ress of sia, France, and England were represented. Unanimity was lg20 lacking but there was a majority for the ominous principle. The three eastern powers, Russia, Prussia, and Austria, absolute monarchies, now formally accepted the principle of intervention as laid down by Metternich. They would refuse to recognize as legal changes brought about in any state by revolution, even if the king of that state himself consented. They asserted their right to intervene to over- throw any such changes, first by using conciliatory methods, then by using force. This probably meant an immediate armed intervention wherever and whenever revolution might 60 REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY break out. And the right so to intervene was held to be implicit in the treaties of 1815 on which the European system rested. From this view England dissented vigorously, declaring that in her opinion the powers by those treaties intended to guarantee to each other only their territorial possessions, not at all their form of government. That was a domestic concern. England and France, though not signing the new declaration, remained, however, merely passive and the absolute monarchies had their way. The Con- Having established the principle the Congress next de- cided to apply it to the Kingdom of Naples. They accord- 1821. i n g^y adjourned to Laibach, inviting the King of Naples to meet them there. The Neapolitan Parliament was opposed to letting him leave the kingdom and only finally consented after he had again sworn to the constitution, and had with facile duplicity declared that he wished to go solely to inter- cede for his people and " to obtain the sanction of the powers for the newly acquired liberties." Falsehoods with Ferdinand I were redundant and superfluous. " I declare to you," he said, " and to my nation that I will do everything to leave my people in the possession of a wise and free constitution." Parliament, deceived by the royal mendacit} r , permitted him to go. No sooner was he out of his realm than he retracted all his promises and oaths and appealed to the Allies to restore him to absolute power, which was precisely what they had already determined to do. Austria was commis- sioned to send an army into the kingdom. It did so. The opposition of the Neapolitans was ineffective and Ferdinand was restored to absolutism by foreigners in 1821. He broke his return journey at Florence in order to make the amende honorable to a probably outraged Deity by placing a votive lamp in the Church of the Annunciation. The political results were for the Neapolitans most de- plorable. The reaction that ensued was unrestrained. Hun- dreds were imprisoned, exiled, executed. Arbitrary govern- REVOLUTION IN PIEDMONT 61 ment of the worst kind was henceforth meted out to this unfortunate kingdom. Just as this Neapolitan revolution was being snuffed out an insurrection blazed forth at the opposite end of the peninsula, in Piedmont. The causes of this movement were discontent at the stupid reaction of the last five years, the desire for constitutional government, and dislike of Austria. The insurgents were led to believe that they would have the support of Charles Albert, Prince of Carignan, head of a younger branch of the royal family and heir presumptive to the crown, as his relations with Liberals were known to be intimate. His political importance was considered great owing to his nearness to the throne. As the king, Victor Emmanuel I, had no son, the crown .would upon his death pass to his brother, Charles Felix, and upon the latter's death, he, too, being without direct heir, Charles Albert would him- self become king. The Piedmontcse revolution broke out in Alessandria on The March 10, 1821. The revolutionists demanded the Spanish Revolution Constitution and Avar against Austria as the great enemy _. . & _ & J Piedmont. of Piedmont and of Italy. The King wavered for several days. He did not wish a civil war, Piedmontcse fighting Piedrnontese, which would surely come if he should refuse the demands and attempt to put down the movement. On the other hand, he knew that if he should grant those demands, the powers would intervene to suppress constitutionalism here as they had done in Naples and his promises would have been in vain. Unable to decide between the cruel alternatives of civil war or foreign intervention and conquest, and dis- covering no other course to follow, he abdicated on March 13, in favor of his brother Charles Felix. As the latter was not in Piedmont at the time, Charles Albert was ap- pointed regent, until his arrival. Charles Albert, therefore, exercised the royal power for the moment and in a manner favorable to the revolutionists. He allowed the Spanish Constitution to be proclaimed from the royal palace in Turin 62 REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY "with such modifications as His Majesty, in agreement with the national representation, shall consider advisable." The new King shortly disavowed these concessions. The whole imbroglio was cut short by the action of the powers. An Austrian army was already on the borders and a hundred thousand Russians were ordered forward from Galicia. The revolutionists clashed at Novara with an army composed of Austrians and Picdmontese loyal to the King. They were easily routed and the revolution was over. Charles Felix, an absolutist king, was upon the throne, and Austria had again shown her resolution and her power. Once more the demand for constitutional freedom had been suppressed, once more Metternich had triumphed. Reasons for Thus both the Italian movements for a freer political of the ^ e ' mt ^ en dcd in disaster. The reasons for their failure movements are instructive and are important for an understanding of the of 1820. Italian problem. The Neapolitan revolution failed because of the European coalition forbidding its success, because of the treachery of the King, because of the illiberal treat- ment of Sicily by the revolutionists. That of Piedmont failed because it was the work of a small clique, had no broad basis of appeal to the people, lacked leadership and definite aims, neglected details, and also because of the opposition of the powers. Thus two revolutions had been overcome and the system of the Congress of Vienna preserved in Italy. There re- mained the more remote problem of Spain. The principle there, however, was the same and the Allies felt obliged to assert it. This was the work of the Congress of Verona. The revolution in Spain was still triumphant. The King and the reactionary parties could not by their own strength regain their old position. They appealed to the allied mon- archs and by 1822 they, thoroughly committed to the policy involved, decided at the Congress of Verona, that Russia, Austria, Prussia, and France, should send to their ministers in Madrid identical notes demandino; the immediate restora- The Con gress of Verona. INTERVENTION IN SPAIN 63 tion of Ferdinand VII to the fulness of his powers. In the event of the expected refusal the ministers should quit Madrid and war should be declared. England opposed this policy with high indignation, but in vain. France, now a thor- oughly reactionary country, was commissioned to carry out the work of restoring Ferdinand. The Spaniards refused to accede to the demand of the powers, and in April 1823 a French army of a hundred thousand under the Duke of Angouleme, heir presumptive to the French throne, crossed the Pyrenees. The Spanish Government had no army and no money and could not oppose the advance of the invaders with any vigor. The French spent six months in traversing the peninsula from north to south, meeting no serious resist- ance. The Cortes retired from Madrid to Cadiz before the invaders, taking the King with them. The siege of Cadiz was now begun. The war was soon over with the seizure of the fort of the Trocadero and Ferdinand was back upon his absolute throne, by act of France, supported by the Holy Alliance. There now began a period of odious reaction. All the Reaction in acts passed by the Cortes since 1820 were annulled. An s P ain - organization called the " Society of the Exterminating Angel " began a mad hunt for Liberals, throwing them into prison, shooting them down. The war of revenge knew no bounds. " Juntas of purification " helped it on. Thou- sands were driven from the country, hundreds were executed. The French Government, ashamed of its protege, endeavored to stop the savagery, but with slight success. It is an odious chapter in the history of Spain. The Holy Alliance by these triumphs in Naples, Piedmont, The and Spain, showed itself the dominant force in European tnum P n politics. The system, named after Metternich, because his fiance diplomacy had built it up and because he stood in the very center of it, seemed firmly established as the European system. But it had achieved its last notable triumph. It was now to receive a series of checks that were to limit it forever. 64 REVOLUTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY Against the decisions of the congresses we have passed in review, one power, England, had protested, though to no effect. England's prestige had steadily declined since the Congress of Vienna. The three eastern powers simply filed her protests against their intentions in their archives, paying no further heed. England, which had driven the French out of Spain ten years before, now saw them coming in again, this time with case and success. As England's influence abroad decreased the wrath of Englishmen grew, and with the advent of Canning to the cabinet England delivered some swift blows in retaliation, showing that she was still a power to be reckoned with. It was, of course, useless for her to think of opposing the three great military monarchies by arms. But the contest between her and them was now removed to a field where her authority would unquestionably prove decisive. Having restored the King of Spain to absolute power, the next wish of the Holy Alliance was to restore to Spain, and thus to monarchy, the revolted Spanish-American colonies. England let it be known that she would oppose any steps having this end in view, save those of the Spaniards them- selves, and, as she controlled the sea, her declaration virtually was that she would keep the Holy Alliance restricted to the continent of Europe and would prevent it from sending ships and troops to the scene of the revolt. She sought and received the co-operation of the United States in this purpose, though no alliance was formed and each power acted independently. The United States had approved the secession of the countries to the south of her, so plainly to her advantage and so evidently in imitation of her example. This Government had also in 1819 virtually forced Spain to cede Florida, hitherto a Spanish possession. And now, just after the close of the successful French invasion and the restoration of Ferdinand, the President of the United The Monroe States, James Monroe, in a message to Congress destined Doctrine. j. Q Dccome ono f t} lc mo st famous documents ever written THE MONROE DOCTRINE 65 in the White House, gave emphatic notice to the Holy Alliance of the attitude this country would assume in case it should endeavor to win back her colonies for Spain, should Spain herself be unable to do so. We should consider any attempt on the part of these absolute monarchies of Europe " to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety," and we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing the South American states " or controlling in any other manner, their destiny, by any European power, in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition to- wards the United States." These suggestions from England and the United States were sufficient to prevent the sum- moning of any new congress to consider the reconqucst of America and thus to add new laurels to the Holy Alliance. The doctrine of intervention had reached its high water mark as applied to the interests of reaction, had received an emphatic defiance — a defiance made the more resounding by the recognition shortly by England and the United States of the independence of the South American republics. Aus- tria, Russia, and Prussia protested against a course which " tended to encourage that revolutionary spirit it had been found so difficult to control in Europe." Canning proudly said, " We have called in the New World to redress the balance of the Old." On the other hand, Mctternich's opinion of Canning was that he was a " malevolent meteor hurled by an angry Providence upon Europe." The Metternich system, thus checked, was to receive before The long a series of blows from which it never recovered, in the Metter " nioli syS" overthrow of the restored Bourbons in France, in the Belgian tem » revolution of 1830, and, in a certain way, in the Greek war checked. of independence. CHAPTER IV FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION THE REIGN OF LOUIS XVIII The pro- No country in Europe had undergone between 1789 and fects of the *^ 15 S0 swce P m g an< ^ so vital a transformation as had French France, the birthplace of the Revolution and still the home Revolution, of its unrealized ideals. Institutions, feelings, aspirations, mental outlook of a kind quite new in Europe, had been adopted by millions of Frenchmen as a new evangel. Much had been irrevocably destroyed by the Revolution, much had been created, much had been merely sketched. It remained for the nineteenth century to fill in this outline. The old form of society to which France had been accustomed for centuries was gone and a type new to Europe, of immense proselytizing power, had been unfolded. The old had been one of privileged classes. The new was democratic. The three great institutions, agencies of the privileged few, which had long weighed down with paralyzing effect upon the mass of Frenchmen, the monarchy, the nobility, and the church, had been brought into subjection to the people, had been weak- ened immeasurably as controlling forces in the life of modern France. France had made a passionate effort to free her- self from all forms of aristocracy, temporal and ecclesiast- ical. France in 1815 was by far the most democratic coun- try in Europe, in her feelings, her thoughts, her customs, and her institutions. These changes had, however, not been brought about by the unanimous consent of the French people. The old privi- leged classes were, from the very nature of the case, sworn enemies of the new order which had been erected at their C3 THE RESTORATION OF THE BOURBONS 67 expense, and it was precisely because men were not agreed as to the permanence of the principles and decisions of the Revolution that the contest between the adherents of the old and the supporters of the new was to be carried over into the new era, and indeed still continues. The war of opinions which began with the Revolution was not ended in 1795 or in 1815, nor has it entirely ended yet, for the reason that not all Frenchmen have at any time been ready to accept the present fact, the status quo, but have tried repeatedly to re-open the discussion, and to modify, if not to reverse, the decision. This warfare is the warp and woof of French history in the nineteenth century. One thing, however, was settled at the outset. The old The regime was not to be restored. The Bourbons recovered the restoratlon right to rule only on condition that their monarchy should be jj our t, ons a constitutional one. The Allies who, as the phrase ran, not a had " brought back the Bourbons in their baggage," in- restoration sisted on this, believing- it the only means of assuring; the , . fc> J <=> regime. continuance of their rule, and Louis XVIII, rather than have a constitution forced upon him by the representatives of the French people, granted one himself. This procedure had the manifest advantage for him that he did not appear to receive his throne from the people on conditions imposed by them, that he did not at all recognize the revolutionary principle of popular sovereignty, that he appeared to rule solely by right of birth, by divine right, as had his ancestors. In the plenitude of his powers he would graciously grant certain privileges to his people. The monarchical principle would remain unblemished. Consequently, on his first return to France in 1814, he issued the most famous document con- The Con- nected with his name, the Constitutional Charter, which, stltuti0ILal • • Charter, suspended later during the Hundred Days, was revived in 1815 and remained in force until 1848, under three kings, Louis XVIII (1815-1824), Charles X (1824-1830), and Louis Philippe (1830-1848), only altered in some details in 1830 as a result of the revolution of that year. G8 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION The form of By this rift the King decreed that his own person should government. lui inviolable, that his ministers might ho impeached by the chambers, that he alone should possess all executive power, that he should command !lu' army and navy, declare war, make treaties, and appoint to all positions in the public services; that the legislative power should be exercised by himself and a legislature consisting of two houses, a Cham- ber o!' Peers and a Chamber of Deputies; that the king alone should propose all laws; that they then should be discussed by the chambers and accepted or rejected according to their desire, but not amended save with his consent. It" he should not propose a law desired by the chambers they might peti- tion him to do so ami might suggest the provisions they would like to see it contain, but it' the king should reject this petition it should not be again presented during the same session. No lax could hi' Levied without the consent of the chambers. A restricted The Chamber of Peers was to be appointed by the king suffrage. f Qr |j£ Gj ()r p 0J , hereditary transmission, as he might see fit. Its sessions were to be secret. The Chamber of Deputies was to consist of representatives chosen for a period of five years. Tlu' suffrage was carefully restricted by an age ami prop- erty qualification. Only those who were at hast thirty years of age and paid at least three hundred francs in direct taxes should have the right to vote for deputies, and only those were eligible to become deputies who were forty years of age or over and paid a direct tax of at least one thousand francs. These provisions were very favorable to tlu- wealthy. Indeed, tiny made the chamber a plutocratic body. There were less than 100,000 voters in France out of a population of 29,000,000, and not more than 12,000 were eligible to become deputies. Tlu" Charter proclaimed the equality of all Frenchmen, yet only a petty minority were given tlu' right to participate in the government of the country. France was still in a political sense a land of privilege, only privilege was no THE CONSTITUTIONAL CHARTER 69 longer based on birth but on fortune. Nevertheless, this was a more liberal form of government than she had ever had under Napoleon, and was the most, liberal to be seen iii Europe, outside of England. The number of voters and of those eligible as deputies increased with the increase of wealth. The influence of English example is apparent, in many of the provisions of the Charter. There was another set of provisions in this document of Provisions even greater importance than those determining the future * ........ civil form of government, namely, that in which the civil rights rights. of Frenchmen were narrated. These provisions show how much of the work of the Revolution and of Napoleon the Bourbons were prepared to accept. They were intended to reassure the people of France, who feared to see in the Restoration a loss of liberties or- rights which had become most precious to them. They were thus intended to win for the restored monarchy a popular support and a guarantee of permanence it thus far lacked. It was declared that all Frenchmen were equal before the law, whatever their titles or rank, and thus the cardinal principle of the Revolution was preserved; that all were equally eligible to civil and military positions, that thus no class should monopolize public service, as had largely been the case before the Kevolu- Recognition tion; that no one should be arrested or prosecuted save the i j /• i work of the by dui' process of law, that thus the day of arbitrary Revolution imprisonment was not to return; that there should be com- plete religious freedom for all sects, though Roman Cathol- icism was declared to be the religion of the state; that the press should be free " while conforming to the laws which arc necessary to restrain abuses of that liberty" — a phrase suspiciously elastic. Those who had purchased the con- fiscated property of the crown, the church, and the nobles, during the Revolution were assured that their titles were inviolable. The Napoleonic nobility was placed on an equal- ity with the old nobility of France, and the kino- (night create new peers at will, but nobility was henceforth simply 70 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION a social title carrying with it no privileges and no exemp- tions from taxation or the other burdens of the state. 1 Such were the concessions that Louis XYII1 was willing to make to the spirit of the times and the demands of the people. They constituted an open recognition of the fact that the France o( IS! 5 was not to be a restoration of the France of 1789. Certain phrases Of the Charter gave offense, but they were mainly those oi' the preamble in which the King- labored to maintain the claim o( the divine right of monarchy ami to connect his act with medieval precedents. These phrases were far-fetched and curiously archaic, but the fact remained that with all its limitations the Charter granted France a larger portion of self-government than it had enjoyed before, except during a brief period in the Revolu- tion. And it put the Bourbon monarchy on record as recognizing the principal results oi' the democratic evolution oi' society. The Restoration started out by accepting the centralized administrative system, the great law codes, the concordat, ami the nobility oi' Napoleon, and the social or- ganization created bv the Revolution. The political condition oi' France after 1815 was exceed- ingly troubled. The nation was divided into several parties whose animosity toward each other had only been embittered Louis bv the Hundred Days. Louis XYIIL restored for a second time by the victorious enemies oi' France, was eminently quali- fied to calm the seething passions of his countrymen and lead them in the necessary work of recuperation. He was natu- rally a man oi' moderate opinions. A thorough believer in the divine right oi monarchs and asserting the belief with fervor, he was, however, too clear-sighted to think that mon- archy of the type historic in France could be restored. He saw as clearly as any one in the realm the greatness of the changes that hail latterly been effected in France, and that 1 The Charter may be found in full in Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, No. !>:*. or in Univ. of Penn. Translations and Reprints, Vol. 1. No. 3, XVIII. 1755-1824 LOUIS XVIII 71 his very throne would be imperiled if he attempted to undo any of the important work of the Revolution. He willingly granted a constitution to his people, sharing with them the power which his ancestors had wielded alone. He preferred to rule as a constitutional king than not to rule at all. He had known the bitterness of the exile's life too well to desire to be compelled to " resume his travels " owing to any illiberal conduct on his part. The throne was for him only the " softest of chairs." ('old-blooded, skeptical, free from illusions, free from the passion of revenge, indolent by nature, he desired to avoid conflicts and to enjoy his power in peace. His policy, which from the beginning he at- tempted to carry out, was expressed by himself a few years later in these words : " The system which I have adopted . . is based on the maxim that it will never do to be the king of two peoples, and to the ultimate fusion of these — for their distinction is only too real — all the efforts of my government are directed." The personality of the King seemed, therefore, admirably The adapted for the problem that confronted France in 1815. difficulti « . . . of his But there were difficulties in the situation that foreboded s it ua tion. trouble. Louis XVIII had been restored by foreign armies. His presence on the throne was a constant reminder of the humiliation of France. Moreover, his strength lay not in himself but in the historic role of his house, in immemorial prescription, and the power of mere custom over the French mind had been greatly lessened during the past twenty- five years. But a more serious feature was his environ- ment. The court was now composed of the nobles who had suffered greatly from the Revolution, who had been robbed of their property, driven from the country, who had seen many of their relatives executed by the guillotine. It was but natural that these men should have come back full of hatred for the authors of their woes, that they should detest the ideas of the Revolution and the persons who had been identified with it. These men were not free from passion, as was 72 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION Louis XVI 1 1. More eager to restore the former glory of the crown, I lie former rank of the nobility and the clergy, more hitter toward the new ideas than the King himself, The Ultras, they were the Ultra-royalists, or Ultras — men more royalist than the King, as they claimed. They saw in the Revolution only robbery and sacrilege and gross injustice to them- selves. They bitterly assailed Louis XVIII for granting the Charter, a dangerous concession to the Revolution, and they secretly wished to abolish it, meanwhile desiring to nullify its liberal provisions as far as possible. They constituted the party of the Right. Their leader was the Count of Artois, brother of Louis XVIII, who, the King being childless, stood next in line of succession. These men, not very numerous, but very clamorous, formed the natural entourage of the monarch. The matter of most pressing importance to France was what power of resistance the King would show to this resolute and revengeful band. Would he in the end give way to them or would he be able to control them? The other parties in France in 1815 were shortly differen- tiated. There was the party of the Left. This was not so much a coherent group as a conglomeration of the disaffected. It included those who believed in a republic, who, however, were for some time so few as to be a negligible quantity. It also included the adherents of Napoleon. This class was numerous and composed chiefly of old soldiers who saw them- selves, the glory of the Napoleonic state, now degraded, put on half-pay, thrown into the background. These radical and discontented elements were opposed to the very existence of the Bourbon monarchy. But they were hopelessly dis- credited by the abuses and the failures of both the Republic and the Empire, The Center There were two other parties, called the Right Center parties. am i fj 10 L e £t Center. They comprised the body of moderate men who stood between the two extremes and were opposed to both. They were united by one bond — common loyalty to the Charter which the King had granted. They were the PARTIES IN FRANCE 73 convinced supporters of the constitutional regime, but they differed from each other in their interpretation of what the Charter should mean. The Right Center accepted it as a finality, to be carried out honestly and to the letter. The Left Center believed in its honest execution, but also be- lieved that, while the Charter should be thus observed, men should work for its further expansion, that as the years went by larger constitutional liberty should be accorded to the people. The Charter was for them not a finality but a stepping-stone. But further progress should be at- tempted only slowly and after full reflection. Of these four parties, two were distinctly unconstitutional — -the Ultras and the Radicals or Left. The former, professing a momentary lip service to the Charter, were resolved to alter it as soon as possible in fundamental and comprehensive ways. They were in principle opposed to a written constitution. They wished to restore the absolute authority of the king and the former privileged positions of clergy and nobility. The Charter stood bluntly in the way. Consequently, however much they might dissemble, they favored its ultimate abrogation. The Radicals favored its destruction for the opposite reason — that the Republic or the Empire might be restored, the Revolution made triumphant once more. The two middle parties were the friends of the new regime. The events of the first year seemed to show the great The White power of the Ultras. Reaction set in fast and furiously in eiror - 1815. There occurred a series of outrages that have come down in history as the White Terror, in contradistinction to the Red Terror of the Revolution. Immediately after the battle of Waterloo rioting broke out in Marseilles, led by Royalists, and resulting in much plundering and many murders. The movement spread to other departments in the south. Religious motives were added to the political, as the Protestants, particularly numerous in the south, had been strongly attached to the Revolution and to Napoleon and had welcomed the return of the latter from Elba. The white 74. FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION flag of the Bourbons was disgraced by these atrocities com- mitted by Royalists. The Government was in no sense the cause of them, but it was criminally negligent in not trying to repress them. With the meeting of the first legislative chambers this campaign of revenge and reaction became systematic and frenzied. The Chamber of Deputies was overwhelmingly Ultra-royalist, elected, as it had been, amid the terror and demoralization of the crashing Empire. It demanded satisfaction for the treachery of the Hundred Days. As a result Marshal Ncy, " the bravest of the brave," and other distinguished French soldiers, were condemned to death and shot — an everlasting disgrace to the Rourbon monarchy. The Chamber demanded repressive measures of various kinds from the King and got them. It demanded still more violent ones which the King would not concede. The dissension between the Moderate Royalists, represented by the King, the ministry, and the Chamber of Peers, on the one hand, and the Ultras, represented by the Count of Artois and the Chamber of Deputies on the other, soon reached a climax. The King himself said bitterly, " If these gentlemen had full liberty, they would end by purging even me." The representatives of the foreign governments intervened to say that so unreasonable a reaction must cease, in the in- terest of the stability of the Rourbon monarchy and of the peace oi' Europe. They feared that the revolutionary ele- ments of Fiance would break out again, stung by such in- sane legislation. The Ultras even went so far as to reject the budget, a blazing indiscretion, as it offended all who were financially interested in France, foreigners and French- Louis men. The King now took a decisive step, prorogued the XVIII Chamber, and then dissolved it. He then appealed to the clif*cks til 6 Ultras people to return a moderate Chamber. The appeal was wholly successful ami this mad reaction was speedily brought to a close. The Ultra majority was swept away and a large majority of Moderate Royalists was returned. France TIIK WORK OF RECONSTRUCTION 75 had weathered her first crisis in parliamentary government, but the temper of the Ultras had been shown with the vividness of lightning. France had had emphatic warn- ing of the danger that would lie in the triumph of that party. From 1810' to 1820 the Government, of France was able A period of to advance along more liberal lines. The two chief ministers, moderate t»- i i- t-» • n liberalism. Kichcheu and Decazes, both convinced adherents of the Bour- bon monarchy, were men who saw the utter folly of attempts at reaction such as those just witnessed and who believed that the pressing needs of France were wvy different from those of a faction bent on revenge. The two Centers now controlled Parliament, and for several years worked in har- mony with the King. They accomplished much for the rehabilitation of France. In 1815, it will be recalled, the Allies had imposed a large war indemnity on France, and had insisted that she support an army of occupation of 150,000 in eighteen fortresses of the northern and eastern departments for a minimum of three, a maximum of five, years. This was a great financial burden and a greater humiliation. The liberation of the soil of the The libera- foreign armies was a task which the Kinrj and the ministry on 6 . J territory, had very much at heart. To effect this the people had to make great sacrifices, for before it could be accomplished the national credit must be re-established and to effect this Frenchmen must pay higher taxes. This they did, and France proceeded to pay off the immense war indemnity more rapidly that the powers that had imposed it had ex- pected would be possible. By 1817 the Allies agreed to withdraw thirty thousand of their troops, and at the Con- gress of Aix-la -Chapelle in 1818 they agreed to withdraw tin remainder before the close of that year. Tbus the out- ward evidence of the .appalling national humiliation was re- moved. "I can die at peace," said Louis XVIII, "since I shall see France fnv and the French flag floating over every city of France." France was, for the first time since 1815, 76 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION Reorgani- zation of the army. mistress in her own house. The foreign ambassadors ceased their weekly meetings in Paris, designed for the drafting of advice to be given to the French Government. The foreign tutelage was over. The reorganization of the army was undertaken at this time. The military power of France had been sadly shattered in the general downfall of the Napoleonic system. The army was reduced to a few corps kept up by voluntary enlistment. Now that the foreign troops were to be withdrawn and France was to resume her full place in international affairs it was necessary to create an army that should command respect. There were, however, difficulties in the way. A large army could not be raised by volunteering. And yet forced military service had become, under Napoleon, so hateful a burden that it had been expressly forbidden in the Charter. A com- bination of the two methods lay at the basis of the new law. Voluntary enlistments were still to furnish the bulk of the army. If these should not be sufficient recourse should be had to compulsion to complete the corps. All young men of twenty years of age should draw lots. The " bad numbers " alone would be forced to serve for six years. Forty thousand might thus by these two processes be enrolled every year. Having served in the active army six years, they should pass into the reserve army for six years more. This reserve should be used only in defense of the soil of France, should not be ordered out of the country. It was estimated that thus there would be an army of 24-0,000 men on a peace footing. Promotion was to be for service and merit and was to be equally open to all. The bill was violently opposed by the Ultras for the reason that it destroyed all hope of the nobility monopolizing the positions in the army. Their chances were simply the same as those of other men. The bill became law in 1818. Thus the basis of the military in- stitutions was firmly laid. The army as thus constituted lasted with some alterations of detail down to 1868, surviving many violent changes in French history. THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM 77 On two other subjects this moderate ministry of Riche- The lieu carried important legislation, the electoral system and the liberty of the press. Concerning both matters the Charter had merely laid down general principles, leaving the manner in which they should be applied to be determined by the legislature in special laws. A liberty so large enabled the legislature to determine the real character, the range, and effect of two fundamental privileges, and as the different parties soon saw that by framing the laws in this way, or in that, they could further their own interests, both matters became the subject of passionate contention in parliament all through the period of the Restoration, and laws very dissimilar in character and in effect were passed as first one party, then another, gained ascendency in the state. Moderates and Ultras differed on these questions as on others. Concerning the electoral system, the ideas of the Mod- erates were shown in the law of 1817, passed by the Richelieu- Decazes ministry. The Charter merely stated the qualifica- tions required of voters and of deputies. The manner in which the voters should elect the deputies was not defined. The law of 1817 established the system of the so-called gen- eral ticket (scrutin de liste) ; that is, the voters of each de- partment should meet in the chief town of the department, and there elect all the deputies to which the department was entitled. This system favored the Moderates and Liberals, who belonged generally to the bourgeoisie, to the industrial and trading classes, largely an urban population, whereas the country gentlemen, the landed proprietors and their tenants, living in the country, were chiefly Ultras, members or adherents of the aristocracy of the old regime. Many of these found it difficult or expensive or annoying to make the trip to the chief town of the department, where alone they could cast their votes. Thus the law, which remained in force from 1817 to 1820, favored the Moderates as each succeeding election showed. 78 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION The press There was passed in 1819 a press law, much more liberal ■ than that of the Napoleonic period) which had, in the main, been carried over into the first years of the Restoration. The censorship was abolished, and press cases were hence- forth to be tried before juries. But even under this system newspapers were a luxury, enjoyed only by the rich and well- to-do, as they were not sold by the single copy but only to subscribers at a high price, and in addition there was a stamp tax on each copy of two cents, and a postage duty of one cent. Moreover, while freedom in establishing newspapers was guaranteed, as a matter of fact only the well-to-do could establish them, owing to the large preliminary deposit re- quired of their proprietors, which was to serve as a guaranty fund for the payment of fines that might be inflicted as a result of damage suits. Activity of Rut this body of liberal legislation rested upon an insecure basis, the favor of the King, and the coherence of the great mass of moderate men, the Centers. The Ultras did not re- linquish their activity and were alert to seize upon every incident that might discredit the party in power. Nor had they long to wait. Events shortly occurred that aroused misgivings among the most timid of the Moderates, tending to drive them over to the Ultras, events, too, that shook the firmness of the King. According to the Charter there was to be a partial renewal of the Chamber of Deputies each year, one-fifth of that body passing out, and their places being filled by new elections. These elections showed a distinct trend in favor of the Radical party, or party of the Left. At the first renewal in 1817, twenty-five " independents " of the Left were returned; in 1818 the result was similar, the Left increasing to forty-five. Among them were Lafayette and Manuel, both prominent figures in the Revolution. Now the principles of the Left were not only liberal, but were largely anti-dynastic. While that wing acquiesced in the existence oi' the Rourbon monarchy, it might at any time become actively opposed to it. THE ELECTION OF ABBE GREGOIRE 79 The flections in 1819 added greatly to the growing Left — Election of it numbering now ninety out of a total of 258. But more damaging than the number was the character of some of the members chosen, particularly of Gregoire. Gregoire had played a prominent role in the Revolution, having been a member of the Constituent Assembly and of the Conven- tion. He had aided in the overthrow of the Roman Catholic Church. He had shown himself a fervid republican. A remark of his that kings are in the moral world what monsters are in the physical had had an immense notoriety, and was not yet forgotten. He was not a regicide, as he was absent from Paris at the time of the trial of Louis XVI, but he was, owing to his utterances, commonly considered one. No man was more odious to the Ultras and his election to the Chamber outraged their deepest feelings. Some of them had themselves helped bring about his election, believ- ing that the triumph of so notable a revolutionary would help them in upsetting the mild policy of the ministry and bring about the longed-for reaction. In this they were largely right, as this election aroused consternation in the ranks of those who had hitherto been moderate, and drove many into the camp of the Ultras. The chief minister, Decazes, (Richelieu having previously resigned), was con- vinced that some change must be made in the policy of the Government. The Ultras raged against this " regicidal priest," declared that either he must yield to the dynasty or the dynasty to him, and in a stormy session and amid shouts of " Long live the King," voted his exclusion from the Chamber, to which he had been chosen. The freedom of elections was thus grossly violated, as well as the promise of the Charter that the past should be forgotten. But an event far more damaging to the Moderates now Murder of occurred— the murder of the Duke of Berry. The Duke the Duke ol Berry, was the younger son of the Count of Artois, and as his elder brother, the Duke of Angouleme, had no heir, he was the hope of the dynasty. At about eleven o'clock on the even- 80 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION Electoral law of 1820. ing of February 13, 1820, as he was helping' his wife into a carriage at the door of the Opera, lie was violently attacked by a man, named Louvel, who plunged a dagger into his breast. The Duke died in the opera house at five o'clock, surrounded by the royal family, and demanding pardon for the murderer. The murderer desired to cut off the Bourbon line, which he thought he could do as the Duke had no children. His act was his own ; he had no accomplices. But the Royalists at once asserted that the Liberal party was responsible and that anarchy was the natural result of the policy of liberalism. Their opposition was directed against the ministry under Dccazes, whom they succeeded in forcing to resign. At his resignation Louis XVIII is said to have remarked, " It is over with me," meaning that from that time on his policy of reconciliation was over, that the party headed by the Count of Artois would control. This was virtually to be the case. In 1820 began the great royalist reaction, started in 1815, suspended from 1816 to 1820, when the more moderate policies prevailed, and destined now to last with but a single slight interruption until 1830, when it culminated in a new revolution. The Right, now in control, proceeded to undo much of the work of the preceding ministries. By the electoral law of 1820 that of 1817 was rescinded, and a new system brought into existence. The Chamber of Deputies was enlarged from 258 members to 430, an increase of 172. The electors of deputies were no longer to meet together in the chief town of the department and vote for all the deputies from that department, but were to be divided into as many groups or colleges as there were arrondissements or districts in the department. Each voter was therefore to vote for one deputy only, the one from his district. Thus the principle of single- member constituencies was adopted. This arrangement would be advantageous to the Ultras, as the country gentle- men and their tenants, supporters of that party, no longer having to make the journey to the chief THE LAW OF THE DOUBLE VOTE 81 town, but enabled to vote at places nearer home, would come to the polls in larger numbers. In this way 258 members were to be chosen. The other 172 were to be elected in a special manner. At the chief town of each department were to meet one-fourth of the voters, those who paid the heaviest taxes, and they were to choose the additional 172. This method, of course, greatly augmented the power of the rich. It thus happened that about twelve thousand voters had the right to vote twice, once in the district and once in the de- partment college, and similarly were twice represented — by the deputies chosen in both ways, in both of which elections they participated. Hence this electoral law of 1820 was called the law of the double vote. Moreover, the president of each The double electoral college was to be chosen by the central government vo e " and the voters must write out their ballots in his presence and hand them to him unfolded — an excellent device for enabling the Government to bring pressure upon them in favor of its candidates. This bill was hotly contested in the Chamber and outside. The debate was long and im- passioned, participated in by over a hundred and twenty members. The principle of the law, the double vote, was adopted only by a majority of five. Hailed with enthusiasm by the Ultras it assured their ascendency. By 1824 the independents, or Radicals, numbered only seven. The liberal press law of 1819 went the same way after a The censor- brief existence of ten months. It was rescinded. The cen- s ip f e " stored, sorslnp was restored. No journal could be founded without the Government's consent, no single issue could appear with- out the censor's permission, the Government might suspend its publication for six months, and even under certain con- ditions suppress it (1820). This control, which would ap- pear sufficient, was strengthened two years later by an additional law which enabled the Government to suppress publications even for " tendencies " when no definite infrac- tion of the law could be proved. Armed with these powerful instruments for the control 82 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION French invasion of Spain. of elections and of the organs of opinion and agitation, the Ultras pushed confidently forward, and their future appeared assured by the birth of a posthumous son of* the Duke of Berry. They forced the King to said an army into Spain to restore Ferdinand VII to an absolute throne in the interests of the Holy Alliance (1S^;5). They thus hoped to throw military glamor over the restored House of Rourbon, to efface by dazzling exploits the uncomfortable memory of those performed by Napoleon. Flushed with an easy victory in Spain, the Ultras resumed the policy of political and re- liflioUS reaction at home with great enthusiasm. Triumph of Thinking that a new election of the Chamber of Deputies held during the war fever would result overwhemingly in its favor, the Villele ministry (1828 1828) caused the existing Chamber to be dissolved and new elections to be ordered. They were held in February 1824, and resulted as desired in a sweeping triumph of the Ultras. Of the 480 deputies elected only fifteen were Liberals. This triumph had been achieved only by the grossest abuse of power on the part of the Government, which stopped at nothing to gain its ends. It even went so far as to relieve many prominent Liberals of taxes, so that they could not meet the tax qualification for voters or for membership in the Chamber. A law was now passed decreeing that the new Chamber should last seven years, to be entirely reconstructed at the end of that time. This was an arbitrary change in the Charter. The reactionary party, now overwhelmingly in the major- ity in the Chamber, and declaring that that Chamber should Tiot be altered for seven years, thus lengthening the term and suppressing the annual partial renewal, considered that it could safely advance to the realization of its most cherished plans, too long helil in abeyance. Their project was helped T by the death in 1824 of Louis XYIII, and the accession to Louis XVIII. power of his brother, the Count of Artois, who assumed the title of Charles X. Charles had virtually directed the policy CHARACTER OF CHARLES X 83 of his brother for several years. His accession, however, would necessarily give it additional impetus. He needed only six years thoroughly to uproot the elder branch of the House of Rourbon. THE REIGN OF CHARLES X The characteristics of the new King were well known. He Charles X, was the convinced leader of the reactionaries in France from 1814 to 1830. He had been the constant and bitter oppo- nent of his brother's liberalism, and had finally seen that liberalism forced to yield to the growing strength of the party which he led. He was not likely to abandon lifelong principles at the age of sixty-seven, and at the moment when he seemed about to be able to put them into force. Louis XVIII had made an honest effort to reconcile the two social regimes and systems into which Frenchmen were di- vided — the old pre-revolutionary regime and the new regime, the product of the Revolution, the old nobility and the modern middle class with its principle of equality before the law. The nobility had returned from abroad unchanged, with ideas of feudal privileges, with the determination to restore as much as possible of the old power of the landed aristocracy and of the church, faithful support of the monarchy by divine right. The policy of reconciliation had been badly shattered during the closing years of Louis XVIII's reign* With the accession of Charles X it was Policy of entirely abandoned, and that of restoration vigorously at- the new tempted. Not that this was proclaimed from the housetops. Charles rather at first attempted to reassure the somewhat perturbed mind of the nation. He announced his firm in- tention to support the Charter, and declared that all Frenchmen were, in his eyes, equal. He liberated political prisoners and won great applause by abolishing the censor- ship of the press. But these halcyon days were limited to the inauguration of the new Government. At the corona- tion of the King, France was treated to a spectacle of St- PRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION medieval mummery thai impressed most unpleasantly a people that had for a generation been living in the posi- tive realities o( the modern spirit. It seemed the most incredible height of absurdity to see the King anointed on seven parts of his person with saered oil, miraculously pre- served, it was asserted, and dating from the time of Clovis, Nor could France, in the modern scientific atmosphere, gravely believe, as il was asked to, in the power of the king's touch, Beranger's witty poem on Charles the Simple was on everybody's lips. The nobles But the legislation now brought forward by the King, and largely enacted, showed the belated political and Social ideas for property * ' confiscated °' * n ' s Government. It was first proposed to grant nine dining the hundred and eighty-eight million t'ranes to the nobility whose Revolution. lan(Js h , ul luvn con fi scate< j d ur i ng the Revolution and sold as M national property " to private individuals. The Charter explicitly assured the purchasers of this land that they should not be molested in their possession. Hut the courtiers, despite this assurance, were demanding the restoration of their estates to themselves. The King expressed the belief that by this act the last wounds of the Revolution would be closed. The emigres should not receive their lands, but they should receive a money indemnification. The debates on this proposal were heated. Many of the Ultra-royalists criticised it, saying that the sum proposed , was entirely Insufficient. Many rejected the very idea of indemnification, but demanded that the "stolen goods" themselves be given back. That there was an article in the Charter preventing this they did not consider a legitimate obstacle. The Opposition, however, did not lack arguments. Had the descendants ot' those whose property hail been seised after the revocation of the Edict oi Nantes ever been indemnified? Hail the emigres suffered so much more than others from the Revolution that tiny alone should be compensated for their losses? It might be right to compensate those who had COMPENSATION OF THE EMIGRES 85 had to flee from France to save their lives, but, many of these emigres who were now to help themselves out. of the public treasury had fled voluntarily in order to bring about an invasion of France by foreigners, and, when that invasion had occurred, had themselves joined it and borne arms against France. Confiscation of property was a very proper pun- ishment for such persons. Again, those who had remained at home and defended the fatherland had suffered as much as those who had emigrated and then invaded it. Further- more, this measure woidd aid only the landed proprietors, but many fortunes, based upon personal property, had like- wise been destroyed by the Revolution. The bill passed (1825) and became law, though the Op- position in the Chamber of Deputies was larger than had been expected. Charles called it-" an act of justice." It w;is perhaps wise in the sense that all purchasers of national domains, who, despite the assurance of the Charter, were constantly threatened, were henceforth safe. The value of these properties immediately rose in the market. But while the act. pleased the emigres and satisfied the purchasers of their domains, it offended the great mass of Frenchmen. The manner in which the transaction was to be carried into Method of effect was as follows: the sum involved was estimated at about P ayinff e indemnity, a billion francs; the financial condition of the state did not permit the outright payment of -so immense a capital; it was (h-c\(U(\, therefore, to pay not the capital but the interest each year. This, it was estimated, would increase the annual expenditures of the state by about thirty millions. 1 This sum was procured by the conversion of the existing debt of France from a five per cent, to a three per cent, basis, thus saving about 28,000,000 francs in interest charges. In this way the indemnification of the emigres would be effected without an increase in taxes. But this new act offended the nation's bondholders, who saw their income arbitrarily reduced by 'As a matter of fact, interest was paid not on a billion but on about 625,000,000 francs. 86 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION The law against sacrilege. Clerical reaction. two-fifths. Thus the monarchy made enemies of a powerful class of capitalists, particularly the hankers of Paris. Money was taken from Peter to pay Paul. The strength of this class, which felt itself outrageously defrauded, was to be shown in 18;30 to the great discomfiture of the Bourbon monarchy. Another law that cast discredit upon this reign, and helped undermine it with the great mass of Frenchmen, was the law against sacrilege. By this act burglaries committed in ecclesiastical buildings and the profanation of holy vessels were, under certain conditions, made punishable with death. This barbaric law was, as a matter of fact, never enforced, but it bore striking witness to the temper of the party in power, and has ever since been a mark of shame upon the Bourbon monarchy. It helped to weaken the hold of the Bourbons upon France. It created a feeling of intense bitterness among the middle and lower classes of society, which were still largely dominated by the rationalism of the eighteenth century. They began to fear the clerical re- action more even than the political and social. The re- newed missionary zeal of the church, the denunciation by Catholic bishops of civil marriage as concubinage, the open and great activity of the Jesuits, a society that had been declared illegal in France, all indicated the growing influence of the clergy in the state, au impression not decreased when, in 18.^0'. the Papal Jubilee was celebrated with great elab- orateness, and Frenchmen saw the King himself', clad in the violet robe of a prelate and accompanied by the court, walking in a religious procession through the streets of Paris. The university was under the control of the local bishop, who kept watch over professors whose opinions were denounced as dangerous, and who suspended many of their courses, as, for instance, those of Cousin and Guizot. Was it the purpose of the dominant party to restore both the nobility and the church to the proud position they had occupied before the Revolution? PROPOSED LAW OF INHERITANCE 87 Criticism of the evident, policy of the Government was Attempt to becoming general and ominous. Rut the ministry proceeded re " estab 1S " .... .,, . P the prin- uith its plans with unusual fatuousness. It now attacked cip i e of what was regarded as one of the most precious acquisitions primo- of the Revolution, the right to an equal division of an in- & enit ure. heritance among all the heirs. The ministry brought for- ward a proposal, quite modest in its scope, to re-establish the principle of primogeniture. The Civil Code provided that in case the deceased died without leaving a will, his real estate should be apportioned equally among his heirs; and this equal division was to be made of most of his property in land, even if he did leave a will. He was given liberty freely to dispose by will of only a portion larger or smaller, according to the number of children. The proposal now made was that this disposable part, which a man might will to his eldest son if he chose, should go to him likewise, if there were no will, as a legal advantage over the other children. This was to be the law only for those who paid three hundred francs in direct taxes. As a matter of fact this law would affect probably not more than eighty thousand families out of six million. Furthermore, the father was in no way forced to constitute this preference for his eldest son, since he was left full liberty of testa- mentary disposition. Yet the mere suggestion threw the country into commotion. The prevailing thought was ex- pressed by the Duke of Broglie, who said: "This is no law. It is a manifesto against existing society. It is a forerunner of twenty other laws which, if your wisdom does not prevent it, will break in upon us and will leave no rest to the society of France, which has been the growth of the last forty years." The proposition was defeated in the Chamber of Peers. For several nights the streets of Runs were illuminated in gratitude for this escape from feudalism. These measures and failures, which were costing the min- istry much popularity, were crowned by an attempt to render 88 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION Attempt to the press law more stringent. Charles X had long since re- es roy e „ rc tf- ec i j-,j s ac j. j n abolishing the censorship. A bill was freedom of ° . . the press. now proposed which wound an amazing mesh around the printing presses of France. So sweeping was it in char- acter, giving the Government a practically unlimited con- trol of all publications, both periodical, like the daily papers, and non-periodical, that it aroused immediately a remark- able opposition. It was denounced as barbaric by Chateau- briand, the foremost man of letters in France. " Printing," said Casimir-Perier, "is suppressed in France to the ad- vantage of Belgium." Those engaged in this business, as well as the prominent writers and members of the French Academy, protested with vigor. The bill passed the Chamber of Deputies, but in the Chamber of Peers an oppo- sition so intense developed that the ministry deemed it wise to withdraw the measure before it came to a vote. Paris was illuminated in honor of this escape. The provinces imitated the capital. These outbursts of joy were occa- sioned not only by the withdrawal of the press law. The people were already celebrating the fall of the hated Villele ministry, which was felt to be imminent. Disband- The mistakes of this ministry, however, were not yet over, ment of the A ffiw d ftfter the withc | rawa ] of this press bm the Na _ National , J . , r Guard. tional Guard was reviewed by the King. The King was personally received with much warmth, but cries of " Long live the Charter," " Down with the Ministers, down with the Jesuits," were heard from the troops. Villele at once de- manded that these troops be disbanded. The King consented and it was done. This was a mistake for two reasons : be- cause it offended the bourgeoisie of Paris, thus far opposed to the ministry but loyal to the King, and because the men were permitted to retain their arms, of which three years later they were to make effective use. The ministry, conscious of rapidly waning power, did not propose to yield, but attempted to crush the opposition. It had been unable to get the press bill through Parliament. THE MARTIGNAC MINISTRY 89 The chief resistance the ministry had encountered had come Attempt to from the Chamber of Peers, which had favored a moderate s amp ou the opposi- policy. Villele thought to overcome this by packing that tion in p ar . chamber with men who would support the ministry through liament. thick and thin. Consequently seventy-six new peers were created, enough, it was thought, to enable the ministry to control that body thenceforth. But it was also clear that the opposition was growing in the Chamber of Deputies too. Although the ministry was able to get its measures through that chamber, its majority was gradually becoming smaller. Villele therefore decided to dissolve the Chamber, although it had yet four years to run. He expected by manipulation of the election to get an assembly in its place overwhelmingly in favor of the ministry. Thus, with the press shackled, and the Chamber of Peers and Chamber of Deputies con- trolled, the ministry could retrieve the rebuffs it had recently experienced and carry out its policy in all its vigor. Never did a minister make a greater mistake. The min- istry was ovenvhelmingly defeated in the elections. Its sup- porters numbered only 170; the combined opposing elements counted 250. Villele retired from office. The Martignac ministry now came in in January 1828. The The difficulties in its way were numerous. It had neither a . f J ministry. the favor of the King, nor the hearty support of the Chambers. Charles X told the new ministers, " Villele's pol- icy was mine, and I hope you will endeavor to carry it out as best you can." Martignac, however, made no such at- tempt, but strove rather to carry out a liberal policy, some- what like that of the years 1816-20. The professors, Guizot, Villemain, whose courses Villele had stopped, were reinstated. A somewhat more liberal press law was carried, abolishing censorship and the offense of " tendency." An educational law was enacted directed against the Jesuits and intended to please the more liberal religious element. But Martignac's course suited neither the Right nor the Left, and he shortly resigned. This pleased Charles X, who re- Polignac ministry 90 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION sented the liberalism of the ministry. Charles believed that he had the right to choose the ministers to suit himself, whether they pleased the Chamber or not. " I would rather saw wood," he said, " than be a king of the English type." The With the fall of the Martignac ministry in 1829 fell also the last attempt made under the rule of the Bourbon Legiti- mists to fuse old and new France, to reconcile monarchy and constitutional freedom. The announcement of the new min- isters was received with great popular indignation. The chief minister was Polignac, son of the Countess of Poli- gnac, the friend of Marie Antoinette. Polignac had been one of the leaders of the emigres at the outbreak of the Revolution, had joined in the Cadoudal conspiracy against Napoleon, had been sentenced to death, but had escaped with simply imprisonment, owing to the intervention of Josephine. In 1815 he had protested against the Charter, and had long refused to take the oath to support it. He had for years been very closely identified with Charles X, and had favored the most extreme laws proposed by him. Other ministers were Bourmont in the War Office, a man who was commonly supposed to have been a traitor to Napoleon, consequently to France, in 1815, and Labourdonnaye, Minister of the Interior, connected in the popular mind with the White Terror of 1815. Even Metternich, who could ordinarily view a policy of reaction with fortitude, considered the advent of such a ministry a matter of considerable gravity. " The change in the ministry is of the first importance," he wrote. " All the new ministers are pure royalists. Everything about the episode means counter-revolution." The feeling, that the appointment of this ministry was virtually a declara- tion of war to the bitter end against the modern society of France, was widespread, and was shared by all parties. Journals whose loyalty to the Bourbon monarchy w r as un- impeachable attacked the new ministry at once and in the most vigorous fashion. Liberals of every shade began to organize to meet the CONFLICT BETWEEN KING AND CHAMBER 91 dangers which they felt were coming 1 . Societies were formed. Widespread Old societies, like the Carbonari, renewed their activity. opposi lon J to the Men began to say that the House of Bourbon and a con- ministry. stitution were two incompatible terms. A faction was organ- ized to prepare the way to the throne of the Duke of Orleans. Men began to study those chapters of English history which told how one prince could be put aside for another more to the liking of the nation. The groups op- posed to the new ministry differed widely from each other in belief and purpose, Orleanists, Bonapartists, Republicans ; but they were temporarily united in a common opposition. Indignation at the appointment of such a ministry was both widespread and deep, and became all the more vehement when Polignac declared his object to be " to reorganize society, to restore to the clergy its former preponderance in the state, to create a powerful aristocracy and to surround it with privileges." For the time being, however, the ministry remained in- Conflict active, apparently amazed and checked by the remarkable ebullition of hostile feeling its appointment had called forth an a t ne with the meeting of the Chambers. Early in March 1830 Chamber of began a conflict which, short and sharp, ended in the over- epu l throw and exile of Charles X. The King opened the session with a speech which clearly revealed his irritation at the Opposition, and his emphatic intention to support the min- istry. The Chamber of Deputies, not at all intimidated, replied by an Address to the King, passed by a vote of 221 to 181, which was virtually a demand for the dismissal of the unpopular ministry, that thus " constitutional harmony " might be restored. The King replied by declaring that " his decisions were unchangeable," and by dissolving the Chamber, hoping by means of new elections to secure one subservient to his will. But the people thought otherwise. The elec- tions resulted in a crushing defeat for the King and his ministry. Of the 221 who had voted for the Address, 202 were returned; of the 181 who had voted against it only 92 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION 99 were returned. The total Opposition was increased from 221 to 270. The ministry could count on less than 150 votes in the new Chamber. The voters had spoken decisively. This Liberal majority was not opposed to the monarchy. Had the King been willing to make some concessions, had he dismissed the ministry, the majority of the Opposition would have been satisfied. Charles X was urged to take this course by the most absolute of rulers, the Emperor Alexander, and by the most absolute of ministers, Metternich. Polignac was willing to go. But Charles had so conspicuously identified himself with his minister that yielding on that point seemed to him like abdicating. His own brother, Louis XVI, had come to a tragic end, he said, because he had made conces- sions. The ministry remained. Tne Charles was unconquerably stubborn. Other methods of ordinances .. , . , , * m -i i it i . . gaining Ins ends having failed, he now determined upon coercion. He resolved to issue a series of ordinances to meet the demands of the situation. The ordinances consequently appeared in the Moniteur, the official organ, July 26, 1830. They were four in number. The first suspended the liberty of the press. For the publication of any periodical a pre- liminary authorization of the Government was thenceforth to be required. This authorization must be renewed every three months and might be revoked at any moment. Thus the edi- tors of France could not lawfully publish another issue without obtaining the permission of the Government. This, it was supposed, would effectually silence the opposition press. The second ordinance dissolved the Chamber of Deputies, just elected and overwhelmingly against the ministry, before that Chamber had ever met. This was to sport with the voters' rights to choose the deputies whom they desired. The reason assigned for this step was that during the late elections methods had been used " to deceive and mislead the electors." To prevent the recurrence of such manoeuvers a third ordinance was issued gravely altering the electoral system. The number of deputies was reduced again to 258, THE JULY ORDINANCES 93 one-fifth renewable each year. The property qualification for the suffrage was so manipulated as practically to ex- clude the rich bourgeoisie, merchants, and manufacturers, liberals and partisans of the new regime born of the Revolu- tion, and to lodge political power almost entirely in the hands of the class of great landed proprietors, chiefly mem- bers of the nobility of the old regime. The electorate was hereby reduced by about three-fourths. Instead of about 100,000 voters there were now to be about 25,000. The fourth ordinance ordered new elections and fixed the date for the meeting of the new Chamber of Deputies that would emerge from those elections. The King had persuaded himself that in issuing these ordi- Charles X's nances he was acting not against the Charter but in con- formity with it. He based his right upon an interpretation charter, of Article 14, which gave him the power to make " the necessary regulations and ordinances for the execution of the laws and the safety of the state." He held that the king alone had the right to interpret the Charter, as the king alone had granted it. His interpretation was monstrous and his application of it pure absolutism, since, if the ordi- nances were legal, the most carefully safeguarded clauses of the Charter could be made null and void by the monarch's act. Needless to say, the Charter did not give the king the right to alter or abolish the fundamental provisions of the Charter. If so the French people would enjoy their liberties simply at the humor of the monarch. Not to have opposed these ordinances would hr.ve been to acquiesce quietly in the transformation of the French government into the absolute monarchy of the time of Louis XIV. If the French cared for the liberties they enjoyed, they could not permit this action of the King to stand. They must repel the assault upon their political system to whatever extent might be necessary, for the first and third ordinances were plainly violations of the Charter. Yet Charles X and his minister, Polignac, were confident 94 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION judgment. The King's that there would be no trouble. The ordinances affected, they said, only a few people — newspaper men and those who had the right to vote — an exceedingly small minority. No right that the masses of the people enjoyed was infringed. The people, therefore, would have no motive or desire to rise to aid simply the privileged few. It was the belief of the ministry that the mass of the nation was indifferent to the electoral law and was satisfied with material pros- perity. The Government, entertaining this view of the situation, took no serious precautions against trouble. The Minister of Police assured his colleagues that Paris would not stir. Charles X, having signed the fateful decrees, and feeling secure, went off to hunt at Rambouillet. On his return that evening everything was quiet and the Duchess of Berry congratulated him that at last he was king. The constitutional party, in truth, was poorly organized for resistance and moved slowly. The ordinances were aimed at the newspapers and the Chamber. The Chamber had not yet met. Its members were scattered over France, although some were in Paris. The first step in resistance was taken by the liberal editors of Paris. Under the leader- ship of Thiers they published a protest. " The reign of law has been interrupted; that of force has begun. The Government has violated the law; we are absolved from obedience. We shall attempt to publish our papers without asking for the authorization which is imposed upon us. The Government has this day lost the character of legality which gives it the right to exact obedience. We shall resist it in that which concerns ourselves. It is for France to decide how far her own resistance shall extend." On the following day the liberal members of the Chamber of Depu- ties drew up a formal protest against the ordinances, but outlined no course of action. The Revolution of 1830, however, was not to be accomplished by the journalists or the deputies. As the significance of the ordinances came to be more The opposi- tion of the liberal editors of Paris. THE JULY REVOLUTION 95 clearly seen, popular anger began to manifest itself. Crowds assembled in the streets shouting "Down with the Minis- try!"; "Long live the Charter!" Fuel was added to the rising flame by the appointment of Marmont, odious as a traitor to France in 1814, to the command of the troops in. Paris. The workmen of the printing establishments, thrown out of employment, began agitating, and other workmen joined them. On Wednesday, July 28, civil war broke out. The in- The July surgents were mainly old soldiers, Carbonari, and a group of Revolution. republicans and workmen — men who hated the Bourbons, who followed the tricolor Hag as the true national emblem, rather than the white flag of the royal house. This war lasted three days. It was the duly Revolution-- the (Jlorious Three Days. It was a street war' and was limited to Paris. The insurgents were not very numerous, probably not more than ten thousand. Put the Government had itself prob- ably not more than fourteen thousand troops in Paris. The insurrection was not difficult to organize. The streets of I'm i is were narrow and crooked. Through such tortuous lanes it was impossible for the Government to send artillery, a weapon which it alone possessed. The streets were paved The with large stones. These could be torn up and piled in cnaracter /. <• , • T of the such a way as to make fortresses lor the insurgents. In fluting. the night of the 27th-28th the streets were cut up by hun- dreds of barricades made in this manner of paving stones, of overturned wagons, of barrels and boxes, of furniture, of trees and objects of every description. Against such ob- stacles the soldiers could make but little progress. If they overthrew a barricade and passed on, it would immediately be built ii}) again behind them more threatening than before because' cutting their line of reinforcements and of possible retreat. Moreover, the soldiers had only the flint-lock gun, a weapon no better than that in the hands of insurgents. Again, the officers had no knowledge of street fighting, where- as the insurgents had an intimate knowledge of the city, of The ordinances withdrawn. 90 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION its st roots and lanes. Moreover, the soldiers were reluctant to fight against the people. The fighting continued two days amid the fierce heat of July. About si\ hundred lives were lost. Finally Charles, seeing his troops worsted and gradually driven back out of the city, determined to with- draw the ordinances. His messengers, who were bringing this news to the Insurgents, were greeted with cries of "Too late, too late!" The insurgents were no longer content with the withdrawal of the odious measures that had pre- cipitated the contest. They would have nothing more to do with Charles X. But the determination of the govern- ment to succeed his was a delicate matter. Those who had done the actual fighting undoubtedly wanted the republic. But tho journalists ami deputies ami the majority of the Parisians were opposed to such a solution. They now took The the aggressive and skilfully brought forward the candidacy can i acy o ^ i ou ; s Philippe, Duke of Orleans, representing a younger of Louis ... , Philippe. branch oi the royal family, a man who had always sympa- thized with liberal opinions. On July 80 appeared a mani- festo writ ton by Thiers in the interest of this candidacy, running as follows: "Charles X may no longer return to Paris: he has caused the blood of the people to flow. Tho Republic would expose us to frightful divisions; it would embroil us with Europe. Tho Duke o( Orleans is a prince devoted to the cause of the Revolution. . . . Tho Duke of Orleans is a citizen king. Tho Duke of Orleans has borne the tricolors in the boat of battle. The Duke of Orleans alone can again boar them; we wish no others. The Duke of Orleans makes no announcement. He awaits our will. Let us proclaim that will and he will accept the Charter, as we have always understood it ami desired it. From the French people will he hold his crown." On the following day the deputies who wore in Paris met and invited the Duke of Orleans " to exercise the functions of Lieutenant-General of the Kingdom." In a proclamation announcing this fact to the people it was stated: "He will ABDICATION OF CHARLES X 97 respect our rights, for lie will hold his from us." The Duke of Orleans accepted the position until the opening of the Chambers which should determine upon the future form of government for France. Fie added, "The Charter shall henceforth be a reality." But the transition from the old to the new was not yet completed. The people, who, during these three hot July d;iys, had done the actual fighting, desired a republic. They had their quarters at the Hotel de Ville and must be reckoned with. The final decision be- tween monarchy and republic lay in the hands of Lafayette, the real leader of the Republicans. It was of the highest importance to know his attitude. On July 31 Louis Philippe rode to the Hotel de Ville dressed in the uniform of a general and wearing the tricolor cockade. He appeared on the balcony. -Lafayette appeared with him and embraced him. The effect of the little pantomime was instantaneous. The crowd shouted for Louis Philippe. This popular applause ended the brief hope of the Repub- licans. The crowd virtually gave another sovereign to France. Charles X now accepted the revolution. He abdicated, as Abdication did his eldest son, the Duke of Angouleme, in favor of the ° , _ to Charles X. posthumous son of the late Duke of Berry, the Duke of Bordeaux, later well known in the history of France as the Count of Chambord and as Henry V, the title he would have worn had he ever become king. The leaders of the movement had, however, other ideas concerning the future government of France. They wished to be entirely rid of this legitimate royal line. Their first step was directed against Charles X and his immediate family. Desiring no repetition of the experience of the former revolutionists of having a king as prisoner they sent troops against him to frighten him out of the country. The method succeeded. Slowly the King and his family withdrew toward the coast, whence they embarked for England (August 14). For two years Charles X lived in Great Britain, keeping a 98 FRANCE DURING THE RESTORATION Louis Philippe King. The end of the Restora- tion. melancholy court in Holy rood Palace, Edinburgh, of somber memory in the life of Mary, Queen of Scots. Removing later to Austria, he died in 1836. The Chamber of Deputies, whose dissolution by Charles X before it had ever come together, had been one of the causes of this revolution, organized itself August 3 and undertook a revision of the Charter. It then called Louis Philippe to the throne, ignoring the claims of the legitimate prince, the nine-year-old Duke of Bordeaux. The revolution was now considered over. It had had no such scope as had that of 1789. It grew out of no deep-seated abuses, out of no crying national distress. France was growing every day richer and more prosperous. It was an unexpected, impromptu affair. Not dreamed of July 25th, it was over a week later. One king had been overthrown, another created, and the Charter slightly modified. Parliamentary govern- ment had been preserved; a return to autocracy prevented. The essential weakness of the monarchy of the Restoration was shown by the ease with which it was terminated. It always labored under the odium of its origin, having been brought back, as the phrase went, " in the baggage of the Allies," the enemies and vanquishers of France. The very presence of Louis XVIII and Charles X in France was a reminder of the humiliation of that country, was a trophy of her enemies' victories. Moreover, it was an inevitable fatality of this monarchy that its natural representatives and counselors had been long in exile, did not understand the complete intellectual transformation of their country- men, had themselves always lived in a world of ideas alien to modern France, viewed the country they had to rule through a distorting though inevitable medium of precon- ceptions, prejudices, and convictions. The Bourbon mon- archy accomplished much that was salutary. It restored the sadly disordered finances of the nation. Its policy in foreign affairs, in Greece, in Algeria, even in Spain, gave general satisfaction. But its ideal in government was the ACCESSION OF LOUIS PHILIPPE 99 old, aristocratic regime and it was impelled by its very nature to seek to approach that ideal. When it approached too near it suddenly found itself toppled over. This ends the Restoration and the reign of Louis Philippe now begins. Those who brought about the final overthrow of the elder Bourbons received no adequate reward. They had the tricolor flag once more, but the rich bourgeoisie had the government. The Republicans yielded, but without re- nouncing their principles or their hopes. Cavaignac, one of their leaders, when thanked for the abnegation of his party, replied, " You are wrong in thanking us ; we have yielded because we are not yet strong enough. Later it will be different." The revolution, in fact, gave great impetus to the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people. CHAPTEB V r REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE wid«- The influence of the Revolution of 18S0 was fell all over spread in- ,, • i> i i /^ hi o •■ i i i> i j . CiUrope in I olaiul, del-many, Italy, Switzerland, I'.Mi'laml, thionrr Of * • ° nu- .inly and the Netherlands. It was the signal and encourage- Kcvoiution. uu'ut tor w ide spread popular movements which for a short time seemed to threaten the whole structure erected in 1818 at Vienna. It created an immediate problem for the rulers of Europe. They had bound themselves in 1810 to guard against the outbreak *>t' M revolution!*' to watch over and assure the "general tranquillity" oi' Europe. They had adopted and applied since then, as wo have seen, the doctrine of intervention in the affairs o( countries infected hy revolu tionary fever, as the great preservative of public order. Wouhl this self-constituted international police acquiesce in the overthrow of the legitimate king ot' Prance by the mob of Paris? Now that revolution had again broken out in that restless country, would they "intervene" as they had done in Spain and Italy? At first they were disposed to tlo so. Metteruielfs immediate impulse was to organize a coalition against this "king oi' the barricades." Hut when the time came this was seen to he impracticable, for Russia was occupied with a revolution in Poland, Powerless- Austria with revolutions in Italy, Prussia with simi- lu-ss n t m |, u . movements in Germany, and England was engrossed in, SO ■ v it* l * • • i • ii iii Aiii'uuv most absorbing discussion oj domestic problems she had faced in many decades. Moreover, England approved the revolution. Al' the powers, therefore, recognized Louis Philippe, though with varying indications of annoyance. In one particular, consequently, the settlement of 1815 was undone t'ore\er. The elder branch of the House o( Bourbon, 100 THE KINGDOM OF THE NETHERLANDS 101 put upon the throne of France by the Allies of 1815, was now pushed from it, and the revolution, haled of the other powers, had done it. THE RISE OF THE KINGDOM OF BELGIUM Another part of the diplomatic structure of 1815 was The now overthrown. The Congress of Vienna had created an Con E re8S ° • n ■/• • i i? -n ii'- Vienna and essentially artificial state to the north or Trance, the King- tne King- dom of the Netherlands. It had done this explicitly for dom of the the purpose of having a harrier against France. The Bel- ■ Netner- gian provinces, hitherto Austrian, were in 1815 annexed to Holland to strengthen that state in order that it might be in a position to resist attack until the other powers should come to its rescue. Tin- Congress had also declared and guaranteed the neutrality of the new state as an additional protection against an aggressive France. Hul it. was easier to declare these two peoples formally united under one ruler than to make them in any real sense a single country. Though it might seem by a glance at the map that the peoples of this little corner of Europe must he essentially homogeneous, such was not at all the case. There were many more points of difference than of similarity between them. Their historic evolution had not been at A union all the same. Except under the overpowering rule of Na- poleon they had not been under the same government since mentally 1571). Holland had been a republic. The Belgian prov- dissimilar inces had remained subject to Spain at the time that IIol- p land had acquired he! - independence and had later passed under Austrian rule. They were also divided by language. The Dutch spoke a Teutonic; tongue, the Belgians either Flemish, a Teutonic speech, yet differing from the Dutch, or Walloon, allied to the French. They were divided by re- ligion. The Dutch were Protestants and Calvinists; the Bel- gians devoted Catholics. They differed in their economic life and principles. The Dutch were an agricultural and com- mercial people and were inclined to free trade; the Hclg v ians 102 REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE The spirit of nation- ality awak- ened among the Belgians. Difficulties in the drafting of the Constitu- tion. a manufacturing people and inclined toward protection. There was one form of union, however, under which such dis- similar peoples might have lived harmoniously together — that of a personal union. Each might have had the same monarch but have kept its own institutions and followed its own line of development. But at Vienna no thought was given to such an arrangement. It was decided that the union should be " close and complete." This was the first disappointment for the Belgians. They had hoped that henceforth they would have a large measure of independence. They had never yet constituted a nation. For centuries they had been subject to the Spaniards and the Austrians. But the French Revolution had powerfully aroused the longing for a national existence. This desire for liberty and independence, thwarted in 1815, operated with growing force throughout the period of their connection with Holland. The Belgians saw themselves simply added to and subjected to another people inferior in numbers to themselves. Friction began at once. The king, William I, had prom- ised a constitution to his united kingdom and appointed a commission to draw it up. The commission consisted of an equal number of Dutch and Belgian members. There were discussions as to the capital. The Dutch desired Amsterdam ; the Belgians, Brussels. No decision was pos- sible, and it was decided consequently to make no mention of the subject in the Constitution. It was agreed that there should be a legislature consisting of two chambers, an Upper Chamber appointed by the king, a Lower elected by the provincial estates. The latter was to be composed of 55 Dutch and 55 Belgian members. The Belgians objected to this equality, saying that they were a population of over three million, while Holland had less than two million. Hol- land replied that it had been a sovereign and independent state for over two centuries and that it would not admit Belgian predominance; also that wealth and general state AN UNSATISFACTORY UNION 103 of civilization must be taken into account; moreover, that if population were regarded as the sole basis of the state Holland had a right to count in her colonies. She insisted upon a representation at ' least equal to that of the newly incorporated territories. As neither would recognize the predominance of the other, equality of representation was the only possible outcome. Equal rights were granted all forms of worship. This was denounced by the Belgian Catholics. The Constitution gave great power to the king. The legislative bodies could reject but not amend bills. The right of trial by jury was not guaranteed, a right the Belgians had enjoyed under the French rule. The Constitution was now submitted to assemblies of the two peoples for approval. The Dutch assembly accepted it but the Belgian rejected it. Never- theless, by an arbitrary exercise of power the King declared it in force. A union so inharmoniously begun was never satisfactory Friction to the Belgians. Friction was constant. The Belgians between objected with justice that the officials in the state and army Belg i ans were almost all Dutch. They objected to the King's attempts and the to force the Dutch language into a position of undue privi- Dutch, lege. They objected to the system of taxation, particularly to two odious taxes on bread and meat, now imposed. Re- ligious differences inflamed passions still further. Though the fact remains that during this period and largely because of this union the material prosperity of the Belgians ad- vanced greatly, still the union never became popular. The evident desire of the King to fuse his two peoples into one was a constant irritation. The system was more and more disliked by the Belgians as the years went by. Thus, long before the revolution in France, there was a The strong movement in Belgium in favor of larger liberty, of in uence ° self-government. Few as yet, however, dreamed of a dis- Revolution, ruption of the kingdom. There was a lively sense of griev- ances too long endured. The July Revolution now came 104 REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE The Belgians declare their inde- pendence. as a spark in the midst of all this inflammable material. On August 25, 1830, rioting broke out in Brussels. It was not. at first directed toward independence. The Bel- gians would have been satisfied if each country could have been given its own government under the same king. The King rejected this proposal to change a " real " into a " personal ,J union. His troops attempted to put down the insurrection. There were in September several days of fight- ing in Brussels as there had been in Paris, and of the same character. The royal troops were driven out, and on Octo- ber 4 the Provisional Government that had arisen out of the turmoil declared Belgium independent and called a con- gress to determine the future form of government. The King now prepared to make concessions, but it was too late. The congress decided in favor of a monarchy as the form of government, adopted a liberal constitution, and at the suggestion of England and France elected as king Leopold of Coburg, who had just declined the new throne of Greece, but who accepted this. The task of greatest difficulty was to get the new kingdom recognized by the Great Powers, which in 1815 had added Belgium to Holland. Would they consent to the undoing of their own work? The king, William I, was resolved not to give up Belgium and was preparing to reconquer it, which he probably could have done, as Belgium had no army. Everything, therefore.! depended on the powers which had suppressed revolution in Spain and Italy ten 3 r cars before. Would they do it again in the interest of the treaties of 1815? Now, however, they were divided, and in this division lay the salvation of the new state. The Tsar wished to intervene in order " to oppose an armed barrier to the progress of revolution." Prussia seemed simi- larly inclined, but Louis Philippe, knowing that his own throne would be overthrown by the Parisians if he supinely allowed these absolute monarchies to crush the new liberties of the Belgians, gave explicit warning that if they inter- RISE OF THE KINGDOM OF BELGIUM 105 vened France also would intervene against them " in order to hold the balance even " until the whole question should be settled by the powers, in congress assembled. In November, 1830, an insurrection broke out in Poland, Interven- which effectually prevented Russia from acting in the Belgian tion of tne matter, caused Prussia to fix her attention upon her eastern Allies boundaries, and filled Austria with apprehension. Thus the prevented Holy Allies, hitherto so redoubtable as the opponents of by events , ,. , . ... in Poland, revolutionary movements everywhere, were in no position to stamp out such a movement in Belgium. This part of the work of the Congress of Vienna had consequently been undone. A new state had arisen in Europe as a result of revolution. Its revolutionary origin, however, was covered up by the action of the powers in now consenting to it. Conferences of the powers, held in London at the close of 1830 and in 1831, accepted the separation of Belgium from Holland, guaranteed the neutrality of the new king- Recogni- dom, and sanctioned the choice by the Belgians of Leopold lon ° e ,.,.,,. Kingdom of as their ruler. The powers had the satisfaction of knowing B e igi um . that though the territorial arrangements of Vienna were altered, France, the arch-enemy, had gained nothing. More- over, the monarchical principle was saved, as Belgium had been prevented from becoming a republic ; but the new monarchy was constitutional, a fact pleasing to England and France, but odious to the three eastern powers. The success of the Belgian revolution had to a considerable extent been rendered possible by a revolution in Poland, which ended in disastrous failure. Neither Russia, nor Prussia, nor Austria would have acquiesced so easily in the dismemberment of the Kingdom of the Netherlands had they not feared that if they went to war with France con- cerning it, France would in turn aid the Poles, and the future of the Poles was of far greater immediate importance to them than the future of the Netherlanders. The French Revolution of 1830 was followed by the rise of the Kingdom 106 REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE of Belgium ; but it was also followed by the disappearance of the Kingdom of Poland. REVOLUTION IN POLAND The resto- Poland had been down to the last quarter of the eighteenth ration of ce ntury an independent state. During; that quarter its in- the King- . , . _ f . , , . 6 . ^ . _ . . dom of dependence had been destroyed and its territory seized by its Poland in three neighbors, Russia, Prussia, and Austria, in the famous 1815 - partitions of 1772, 1793, and 1795. But the Polish people's passionate love of country was not destroyed and their hope that Revolutionary and Napoleonic France would restore their independence was intense. It was, however, destined to disappointment. But with the fall of Napoleon hope sprang up in another quarter. Alexander I, Tsar of Rus- sia, was in 1815 filled with generous and romantic aspira- tions and was for a few years a patron of liberal ideas in various countries. Under the influence of these ideas he conceived the plan of restoring the old Kingdom of Poland. Poland should be a kingdom entirely separate from the Em- pire of Russia. He should be Emperor of Russia and King of Poland. The union of the two states would be simply personal. Alexander had desired to restore Poland to the full extent of its possessions in the eighteenth century. To render this possible Prussia and Austria must relinquish the prov- inces they had acquired in the three partitions. This, as we have seen, was not accomplished at the Congress of Vienna. There were henceforth four Polands — Prussian Poland, Austrian Poland, Russian Poland, and a new small independent Poland, created by the Congress of Vienna, the Republic of Cracow. The new Polish kingdom, erected by Alexander I in 1815, was then simply a part of historic Poland, nor did it indeed include all of the Polish territories that Russia had acquired. Of this new state Alexander was to be king. To it he granted toward the close of 1815 a Constitution. There was POLAND A CONSTITUTIONAL KINGDOM 107 to be a Diet meeting every two years. This was to consist Alexander I of a Senate, nominated by the king, and of a Chamber cons lj.lu.~ of Nuncios, elected by the assemblies of the nobles and by tion to the communes. The latter chamber was to be elected for Poland, six years, one-third renewable every two years. Roman Catholicism was recognized as the state religion ; but a generous measure of toleration was given to other sects. Liberty of the press was guaranteed, subject to laws de- signed to prevent its abuse. The Polish language was made the official language. All positions in the govern- ment were to be filled by Poles, not by Russians. No people in central Europe possessed such liberal institutions as those with which the Poles were now invested. A prosperous career as a constitutional monarchy seemed about to begin. The Poles had never enjoyed so much civil freedom, and they were now receiving a considerable measure of home-rule. But this regime, well-meant and full of promise, en- Friction countered obstacles from the start. The Russians were between i-r.ii i -ii tne Poles opposed to the idea of a restored Poland, and particularly and tne to a constitutional Poland, when they themselves had no Russians, constitution. Why should their old enemy be so greatly favored when they, the real supporters of the Tsar, were not? The hatred of Russians and Poles, a fact centuries old, continued undiminished. Moreover, what the dominant class of Poles desired, far more than liberal government, was independence. They could never forget the days of their prosperity. Unfortunately they had not the wisdom or self-control to use their present considerable liberties for the purpose of building up the social solidarity which Poland had always lacked by redressing the crying grievances of the serfs against the nobles, by making all Poles feel that they were a single people rather than two classes of oppres- sors and oppressed. They did not seek gradually to de- velop under the aegis of their constitution a true and vigor- ous nationality, which might some day be strong enough to win its independence, but they showed their dissatisfaction 108 REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE Influence of the July Revolution. The Polish expectation of foreign aid disap- pointed. with the limited powers Alexander had granted and shortly became obstructive and censorious — conduct lacking in tact and judgment. The Diet criticized certain acts of the Tsar's officials and the Tsar warned the Diet. Friction developed from time to time, and, moreover, as the years went by, Alexander's early liberalism faded away. His successor, Nicholas I, who came to the throne in 1825, was a thorough-going absolutist. The spirit of unrest was strong among the mass of the lesser Polish nobility, a class little accustomed to self- control and also strongly influenced by the democratic ideas of Western Europe. This party was now inflamed by the reports of the successful revolution in France; by the belief that the French would aid them if they strove to imitate their example. When, therefore, the Tsar summoned the Polish army to prepare for a campaign whose object was the sup- pression of the Belgian revolution, the determination of the Liberals was quickly made. They rose in insurrection on the 29th of November, 1830. The Russian Grand Duke Constantine was driven from Warsaw. The revolutionists first tried negotiation with the Tsar, hoping in this way to secure their demands for larger political liberty. The attempt failed, but consumed time which the revolutionists could have used to much better advantage in arousing and organizing the country. When the Tsar sent word that Poland had but two alternatives — unconditional submission or annihilation — then the more radical revolutionists seized control of the movement, declared that the House of Roman- off had ceased to rule in Poland, and prepared for a life and death struggle. Russia's military resources, however, were so great that Poland could not hope alone to achieve her national inde- pendence. The Poles expected foreign intervention, but no in- tervention came. Enthusiasm for the Poles was widespread among the people in France, in England, and in Germany. But the Governments, none of which was controlled by public THE POLISH INSURRECTION 109 opinion, refused to move. Louis Philippe, feeling his new throne quite insecure, did not wish to hazard it in the vicissi- tudes of a war. The revolution from which he had himself profited was a half-way affair. Revolutionary flames feed each other. If France should aid Poland the restless elements at home would be encouraged to go further and insist upon a thorough change in France which would endanger his position. England was not disposed to injure Russia, which might somewhere else wreak vengeance upon her. Prussia and Austria felt that an independent Poland would be a menace to them, as it would seek to win their Polish possessions. Moreover, patrons of reaction as they were, ought they to become, for no reason better than a popular sentiment, patrons of revolution? Thus Poland was left to fight alone with Russia and of The failure the outcome there could be no doubt. The Poles fought of the in " surrcction with great bravery, but without good leadership, without careful organization, without a spirit of subordination to military authorities. The war went on from January 1831 until September of that year, when Warsaw fell before the Russians. The results of this ill-advised and ill-executed insurrection were deplorable in the extreme. Poland ceased to exist as a separate kingdom and became merely a province of the Russian Empire. Its Constitution was abolished and it was henceforth ruled with great severity and arbitrariness. The insurgents were savagely punished. Many were exe- cuted, many sent to Siberia. Thousands of Polish officers and soldiers escaped to the countries of western Europe and became a restless element in Paris, Berlin, and Vienna, al- ways ready to fight for liberty. Even the Polish language seemed doomed, so repressive was the policy now followed by Russia. The Poles' sole satisfaction was a highly altruistic one, that by their revolt they had contributed greatly to the success of the revolutions in France and Belgium. 110 REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE REVOLUTION IN ITALY Italy after the revolu- tions of 1820. Revolu- tionary movements in 1831. The Italians receive no help from France. Another country which felt the revolutionary wave of 1830 was Italy. The revolutions of 1820 and 1821 had occurred in northern and southern Italy. They had been easily crushed, largely by Austrian arms. During the next decade Austrian influence weighed ever more heavily upon the peninsula. Discontent with existing conditions was general. The various governments were despotic, reaction- ary, unenlightened. The Carbonari were constantly plot- ting new insurrections. In 1830 Prince Metternich de- clared Italy to be of all European lands the one which had the greatest tendency to revolution. Mctternich's diagnosis was destined to immediate vindica- tion. Revolutions broke out in the states of central Italy in 1831. The Prince of Modena and the Duchess of Parma, Marie Louise, the former Empress, were forced to flee from their states. More serious was the rising in the Papal States against the government of the priests. In the Ro- magna, the northern part of the Papal States, Bologna, the center of the disturbance, declared the temporal power of the Papacy at an end. Nearly every town in the States except Rome joined the movement. The revolutionists expected the inevitable hostility of Austria but hoped for the support of France as well as of the people in other Italian states. But France was a most uncertain reed. Louis Philippe desired peace above all things, not wishing to risk his newly acquired power in the chances of a war so far away and with so strong a state as Austria. His prime minister declared in a cele- brated speech that " French blood belongs to France alone," a phrase odious to all Liberals as in it there was only egoism. Louis Philippe, too, was probably influenced by fear of the rise anew of Bonapartism out of an Italian war. The two sons of Louis Napoleon of Holland had offered their services to the Italian insurgents. Further, might not Austria, AUSTRIAN INTERVENTION IN ITALY 111 irritated, permit Napoleon's son, the Duke of Reichstadt, now a virtual prisoner at Vienna, to return to France, in which case Louis Philippe's power would probably founder quickly? Feeling his position strong, Metternich decided to intervene and suppress the insurrection. Austrian troops were sent southward. The exiled rulers were easily restored. The Pope recovered his provinces. But a conference of the five great powers at this juncture demanded that he carry out extensive reforms, mainly in the direction of put- ting the government into the hands of laymen. The Aus- trian forces were then withdrawn. But the papal promises, not being kept, insurrection broke out again in 1832. Again the Papal Government was powerless to maintain itself. The Austrians once more crossed the frontier, at the re- Austrian quest of the Pope. But this time France intervened, not * n t erven - in the interest of the Italians but, as she held, in the general interest of the European equilibrium which would be upset by the predominance of Austria in Italy. Asserting that she had as good a right to be in the Papal States as had Austria, she seized the fortress of Ancona, announcing that she proposed to stay there as long as Austrian troops re- mained. All this was a mere episode in the game of the balance of power. The two powers watched each other on the Pope's domains until 1838 when, the Austrians having withdrawn their troops, France gave up Ancona. Absolu- tism was restored in the Papal States and in the duchies. Thus another attempt of Italians to direct their own The results affairs had failed. The leaders were incapable, the odds too ° the , , . rril insurrec- great. But there were certain results of importance. The t i ong> absolute necessity of driving Austria out of the peninsula, if the peninsula was ever to have a career of its own, was proved once more; also the difficulty of driving her out. The hostility of the Papacy to any such project was again shown. The temporal power of the Pope had by some of his own subjects been declared at an end — a suggestive precedent. The ambition of the leaders, too, had been to make Rome 112 REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE Revolution in Germany. New measures of re- pression. the capital of a now state of Italy. The revolutions of 1820 and 18181 had mainly been the work of military circles. The movements of 18;H and 1832 were joined by many merchants and laborers. Liberalism was appealing with increasing force to classes of the population hitherto passive or ignored. Liberalism was becoming more democratic. But for the time being reaction again held sway in Italy. REVOLUTION IN GERMANY Thus in 1830 revolution raged with varying vehemence all about Germany — in France, in Belgium, in Poland, and in Italy. The movement also affected Germany itself. In Brunswick, Saxony, Hesse-Cassel, and in two Saxon duchies revolutionary movements broke out with the result that sev- eral new constitutions were added to those already granted. The new ones were chiefly in North German, whereas the earlier ones hail been mainly in South German states. But the two great states, Austria and Prussia, passed unscathed ami set themselves to bring about a reaction, as soon as the more pressing dangers in Poland and Italy and France were over, and they themselves felt secure. Using certain popular demonstrations, essentially insignificant, with all the effect with which he had previously used the ^Yartburg festival, Metternieh succeeded in carrying reaction further than he hail been able to even in the Carlsbad Decrees of 1819. Those decrees were aimed chiefly at the universities and the press. New regulations were adopted in 1832 and 1834 by which he secured not only the renewal of these but the enactment of additional repressive measures. In 183^ six new articles were adopted by the Diet of the Confederation, by which the suppression of liberalism was rendered more thorough than ever. By them every German sovereign was bound to refuse any petition of his local assem- bly that might impair his sovereignity : every assembly was forbidden to refuse its sovereign the taxes necessary to carry on the government or to use the taxing power to force REPRESSION IN GERMANY 113 concessions from the prince, or to pass any laws prejudicial to the objects of the Confederation. A committee was to be appointed by the Diet to watch over the legislation of the different states, and to report all measures that threat- ened the rights of the Diet or of the individual sovereigns. The Federal Diet was made a kind of Supreme Court with power to interpret the fundamental laws of the Confedera- tion and to decide what state laws were inconsistent with them, that is, were unconstitutional. The Diet also passed other repressive measures forbidding Metternich political societies, public meetings, and revolutionary badges, 8u P reme in and promising aid to sovereigns in case of need. The de- German7, crees against the universities were enforced with renewed vigor. Thus not only universities, but chambers of deputies were now under the Metternich system. This was Metter- nich's crowning achievement in Germany. Again a persecu- tion of professors, students, and journalists, surpassing pre- vious ones, was instituted. Obstinate chambers of deputies were dissolved. Constitutional life in the few states where it existed was reduced to a minimum. The political history of Germany offers but little interest until the great mid-century uprising of 1848 shook this entire system of negation and repression to the ground. CHAPTER VI THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE The career of Louis Philippe, 1773-1850. Louis Philippe, the new monarch of the French, was already in his fifty-seventh year. He was the son of the notorious Philippe Egalite, who had intrigued during the Revolution for the throne occupied by his cousin, Louis XVI, had, as a member of the Convention, voted for the latter's execution, and "had himself later perished miserably on the scaffold. In 1789 Louis Philippe was only sixteen years of age, too young on the whole to play a political role, though he became a member of the Jacobin Club. Later, when the war broke out, he joined the army of his country and fought valiantly at Valmy and Jemappes. Becoming suspected of treason he fled from France in 1793 and entered upon a life of exile that was to last twenty-one years. He went to Switzerland, where he lived for a while, teaching geography and mathematics in a school in Reichenau. Leav- ing there when his incognito was discovered he traveled as far north as the North Cape, and as far west as the United States. He finally settled in England and lived on a pension granted by the British Government. Returning to France on the fall of Napoleon he was able to recover a large part of the family property, which, though confiscated during the Revolution, had not been actually sold. During the Restora- tion he lived in the famous Palais Royal in the very heart, of Paris, cultivating relations that might some day prove His useful, particularly appealing to the solid, rich bourgeoisie liberalism, by a display of liberal sentiments and by a good-humored, unconventional mode of life. He walked the streets of Paris alone, talked, and even drank with workmen with engaging bonhomie, and sent his sons to the public schools to associate 114 THE CAREER OF LOUIS PHILIPPE 115 with the sons of the bourgeoisie — a delicate compliment fully appreciated by the latter. His palace was the meeting place for the liberal, artistic, intellectual society of Paris. Here certainly was a prince as nearly republican as a prince could be. The rights won by the Revolution would surely not be endangered by a man who so easily adapted himself to the new ideas that had come into the world with the great up- heaval. Frenchmen, who dreaded the idea of a republic, discredited by the horrors of the Revolution, and who wished to do away with the old-style monarchy, revived by Charles X, might naturally be hopeful of combining the advantages of both and avoiding the evils of both by placing so amiable and enlightened a prince in power. Thus the legend grew up, carefully fostered, that here was a prince who put patriotism- above self-interest, who had fought and suffered for his country. It was not known then, or in 1830, that he had sought to fight against it during Napoleon's reign, nor was it known that under this exterior of ostentatious liberalism there lay a strong ambi- tion for personal power, a nature essentially autocratic, thoroughly imbued with extreme monarchical principles. Louis Philippe had learned the arts of intrigue, of self- control, of silent, incessant exploitation of circumstances for his own advancement. Such was the man who in 1830 became king, called upon His legal to govern a country in a sea of troubles. His legal title title to the to the throne was very weak, his actual position for many years most precarious. He had been invited to ascend the throne simply by the Chamber of Deputies — a chamber, more- over, which had been legally dissolved, which, furthermore, had never been authorized to choose a king, which was, therefore, giving away something it did not possess. More- over, of that chamber of 430 members only 252 took part in the vote, 219 in favor of Louis Philippe, 33 opposed. The Chamber of Peers concurred, but its concurrence merely emphasized its nullity in the whole proceeding. The 116 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE choice of the new king was never submitted to the people for ratification, was never even submit toil to the voters, who numbered about a hundred thousand. Louis Philippe was virtually the elect of 819 deputies who, in turn, hail no legal standing. Though the people of France acquiesced in the now regime, they never formally sanctioned it. The new king, in order to show clearly the break with the past, assumed the name Louis Philippe, rather than Philip Yll. The Con- The Chamber of Deputies, before calling Louis Philippe stitutnm { (| ie throne, drew up a Constitution to which he took oath, revised. The Constitution was really a revision of the Charter oi 1814 in those articles which had occasioned trouble during the last fifteen years, or which seemed inconsistent with the new monarchy. The fatal Article 1-i was modified to read, " The king issues the ordinances necessary for the execution of the laws but never has power to suspend the laws or prevent their execution." Another change was that the right of initiating legislation should no longer belong simply to the king, but should be enjoyed by both chambers. The sessions of the Chamber ol' Leers were made public like those of the Chamber of Deputies. Instead of the formula, " the Catholic religion is the re- ligion of the state," a phrase that denoted a position of privi- lege, a new formula appeared to the effect that that religion was M professed by the majority of the French." It was explicitly provided that the censorship should never be re- established. Article ()7 said. " France resumes its colors. For the future, no other cockade shall be worn than the tricolor cockade." Thus the flag of the Revolution, lustrous with victories on a hundred battlefields, replaced the white banner of the Bourbons. The preamble of the Charter of 1814 was suppressed because it sanctioned the theory of monarchy by divine right and because in it the king con- descended to grant Frenchmen rights as an act of royal pleasure, which they considered belonged to them inherently. In most other respects the Charter of 181-A remained un- CHARACTER OF THE JULY MONARCHY 117 altered. The age qualification was reduced for deputies to thirty years, for voters to twenty-five. It was, however, staled in the revision that the electoral system should be determined by ordinary law, thus providing for a super- session of the existing method. 1 A law was accordingly passed in \H'M establishing the sys- The fran- leni that was destined to remain in force until 1818. The law , lowered. of the double vote was rescinded. Tin; franchise, hitherto given only to those paying a direct property tax of 300 francs, was now extended to those paying one of 200 francs. The qualification was reduced to 100 francs in the ease of certain professional classes, the "capacities," so-called, law- yers, physicians, judges, professors. Thus the electorate was doubled. Hut France was still far from democracy. At the beginning of the reign the voters numbered about two hundred thousand out of a population of about thirty mil- lions. France was still governed by the propertied classes, by an aristocracy of wealth. Under the .July Monarchy the bourgeoisie enjoyed a practical monopoly of power. There; was from the beginning a division of Opinion as Tne char- • * • 3.ctcr of til'* to the character of the new monarchy. Did Louis Philippe , __ J rr July Mon- rule by divine right, or did he rule by the will of the people, archy. expressed by I heir deputies? The very nature of the July Revolution showed that the former claim was untenable. That revolution had been mule by the people of Paris against the monarch who ruled by divine right. Kven with Charles X out of I he way bis legitimate successor was not Louis Philippe but the little Duke of Bordeaux. But did the accession of this prince to the throne prove on the other hand that all sovereignty was vested in the people? Many claimed that such was the case, that the people of France had virtually elected Louis Philippe king, that they might with equal propriety have elected any one else, that having elected him they could dismiss him. The opponents of those •The constitution is given in full in Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, No. I Oo. 118 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE who held this view declared that this was to make the July Monarchy virtually a republic, and the fact remained that the republic had been deliberately rejected. This party argued that the new monarchy was peculiar — that the basis of the new system was a kind of contract between the king and the nation; that neither was absolutely sov- ereign, but that each possessed a part of the sovereignty; that thus each was indispensable to the other, each incom- plete without the other ; that France did not recognize with- out qualification the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people, or that of the sovereignty of the monarch; that the fusion of the two, inevitable, complete, was the basis of the state; that the true theory of the monarchy was that expressed in Louis Philippe's phrase that he was " king by the grace of God and the will of the nation." Insecurity Not only was the legal basis of the July Monarchy un- of the new certain, but its practical hold on France was most precarious. re crime. It was forced to devote the first half of its life to the prob- lem of getting solidly established. Improvised at the mo- ment of revolution, cleverly set up in the midst of general confusion, it was singularly lacking in all the qualities that impose upon mankind, that command immediate respect, that indicate the possession of authority and power. There was nothing majestic about its origin. It had no roots. De- vised by the rich bourgeoisie, it seemed the expression of purely business considerations. Whether it could captivate the sentiments of France, could throw about itself the glamour that usually hovers over a throne, remained to be seen. It certainly possessed no prestige at the moment of its incep- tion. Metternich analyzed the situation with keenness. " Louis Philippe finds himself at his accession to the throne in an untenable position," wrote the Austrian Chancellor, " for the basis upon which his authority rests consists only of empty theories. His throne lacks the weight of the plebiscite which was behind all the forms of government from 1792 to 1801 ; lacks the tremendous support of his- PARTIES UNDER LOUIS PHILIPPE 119 torical right, which was behind the Restoration; lacks the popular force of the republic, the military glory of the empire, the genius and the arm of Napoleon, the Bourbon support of a principle. Its durability will rest solely upon accidents." Its durability, however, proved greater than had that of A period the Napoleonic Empire or of the Restoration. Yet it had first of storm to pass through a long period of storm and stress. It had enemies without, who denied its very right to exist. And even the supporters of the new regime were divided into two parties who could not long co-operate, so different were their views of the policies that ought to be followed by the Government both at home and abroad. There was the so-called party of movement or progress, with Laffitte, a Tne P r °- rich Parisian banker, and Lafayette, at its head. This & re * slve . party, party did not consider that the revolution was over as soon as Louis Philippe sat upon a throne. They wished at home to effect many reforms in a democratic sense, not with revolutionary haste but gradually ; and abroad, they wished to aid those peoples which were revolting against mis- rule — as in Belgium, Poland, and Italy. Thus by making France more democratic and by supporting democratic movements elsewhere, France would resume in the world her position of leadership in liberalism, which she had held under the Revolution of 1789. The other party was called the party of resistance, of The con- conservatism. It believed that the Revolution of 1830 had servative party, terminated on August 9th when Louis Philippe accepted the revised constitution and became king. It held that the Revolution had simply substituted for a king who wished to overthrow the parliamentary system established in 1814» a king who wished to maintain that system ; that the Revolu- tion meant the preservation of . existing institutions, did not at all mean the expansion of those institutions in a democratic direction ; that it was a popular revolution designed to prevent a royal revolution. It believed that 120 THE REIGX OF LOUIS FHILIPFE Popular unrest. Cnsimir- Perier and the policy of the con- servatives. France ought immediately to recover her normal condition, that the revolutionary passions which disturb men's minds and injure business ought to be quieted at once. Abroad, as well as at home, it would pursue a policy ot' peace. Casimir-Perier, Guizot, and the Duke of Broglie were leaders of this group. Louis Philippe's preferences were decidedly for the latter party. Yet he could not at first break openly with the former. For some time, therefore, he called members of both to the ministry. Such a ministry could not from the very nature of the case have a clear, coherent policy. Revolutionary passions still ran riot in Paris. Crowds de- manded the execution of the ministers ot Charles X, who had advised the autocratic actions oi that monarch. Mobs attacked Legitimists in the streets of Paris. These out- breaks resulted in business stagnation. The working classes suffered. It is said that 150.000 of them left Paris in search of employment. Public credit sank rapidly. The bonds fell. Xo one could foresee what would happen either at home or abroad. The bourgeoisie felt insecure and rallied to the party oi' resistance. Finally March 18, 1881, Casimir-Perier and the party of resistance came into power. That party was destined to remain in power, with some variations, more or less marked, during the rest of the reign of Louis Philippe. Its policy truly expressed the essential character of the July Monarchy, which fell after eighteen years because it had not accomplished the democratic reforms demanded by the party of progress. Casimir-Perier was a man of great wealth, of imperious temper, of positive opinions, ot' incisive speech. The prin- ciples according to which he intended to administer the government were boldly and clearly stated in an address delivered in the Chamber of Deputies shortly after the for- mation of his ministry. His declarations formed virtually the programme of the party of resistance. He announced THE POLICY OF ORDER 121 his intention to carry out without weakness and without exaggeration the principle of the July Revolution. Now that principle was not insurrection ; it was resistance to executive aggression. " France was exasperated, she was defied; she defended herself, and her victory was the victory of law basely outraged. Respect for plighted faith, respect for law, that is the principle of the Revolution of July, the principle of the government founded by it. For that Revo- lution founded a government and did not inaugurate an- archy. It did not overthrow the form of society, it affected only the political system. It aimed at the establishment of a government that should be free but orderly. Thus violence must not be, either at home or abroad, the character of our government. At home every appeal to force, abroad every encouragement of popular- insurrection, is a violation of its principle. Such is the thought, such the rule of our home and foreign policy. Order must be maintained, the laws must be executed, authority respected. Public security and tranquillity must be revived. The Revolution has not begun for France the reign of force. The blood of the French belongs to France alone. The first result of this Revolution has been to render monarchy more popular by reconciling it with liberty." Casimir-Perier formulated for foreign affairs the principle Foreign of non-intervention, promising not to intervene in favor of P° lic y* peoples in insurrection, but asserting that foreign powers had likewise no right to intervene beyond their own frontiers. This principle was absolutely opposed to that on which the Holy Alliance had been acting. Later Casimir-Perier did intervene in Italy and in Belgium in the name of the principle of non-intervention. This policy of rigorous restoration of order was begun at once. Casimir-Perier died in 1832 after a service of only fourteen months, but the policy he outlined with such clearness and firmness, and put into force, was continued in large measure by his successors. 122 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE Opposition The Government needed whatever strength it could get p from a concentration of all its forces for the preservation of its existence, for the parties that desired the overthrow of the Orleanist Monarchy were active and daring. These parties, the Legitimists and the Republicans, it finally suc- ceeded in silencing, though not until after much shedding of blood. The For the Legitimists, those who defended the rights of eg ' Charles X and his descendants, Louis Philippe was a usurper, a thief who had treacherously stolen the crown of the Duke of Bordeaux, the legitimate king. This party was numer- The ieally small, but it had in the Duchess of Berry a dauntless Duchess of an( j reso l u te, if imprudent leader. A woman of unusual personal charm, attracting people to her and her plans despite their better judgment, she now, an exile in England, conceived the idea of winning a throne for her son, the Duke of Bordeaux. That the accomplishment of this would be the ver}' climax of adventure did not sober her romantic, passionate nature. She believed that foreign monarchs would aid in asserting the principle of legitimacy, which lay at the basis of their own power. The magic of Na- poleon's return from Elba was fresh in the mind of Europe. Might not a beautiful woman, representative of the House of Bourbon, succeed where the audacious soldier had suc- ceeded? The Duchess won the reluctant consent of Charles X. She counted for success upon the favorable situation of the European powers, upon the supposed strength of the Bourbon party in France, upon the co-operation of the clergy and the nobility, and upon the support of the Vendee, considered the home of chivalric devotion to the white flag of the Bourbons. She felt so sure of success that she had already prepared a new constitution. She was warned in vain by prominent Legitimists of the total lack of effective preparations for so desperate an undertaking. Crossing the continent from England to Italy, she landed in France April 28, 1832, and, concealed in a hut, waited INSURRECTIONARY MOVEMENTS 123 for the promised rising of Marseilles. Even the news that this had failed and that the leaders were prisoners did not daunt her. She had told the faithful to be ready for her in Vendee on the first of May. She must keep the promise. Eluding the spies who were upon her heels, after great hard- ship, constant danger, and numerous adventures, she suc- ceeded in reaching her destination. But the Government knew of the plan and the few hundred defenders of the legitimate monarchy were put down after a brave resistance. The Duchess escaped, reached Nantes after great exertions, and eluded the police for several months. She was betrayed by a person whom she had employed on several errands, was arrested, and was imprisoned until it was thought she was dishonored and rendered politically impotent by the birth of a daughter and the avowal of a secret marriage. At the very time this royalist insurrection was being put down in the west, a republican insurrection burst out in Paris. Lafayette had won the acquiescence of the Republi- cans in the erection of the July Monarchy, but only by assuring them that it would be the " best of republics." But this did not prove to be the case. By 1832 it seemed clear to them that they had been duped, and that the July Mon- archy promised no growth in liberty for France. They then became its bitter enemies. An insurrection broke out in Paris in June 1832 on the Republican occasion of the funeral of General Lamarque, a prominent insurrec Republican. It was not sanctioned by the prominent men of the republican party. The generals, known to be Re- publicans, remained inactive. The insurgents, therefore, were obscure, and their number was small, yet they fought with desperation for two days in the streets of the capital. They were defeated because they were unable to gain the co-operation of any considerable body of men. The work- men of Paris did not rise. The leaders refused to lead. Yet an insurrection so ill-timed and so ill-directed occasioned considerable loss to the Government. It was important as be- 124 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILHTE Vigorous measures of the Gov- ernment. ing the first frankly republican insurrection since 1815, and it was the strongest opposition the Government of July had thus far had to overcome. The Republicans were not discouraged by this failure, but went on preparing for the future. The Government favored a law aimed at breaking up the secret societies which were spreading republican principles, by restricting the right of association. Hence- forth, any association, whatever might be its nature and whatever the number of its members, must submit its con- stitution and by-laws to the Government, and might not exist without its consent. Hardly had the new law been passed than new insurrections burst forth in several cities. Particularly important was that in Lyons in April 1834, which grew out of labor troubles but quickly took on a political character. For five days the riot raged in that city, finally, after great exertions, being put down by the Government. Insurrections also occurred in several other cities. The Government was successful in suppressing these re- publican upheavals. It made no attempt to conciliate the discontented. It did not study the labor problem, which was one of the causes of the prevalent unrest, but deter- mined to crush this annoying faction once for all. Repub- licanism must be stamped out. To this end the press must be controlled. The revised Charter of 1830 had provided for freedom of the press, and had declared the censorship abolished forever; yet the July Monarchy from the very mo- ment of its inception had vigorously prosecuted republican journals, instinctively recognizing in them its most danger- ous enemy. From July 1830 to September 1834 it had in- stituted over five hundred trials of journalists alone, had imposed heavy fines and long terms of imprisonment upon editors. The Tribune, the most aggressive republican sheet, had been prosecuted 111 times and had been forced to pay 157,000 francs in fines. Such prosecutions were more fre- quent than ever after the futile insurrections of April 1834. ATTACKS UPON LOUIS PHILIPPE 125 In addition to press prosecutions the Government deter- The prose- mined to prosecute some of those who had been arrested in cution °* the recent riots. It instituted a monster trial of 164 ac- cused, not before the jury courts, distrustful of the results in that case, but before the Chamber of Peers. Over four thousand witnesses were called. The defendants refused to recognize the jurisdiction of the Peers or to defend them- selves. The case dragged on for months, from March 1835 to January 1836, creating much bitterness of feeling. Fi- nally the accused were condemned to various terms of im- prisonment or to deportation. But the decision was not enforced. A general amnesty, proclaimed a little later on the occasion of the marriage of the King's eldest son, liber- ated them. By these vigorous methods, however, the repub- lican party was effectually silenced for many years. Its im- potence was increased still further by divisions among the members themselves. Not only were attacks made upon the Government during Attempts these stormy years, but attempts upon the life of the King u P on e were frequent. These were ascribed to the Republicans i^g and served to discredit them still further. They were not the Philippe, acts of the party but of isolated individuals. From 1835 to 1846 six different attempts to assassinate the monarch were made and numerous other plots were discovered before they could be put into operation. The most horrible of these was that of Fieschi in 1835. An infernal machine composed of many gun-barrels was discharged by a Corsican, Fieschi, at the King as he was passing with his three sons and many members of the court and army through the streets of Paris, July 28, 1835. Eighteen persons were killed on the spot, many more were injured. The King and his sons escaped as by a miracle. The Government, encouraged by the widespread execration The Sep- of this fiendish crime, determined to strike hard at all op- teml5er , Laws, 1835. poncnts. It secured the passage in September 1835 of new laws concerning the assize courts, the jury system, 126 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE and the press. The Minister of Justice was empowered to establish as many of these assize or special courts as might be necessary to judge summarily all those attacking the security of the state. The accused might be judged even though absent. In jury trials the decision might hence- forth be given by a mere majority, seven, instead of the two- thirds vote, eight, previously required. The third and most The press important law concerned the press. It was designed to pro- law> tect the king, the constitution, and the fundamental prin- ciples of society from attack. Heavy fines, as high as 50,000 francs, were imposed for various offenses — for a summons to insurrection, even if the insurrection should not occur; for attacks upon the King, even allusions to his per- son, or caricatures; for publication of jury lists; for the collection of subscriptions to aid newspapers to pay their fines. The law went even further and forbade Frenchmen under heavy fines the right to defend other forms of govern- ment than the existing one, to declare themselves adherents of any fallen royal house ; to question the principle of private property. The censorship was re-established for drawings, caricatures, and plays. The preliminary deposit required of papers was raised to 100,000 francs. These September laws gave great offense to all liberal and moderate men. After five years of freedom of the press to return to so far-reaching a suppression of that freedom seemed unjustifiable. The most careful defense of the King and the constitution was certainly desirable, but did it require any such drastic measures at this time? Would not the very multiplicity of crimes tend to encourage crime ? These laws greatly weakened the July Monarchy. Men felt that individual liberty was only an empty word. The press law was aimed particularly at the Legitimists and the Republicans. The papers of the former party, well supplied with capital, survived the persecution to which they were now subjected. The republican organs, lacking THE REVIVAL OF BONAPARTISM 127 this resource, largely disappeared. The press in France was in as deplorable a condition as in the worst days of the Restoration. The Government might now feel secure against the at- The Bona- tenipts of the Legitimists and the Republicans. The only P artlsts * other party that was an inevitable opponent of the July Monarchy was the Bonapartist. But of this Louis Philippe entertained no fear. Indeed, with what proved to be singu- lar fatuity, he distinctly promoted by his actions the growth of a sentiment that in the end was to prove very costly both to himself and to France. With the evident intention of showing that the July Monarchy, unlike that of the Restora- tion, was truly national, that it had no desire to eliminate all reminders of the Napoleonic era, but rather regarded them as among the priceless glories of France, he completed the Arc de Triomphe, begun by Napoleon, named streets and bridges after Napoleon's battles, and caused the Na- *> ouis poleonic history to be portrayed on the walls of the palace at . .. Versailles, side by side with that of Louis XIV. Literature Napoleonic was already busy creating the Napoleonic legend, which, ig- iegend. noring the evils and the frightful cost to France of the great Emperor's rule, was immortalizing his achievements and mourning his tragic end. It was singular policy, indeed, for a descendant of Capetian kings to foster the reviving interest in the career of the illustrious founder of a rival family. But that no danger lay that way seemed to be proved by two attempts on the part of the heir to the Napoleonic throne to overthrow the July Monarchy, which was showing itself so complaisant to the Napoleonic senti- ment, attempts which resulted in ridiculous failures. Napoleon I had died in 1821, and his son, the King of Louis Rome, known after 1818 as the Duke of Reichstadt, had Na P° leo1 ; ,. . . Bonaparte, died in 1832. The headship of the family thus passed to 1808-1873. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, the son of Louis Napoleon, for- merly King of Holland, and of Hortense Beauharnais, daughter of the Empress Josephine. Napoleon had indicated 128 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE that the succession should be in this line in case he should leave no direct descendant. Prince Louis, born in the Tuile- ries in 1808, had been educated in Germany, and had gone to Italy, where, in 1831, he had participated on the popular side in the revolutionary movements described above. He was now living in Switzerland, brooding over his fortune, taking seri- ously his role of pretender, publishing his political views. Suddenly he appeared before the garrison of the fortress of Strassburg in 1836, wearing the familiar Napoleonic coat and hoping to win the support of the soldiers by the very magic of his name. Thus having a lever he could perhaps topple Louis Philippe from his throne. He failed miserably, and was brought to Paris a prisoner. The Government, thinking it wise to breat this episode as a childish folly, did not prosecute him but allowed him to sail to the United States. But Louis returned next year to Switzerland. He removed to England upon the threat of Louis Philippe, taking part there in fashionable or semi-fashionable life, elaborating his political theories and planning for his political future. His undertaking had failed but he had at least announced himself to France as the heir of the Great Napoleon. He believed firmly in his star and felt that he would some day be called to finish the interrupted work of his uncle. The second The Government of Louis Philippe proceeded to inject unera o s ^ i 1 1 further vitality into the growing Napoleonic legend. It secured the consent of the English Goverment to the removal of the remains of Napoleon from St. Helena to Paris, where they might repose according to the wish which the Emperor had himself expressed in his last testament, on the banks of the Seine, " in the midst of the French people whom I have loved so well," and in December 1810 they were de- posited beneath the dome of the Invalides with elaborate funeral pomp and amidst evidences of extraordinary popular excitement. A minister of Louis Philippe said in the Cham- ber of Deputies, " He was Emperor and King, the legitimate THE BOULOGNE FIASCO 129 sovereign of this land; as such he might rest in St. Denis. But he is entitled to more than the usual burial place of kings." The question put by Lamartine was pertinent. What was the Government thinking of " to allow the French heart and imagination to be so fired? " Meanwhile, Louis Bonaparte, pretender to the throne, had The resolved to take advantage of this renewed interest in Na- „ ou ° ene ° fiasco. poleon. Declaring that the ashes of the Emperor ought to rest only in an Imperial France, he made another attempt to overturn the Government of Louis Philippe. On August 6, 1840, he landed with about sixty companions near Bou- logne, hoping to win over the garrison of that town and then to enact another " return from Elba," an event whose fascination for adventurers was lively, but an achievement difficult to repeat. He brought with him proclamations declaring the House of Orleans dethroned. The failure of this attempt was more humiliating than that of Strassburg, four years earlier. The little group was scattered by the appearance of troops. They fled toward the beach, where most of them surrendered. But a few, among them the Prince, plunged into the water in order to get to a boat nearby, which capsized as they were attempting to scramble into it. They were seized by the authorities. But the Prince, brought before the Chamber of Peers for trial, had a chance to make a speech. " For the first time in my life," he said, " I am at last able to make my voice heard in France and to speak freely to Frenchmen. . . . The cruel and undeserved proscription which for twenty-five years has dragged my life from the steps of a throne to the prison which I have just left has not been able to impair the courage of my heart. ... I represent before you a principle, a cause, a defeat. The principle is the sovereignty of the people : the cause is that of the Empire : the defeat is Waterloo." His eloquence, however, was unavailing. He was condemned to imprisonment for life in the fortress of Ham. He escaped, however, six years later disguised as 130 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE Ministerial instability. Rivalry of Thiers and Gnizot. Louis Philippe intends to rule. a mason. Two years after that he was the most important figure in France. The parliamentary history of France during the ten years from 1830 to 1840 was marked by instability. There were ten ministries within ten years. Yet there was a fairly con- tinuous policy. Ministries might disappear and new ones come on the scene, but all after the fall of Laffitte, 1831, were composed of men of the party of resistance, such as Casimir-Perier, Broglie, Thiers, and Guizot. The chief work was to consolidate the July Monarchy, to put down its ene- mies, and to keep the peace with foreign countries. When, however, the members of this party had finally triumphed over their adversaries, they divided against each other. The personal rivalry of two men, Thiers and Guizot, was largely the cause of this. Each desired the leading place in the Government. Out of this rivalry arose two parties, one called the Left Center, with Thiers as leader, the other called the Right Center, under Guizot. The division, however, was not based simply upon the personal ambitions of the two men. Each had its theory of the constitution. Thiers held that tlie king reigns but does not govern ; in other words, the king must always choose his ministers from the party that is in the majority in the Chamber and must then let them govern without intervening personally in affairs. Guizot, on the other hand, held that the king should have the greatest consideration for the opinions of the majority but that he was not bound strictly to follow that majority. " The throne," he said, " is not an empty chair." Louis Philippe had no desire to be simply an ornamental head of the state, as he was according to Thiers' view. He desired to be the real ruler, to govern as well as to reign. He insisted upon conducting foreign affairs himself, and he endeavored to exercise a controlling influence in other ways through his ministers. But for several years after his accession to the throne he was careful to guard himself from LOUIS PHILIPPE AND THIERS 131 all appearance of assuming personal power. But now that his enemies were overthrown and crushed, now that these street insurrections were stamped out, he began to reveal his real purpose more clearly, which was to be ruler in fact as well as in theory. Taking advantage of the party divi- sions just alluded to he forced Thiers, the chief minister and a man too independent to be a mere spokesman of the King, to resign in 1836, and called to the ministry Mole, a man who, as he correctly supposed, would, because of his political convictions, be very willing to be the representative of the King's personal views. Men began at once to talk of " personal government," of the interference of the mon- Personal arch in the realm that properly, they held, belonged to & overn " . ment. parliament. References to Charles X became frequent. A vigorous opposition to this " court policy " and " court min- istry " finally brought about its fall in 1839. Thereupon Soult became chief minister, but was looked upon as as much the representative of the King as Mole had been. His brief ministry was notable for a direct rebuff administered through him to the monarch. Louis Philippe asked for an appro- priation for his son, the Duke of Nemours. The Chamber rejected the request by a vote of 226 to 220. The Soult ministry then retired and at last the King, appearing to renounce his personal ambition, called Thiers to the ministry. The chief feature of the short Thiers ministry was its Thiers and treatment of the Eastern Question, which in a new phase e astern . r Question, had been for several years before Europe again. The exist- ence of the Turkish Empire was once more threatened, this time by a powerful vassal of the Sultan. After the Greek war of independence, in which the viceroy of Egypt, Me- hemet Ali, had greatly aided the Sultan, the former was dis- satisfied with his reward. He began to extend his possessions by arms. He conquered all of Syria (1832). He pushed for- ward into Asia Minor, defeating the Turkish generals sent against him. He prepared to go still further, to Constanti- nople. At once the European powers began to take sides. 132 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE Resigna- tion of Thiers. Russia offered her aid and succeeded in making a treaty with the frightened Sultan, the treaty of Unkiar Skelessi, 1833, whereby, for certain obligations she was to assume, she acquired an almost complete control of the Turkish govern- ment. England, hostile as ever to Russian influence in Turkey and also wishing to maintain her own commercial prestige in the East, came to the aid of Turkey. Russia and England, therefore, declared their intention of maintain- ing the integrity of the Sultan's dominions, though their mo- tives were contradictory. Prussia and Austria took the same side, asserting that the rights of legitimate monarchs must be maintained. On the other hand, France supported Me- hemet Ali. The French had been attracted toward Egypt ever since Napoleon's expedition. The Egyptian army was organized and drilled by Frenchmen. France had just conquered Algiers. A close connection between Mehemet Ali and France would probably offer considerable commer- cial and political advantage in the Mediterranean. Thus France became the patron of Mehemet. But she stood alone. Her isolation was shown to all the world when the powers met in conference in London in 1810 and, ignoring her, because they knew that she was hostile, made a treaty with Turkey, pledging themselves to force Mehemet Ali to terms. The publication of this treaty aroused a warlike feel- ing in France, as it seemed to exclude her from the concert of powers, as in 1815. Thiers urged the adoption of warlike measures, but the King vigorously opposed such proposals, which would involve France and the July Monarchy in the greatest danger. Thiers resigned and Guizot now became chief minister. France adopted a policy of peace and the danger of a war passed. Thus the King rather than the ministry had determined the policy of the Government. In- cidentally, Louis Philippe found himself relieved of the min ister who believed that the king should reign but should not govern, and he gained in Guizot, who now became the leading minister and who remained in power until 1818, THE GUIZOT MINISTRY 133 an instrument through which he was enabled to carry out with great skill his personal policy during the remainder of his reign. With the elevation of Guizot to the leading position in Guizot, the Government, France attained ministerial stability. The 1787 " 1874 - administration of which he was the head remained in power from 1840 to 1848. Guizot was now fifty-three years of age. He had been a Liberal at the time of the Empire and the Restoration. Eminent as a professor, an historian, and an orator, he was a man of strong and rigid mind, holding certain political principles with the tenacity of a mathema- tician. In a world of change he remained immutable. He Guizot's refused to recognize that France needed any alteration po . * ica ..... . . principles. in her political institutions. He believed in the Charter of 1814 as revised in 1830. Any further reform was un- necessary and would be dangerous. To preserve order within and peace without, that the wealth of France might increase, was his programme. His policy was, as he said in his opening speech in the Chamber, the " maintenance of peace everywhere and always." These were also the views of Louis Philippe. The King could in no sense use Guizot as a pliant tool. Guizot was a man of far too great independence of thought, of far too vigorous and original character, to be the tool of any man. But this harmony of opinions was so complete that the King could complacently watch his minister carry out the royal programme, and Louis Philippe was always far more concerned with the reality than with the appear- ance of power. Moreover, the Government was scrupulous in its adherence The Govern- to parliamentary forms, in which Guizot was a strict be- men scru ~ ■ ... ... pulously hevcr. This ministry always had a majority in the Cham- par ii a _ ber of Deputies. That majority, indeed, increased at each mentary. election. There was no attempt to defy the Chamber and exalt the royal prerogative. The King could not be accused of aspiring to play a personal role as in the days of Mole, 134 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE How the Govern- ment ob- tained its majorities. The ma- nipulation of the voters. for the ministry directed the Government and the ministry constantly had a majority of the Deputies to approve its ac- tions. What France witnessed was a policy of stiff con- servatism, or immobility, constantly supported by the Chamber. The attention of the country consequently became riveted on that majority. How was it obtained? It was clear that it did not represent public opinion, did not at all express the convictions of France as a whole. It became evident on examination that that majority, the never failing support of the ministry, was obtained by an elaborate system of corruption. Louis Philippe and Guizot took no account of public opinion. They fixed their attention solely upon what was called the pays legal, that is, upon the body which possessed political rights under the constitution, namely, the voters and the deputies whom the voters chose. Now the number of voters was about 200,000, the number of deputies 480. Bodies so small could be manipulated and the manip- ulation was the supreme task of Guizot, the very founda- tion of his system. It was accomplished without difficulty. France was a highly centralized state, with local govern- ment largely controlled by the central power. Consequently, the ministry had at its disposal an immense number of offices and it could do numberless favors to individuals and to communities. The electoral colleges, which chose the deputies, were small bodies frequently consisting of not more than two hundred members, many of whom were office- holders. The office-holders did as they were told by the Government, and other members were bribed in various ways by appeals to their self-interest. If they elected the candidate desired by the minister they might be rewarded by seeing a railway built in their district, for this was the period of railway building; or they might obtain tobacco licenses or university scholarships or petty offices for their friends. Many were the attractions held out to the self- interest of the voters, the pays legal. This was plainly THE DEMAND FOR REFORM 135 corruption of the electorate, but it worked well in the opinion of the ministry. It insured the election to the Chamber of a large number of deputies pleasing to the ministry. Within the Chamber the same methods were used. About two hundred deputies, nearly half the assembly, were at Th « ma- the same time office-holders. The Government controlled ni P ulation them, as all promotions or increases of salary were dependent deputies, upon its favor. The ministry only needed to gain a few more votes to have a majority, and this was easily accom- plished by a tactful distribution of its favors among those who had an eye to the main chance. There were plums enough for the purpose, offices to be bestowed, railroad franchises to be granted, lucrative contracts for government supplies to be awarded. "What is the Chamber?" said a deputy in 1841. " A great bazaar, where every one barters his conscience, or what passes for his conscience, in exchange for a place or an office." Such a system was a mockery. The forms of the con- The stitution were observed but its spirit was nullified. Self- servilit y of interest was exalted above the interests of the nation. The ministry commanded a servile parliament. It is one of the ironies of history that Guizot, a man of most scrupulous honesty in private life, should have been the master mecha- nician of so corrupt and demoralizing a political machine. Opposition to this system was, of course, inevitable, and is the main feature of the domestic politics of France from 1841 to 1848, when Louis Philippe and Guizot and the entire regime were violently overthrown. Reformers de- manded that there be a change in the composition of the Chamber of Deputies and in the manner of electing it, par- liamentary reform and electoral reform. Electoral reform Demand for should be effected by increasing- the body of voters, by electoral . ... and par- lowering the property qualification, and by adding certain ii ame ntary classes which could safely be intrusted with the suffrage, reform. even if they could not meet the property qualification. Thus with an increased body of voters corruption would be more V36 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE sition of the Guizot ministry. difficult. The ministry absolutely refused to consider this proposition. According to Guizot there were voters enough; moreover, the number was increasing with the increase of wealth. lie even rejected a proposition that would have added only fifteen thousand voters to the existing electorate. Big-id oppo- It was demanded that the reform of the Chamber itself should be effected by forbidding deputies to hold office. Against this also the ministry set itself*. Both plans, there- fore, were rejected and the policy of immobility complacently continued. Year after year the two demands were brought forward in the Chamber: year after year they were voted down by the pliant majority. Reformers appeared to be hopelessly checkmated by the smooth operation of the machine they were denouncing. Well might Lamartine exclaim to Guizot, " According to you, the genius of the politician consists of only one thing — placing yourself in a position created by chance or by a revolution, and there remaining immobile, inert, implacable to all improvement. If in truth that were all the merit of a statesman directing a govern- ment, there would be no more need of statesmen: a post would do as well."' This inertia ultimately disgusted some of the conservatives themselves. One of the members who had hitherto followed the ministry, summing up its work in 1847, said, ** What have they done for the past seven years? nothing, nothing, nothing." " France is bored,'' said La- martine. Yet this July Monarchy with its negative policy of resist- ance in season and out of season, resistance to lawlessness in the streets, to attacks of Legitimists and Republicans, to demands for an active foreign policy favorable to liberty, to demands for constitutional reform at home, was living in a world fermenting with ideas, apparently oblivious of the fact. Not only did its policy alienate many former supporters by its rigid and peremptory refusal of all con- cessions, and augment and sharpen more and more the an- tagonism of the Republicans, but its complete indifference Rise of radicalism ECONOMIC PROBLEMS 137 to a now set of demands in the economic sphere, demands for social reform, was creating bitter enmities in another quarter and preparing a troublous future. There was growing up in France a party more radical than the re- publican, a party that looked forward not only to a change in the political form of the government but to a sweeping alteration in the form of society, in the relation of the great mass of the population who were wage-earners to the privi- leged few, the capitalists and employers. The July Mon- archy was a government of the bourgeoisie, of the well-to-do, of the capitalists. They alone possessed the suffrage. Con- sequently, the remainder of the population was in a political sense of no importance. The legislation enacted during these eighteen years was class legislation, which favored the bourgeoisie and which made no attempt to meet the needs of the masses. Yet the distress of the masses was wide- Economic spread and deep and should have appeared clear and ominous to the Government. Under the Restoration, but chiefly under Louis Philippe, France was passing from the old in- dustrial system of small domestic manufacture to the new factory system, the application of machinery to industry on Introduc- a large scale, the employment of the new motive force, steam. lon This transition was in every country painful, involving as sys t e ni. it did a dislocation and clumsy maladjustment of forces, and giving rise to most vexatious labor questions. Capi- talists who could give or withhold the chance of employ- ment had the upper hand and knew it. Grossly excessive hours of labor were required, and women and children Avho could tend machines were sacrificed to the new system in a manner that had never been possible under the old. The strange new conditions, the manifest evils dangerous to mind and body, required new laws for the protection of the weaker class. But legislation lagged far behind. Em- Condition ployers were intent on exploiting their factories, their ma- chines, their workmen to the fullest possible extent, and c i asses . many were amassing large fortunes. They were not in- 138 THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE terestcd in lessening the misery which the new order pro- visionally caused. And the law of France forbade the workmen themselves to combine for purposes of improving their condition. Ignorant, poor, lacking leadership, with- out political power, smarting under a sense of oppression and injustice, they were the inevitable enemies of a regime that passed them by, giving them no heed. In 1831 the silk-weavers of Lyons, earning the pitiful wage of eighteen sous a day for a day of eighteen hours, had risen in in- surrection under the despairing banner, " We will live by working or die righting." Growth of Such conditions provoked discussion and many writers socialism. began to preach new doctrines concerning the organization of industry and the crucial question of the relations of capital and labor, doctrines henceforth called socialistic, and appealing with increasing force to the millions of laborers who believed that society weighed with unjustifiable severity upon them, that their labor did not by any means receive its proportionate reward. St. Simon was the first to an- nounce a socialistic scheme for the reorganization of society in the interest of the most numerous class. He believed that the state should own the means of production and should organize industry on the principle of "Labor according to capacity and reward according to services." St. Simon was a speculative thinker, not a practical man of affairs. His doctrine gained in direct importance when it was adopted by a man who was a politician, able to recruit and lead a party, and to make a programme definite enough to appeal loxiis Blanc, to the masses. Such a man was Louis Blanc, who was destined to play a great part in the overthrow of the July Monarchy and in the Republic that succeeded. In his writings he tried to convince the laborers of France of the evils of the prevailing economic conditions, a task which was not difficult. He denounced in vehement terms the government of the bourgeoisie as government of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich. It must be swept away and THE RISE OF SOCIALISM 139 the state must be organized on a thoroughly democratic basis. This was the condition precedent to all success. Only then and with the full power of the state at their disposal could the laboring classes work out their own sal- vation. The state, organized as a democratic republic, should then create so-called national or social workshops, advancing the necessary capital. These would be con- trolled by the workers who would share the proceeds. They would gradually supersede the existing workshops or fac- tories, controlled and directed by the private individuals who had supplied the capital and who appropriated the profits. Private competition would give way to co-operative production. The individual producers would disappear. Louis Blanc's theories, propounded in a style at once clear and vivid, were largely adopted' by workingmen. A social- ist party was thus created. This party threatened the existence of the monarchy ; it also threatened the industrial and commercial system in vogue. It believed in a republic as the only government that the democracy could hope to control; but it differed from the other republicans in that, while they desired simply a change in the form of govern- ment, it desired a far more sweeping change in society. As early as 1842 a German named Stein wrote: " The time for purely political movements in France is past; the next revolution must inevitably be a social revolution." Thus it is evident that the amount of discontent with the Widespread Government of France was great and growing. From nearly opposition every quarter enemies arose. These enemies differed from .. f each other — they might not be able to co-operate in con- the Govern- structive work, but they could co-operate in destroying the ment. existing system. There were the moderate Orleanists, con- vinced friends of monarchy, who were repelled by the prev- alent corruption of Parliament and wished to end it; there were the convinced Republicans, silenced but not suppressed; there were the Socialists, democratic, republican. The vol- ume of discontent was increased by the unpopular character 1 bO THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE Fusion of the oppos- ing parties The •' reform banquets of the foreign policy of the ministry, which appeared hu- miliatingly submissive to England on certain occasions, too desirous of pleasing the absolute and reactionary monarchs of central Europe on others, too cold towards Liberals every- where, too pettily personal, also, in thai one of its aims was the advancement of the dynastic ambitions of Louis Philippe. who sought to promote by marriage alliances the fortunes of his family, even at the expense of the interests of the nation which he ruled. These various groups, exceedingly dissatisfied with the existing order, converged in 1848, though unintentionally and unsvn, pathetically, toward the most violent and reek- less upheaval France had known since 1789 — a movement initiated by the moderate Monarchists, rapidly furthered by the Republicans, and in the end partly dominated by the Socialists. Each id* these parties was by conviction and by temperament violently opposed to the other. The im- mediate occasion for their co-operation was furnished by the continued demand for electoral ami parliamentary re- form. The electoral and parliamentary corruption of the July Monarchy has been described. Year after year the ministry had proved itself stronger and had defiantly resisted all proposals. The King was fatuously opposed to reform in itself. Guizot, believing in growth, nevertheless held that the time hail not yet come for any alteration in the prevailing system. Beating against this wall, which seemed to grow higher and more solid each year, the Opposi- tion came to see that there was no hope of overthrow- ing the obstructionist ministry by ordinary parliamentary methods. Guizot constantly asserted that the demand for reform was simply brought forward for political purposes, that it was the work of a few. that the people as a whole were entirely indifferent. To prove the falsity of this assertion the Opposition instituted in 1817 a series of "reform ban- THE REFORM BANQUETS 141 quets," which were to be attended by the people and addressed by the reformers. Petitions for reform were to be circu- lated on these occasions. Thus popular pressure would be brought to bear on Parliament and King. These banquets were instituted by those loyal to the monarchy, but hostile to its policy. They simply wished to change the latter. Similar meetings, however, were instituted by the Republic- ans, who were opposed to the very existence of the monarchy. On the 18th of July, 1847, Lamartine, now rapidly ad- Emergence vancing as a leader of the latter party, prophesied a coming revolution. " If the monarchy," said he, " is unfaithful to the hopes that the wisdom of the country reposed in 1830, less in its nature than in its name, if it surrounds itself with an electoral aristocracy rather than unites the entire nation, if it allows us to descend into the abyss of corruption, rest assured that the monarchy will fall, not in its own blood as did that of 1789, but in the trap it itself has set. And after having experienced revolutions of liberty and counter- revolutions of glory, you will have a revolution of the public conscience and a revolution of contempt." Great enthusiasm was aroused by these informal plebi- The people scitcs all over the country during the summer and fall of su PP° rt tne . . demand for 1847. It was conclusively shown that the people were re f orm behind this demand for reform. But the monarchy remained unaffected — still gave its systematic refusal. The King denounced in his speech from the throne this agitation " fo- mented by hostile or blind passions." lie denied the legal right of the people to hold such meetings. To test this right before the courts of law the Opposition arranged a gnat banquet for February 22, 1848, in Paris. Eighty- seven prominent deputies promised to attend. All were to meet in front of the church of the Madeleine and march to the banquet hall. In the night of February 21-22 the Government posted orders forbidding this procession and all similar meetings. Rather than force the issue the depu- ties who had agreed to attend yielded, though under pro- 143 THE REIGN OF LOUIS FHILirrE test. Bui a vast crowd congregated, of students, working- men, and others. They had no leader, no definite purpose. The crowd committed slight acts of lawlessness, but nothing serious happened that day. But in the night barricades arose in the working-men's quarters of the city. Some shots were tired. The Government called out the National Guard. It refused to march against, the insurgents. Some of its members even began to shout, " Long live Reform! M " Down with Guisot!" The King, frightened at this alarming as- Resipnntion peet, was willing to grant reform. Guizot would not con- of Guizot. scn t , uu ] consequently withdrew from office. This news was greeted with enthusiasm by the crowds and, in the evening of February 88d, Paris was illuminated and the trouble seemed ended. The contest thus far had been simply between Royalists, those who supported the Guizot ministry, and the reformers, and the fall of Guizot was the triumph of the latter. But the movement no longer remained thus circumscribed. The Republicans now entered aggressively upon the scene, resolved to arouse the excited people against Louis Thilippe himself and against the monarchy. They marched through the boulevards and made a hostile demon- stration before Guizot's residence. Some unknown person tired a shot at the guards. The guards instantly replied, fifty persons fell, more than twenty dead. This was the doom of the monarchy. The Republicans seized the occa- sion to inflame the people further. Several of the corpses were put upon a cart which was lighted by a torch. The cart was then drawn through the streets. The ghastly spectacle aroused everywhere the angriest passions; cries of "Vengeance!" followed it along its course. From the towers the tocsin sounded its wild and sinister appeal. Thus began a riot which grew in vehemence hourly, and which swept all before it. The cries of M Long live Reform! " heard the day before, now gave way to the more ominous cries o\' "Long live the Republic!" Finally, on February 24th, the King abdicated in favor of his grandson, the The over throw of Louis Philippe. THE FALL OF THE JULY MONARCHY 143 little Count of Paris, who should be King Louis Philippe II, and whose mother, the Duchess of Orleans, should be regent. The royal family left the Tuileries and escaped from Paris in safety. Another French king took the road to England and entered upon a life of exile, which was to end only with death in 1850. The Government of France had been swallowed up by another revolution. The King and the minister were over- thrown. Who would succeed them? The King had abdi- cated in favor of his grandson. But would the revolution- ists recognize him? The Duchess of Orleans with great bravery went directly to the Chamber of Deputies with her two sons, nine and seven years old. A painful scene fol- lowed. The majority of the deputies hailed her as regent and her son as king, but soon the mob, consisting of the students, the Republicans, and Socialists who had forced the abdication, invaded the Chamber. The president de- clared the session closed. The mob continued in the hall, re-enforced by new armed bands, which denounced the idea of a regency, denounced the Chamber and the deputies, and cried " No more Bourbons ; a Provisional Government and after that the Republic." Out of this wild turmoil by no legal method arose a new system. The republican deputies The rise ot finally declared the House of Orleans deposed and proclaimed a Provisional Government and Lamartine read a list of seven names of those who should compose it. All were deputies. This list had been previously drawn up at the office of the National, the leading liberal newspaper. The crowd in the hall shouted their approval. This assembly did not proclaim the Republic. While this government was arising in the Chamber, an- other movement was in progress, in another part of the city. The republican Socialists, meeting in the office of the Reform, their organ, had drawn up a list which had included the names on the list of the National, but had added to them three of their own number, among whom was Louis Blanc. III. T1IF, KKKJN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE These established themselves in the Hold de Ville and pro* claimed the Republic. Thus there were two governments as a result oi' tlu> insurrection. The members chosen in the Chamber traversed the Btreets of Paris to ilu> H6tel de Ville, There the two groups were fused. Positions were found in the new government for the members of both. The Repub- lic was immediately proclaimed, subject to ratification by the people. CHAPTER VII CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN TWO REVOLUTIONS PRUSSIA The French Revolution of 1848 was the signal for the The Fcbru- niost wide-reaching disturbance of the century. Revolu- ary Revo " • i . • i. /. lution a lions broke out from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, from S j„ na i f or France to the Russian frontier. The whole system of re- other revo- action, which had succeeded Waterloo and which had conic to lutions - be personified in the imperturbable Metternich, crashed in Unutterable confusion. Hut in order to understand the swiftness and completeness of this collapse, one must know something of the evolution of central Europe between 1830 and 1848, for the revolutions of 1818 were no sudden and accidental improvisations) but were simply the decisive and dramatic culmination of movements everywhere making for change. The Revolution of 1818 was a signal and an encouragement to other peoples to attempt similar things; it was not a cause. Particularly necessary is it to trace the inner evolution of Germany, Austria, and Italy during this period, which was not at all one of stagnation, but one characterized by a great, and fruitful fermentation of ideas. The interest of German history between 1830 and 1818 The general does not lie in the evolution of political liberty, for political repression and absolutism were the order of the day. I • period. lies rather in growth along economic- lines, in intellectual achievements outside the domain of politics, and ill those movements of opinion and of racial aspiration which ren- dered so notable and far-reaching the vast turmoil of 1818. 145 146 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS Evolution of Prussia. Great in- tellectual activity. For German history the all-important matter is the evolu- tion during those years of a remarkable situation in both Prussia and Austria, which was highly favorable to revolu- tions in the fulness of time. The Confederation as a whole had no evolution, but was a sleeping, hollow mockery. The evolution of the lesser states, important no doubt, must be neglected in a study of this scope. The ideas, personalities, tendencies, and situations that were to prove determinant for central Europe, came not from them but from the two first- class powers already named, which stood confronting each other in the Confederation and in Europe as a whole, ren- dering unity impossible, and both opposed to liberty. And first of the evolution of Prussia during these years. Political liberty, as we have seen, was denied. No constitu- tion was granted, no parliament created, but it would not be reasonable to emphasize that fact unduly. Their absence was not acutely felt save by a small enlightened minority. Such liberties Prussians had never known, and there were few serious practical grievances. The state was well ad- ministered. The king, Frederick William III (1797-1840), was honest and beloved, the administration hard-working and economical, the policies enlightened. The period be- tween 1815 and 1848, though politically unimportant, was immensely significant in other ways. While university pro- fessors and students suspected of dabbling in politics were shamefully persecuted, the regime was not opposed to in- tellectual progress. Under it great advances were made in all branches of education from the lowest to the highest. Intellectual activity, forbidden to enter the political field, overflowed into others. It was a period of great and durable conquests in the domain of science, rich in leaders who held high the best traditions of scholarship and widened the bounds of human knowledge. The great political achievements of the period lay in the administrative and economic questions met and solved by Prussian statesmen. Prussia had to undergo the most thor- REFORMS IN PRUSSIA 147 ough reorganization. Before German unity could be The achieved Prussian unity must be secured. The treaties of achieve " 1815 had transformed Prussia by almost doubling her terri- p russian tory and her population. Out of ten million inhabitants unity im- five million were new subjects, difficult to assimilate: the in- P erative - habitants of the Rhenish provinces had been for twenty years a part of the French Empire and were strongly at- tached to French ideas ; the Poles still bitterly regretted the loss of their former independence; the Saxons resented their annexation to Prussia. These peoples did not feel them- selves Prussians, though fate had put them under a Prussian king. The task of building anew the Prussian state out of such varied elements, of making a thoroughly homo- geneous kingdom, was rendered all the more difficult from the fact that Prussia was divided into two separate, un- connected parts, an eastern and a western, separated by Hanover, Brunswick, and Hesse-Cassel. Her boundaries were not those of a healthy state. These were the problems whose solution would take time. Meanwhile certain definite reforms were undertaken. The financial question was the most urgent, and this was Revision ol faced heroically. The burden of the Napoleonic wars had the s y stem been tremendous. The Prussian debt was large; deficits were usual. By revising her system of taxation, and by rigid economy, order was finally brought about, there were surpluses instead of deficits, and in 1828 government bonds stood at par. The great interest of the Prussian Government in the The material development and prosperity of the country was q ^ Tj. 1011 best shown in its tariff policy. Prussia, as has been said, tariff, was divided into two unequal and unconnected parts. The boundaries were very extensive, increased still further by the fact that entirely within her territory lay states or fragments of other states independent of her. Moreover, the economic conditions in the eastern part of the realm were essentially different from those in the western; the 148 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS one agricultural, the other industrial. There was nothing like freedom of trade between the different parts. Indeed, there were in old Prussia alone sixty-seven different tariff systems in operation, separating district from district. Cities were shut off from the surrounding country districts by tariff walls, and province from province. All this meant that commerce could not flourish, hampered on every side, and that industries, the support of commerce, could not expand, owing to narrow and uncertain markets. Under these conditions one industry thrived — smuggling. The smugglers' trade was easy, owing to the fact that the fron- tiers to be guarded were over 4,000 miles long, a line that could only be guarded by a very large number of customs officials, which would involve great expense. All this was changed in 1818, under the influence of a great financial reformer, Maassen. All internal customs were abolished and free trade was established throughout all Prussia. Then a tariff, very simple and covering few commodities, was established against the rest of the world. This tariff was put low enough to make smuggling unprofitable. Products that would be brought over sea were taxed higher, as they must enter by the few ports, which could be easily guarded. Having established a common tariff for her own kingdom, Prussia sought to induce other German states to enter into union with her, to adopt the same tariff against other na- tions and free trade with each other. She offered to share the total revenues collected pro rata according to popula- tion. The other states protested vehemently at first against what they considered the high-handed measures of the larger state, but they finally saw the advantages of union. The first to join were those which were entirely inclosed or which had parts entirely inclosed by Prussia; whose commerce with the outside world must be through Prussian territory. The Between 1819 and 1828 the little Thuringian duchies entered Zollverein. this Zollverein, or Tariff Union. The southern and central states of Germany held aloof and even formed rival tariff THE TARIFF UNION 149 unions of their own. These, however, did not prosper. One by one the other states joined the Prussian Union, led thereto by the apparent advantages of free trade with each other and by Prussia's liberal terms. By 1842 all, save the Hanseatic towns and Mecklenburg, Hanover, and Austria, had joined. The treaties between the co-operating states upon which the union rested were made for brief periods, but were constantly renewed. The advantages of the Zollverein were both economic and The ad- political. Industry grew rapidly by the application of the vanta & es principle of free trade to the states of Germany. It created a real national unity in economic matters, at a time when Germany was politically only the semblance of a union ; it accustomed German states to co-operation without Austria, and it taught them the advantages of Prussian leadership. Men began to see that a Germany could exist without Aus- tria. The Zollverein is generally considered in a very real sense to have been the beginning of German unity. As long as Frederick William III lived it was recognized Death of that no changes would be made in the political institutions re enc . . ,,.,.. William of Prussia. It was tacitly understood that his declining jjj years should not be disturbed, that the demands for reforms should not be pressed. But when he died in 1840, says von Treitschke, " all the long pent up grievances and hopes of Prussia overflowed irresistibly, gushing and foaming like molten metal when the spigot is knocked out." All eyes were now turned upon his son and successor, Frederick William IV. The new King, forty-five years of age, was already well Frederick known as a man of unusual intellectual gifts — quick, mobile, ' enthusiastic, imaginative, an eloquent conversationalist and public speaker. He was a patron of learning, surrounding himself with scholars, artists, and writers. Goethe had said of him that " so great a talent must awaken new talents in others." From his general intellectual restlessness and lib- erality much was hoped, as it was also known that he had 150 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS latterly not approved the policy of his father. This im- pression he confirmed by his acts at the opening of his reign. He issued an amnesty pardoning political prisoners. He restored Arndt to his professorship at Bonn. He re- leased Jahn. In a series of impassioned utterances he spoke glowingly of Prussia's destiny. It seemed that a new and liberal era was dawning. But disillusionment soon began. The people wanted re- forms and expected them from the new King. His predeces- sor had consented to the creation of local diets for local The demand concerns m each of the provinces into which Prussia was for a par- divided. He had promised a central parliament but had liament. no j- k e pj. ^he p rom i se# The demand now was for this. Would Frederick William IV grant it? This question was asked him by the estates of the Province of Prussia. His answer was kindly and vague. A little later a real answer came in the form of an ordinance which somewhat increased the powers of the provincial estates and provided that dele- gations from each should unite in Berlin. This was not at all what was wanted. Several of the provincial estates de- manded the fulfilment of the promises of 1815. Books ap- peared discussing constitutional questions. The press took the matter up vehemently, the censorship having been some- what slackened. The King apparently made no effort to win back the favor of his people. His policy was evidently purely reactionary. Popular meetings were forbidden in certain provinces ; the press, too free for his satisfaction, was shackled again. Even the independence of the judiciary was threatened. Year after year went by and the people became impatient because no parliament was created. The King, meanwhile wavering between the most exalted notions of the divine origin and nature of his position and his desire to live in harmony with his age, sketched plan after plan of an as- sembly which should not be representative, which should co- operate with him, and which should quiet the insistent clamor THE UNITED LANDTAG OF 1847 151 of his people. Finally, on February 3, 1847, he issued a Letter Patent which marks the beginning of the constitu- The Letter tional history of Prussia. By this Patent it was announced a en ° . . . . February, that the king would summon all the provincial assemblies 18 47 # to meet in one general assembly or United Landtag when- ever the needs of the state should demand new loans, the levying of new taxes, or the augmentation of those already existing. The United Landtag was to have the right of petition, and the king might consult it in regard to new legislation. There were to be two chambers, meeting apart, except when considering financial questions, the former a chamber of lords, the other of the three estates. At first enthusiastic, the people were shortly chagrined at the out- come of all their efforts. The Landtag was not to meet at definite periods but only when the king should summon it. It was to resemble a medieval diet more than a modern parliament. Even its power in financial matters was greatly limited. All discussion involving the tariff was reserved for the Zollverein. Provincial and local taxes remained to be determined absolutely by the crown. In case of war the Government might increase the existing taxes, being merely obliged to bring the matter to the attention of the next Landtag. Even the right of petition was carefully restricted. The king would receive petitions only when two- thirds of both houses had agreed upon them. This was not the constitution the people had been so long popular demanding. By it the king was not required ever to call the dissatis- United Landtag together. Moreover, he retained the com- ac 10n * plete law-making power and an almost unrestricted power over the nation's purse. The new parliament was to repre- sent, not the people, but social classes. Moreover, in the speech from the throne, with which Frederick William IV opened this assembly in the following April, he took particular pains to state that this Patent was no constitution creating a parliament representing the people of Prussia. " Never will I allow," he said, " a sheet 152 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS of written paper to come, like a second Providence, between our Lord God in Heaven and this land, to govern us by its paragraphs. The crown cannot and ought not to de- pend upon the will of majorities. I should never have called you together if I had the least idea that you could dream of playing the part of so-called representatives of the people." Conflict A conflict began at once between the King and the United between Landtag, which developed into a deadlock. The Landtag Frederick ° , ,- . , William IV demanded a real parliament. The King demanded loans. and the Neither yielded to the other, and in June 1817 the Landtag United was di sso lved. Nothing had been accomplished. A grave Landtag. .... constitutional crisis had been created. The monarch stood in direct opposition to the Liberals. Such was the danger- ously overheated state of the public mind when news of the revolution in Paris reached Berlin. AUSTRIA Anstria The history of Austria between 1815 and 1S18 resembles not a in some respects that of the German Confederation in that it was not the evolution of a single homogeneous state, neous state. ° ° Movements proceeded from several local centers. For pur- poses of simplification it is well to examine each in turn. In the provinces of Austria proper, in the western part of the empire, the movement took the form of a demand for the diminution of the autocratic system. There, as elsewhere in Europe, after 1810 a popular feeling that the time had come for larger liberty was distinctly perceptible. Yet there the difficulty of its achievement was at its maxi- mum. For as long as Francis I lived there was no hope of sympathy from the throne. His successor, Ferdinand I (1835-48), was a man of less ability and was, moreover, mentally incapacitated for rule. This meant that Metter- nich and his colleagues exercised nearly uncontrolled power. Political During this period little change occurred in the conditions stagnation. G f the Austrian provinces. Liberal opinions could not be THE GROWTH OF NATIONALITIES 153 freely published owing to the severity of the censorship; yet there were a few journalists and lawyers who managed to express a desire for some measure of political freedom and for a constitution. One significant feature of the time The indus- was the transition from the old to the new in the economic na revo " lution. sphere. The introduction of machinery, bringing with it the factory system, was now accomplished, and was accom- panied by the terrible evils which had marked this transition in England and in France. Many laborers were thrown out of work, wandered about the country, demoralized, starving, and drifted to the cities, particularly to Vienna, forming a desperate element, easily incited to deeds of violence, as the issue was to show. An industrial crisis preceded the political crisis of 184-8 and profoundly influenced its course. The period preceding 1848, politically of slight interest, The devel- was rendered notable by the development of the spirit of na- °P ment ° . . nationali- tionahty among several of the varied peoples who had hither- ties w ithin to been quiescent under the House of Hapsburg. This the empire, was the most significant phenomenon of these years, as it was to be the most permanent in its effects. This feeling of separate individuality, this assertion of the rights of nationality, which is one of the principal features of the history of the nineteenth century everywhere, had come to be the most salient characteristic of Austrian evolution in particular, and is so still. Under the aegis of the House of Hapsburg several nations were arising and were strug- gling for a larger and more independent place in the col- lective state. This spirit was particularly pronounced in Bohemia and Hungary. Bohemia had been united with Austria since 1536. Its Bohemia, population consisted of Germans and of a branch of the Slavic race called Czechs. The Germans had for more than two centuries been preponderant. Their language was that of the government, of educated people, the language of literature and science, the Czechish being regarded as fit only for peasants. But after 1815 the popular conscious- 154 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS ness gradually awoke. The idea that the Czechish nation- ality could be revived took strong hold of a few educated men who believed that Bohemia should be torn from German control and that the native Czechish element should be put in its place. The movement was at first confined to univer- sity men, was literary and scientific. A group of historians arose, of whom Palacky was the leader, who by their his- tories of Bohemia when she had been an independent kingdom, inculcated the wish that she might again be one. Pride was enlisted, too, by reviving a knowledge of the ancient native literature. Henceforth every Czech should cease to use German and speak his own native tongue. This movement grew, passing from university circles to the mass of the people. It was directed against the German office- holders in Bohemia and against the use of German in the government and in education. While during the period from 1815 to 18-18 it accomplished no practical reform, it created a public opinion and a vehement aspiration for na- tional independence that constituted an important factor in the general situation of that year. Hungary. A more pronounced national and racial movement within the empire was going on at the same time in Hungary, a country peopled by several different races speaking differ- ent languages and possessing different institutions. The leading races were the Magyars ; the Slavs, broken up into several branches, north and south of the Magyars ; the Ger- mans or Saxons ; and the Roumanians. The Magyars, though numerically a minority of the whole people, were more numerous than any other one race, were the most de- veloped politically, and had, ever since they had come into the country in the ninth century, regarded it as their own and had paid scant attention to the other races. Two sec- tions of Hungary, Croatia, peopled almost entirely by Slavs, and Transylvania, the majority of whose inhabitants were Roumanians, were somewhat differentiated from Hungary proper, where the Magyars predominated, in that, though THE CONSTITUTION OF HUNGARY 155 annexed countries and subject to the king of Hungary, they enjoyed a certain measure of autonomy. Croatia, for in- stance, had a viceroy or ban and a Diet of its own. Transyl- vania had its Estates, infrequently convoked. Hungary had a constitution dating in part from the thir- The teenth century. It was in 1222 that the Golden Bull of Hungarian Andreas II was issued, nearly contemporary with Magna tion Charta. There was a Diet or Parliament meeting in Presburg in two chambers, or Tables, as they were called ; a Table of Magnates, composed of the highest nobility, of certain of the higher clergy and office-holders ; and a Table of Deputies, chosen by the congregations or county assem- blies, and by the free cities. Hungary was divided into more than fifty counties, each one of which had its local assembly or congregation. The nobility alone possessed political power. Only nobles The impor- sat in the national Diet, and only nobles were members of tance of tne the county assemblies. The nobility was itself divided into two sections, the very wealthy, the Magnates, about five hun- dred in number, and the petty nobility, numbering perhaps seven hundred thousand, poor, in many cases uneducated and hardly to be distinguished from the peasants among whom they lived, save by their privileges. Everywhere feudalism flourished in its most flagrant form and perhaps as nowhere else in Europe. The aristocracy not only constituted all the assemblies, national and local, but they filled all the offices. They enjoyed old feudal dues and paid no taxes themselves. The very tax intended to defray the expense The of the local administration, which they monopolized, was laid prevalence upon the class beneath. Their lands could be alienated , .. r dalism. only to members of their own order. Their palaces in the cities were not subject to municipal jurisdiction. The en- tire class of the bourgeoisie had only one vote in the Diet. Neither bourgeoisie nor the laboring class possessed any power. The immense mass of the population, the peasantry, were subject to a most oppressive serfdom. 156 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS It is evident that though Hungary had a constitution it was not of the modern type but of the medieval. To take a place among the progressive lands of Europe, Hun- gary needed to be brought within the region of modern ideas. One of those who saw this and whose whole activity was to contribute powerfully to this modernization, was Count Ste- Szechenyi phen Szechenyi, a great Hungarian Magnate who, himself and reform. an ar i stocra t, boldly told his fellow-aristocrats that the time for reform had come, that they must reform them- selves, and must change radically the conditions of their country. He was rather a social than a political reformer, interested chiefly in the encouragement of material prosper- ity, which necessitated the removal of many abuses from which the aristocracy profited. He devoted his time, his money, and his immense prestige to social and economic im- provement, to the draining of marshes, the building of roads and tunnels and bridges, the clearing of the Danube for nav- igation. His aim was to make Hungary a busy, prosperous, modern industrial state instead of an illustration of belated medievalism. He encouraged the foundation of learned societies, the use of the national language, the establishment of a national theater. His work was mainly outside the Diet and consisted chiefly of his vigorous writings and his example. He was not a political revolutionist, not an enemy of Austria. The spirit in which he worked was shown by his admonition to his countrymen : " Do not con- stantly trouble yourselves with the vanished glories of the past, but rather let your determined patriotism bring about the prosperity of the beloved fatherland. Many there are who think that Hungary has been, but I for my part like to think that Hungary shall be." The policy Meanwhile the Diet, controlled in both houses by the of the Magyar aristocracy, accomplished little in the direction of reform. It was not willing to curtail its own privileges. But, on the other hand, it was willing to assert itself against the Austrian Government, to attempt to gain a larger in- THE AMBITIONS OF THE MAGYARS 157 dependence for Hungary in the collective state. One gain it made — that concerning the Magyar language. Latin was the language used in the Hungarian Diet. It Tne was the language of the Roman Catholic Church and had ° ° m question. formerly been the language of diplomacy. In a country where so many tongues were spoken its use seemed a felicitous arrangement, favoring no one race. It was neu- tral. But the Magyars, now alive with the spirit of self- assertion, sought to depose Latin and to place Magyar in its stead as the official language. This they finally achieved in 1844. The Croatian deputies, on the other hand, wished still to speak Latin, but were not permitted to. The Mag- yars showed that their desire was not the freedom of the several peoples of which Hungary was composed, but only their own freedom, indeed,- the freedom to impose their will upon others. Their object was the complete Magyar- ization of all who lived in Hungary, were they Croatians, Servians, Roumanians, or what else. In this struggle over language lay the germ of a conflict of races which was later to be most disastrous to the Magyars themselves. They were not willing to grant to others the rights which they had demanded for themselves. While the Hungarian Diet was zealous in asserting the Rise of a claims of Hungary against Austrian domination, and was radlcal eager to air Hungarian grievances against the Imperial Gov- ernment, it refused to undertake any large measure of inter- nal reform. The Magnates, intent upon the preservation of their unrivaled position, blocked the way of even those changes which the other chamber, representative of the numerous lower nobility, was disposed to grant. Gradually there grew up as a result a party much more radical, nour- ished in the ideas of western Europe, democratic, and be- lieving that the existing medieval institutions, the Diet and the county assemblies, must be thoroughly reorganized or , Louis swept away before the new ideas could be worked out. Kossuth This Liberal party was led by Louis Kossuth, one of 1802-1894. 158 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS Hungary's greatest heroes, and Francis Dealt, whose per- sonality is less striking, but whose services to his country were to be more solid and enduring. Kossuth had first come into notice as the editor of a paper which described in vivid and liberal vein the debates in the Diet. When it was forbidden to print these reports he had them litho- graphed. When this was forbidden he had them written out by hand by a corps of amanuenses and distributed by servants. Finally he was arrested and sentenced to prison. During his imprisonment of three years Kossuth applied himself to serious studies, particularly to that of the English language, with such success that he was able later to address large audiences in England and the United States with remarkable effect. In 1840 he was released and obtained permission to edit a daily paper. After 1840 the mass of the nation turned away from Szechenyi and toward Kossuth and Deak. Szechenyi, a Magnate, wished the gradual reform of his country from above, and had no sympathy with democratic movements. Kossuth, on the other hand, was the very incarnation of the great democratic ideas of the age. Sharing fully Szechen- yi's desire to place Hungary in the front rank of modern nations, to develop its material prosperity, its civilization, he did not believe it possible to accomplish this by the meth- ods hitherto followed, and without a thoroughly modern constitutional government. He believed that free political institutions contribute directly to material well-being and to civilization. Kossuth, now as a brilliant editor and as an even more brilliant orator, conducted an agitation that had little in common with the reform movement of the Liberals up to this time. He did not believe that the necessary reforms could ever be brought about by existing agencies — either by the Diet or by the powerful county assemblies, both con- trolled by the nobility. He wished to erase all distinctions between noble and non-noble, to fuse all into one common HUNGARY IN 1847 159 whole. He demanded democratic reforms in every depart- ment of the national life; abolition of the privileges of the nobility and of their exemption from taxation; equal rights and equal burdens for all citizens; trial by jury; reform of the criminal code. Kossuth's impassioned appeals were made directly to the people. He sought to create, and did create, a powerful public opinion clamorous for change. This vigorous liberal opposition to the established order, an op- position ably led and full of fire, grew rapidly. In 1847 it published its programme, drawn up by Deak. This de- Tne manded the taxation of the nobles, the control by the Diet thg Hun ~ a . of all national expenditures, larger liberty for the press, rians in and a complete right of public meeting and association; 1847 - it demanded also that Hungary should not be subordinate to Austrian policy, and to 'the Austrian provinces. Such was the situation when the great reform wave of 1848 began to sweep over Europe. ITALY The Italian revolutions of 1820 and 1821, and of 1831 and Italy after 1831 1832 had had no depth of root, no powers of endurance and had been easily crushed out by a few thousand Austrian bayonets. The humiliation of liberal-minded Italians was great indeed. It was clear to all that the methods hitherto employed would be inadequate to the end. The next fifteen years were devoted to a deeper study of the problem, to the elaboration of several plans for its solution, to the long and patient processes of preparing for an independent national existence a people sorely lacking the most essential elements characteristic of such a state. During this period a group importance of writers figure with unusual prominence. The previous of a group revolutions had failed, partly at least, because of the narrow basis on which they rested. Disaffected army circles and members of a loosely organized, incompetently directed secret society, the Carbonari, had attempted these insurrections. The basis was narrow at best; moreover, the Italians had 160 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS not yet learned the fundamental necessity of solidarity. In- surrections were pitifully local ; Italians of different states rendered each other no assistance, or only the slightest, in movements that would have a common advantage for all and that to succeed must have the support of all. It was im- perative that a universal mental state be created, that a common aspiration characterize the liberal elements every- where, that an Italy of the imagination and affection should exist, even if the Italy of reality was only an expression of geography. All Italians must hold a common set of political ideas, whether they be Piedmontese, Sicilians, Vene- tians, or subjects of the Pope. To bring this about was the work of several gifted men, working mainly through the channel of literature. Joseph Foremost among these was Joseph Mazzini. Mazzini was Mazzini, ^.j ie S pi r £tua,l force of the Italian resurrection, the prophet 1805-1872. . r of a state that was not yet but was to be, destined from youth to feel with extraordinary intensity a holy mission imposed upon him. He was born in 1805 jn Genoa, his father being a physician and a professor in the university. Even in his boyhood he was morbidly impressed with the unhappiness and misery of his country. " In the midst of the noisy, tumultuous life of the students around me I was," he says, in his interesting though fragmentary autobiog- raphy, " somber and absorbed and appeared like one sud- denly grown old. I childishly determined to dress always in black, fancying myself in mourning for my country." It was after the failure of 1821 that Mazzini first became conscious of the mission of his life. While walking one Sun- day with his mother and a friend in the streets of Genoa, they were addressed, he says, " by a tall, dark-bearded man with a severe, energetic countenance and a fiery glance that I have never since forgotten. He held out a white handker- chief towards us, merely saying, ' For the refugees of Italy.' " The incident, simple as it was, made a profound impression upon Mazzini's ardent nature. " The idea of an MAZZINI AND " YOUNG ITALY " 161 existing wrong in my country against which it was a duty His intense to struggle, and the thought that I, too, must bear my part patno lsm - in that struggle, flashed before my mind on that day, for the first time, never again to leave me. The remembrance of those refugees, many of whom became my friends in after life, pursued me wherever I went by day and mingled with my dreams by night. I would have given, I know not what, to follow them. I began collecting names and facts, and studied as best I might the records of that heroic struggle, seeking to fathom the causes of its failure." As Mazzini grew up all his inclinations were toward a literary life. " A thousand visions of historical dramas and romances floated before my mental eye." But this dream he abandoned, " my first great sacrifice," for political agita- tion. He joined the Carbonari, not because he approved even then of their methods, but because at least they were a revolu- tionary organization. As a member of it, he was arrested His impris- in 1830. The governor of Genoa told Mazzini's father that onment - his son was " gifted with some talent," but was " too fond of walking by himself at night absorbed in thought. What on earth has he at his age to think about? We don't like young people thinking without our knowing the subject of their thoughts." Mazzini was imprisoned in the fortress of Savona. Here he could only see the sky and the sea, " the two grandest things in Nature, except the Alps," he said. After six months he was released, but was forced to leave his country. For nearly all of forty years he was to lead the bitter life of an exile in France, in Switzer- land, but chiefly in England, which became his second home. After his release from prison Mazzini founded in 1831 a Founder of society, " Young; Italy," destined to be an important factor oung J . ° J r Italy." in making the new Italy. The Carbonari had led two revolu- tions and had failed. Moreover, he disliked that organization as being merely destructive in its aim, having no definite plan of reconstruction. " Revolutions," he said, " must be made by the people and for the people." His own society must 162 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS be a secret organization ; otherwise it would be stamped out. But it must not be merely a body of conspirators ; it must be educative, proselyting, seeking to win Italians by its moral and intellectual fervor to an idealistic view of life, a self-sacrificing sense of duty. Only those under forty were to be admitted to membership, because his appeal was particularly to the young. " Place youth at the head of the insurgent multitude," he said, " you know not the secret of the power hidden in these youthful hearts, nor the magic influence exercised on the masses by the voice of youth. You will find among the young a host of apostles of the new religion." With Mazzini the liberation and unification of The Italy was indeed a new religion, appealing to the loftiest methods of emotions, entailing complete self-sacrifice, complete absorp- ' tion in the ideal, and the young were to be its apostles. Theirs was to be a missionary life. He told them to travel, to bear from land to land, from village to village, the torch of liberty, to expound its advantages to the people, to establish and consecrate the cult. He told them to " climb the mountains and share the humble food of the laborer ; to visit the workshops and the artizans; to speak to them of their rights, of the memories of their past, of their past glories, of their former commerce; to recount to them the endless oppression of which they were ignorant, because no one took it upon himself to reveal it." Let them not quail before the horrors of torture and imprisonment that might await them in the holy cause. " Ideas grow quickly when watered with the blood of martyrs." Never did a cause have a more dauntless leader, a man of purity of life, a man of imagination, of poetry, of audacity, gifted, more- over, with a marvelous command of persuasive language. The response was overwhelming. By 1833 the society reck- oned 60,000 members. Branches were founded everywhere. Garibaldi, whose name men were later to conjure with, joined it on the shores of the Black Sea. This is the romantic proselyting movement of the nineteenth century, all the THE AIMS OF "YOUNG ITALY" 163 more remarkable from the fact that its members were un- known men, bringing to their work no advantage of wealth or social position. But, as their leader wrote later, " All great national movements begin with the unknown men of the people, without influence except for the faith and will that counts not time or difficulties." The programme of this society was clear and emphatic. The aims First, Austria must be driven out. This was the condition society, precedent to all success. War must come — the sooner the better. Let not Italians rely on the aid of foreign govern- ments, upon diplomacy, but upon their own unaided strength. Austria could not stand against a nation of twenty millions fighting for their rights. At a time when the obstacles seemed insuperable, when "Unity a but few Italians dreamed of -unity even as an ultimate ideal, prac e ... ideal. Mazzini declared that it was a practicable ideal, that the seemingly impossible was easily possible if only Italians would dare to show their power ; and his great significance in Italian history is that he succeeded in imparting his burning faith to multitudes of others. " The one thing wanting to twenty millions of Italians, desirous of emancipating themselves, is not power, but faith," he said. His life was one long apostolate, devoted to the preaching of the true gospel. His writings thrilled with confidence and hope. " Young Italy must be neither a sect nor a party, but a faith and an apostolate." But if Italy were united what should be its form of government? Mazzini believed that it should be a republic, because sovereignty resides essentially in the people, and can only completely express itself in that form. Moreover, " our great memories are republican," and " there are no monarchical elements in Italy," no dynasty rendered illustrious by glory or by important services to Italy, " no powerful and respected aristocracy to take the inter- mediate place between the throne and the people." That a solution of the Italian problem lay in combining the exist- ing states into a federation, Mazzini did not for a moment 164 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS Mazzini as a conspir- ator. Gioberti, 1801-1852. believe. Every argument for federation was a stronger argument for unity. " Never rise in any other name than that of Italy and of all Italy." Mazzini's work, when it passed from the realms of ex- hortation, of ideas, to practice, proved ineffective. Young Italy attempted several insurrections which were less im- portant and less successful than those conducted by the Carbonari. He himself lacked some of the qualities of practical leadership. He was dogmatic, intolerant. He underestimated the strength of the opposition. As a man of action he was not successful. Nevertheless is he one of the chief of the makers of Italy. He and the society which he founded constituted a leavening, quickening force in the realm of ideas. Around them grew up a patriotism for a country that existed as yet only in the imagination. Their influence even reached the king of Piedmont, who had driven Mazzini into exile and who kept him there. " Ah, Ricci," said Charles Albert, " the form of governments is not eternal ; we shall march with the times." But to many serious students of the Italian problem Maz- zini seemed far too radical; seemed a mystic and a rhetori- cian full of resounding and thrilling phrases, but with little practical sense. Men of conservative temperament could not follow him. Repelled by the needless waste of life in small and pitifully weak insurrections, alienated by the sweeping character of his demands, these moderate reformers thought that the problem was of a different nature and ought to re- ceive a different solution. They began about 18-AO to ex- press their views in books which were widely read and which exerted a considerable influence. One of these was " The Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians," a book by a Picdmontese priest, Gioberti, forced, like Mazzini, to live abroad in exile many years because of his radicalism. Gioberti believed that as Italy had been the fatherland of Dante and Napoleon, so it must always be the " home of creative genius." If so, it must occupy THE PROBLEM OF ITALY 165 no less a position in the world than independence. He believed in independence as fervidly as did Mazzini, but he did not believe in the possibility of Italian unity, for Italy had been too long divided. The divisions were deep-seated, historic, insuperable. Unity could never be brought about by peaceful methods, and ought never to be attempted by force. Gioberti believed in a federation of the states of Italy under the presidency or leadership of the Pope. Thus Italy would be secure from foreign aggression or control and a free field would be opened for all kinds of internal improvement. He held that the genius of Italy was mon- archical and aristocratic, whereas Mazzini had declared it to be republican and democratic. He believed that the futility of conspiracies and secret societies and insurrections had been proved, that they did not further but hindered the cause. He concurred with Mazzini in believing in inde- pendence. But to many who did not agree with Mazzini, Gioberti's D'Azeglio, 1798-1866 idea that hope lay in the Pope seemed preposterous. This attitude was expressed by D'Azeglio in his " Recent Events in Romagna " (1846), a scathing commentary on the wretched misgovernment of the Pope within his own do- minions, a vivid portrayal of the evils under which his subjects groaned. D'Azeglio also denounced the republican attempts at insurrection. Hope lay, in his opinion, in the king of Piedmont. Still another point of view was represented by Cesare Balbo Balbo, in his "Hopes of Italy" (1844). He too was a Pied- 1789 " 1853 - montese. He did not believe in unity ; that was a madman's dream. Like Gioberti, he believed in federation, but federa- tion could not be accomplished as long as Austria remained an Italian power. " Without national independence other good things are as nought." Austria then must be elim- inated, but how? Not by a war against her of the Italian people or of the Italian princes, nor yet by foreign aid, but by the disruption of the Turkish Empire, which he 166 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS felt to be near at hand. Might not Austria expand east- ward at the expense of the Sultan, and might she not then "make Italy a present of her independence?" Certainly a fanciful idea. Balbo pointed out the defects of the Italian character, and urged his countrymen to cast off their indo- lence, to cease to be " the land of the olive and the orange," and to develop strength and earnestness of character. The Risor- Out of this fermentation of ideas grew a more vigorous gimen o. S pi r it of unrest, of dissatisfaction, of aspiration. This is the beginning of what is called in Italian the Risorgimento — the resurrection. Although ideas of how that resurrection should be brought about were at variance with each other, every utterance urged it forward. No political party was organized, but a general state of mind was created which held that Italy must become independent, which meant that Austrian influence must be eliminated, and that the Italians could do this themselves, if they only would. The watch- word was given by Charles Albert, King of Piedmont. When asked how this great work could be accomplished, he said, " Italia fara da se," Italy will do it alone. Pius IX, Events in the realm of politics only intensified the effect of these books, seeming to open wide the door of hope. In 1846 a new Pope was elected, Pius IX. It was considered auspicious that he was chosen by the anti-Austrian mem- bers of the conclave. He was known to have read Gioberti. His first acts were liberal. He pardoned political offenders, thus condemning his predecessor's policy. He appointed a commission to consider the question of railways, whose introduction had been opposed by his predecessor, one reason having been, it was said, his belief that they would " work harm to religion." He protested against the Austrian occu- pation of Ferrara. Metternich viewed this tendency with alarm. He had previously said that a liberal Pope was an impossibility. Now that there appeared to be one, he declared it the greatest misfortune of the age. The Pope's statement " that he was resolved to preserve all his author- Pope, 1846-1878. REFORMS IN PIEDMONT 167 ity " passed unheeded in the momentary enthusiasm. " Be a believer," wrote Mazzini to him, " and unite Italy." Reforms were speedily granted in Tuscany and in Pied- mont by the princes, stimulated by the spectacle of a re- forming Pope. A citizens' guard was established in the former, that is, the people were given arms. This they believed would henceforth make despotism impossible. Charles Albert of Piedmont, hitherto called the " Hesitating Charles King," because of his constant vacillation between absolutism Albert » and liberalism, now veered toward the latter, influenced pi e a mon t 4 by the action of the Pope and by the consensus of ideas represented in the Risorgimento. In October 1847 he issued a decree granting many reforms in local government, the organization of the police, and the censorship of the press. Shortly afterward he proclaimed the civil emancipation of Protestants. These reforms were received with great en- thusiasm, an enthusiasm vastly augmented by a letter which he sent at this time to a scientific congress in which he said: " If Providence sends us a war of Italian independence I will mount my horse with my sons. I will place myself at the head of an army. . . . What a glorious day it will be in which we can raise the cry of a war for the independence of Italy ! " In January 1848 a revolution broke out in the Kingdom of Naples, the first of that year of revolutions. The king, Ferdinand II, was forced to yield to the demand for a con- stitution. Such was the condition of Italy at the opening of 1848. Ital y on The demand for reform was universal, but now news arrived f revo i u . which caused Italians speedily to pass on from this to a tj on# far greater undertaking, the ending of foreign domination. The news was that the monarchy of Louis Philippe was overthrown ; that the Second Republic was declared ; that Germany had risen; that Austria was in the throes of dis- memberment ; that Metternich's system had collapsed, and that he himself had been driven into exile whither he had 168 CENTRAL EUROPE BETWEEN REVOLUTIONS previously driven so many. The hour for Italy seemed to have struck in the hour of the distress of Austria. For the year 1848 was to be one of revolution the like of which Europe had not known since the Napoleonic period. Events were to succeed each other of a most sensational character, and the reaction of these events upon each other, of nation upon nation, of parts of nations upon other parts, was to be the most distinguishing as well as the most confusing characteristic of the time. CHAPTER VIII CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT Central Europe at the opening of 1848 was then in The great a restless, disturbed, expectant state. Everywhere men mi ." c , en ury . . uprising, were wearied with the old order and demanding change. A revolutionary spirit was at work, the public mind in Ger- many, Italy, and Austria was excited. Into a society so perturbed and so active came the news of the fall of Louis Philippe. It was the spark that set the world in conflagra- tion. The news was received with joy by the discontented everywhere, who by it were themselves nerved to resistless energy. Revolution succeeded revolution in the various countries with startling rapidity. The whole political system of conservatism seemed about to founder utterly. The great mid-century uprising of the peoples had begun. The storm-center of this general convulsion proved to be Vienna the Vienna, hitherto the proud bulwark of the established order. storm ~ center. Here in the Austrian Empire one of the most confused chap- ters in European history began. A wild welter of disintegra- ting forces threatened for a while the very submersion of the Danubian state. The movement was so complicated and intricate that to give a clear account of it is exceedingly difficult. The immediate impulse came from Hungary. There the Diet had been in session since 1847, engaged in working out moderate reforms for the kingdom. The effect The de- of the news of the fall of Louis Philippe was electrifying. clslve in " • /i i- tervention The passion or the hour was expressed in a naming speech Qf Hungary. by Kossuth, who proved himself a consummate spokesman for a people in revolt. Of impressive presence, and endowed with a wonderful voice, he was revolutionary oratory in- carnate. In a speech in the Diet, March 3, 1848, he voiced 169 170 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT the feelings of the time, and seized the leadership from more moderate men. With bitter execration he fulminated against the Austrian Government as a charnel house whence issued suffocating vapors and pestilential winds benumbing the senses, deadening the national spirit. Only with a free con- stitution could the various races of Austria have a happy future and live together in brotherhood. The effect of this speech in Hungary and throughout the Austrian states was immediate and profound. Translated into German, and published in Vienna, it inflamed the passions of the people. Ten days later a riot broke out in Vienna itself, organized largely by students and workingmen. The soldiers fired and bloodshed resulted. Barricades were erected and the people and soldiers fought hand to hand. The crowd surged about and into the imperial palace, and invaded the hall in which The over- the Diet was sitting, crying " Down with Metternich ! " Met- ,, ., . ^ temich, who for thirty-nine years had stood at the head of Metternich. J J the Austrian states, who was the very source and fount of reaction, imperturbable, pitiless, masterful, was now forced to resign, to flee in disguise from Austria to England, to witness his whole system crash completely beneath the on- slaught of the very forces for which he had for a generation shown contempt. The effect produced by the announcement of Metternich's fall was prodigious. It was the most astounding piece of news Europe had received since Waterloo. His fall was correctly heralded as the fall of a system hitherto impreg- nable. As Hungary, under the spell of Kossuth's oratory, had exerted an influence upon Vienna, so now the actions of the Viennese reacted upon Hungary. The Hungarian Diet, dominated by the reform and national enthusiasm just un- The March chained and constantly fanned by Kossuth, passed on March 15th and the days succeeding the famous March Laws, by which the process of reforming and modernizing Hungary, which had been going on for some years, was given the finish- THE MARCH LAWS IN HUNGARY 171 ing touch. These celebrated laws represented the demands of the Hungarian national party led by Kossuth. They con- cerned two great subjects, the internal reorganization of Hungary and the future relations of that kingdom to the empire as a whole. They swept away the old aristocratic political machinery and substituted a modern democratic constitution. Henceforth there was to be a Diet meeting annually, not at Presburg, a town near Austria, but at Budapest, in the very heart of the kingdom, a Diet, moreover, to be elected, not by the privileged nobility but by every Hungarian owning property to the value of about one hundred and fifty dollars. The feudal services owed the nobility by the peasants were abolished, and nothing was said of compensation, save that it was a " debt of honor," presumably to be discharged -by the nation later. Religious freedom, liberty of the press, trial by jury, a national guard were all proclaimed. And as regards the relations of Hungary to the empire, it was declared that Hungary should henceforth have its own ministry, not only for domestic business, but also for war, finance, and foreign affairs. These latter departments had hitherto belonged to the central government. The March laws made Hungary prac- Hungary tically an independent nation. The only connection with P racticall 7 Austria was in the person of the monarch, who could act ent in Hungary, however, only through this Hungarian ministry. The consent of the Vienna Government was all that was now needed to complete this virtual separation, and this consent was shortly given under the compulsion of dire necessity (March 31). Thus, with remarkable swiftness and without bloodshed, Hungary had practically won her independence. Henceforth she would be mistress of her own destinies. That she so understood the matter was shown by her creation of a national army with a national flag, and by the appointment of Hungarian ambassadors to foreign countries. The example of Hungary was speedily followed by Bo- Revolution hernia. Here there were two races : the Germans, wealthy, n ° emia * 172 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT Revolution in the Austrian provinces. Revolution in Lombardy- Venetia. educated, but a minority, and the Czechs, poorer, but a majority, ambitious to make Bohemia a separate state, sub- ject only to the emperor. The movement for the revival of Czechish nationality had been growing since 1830, ex- pressed particularly by the revival of the Czechish language as a mark of distinction from the German, as a method of spiritual unification. This had been accompanied, as we have seen, by a revival of interest in Czechish and Slavic history. The Bohemians now sent a deputation to Vienna March 19th, to ask for the complete equality of Czechs and Germans, for the familiar liberal reforms relating to the Diet, the press, taxation, and religion, and for local auton- omy. The Emperor a few days later conceded most of these demands. Meanwhile, recognizing the opportunity, the Liberals of Vienna and the Austrian provinces snatched at advantages for themselves. They demanded a constitution for the whole empire, and larger local self-government for the Austrian provinces. These demands, too, were granted, of course because of the helplessness of the Government. That help- lessness was due chiefly to the critical situation in Italy. In Hungary, Bohemia, and the Austrian provinces extensive rights in the direction of self-government, of constitutional reform, of personal freedom, had been won. But there had in no case been a repudiation of the empire. The emperor's legitimate headship was not questioned. But in Italy it was just this that was denied. There, Austria possessed the Lombardo- Venetian kingdom. The leading city of Lombardy was Milan, of Venetia, Venice. These states had long re- sented Austrian rule. Moreover, the other states of Italy had, since 1815, been practically dominated by Austria. In the peninsula the desire to expel the foreigner completely, and to achieve unity, was strong and growing. This is an important chapter of Italian history, which, however, can only be briefly treated here. The Italian reformers saw their opportunity in the disturbances of 1818. Milan rose REVOLUTION IN ITALY 173 in insurrection, and expelled the Austrian troops, which were unprepared. Venice, under the inspiring leadership of Daniel Manin, threw off the Austrian allegiance and declared itself a republic once more. Piedmont, an independent state, threw in its lot with these rebels, and sent its army into Lombardy. The other Italian states, Tuscany, the Papacy, and Naples, being compelled thereto by the popular demand, sent troops forward to northern Italy to co-operate. The moment seemed to have arrived for the liberation of the peninsula Italy from Austrian control. The peoples and governments ap- renounces peared to be unanimous in their determination to drive out . . the Austrians once for all. Italy had practically declared its independence. Here, then, was the critical point that must be defended at all costs. Fortunately for Austria she had in northern Italy a commander equal to the task, Radetzky, a man who had served with credit in every Aus- trian war for sixty years, and who now at the age of eighty- two was to increase his reputation. Radetzky, forced out of Milan, retired to the famous Quadrilateral, the fort- resses on the Adige and the Mincio, Legnago, Peschiera, Verona and Mantua, one of the strongest military positions in Europe. Temporarily on the defensive, he believed he could win in the end if properly supported. Lie succeeded in convincing the Austrian Government that the crucial point was Italy, that here the fate of the empire would be decided. Meanwhile, there were March days in Germany, too. Aus- Revolution tria's distress was Germany's opportunity as it was Italy's. „ J , rr J . Germany. As we have seen, the personality and system of Metternich had imposed themselves upon the German Confederation, and through it upon the states of which it was composed. The news of his fall had immediate and resounding effect, and particularly in Prussia, for months kept fevered by its struggle with Frederick William IV for a real parliament. On March 15th barricades were erected in Berlin and for a week the capital was the scene of great turbulence and some 17* CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT bloodshed. The King, who had begun to waver even before the outbreak, issued on the 18th a proclamation in which he summoned the United Landtag to co-operate in framing a constitution for the realm, guaranteeing the political and civil liberties that had been demanded for years. He also promised to lead in the attempt to achieve unity for Germany. The For the moment seemed to have come when this, also, might be wrung out of the chaos of the times, when the loose con- movement. # ° federation erected by the Congress of Vienna might be trans- formed into a strong and vigorous union. The Liberals had always desired this, and had recently become unusually active in outlining plans and preparing for the future. The revolu- tion in France gave them encouragement. The fact that Austria, interested in the preservation of the old Confedera- tion, was now impotent, that the princes everywhere in Ger- many were powerless to oppose, greatly advanced the cause. A self-constituted committee of Liberals met at Heidelberg early in March and decided to call a preliminary assembly to consider the whole question. This preliminary assembly, or Vorparlament, met from March 31st to April 4th and arranged for the election, directly by the people, of an assembly that should draw up the constitution for a united Germany. The princes of the different states were forced to sanction this proceeding, as was also the Diet. In April The Par- and May the elections were held, and on May 18th the first liament of German National Assembly or Parliament of Frankfort met amid the high hopes of the people. Thus by the end of March 1848 revolution, universal in its range, was everywhere successful. The famous March Days had demolished the system of government that had held The sway in Europe for a generation. Throughout the Austrian March Empire, in Germany and in Italy the revolution was tri- revolutions umphant. Hungary and Bohemia had obtained sweeping con- cessions; a constitution had been promised the Austrian trium- provinces ; several Italian states had obtained constitutions ; phant. the Lombardo-Venetian king-dom had declared itself inde- AUSTRIA RECOVERS LOST GROUND 175 pendent of Austria, and the rest of Italy was moving to sup- port the rebels ; a constitution had been promised Prussia, and a convention was about to meet to give liberty and unity to Germany. But the period of triumph was brief. At the moment of Austria greatest humiliation Austria began to show remarkable be ^ ins tne & & . work of powers of recovery. In the rivalries of her races, and in restoration. her army lay her salvation. The Government won its first victory, not in Italy, which was the critical point, but in Bohemia. There, in March, the Germans and the Czechs had worked together for the acquisition of the reforms de- scribed above. But shortly serious differences drove the two races apart. The Germans wished to have Bohemia repre- sented in the Frankfort Parliament, and included within the new Germany that was expected to issue from the delibera- tions of that body. To this the Czechs, however, were strongly opposed, fearing that this would only mean the complete submersion of their own nationality in that of Germany, the Germans being overwhelmingly predominant. What they aspired to was ultimately a Czechish or Slavic kingdom of their own. Fearing this very thing the Germans in Bohemia redoubled their efforts to make the connection between Bohemia and Germany close. Racial animosities were thus vigorously fanned. The result was street dis- turbances in Prague between the Germans and Czechs, cul- Bohemia minating in an insurrection June 12th. Windischgratz, conquered, commander of the troops in Prague, proclaimed the city in a state of siege. Unable to restore quiet by negotiation he bombarded the city on the 17th, soon subdued it and was dictator. The army had won its first victory, and that, too, by taking advantage of the bitter racial antagonisms in which the Austrian Empire so abounded. In Italy also the army was victorious. Radetzky had Italy correctly foreseen the future. The Italians, after the first P artiall y , ... conquered, flush of enthusiasm, began to be torn by jealousies and dis- sensions. The Papal, Neapolitan, and Tuscan troops were 176 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT Civil dissension within Hungary. recalled and northern Italy was left to itself. The rulers of those states had sent their armies forward to join Piedmont in the war with Austria, not because they had wished to, but because of popular pressure which they now felt able to defy. Charles Albert was no match for Radetzky, and was defeated badly at Custozza, July 25th. Austria recovered Lombardy and could even have invaded Piedmont had it not been for the opposition of France and Great Britain. Hostilities were brought to a close by an armistice August 9th. By the middle of the summer of 1848 the Austrian Government was again in the saddle in Bohemia, and had partially re- covered its power in Italy. But in Vienna itself and in Hungary its position was still most precarious. Hungary, as we have seen, had won by the March Laws of 1848 a position of practical independence of Austria. It possessed its own ministry, which constituted the real government. The role of the Emperor was most circum- scribed, yet he was forced to endure this humiliation for the present. But the Austrian ministry was only biding its time to humble this arrogant Magyar Government. The opportunity came with the outbreak of civil dissension within Hungary itself. There racial and national rivalries rose to the highest pitch. The Magyars, though a minority of the whole people, had always been dominant and the victory of March had been their victory. But the national feeling was strong and growing with Serbs, Croatians, and Rou- manians. These, in the summer of 1848, demanded of the Hungarian Diet much the same privileges which the Magyars had won for themselves from the Vienna Government. They wished local self-government and the recognition of their own languages and peculiar customs. To this the Magyars would not for a moment consent. They intended that there should be but one nationality in Hungai'y — that of the Magyars. Individual civil equality should be guaranteed to all the inhabitants of the kingdom of whatever race, but no separate or partly separate nations, and no other DISSENSIONS WITHIN HUNGARY 177 official language than their own. They, therefore, refused these demands point-blank. As a consequence, the bitterest race hatreds broke out in this Hungarian state, whose power had been so recently established, and was so lightly grounded. The Magyars insisted that the Magyar language should be taught in all the schools in Croatia and should be used in all official communications between that province and the central government in Budapest. The Croatians resented Tne this uncompromising and ungenerous policy and their resent- roa ians ment rapidly became rebellion. The Austrian Government against the appointed Jellachich, a Croatian colonel and a bitter oppo- Magyars, nent of the Magyars, as governor or ban of Croatia. This the Hungarians felt to be an insult, and their relations with the Vienna Government became very much strained. Jellachich labored from the outset to fan the flames of this hatred of Croat and Magyar. Would the Austrian Government sanction these acts of one of its subjects against Hungary? That Government had approved the March Laws which gave large powers to Hungary, and Hungary included Croatia, Slavonia, and other Slavic areas. The Hungarian Gov- ernment was entirely within its rights when it demanded that Jellachich be dismissed and that the agreement of March be loyally applied. But Austria had made those concessions only from compulsion. It saw now in Jellachich a means Austria of recalling them. But its own position was still too in- e * p °* s ° r situation. secure to permit it to proceed openly and aboveboard to that direct end. The policy that it followed was most tortuous, — now apparently conceding the Hungarian de- mands, at the same time not discrediting Jellachich. It would be impossible in our space to trace these manoeuvers in detail. Suffice it to say that conduct so uncandid in- creased daily the tension between Hungary and Austria, considered by Hungary responsible for the actions of Jella- chich. A change consequently occurred in the inner politics of Hungary, which was resolved to maintain itself against the rebellious Slavs and, if Austria supported them, against 178 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT Radical party in Hungary seizes control. Austria itself. The Hungarian ministry since March had been a moderate one, in favor of maintaining peace. It included all the more important Magyar statesmen. But the perilous position into which the Magyars were drifting naturally favored the more warlike and revolutionary leaders who embodied the passionate hatred of the Slavs and Austrians. Peaceful negotiation between the various parties to the con- flict failed, and in September 1848 matters were precipitated by Jellachich, who began a civil war by leading an army of Croatians and Serbs against the Magyars. The effect of this action was to arouse the Magyars to a fever heat, and to play directly into the hands of the aggressive war party. Kossuth and the extreme radicals now came into power. Those who stood for peaceful relations with Austria, like Deak, gave up in despair. The Austrian Government finally assumed the aggressive. On October 3d the Emperor declared the Hungarian Diet dissolved. At the same time Jellachich, so odious to all Magyars, was given the command of all the imperial troops in Hungary. The immediate effect, however, of this action was not what had been in- tended, but was rather another outbreak in Vienna itself. There the revolutionists, sympathizing with the Magyars, rose and actually controlled the city for several Aveeks. The Emperor fled to Olmutz. But now the army appeared upon the scene. Windischgratz, recalled from Prague, besieged Vienna for five days, finally forcing its surrender October 31, 1848. Austria had won her third victory; for in Bo- hemia, in Italy, and now in Vienna the army had intervened with decisive effect and had either crushed or checked the revolutionary parties, and had won back for the Government some of the ground lost in March. The reactionary party in Austria now became stronger and more determined to finish with this ubiquitous revolution. It forced the Emperor Ferdinand to abdicate. He was suc- ceeded December 2, 1848, by his nephew, Francis Joseph I, a lad of eighteen, who is still the Emperor of Austria (1909). WAR BETWEEN AUSTRIA AND HUNGARY 179 The purpose of this manoeuver was to permit by a show Abdication of legality the abrogation of the March Laws in Hungary. ° e . J . . . . Emperor of Promises made by Ferdinand, it was held, were not binding Austria. upon his successor, and the promises of March were hence- Accession forth to be repudiated. Schwarzenberg, one of the most of Francis reckless, daring, and autocratic ministers of the nineteenth century, now became the real leader of the Government. The Austrian ministry, at last confident of its power, re- tracted the March Laws and prepared to subdue Hungary as it had subdued Bohemia and Vienna. Hungary stiffened for the coining conflict. She declared Francis Joseph a Hungary usurper. Only that person was King of Hungary who had been crowned in Hungary with the crown of St. Stephen. Joseph a She therefore refused to recognize the new ruler until he usurper, should be crowned and take the oath to the constitution, and she held that Ferdinand was still King, and prepared to fight in his defense and that of the March Laws which he had sanctioned. Thus it came about that the year 1849 saw a great war War in Hungary. Austrian armies were sent into that country Detween Austria and from various directions. The ungenerous conduct of the Hungary. Magyars toward the other races in Hungary was now given its reward. Not only did the Hungarian armies have to face Austrian troops, flushed with victory, but in the south the Serbs were in full revolt, in the east the Roumanian peasantry favored the Austrians, in the south and south- west the Croatians and Slavonians under Jellachich were eager for revenge. The result was that the Hungarian armies in the period from January to March 1849 were in the main unsuccessful. In April, however, they gained several victories and drove back the Austrians. Then, in a frenzy of excitement, the Hungarian radicals, led by Kossuth, in- Hungarian duced the Diet to take the momentous step of declaring that Declaration the House of Hapsburg, as false and perjured, had ceased ° Inde " xt »ii • tt pendence, to rule, and that Hungary was an independent nation. Kos- ADr ji 14 suth was appointed President of the indivisible state of Hun- 1849. 180 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT gary. While the word republic was not uttered, such would probably be the future form of government if the Hungarians succeeded in achieving their independence. The Hungarian victories still continued for a while, but the action of the Diet in declaring independence altered the situation disas- trously. The matter became international. Foreign inter- vention brought this turbulent chapter abruptly to a close. The young Francis Joseph I made an appeal for aid to the Tsar of Russia. Nicholas I showed the greatest alacrity in responding. The reasons that determined him were vari- ous. He was both by temperament and conviction predis- posed to aid his fellow-sovereigns against revolutionary movements if asked. He was an autocrat and interested in the preservation of autocracy wherever it existed. Also he had no desire to see a great republic on his very borders. Furthermore, a successful Hungary might make a restless Poland. Many Poles were fighting in the Hungarian armies. Hungary Russian troops, variously estimated at from 100,000 to conquere . 000,000, now poured into Hungary from the east and north. The Austrians again advanced from the west. The Hun- garians fought brilliantly and recklessly, urged on by the eloquence of Kossuth. They sought the aid of the Turks but did not receive it. They even appealed to the Slavs, promising them in adversity the rights they had refused in prosperity, but in vain. The overwhelming numbers of their opponents rendered the struggle hopeless. Kossuth resigned in favor of Gorgei, a leading general. The latter was forced to capitulate at Vilagos, August 13, 1849. The war of Hungarian Independence was over. Kossuth and others fled to Turkey, where they were given refuge. Nich- olas proudly handed over to Francis Joseph his troublesome Hungary, which Austria, if left to her own resources, would probably have been unable to conquer. The punishment meted out to the Hungarians had no quality of mercy in it. Many generals and civilians were hanged. The constitutional privileges were entirely abolished. Hungary became a mere AUSTRIA DEFEATS PIEDMONT 181 province of Austria, and was crushed beneath the iron heel. The catastrophe of 1849 seemed the complete annihilation of that country. Meanwhile Italy also had been reconquered by the revived The military power of Austria. The armistice concluded in K com _ August 1848 between Austria and Piedmont, after the battle pieted. of Custozza, lasted seven months, during which time diplo- macy was vainly attempting to effect a peace. Austria crushed Lombardy as never before beneath a harsh military rule. Charles Albert considered himself now so deeply pledged to deliver Italy that he resolved to reopen the war and did so in the spring of 1849. But his chances were much poorer than in 1848. During those months absolutism in its severest form had been restored in Naples, and Naples consequently would send no ard ; also the Pope had fled from Rome, his prime minister, Rossi, having been murdered, and had gone to Naples as the guest of Ferdinand. Rome had been declared a republic, with Mazzini as one of the Trium- virs, as the executive was called. Tuscany, also, had been declared a republic, the Grand Duke having likewise taken refuge with Ferdinand of Naples. Tuscany and Rome were consequently involved in such internal complications that they could not be counted on in a renewal of the war. More- over, there was little sympathy between the republicans of these states and the monarchists of Piedmont, for one of the causes here, as everywhere, of Austrian success lay in the fact that the revolutionists were divided among them- selves. When Charles Albert took the field, therefore, in Abdication 1849 he took it alone. No help came from the states to of the south. The result was not long doubtful. At Novara, Albert# March 23, 1849, the Sardinian army was utterly overthrown. The King himself sought death on the battlefield, but in vain. " Even death has cast me off," he said. Believing that better terms could be made for his country if another sovereign were on the throne, he abdicated in favor of his son, Victor Emmanuel II, whose reign, begun in the darkest 182 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT Overthrow of the Soman Kepublic. Fall of Venice. adversity, was destined to be glorious. Passing into exile, Charles Albert died a few months later. He had rendered, however, a great service to his house and to Italy, for he had shown that there was one Italian prince who was willing to risk everything for the national cause. He had enlisted the interest and the faith of the Italians in the Government of Piedmont, in the House of Savoy. He was looked upon as a martyr to the national cause. The battle of Novara was followed shortly by the over- throw of the Florentine Republic and the restoration of the grand duke of Tuscany. But the restoration of the Pope and the extinction of the Roman Republic was a more difficult task. That republic, under the leadership of Maz- zini, was becoming popular with the former subjects of the Pope, and would no doubt have lived had foreign powers been willing to let it alone. But they were not. France, believ- ing that Austria would intervene if she did not, and wishing to assert something like a balance of power in the peninsula, decided to send an expedition to restore the Pope, but at the same time to preserve the free institutions that had re- cently been won by the Romans. The president of the re- public, Louis Bonaparte, favored this for personal reasons. He wished to win the favor of the Catholics and conserva- tives of France. And thus France, pledged by its very con- stitution " never to employ its forces against the liberties of another people," went to work to destroy a sister republic. It should be said that the true Republicans in France strove to prevent the Government from embarking upon this policy, but in vain. At first the French were repulsed, but then, re- inforced and far superior to the Romans, they began a siege of the city which lasted about three weeks, ending in its cap- ture June 30, 1849. With the fall of Venice before the Austrians in August 1849 this chapter of Italian history closes. The hopes of 1848 had withered fast. A cruel reaction now held sway throughout most of the peninsula. The power of Austria THE PARLIAMENT OF FRANKFORT 183 was restored, greater apparently than ever. Piedmont alone preserved a real independence, but Piedmont was for the time being crushed beneath the burdens of a disastrous war and a humiliating peace. Meanwhile the victories of the Liberals in Germany were The Par- being succeeded by defeats. There hope had centered in the deliberations of the Parliament of Frankfort, consisting of nearly six hundred representatives, elected by universal suffrage. The assembly was composed of many able men, but it possessed only a moral authority. Though its exist- ence had not been prevented by the rulers of the various states, because they had not dared to oppose what the people so plainly desired, still those rulers gave it no positive sup- port and played a waiting game, hoping to be able to pre- vent the execution of any decisions unfavorable to them- selves. The assembly aspired to give unity and a constitu- tion to Germany. But having no draft ready to discuss, much time was lost. Debates on rather abstract questions, too, which might better have been postponed, consumed many weeks, during which the old order was beginning to win back its old position, particularly in Austria. Gradually, how- ever, the Constitution was elaborated. It reduced con- siderably the powers of the several rulers and created a fairly strong federal state. Two most thorny questions long baffled the assembly: what territory should be included in the new Germany, and who should be its head? The difficulties were extreme in either case. They lay in the fact that there were two great powers, Austria and Prussia, the fundamental fact, as we have seen, of the historical evolu- tion of Germany. Any decision of either question would The probably offend one or the other. Austria was the chief or ian problem. Should she be admitted into the new union? If so, wholly or only in part? If wholly, that would mean that millions of Italians, Croatians, Hungarians, Poles, Roumanians would come in, would participate in the making of the laws. It would mean, too, that the new central par- 184. CENTRAL EUROrE IN REVOLT liament would have to legislate for a most motley aggregation of peoples. Moreover, the empire thus created would be no Germany, but a nondescript. Austria, largely non- German, had a population of 158,000,000. The rest of Germany would number only about 132,000,000. Austria would, therefore, have an absolute majority in the parlia- ment, and the actions of that majority might be determined by the desires of Hungarians and Slavs. Obviously such an unity would be a mockery. Moreover, to permit such dissimilar elements to live together the loosest confederation would be necessary, and Germans were tired of loose con- federations. On the other hand, to admit o\\\y the German provinces of Austria would be to break up the unity of Austria, and to this the Austrian Government objected. It was finally decided, however, to include those provinces only. The boundaries of the new union were to be the same as those of the German Confederation. The other most important question was what should be the form of the new government, and who should be the executive? Should there be an emperor or a president or a board, and, if an emperor, should his office be hereditary, or for life, or for a term of years? Should he be the ruler of Prussia or of Austria, or should first one and then the other rule? The final decision was that Germany should be an hereditary empire, and on March 28, 1849, the King of Prussia was chosen to be its head. Austria announced curtly that it " would neither let itself be expelled from the German Confederation, nor let its German provinces be separated from the indivisible monarchy." The center of interest now shifted to Berlin, whither a delegation went to offer to Frederick William IV the imperial crown of a united Germany. Would he aceept it? If he the King of s ^ ouu ^ the nc ^ scheme to which twenty-eight minor states Prussia. had already assented would go into force, though it might involve a war with Austria, by this time largely recovered from her various troubles. Frederick William had declared Leadership in Germany offered to FAILURE OF THE FRANKFORT PARLIAMENT 185 in 1847 that lie was willing to settle the German question, u with Austria, without Austria, yes, if need be, against Austria." Now, however, he was in a very different mood. He declined the offer of the Frankfort Parliament. The reasons wi:r(t varied. Austria protested that she would never accept a subordinate position, and this protest alarmed him. And he disliked the idea of receiving a crown from a revolu- tionary assembly; rather, in his opinion, ought such a gift to come from his equals, the princes of Germany. Thus the two great German powers, Austria and Prussia, Rejection rejected the work of the Frankfort Parliament. Rebuffed of the . . . ... work of the in such high quarters, that body was unable to impose its work F ran kf or t upon Germany, and it finally ended its existence wretchedly. Parliament. In session for over a year it accomplished nothing. Rut the responsibility for the failure of Germans to achieve a real unity in 1848 and 1849 rests primarily not with it, but with Prussia and Austria. Its failure, however, and its mistakes probably made it easier for the next generation to solve the problem. The King of Prussia now attempted to form a union along The his own royal lines. This brought him into conflict, how- numilia - • r> i • i -l ill- tion of ever, with Austria in 1850, which peremptorily ordered him oimiitz." to abandon his schemes, which he forthwith did. This was the famous " humiliation of Oimiitz." Austria then de- manded that the old German Confederation of 1815, which had been suspended in 1848, be revived with its Diet at Frankfort. This was done in 1851. The permanent results of this mid-century uprising of Results of central Europe were very slight. Everywhere the old gov- e Tevo u " ernments slipped back into the old grooves and resumed the 1848 old traditions. Two states, however, emerged with consti- tutions which they kept, Sardinia, whose Constitutional Statute granted by Charles Albert on March 4, 1848, estab- lished a real constitutional and parliamentary government, the only one in Italy, and Prussia, whose Constitution issued by the King in its final form in 1850 was far less liberal, yet 186 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT sufficed to range Prussia among the constitutional states of Europe. By it the old absolutism of the state was changed, at hast in form. There was henceforth a parlia- ment consisting of two chambers. In one respect this docu- ment was a bitter disappointment to all Liberals. In the March days of 184-8 the King had promised universal suf- frage, but the Constitution as finally promulgated rendered it illusory. It established a system unique in the world. Universal suffrage was not withdrawn, but was marvelously manipulated. The voters were divided in each electoral district throughout Prussia into three classes, according to wealth. The amount of taxes paid by the district was divided into three equal parts. Those voters who paid the first third were grouped into one class, those, more numerous, who paid the second third into another class, those who paid the remainder into still another class. The result was that a few very rich men were set apart by themselves, the less rich by themselves, and the poor by themselves. Each of these three groups, voting separately, elected an equal number of delegates to a convention, which convention chose the delegates of that constituency to the lower house of the Prussian Parliament. Thus in every electoral as- sembly two-thirds of the members belonged to the wealthy class. There was no chance in such a system for the poor, for the masses. This system, established by the Constitution of 1850, still exists in Prussia. It gives an enormous prepon- derance of political power to the rich. The first class con- sists of very tew men, in some districts of only one; the second class is sometimes twenty times as numerous; the third sometimes a hundred, or even a thousand times. Thus though every man twenty-five years of age has the suffrage, the vote of a single rich man may have as great weight as the votes of a thousand workingmen. CHAPTER IX THE SECOND REPUBLIC AND THE FOUNDING OF THE SECOND EMPIRE THE SECOND REPUBLIC The Revolution of 1848 in France was extraordinarily The French swift, entirely unexpected, and extremely radical. " Though Revoluti TB *^ ' policy of of self interest. Now it. was to change, become lets precise, peacei bolder, and more uncertain, calculated to arouse criticism and to create ■> lack of confidence, a genera] sense of in- security. In preparing France for the Empire while yet he was the dictatorial President of 1852, Napoleon had taken I-' 'i,i.| care to reassure her on o/ie {joint. As the First Empire had been a period of unexampled war, would not the Second be the same? In a speech at Bordeaux, which became famous, Napoleon had with great deliberation treated this subject. w Nevertheless," said he, "there is a fear to which I ought to reply. In a spirit of distrust certain people sayj the Empire is war. But J .say: the Empire is peace. I confess, however, that I, like the Emperor, have many conquests to make. I wish, like him, to win and to reconcile the hostile parties/' and to achieve economic and moral victories of various kinds. "... Such are the eon- quests that I contemplate, and all of you who surround me, who desire, like myself, the welfare- of the fatherland, you are my soldiers." To the latter sort, of con- quests the Emperor gave himself, as we have: seen, with energy and success. But the other part of his promise he dirl not adhere to. Wars w18 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Policy of economic develop- ment. Cavour seeks a military ally. vara, that if Piedmont would " gather to itself all the living forces in Italy it would be in a position to lead our mother country to those high destinies whereunto she is called." To accomplish this, he now said, " Piedmont must begin by raising herself, by re-establishing in Europe as well as in Italy a position and a credit equal to her ambition." He threw himself with enthusiasm and intelligence into his pre- liminary work of making Piedmont, a small and poor coun- try, strong, vigorous, modern, of calling the attention of the great powers to this little state beneath the Alps. To accomplish this the army must be reorganized and strength- ened, the fleet built up, fortifications erected. This would involve immense expenditure. But Piedmont's debt had been greatly increased by the late war. The interest on it had mounted from about two million lire in 1847 to thirty million in 1852. There were large annual deficits ; bank- ruptcy appeared imminent. Economy rather than expendi- ture seemed imperative. Not so thought Cavour. He be- lieved in spending freely on improvements, because they were necessary, and because in the end larger revenues would result. He urged large appropriations not only for the army, but for public works. He encouraged agriculture, completed the railway system of Piedmont, stimulated commerce and in- dustry by treaties of commerce with other states, secula- rized some of the monastic lands, levied new taxes, all this, of course, by securing the necessary laws from Parliament. The result of all this activity was that Piedmont entered upon a period of rapid growth in material prosperity, and the new bunions were as easily borne as the old had been. Cavour was thus able to create a large and well-equipped army of ninety thousand men, remarkable for a state whose population was only five million. And this facilitated his next object, which was to secure for Piedmont an ally among the great powers, for this he considered absolutely necessary if she were to accomplish her high mission. Cavour believed, as did all time patriots, that Austria must be driven PIEDMONT AND THE CRIMEAN WAR 219 out of Italy before any Italian regeneration could be achieved. But he did not believe with Mazzini and others that the Italians could accomplish this feat alone. In his opinion the history of the last forty years had shown that plots and insurrections would not avail. It was essential to win the aid of a great military power comparable in strength and discipline to Austria. This explains why he urged that Piedmont participate in the Crimean war. The Crimean war was fought in 1854 and 1855 by France Why and England against Russia, to prevent the latter power Piedmont from dismembering the Turkish Empire. There seemed to pated in be no reason for a small and struggling state like Piedmont the Cri- to interfere. It had no serious quarrel with Russia. The mean war. preservation or dismemberment of Turkey was for it a matter of only remote concern. Yet Cavour, looking beyond the immediate question, believed that Piedmont's and Italy's in- terests would be subserved by an alliance offensive and de- fensive with the two western powers against Russia. For he believed that thus Piedmont would win the good will of her two allies, and might take her place as an equal at the council board of European diplomacy. Such a position this state, petty and poor, in comparison with France and England and Austria and Russia, with barely five millions of people, had hitherto not held. Among the " powers " she was practically unrecognized. For reasons, then, quite remote from the real question at issue, and reasons, there- fore, which Cavour could not publicly give, he wished to use this opportunity. His plan was bitterly denounced and generally condemned. It was said that the quarrel was none of Piedmont's, that by sending her army to the Crimea she would be exposing her own frontiers, that her finances would be ruined by this additional strain, that she should husband her money and her men for her own struggle, which must ultimately come with Austria. Her resources would be none too great at best. Cavour himself called the risks of the venture " enormous." MO CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Otvoax ; \t H u t he succeeded in carrying it through. Seventeen thou- sand Sardinians were sent to the Crimea] whore they proved irvrss of . ... y, uis excellent soldiers anil won distinction. Bui Cavour was not aiming primarily a1 military glory) but at moral anil diplo- matic victories. Piedmont had entered the alliance uncon ditionally. She was not promised that, participating in the war, she would be permitted to participate in the making of the peace) ami when the Congress of Paris was called in 1856 Cavour started out not knowing whether he would be admitted to it, owing to Austria's opposition. He was going to Paris, he said) in order M to sniff the air." Bui ■ few days after his arrival he was informed that he would be received. The two great powers could not well consent to the ignoring of their all v . CaVOUr had WOn the interest of Napoleon 111, who in 1855 hail asked hun, M What can be done for Italy? w Cavour had replied by ■ memorandum. Now in Pans, after the treat v had been made) Napoleon caused the ques- tion of Italy a question foreign to the purpose of the Congress — to he brought before it. This was Cavour's chance. The Italian situation was to be diseussed in a congress in which Austria sat. Clarendon) representing England, indignantly denounced the Papal Government as a "disgrace to Europe," and Ferdinand's misrule in Naples as crying for the intervention of the civilised world. This speech created an extraordinary sensation. Moreover, by Dtseasstoa bringing the Italian question forward) it furnished Cavour an °* tho Opportunity to speak. His speech was brief, oautious, and ' bold. The main cause of the evils from which Italy suffered question. was Austria, he declared* " Austria is the areh enemy of Italian independence; the permanent danger to the only free nation in Italy, the nation which I have the honor to represent." Moral Cavour returned from Paris with no material advantage spained) but his moral victorv was complete. Piedmont had for Qavovr, v • participated in ■ council of the great powers. Austria had been indicted publicly in ■ great international congress. THE NATIONAL SOCIETY 321 So had the Pope, and so had the King of Naples. Piedmont had again shown that she was the champion of all Italy. M ; i r i y who, influenced by Mazzini, had hitherto believed that Italy's salvation lay in a republic, began to change their opinion, and to entertain an increasing confidence in the patriotism and statesmanship and military power of the Piedmontese monarchy. Cavour had gained for himself a great reputation as a diplomatist. Prince Metternich, now in retirement, and a connoisseur in such matters, is said to have remarked : " There is only one diplomatist in Europe, but unfortunately he is againsl us; it is M. de Cavour." Cavour was now one of the commanding personalities of Europe. His position in his own country was more solid than ever. After the Congress of Paris Piedmont proceeded still further to make herself the model state of Italy. Laws Army v,erc passed strengthening the army. Industry expanded strengths under wise legislation. Education was stimulated, and the National Society was organized to encourage the growth in the Other states of Italy of a sentiment in favor of Pied" Founding mont. The motto of this societv was: " Independence and ° e J ' National Unity; out with the Austnans and the Pope." The sub- society. jects of other states were to be won from their loyalty to their own princes to loyalty to Piedmont. A revolution in opinion and sentiment was to be effected that later a political revolution might be easier. This society was suc- cessful. Many, like Manin, who had hitherto been Repub- licans, renounced their republicanism and declared them- selves willing under certain conditions to follow Piedmont. " Make Italy," wrote Manin, "and we are with you; if not, not." The National Society spread rapidly throughout the other states. \iy it Liberals everywhere were drawn to- gether under the banner of the House of Savoy, and a state of mind was created favorable to the overthrow of the petty princes and the exaltation of Piedmont. Cavour had returned from Paris hoping that France might shortly be induced to aid Piedmont. The Emperor 222 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Cavonr and had in 1855 asked what he could do for Italy, and Cavour Napoleon j lad res p nded with all explicitness. Suddenly all hope of this consummation seemed dashed to the ground by a murder- ous attempt upon the life of Napoleon by certain Italians, led by Orsini (January 14, 1858). This, however, did not deflect Napoleon from the alliance with Sardinia toward which he had been tending for some time. The motives that influenced him to take the step momentous for himself as well as for Italy were numerous. The principle of nationality which he held tenaciously, and which largely determined the foreign policy of his entire reign, prompted him in this direction — the principle, namely, that peoples of the same race and language had the right to be united politically. He sought, as we shall see, to further this principle in several cases, with results very disastrous to himself and to France. Further, Napoleon had long been interested in Italy. He had himself taken part in the revolutionary movements there in 1831, and had probably been a member of the Carbonari. Moreover, it was one of his ambitions to tear up the treaties of 1815, treaties that sealed the humiliation of the Na- poleonic dynasty. These treaties still formed the basis of the Italian political system in 1858. Again, he was probably lured on by a desire to win glory for his throne, and there was always the chance, too, of gaining territory. Fear, also, may have influenced him. Orsini had not been the first Italian who had tried to assassinate the Emperor; he might not be the last, if he should do nothing for Italy. At any rate, the Emperor decided to draw closer to Pied- mont. Hardly six months after Orsini's attempt, he in- vited Cavour to meet him at Plombieres, a watering place in the Vosges mountains. The meeting, which occurred July 21, 1858, was shrouded in utmost mystery. Only four persons in Piedmont knew of it, including Victor Em- manuel and La Marmora. The ministers of Napoleon were kept in ignorance of it. The Emperor, always a dreamer The interview at Plom- bieres. THE INTERVIEW OF PLOMBIERES 223 and conspirator, was now closeted with a conspirator far more skilful than himself. The interview of Plombieres is one of the most famous in the history of the century. There were long conversations, a memorable description of which was contained in a letter which Cavour immediately sent to Victor Emmanuel and which constitutes our chief source of information concerning the intrigues of two unscrupulous A con_ men conspiring for different reasons to bring about a war. 1 . y . No written agreement or treaty of alliance was made, but it a war , was agreed verbally that France and Piedmont should go to war with Austria, but only upon some pretext which could be justified before Europe, and which would make it appear that the two powers were not bent upon revolution, but that they were merely repelling Austrian aggression. A rising in Massa and Carrara was to serve as the pretext. If Austria The should begin war against Piedmont, France would come to the ° t ° agreed latter 5 s assistance, and if the allies were victorious Italy should upo n. be reconstituted as follows : Lombardy and Venetia should be added to Piedmont, as should also the duchies and parts of the Papal States, the Romagna and the Legations. Austria would thus be completely expelled from the peninsula, and Victor Emmanuel would rule over a kingdom of Northern Italy. The rest of the Papal States, with the exception of Rome and a region round about should be added to Tuscany which would thus form a kingdom of Central Italy. These two kingdoms and that of Naples and the Papal States should then be united into an Italian Confederation under the presi- dency of the Pope who might consequently feel compensated for the loss of most of his possessions. In return for her aid France was to receive Savoy and possibly Nice. The Emperor urged a marriage between his cousin Prince Napo- leon and the daughter of Victor Emmanuel. No definite agreement was then made. Prince Napoleon was a de- bauchee of forty-three. Princess Clotilde was a young 1 Chiala, Lettere edite ed inedite di Camillo Cavour, II, 568 seq. 2nd edit. **4 CREATION OV THE KINGDOM OF ITALY girl of sixteen. Ultimately this sacrifice was made — so re- volting to Victor Emmanuel ami the Piedmontese. Early in December 1858 these verbal agreements were put into writing) though not, it would seem, although the matter is most obscure, into a binding treaty. Difficulties Though CavoUT had apparently achieved the dream of his angers \[{ c ^ , m n l]j. inc0 with a great militarv power, his position of Cavour's ... . " . -r»i position. during the next Few months, between the meeting at 1 lom- bieres. duly 1858, and the final declaration o\' war, April 1859, was one o( extraordinary difficulty. He had invoked a powerful spirit. Could he control it, or would he beeome the mere sport of it? Might not Napoleon, notably of a changeable mind, change it now at the critical time, leaving Piedmont high and dry, at the mercy oi her powerful neighbor, Austria, leaving Cavour and all his policy a wreck: Might not the other powers, getting wind of the con- spiracy, step in to prevent war, the necessity of which was the very basis oi (favour's policy for the creation of modern Italy, as it was oi Bismarck's policy later for the creation of modern Germany? If the war should come and Napoleon should be faithful to his engagements, might not the crreatest danger lie right there? Might not a victorious Napoleon in Italy do what a victorious Napoleon had done in Italy before, use his opportunity for his own advantage and not for that of the Italians, whom he ostensibly came to succor? CaVOUT did not wish to play a game for Napoleon. The risk ;it any rate must be run. Cavour's j^ \ vil \ i Hvn stipulated by Napoleon that he would support Piedmont in a war with Austria if Austria appeared as the aggressor. favour's policy therefore for the next months was to provoke Austria to this end. It was a period of great tension for the Piedmontese minister, in which he dis- played extraordinary resourcefulness, coolness, craft, un- Scrupulousness. lie wove ceaselessly a marvelous web of tortuous intrigue. Now Napoleon seemed about to with- draw ; now a congress of the powers to cut clean through the THE AUSTRO-SARDINIAN WAR 225 projects of these conspirators. Into the interesting details of these machinations we cannot go. In the end they were success ful, and Austria was goaded by Cavour's conduct to take the fatal step. She demanded that Piedmont disarm within three days, otherwise war would be declared. War was precisely the tiling Cavour wanted, and for which he had for months been ceaselessly working. He had contrived to make Austria appear the aggressor and now the case had arisen for which Napoleon had promised his aid. Piedmont refused the Austrian ultimatum, and at the end of April The 1859 war began. The public opinion of other nations blamed Austro- Austria and exonerated Piedmont, most unjustly, for this war was Cavour's, desired by him and brought about by him with extraordinary skill. That he had succeeded in throw- ing the whole responsibility for it on his enemy was only furt her evidence of the cunning of his fine Italian hand. The Austro-Sardinian war lasted only about two months. The The Austrian armies were large but incompetently led. cam P a £ n . . of 1859. They wasted the time before the arrival of the French troops when Piedmont was at their mercy. When the French arrived, the Emperor at their head, active fighting began. The theater of war was limited to Lombardy. The battles of Magenta (June 4) and of Solferino (June 24) were victories for the Allies. The latter was one of the greatest battles of the nineteenth century. It lasted eleven hours, more than 200,000 men were engaged, nearly 800 cannon. The Allies lost over 17,000 men, the Austrians about 22,000. All Lombardy was conquered, and Milan was occupied. It seemed that Venetia could be easily overrun and the termina- tion of Austrian rule in Italy effected, and Napoleon's statement that he would free Italy "from the Alps to the Adriatic " accomplished. Suddenly Napoleon halted in the The Pre " full tide of success, sought an interview with the Emperor . villa- of Austria at Villafranca, and there on July 11th, without franca, consulting the wishes of his ally, concluded a famous armis- tice. The terms agreed upon by the two Emperors were: 226 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Reasons for Napo- leon's action. (1) The creation of an Italian Confederation under the honorary presidency of the Pope. (2) The cession to France, and the transfer by France to Sardinia, of the province of Lombardy. (3) The inclusion of Venetia in the Italian Confederation, as a province, however, under the Crown of Austria. (-A) The restoration of the Grand Duke of Tuscany and the Duke of Modena to their respective states, whence they had just been driven by popular uprisings. The considerations that determined Napoleon to stop in the middle of a successful campaign, and before he had attained the object for which he had come into Italy, were many and serious. While victorious on five battlefields he had no reason to feel elated. Magenta and Solferino had been victories, but he saw that they might easily have been defeats. He had conquered Lombardy, but Austria had 150,000 men in Venetia, and 100,000 more were advancing to join them. Austria's troops would then outnumber his. Moreover Austria would now plant herself firmly in the famous Quadrilateral, whose fortresses could only be taken, if at all, after long and difficult sieges. Furthermore, the control of events was plainly slipping from him. The effect of the Piedmontesc propaganda in the other states of Italy was already becoming apparent. During the war the Ro- magna had thrown off its allegiance to the Pope, the author- ity of the rulers of Modena and Parma had been renounced by their rebellious subjects, and all three— the Romagna, the two duchies, and Tuscany also, were clamoring for annexa- tion to Piedmont. If the war should continue the other Italians might show the same determination and Napoleon might find that, instead of an enlarged kingdom of Piedmont, a kingdom of all Italy had been created, and many of the leading men in France were denouncing as very dangerous to France this possible creation of a powerful state on her southeastern border. The French Catholics were opposed to the continuation of a war so full of menace to the Pope. Moreover, Prussia was mobilizing her troops on the Rhine THE PEACE OF VILLAFRANCA 227 and was contemplating intervention, and France was in no condition to fight Austria and Prussia combined. Also, the Emperor had been touched by the horrors of the battlefield. " The poor people, the poor people, what a horrible thing is war,'' he was heard to say more than once at Solferino. Austria was eager for peace. Her army was badly led. Austria She was involved in trouble with Hungary. She did not eager t0T . . . peace. relish being saved by Prussia, for Prussia might then seize her leadership in Germany. Francis Joseph, too, like Na- poleon, was horrified by war. " Better lose a province," he said after Solferino, " than be present again at so awful a spectacle." Thus both rulers were willing to come to terms. The news of the armistice came as a cruel disappointment to the Italians, dashing their hopes just as they were appa- rently about to be realized. The Government of Victor Emmanuel had not even been consulted. In intense indigna- tion at the faithlessness of Napoleon, overwrought by the excessive strain under which he had long been laboring, Cavour completely lost his self-control, urged desperate measures upon the King and, when they were declined, in a fit of rage, threw up his office. The King by overruling Resigna- Cavour showed himself wiser than his gifted minister. As tl0n of . Cavour. disappointed as the latter, he saw more clearly than did Cavour that though Piedmont had not gained all that she had hoped to, yet she had gained much. It was wiser to take what one could get and bide the future than to imperil all by some mad course. Here was one of the great moments where the in- dependence and common sense of Victor Emmanuel were of great and enduring service to his country. Napoleon had not done all that he had planned for Italy, Piedmont yet he had rendered a very important service. He had se- ac< l uires . Lombardy. cured Lombardy for Piedmont. It should also be noted that he himself acknowledged that the failure to carry out the whole programme had cancelled any claim he had upon the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France. 228 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY ANNEXATIONS AFTER VILLAFRANCA Thus by the preliminaries of Villafranca, embodied later in the Peace of Zurich, November 10, 1859, the Emperor of the French and the Emperor of Austria put an end to the process of Italian unification shortly after it had begun. Piedmont had grown by the addition of Lombardy and that was all. Austria was still an Italian power, and by the terms agreed upon was to be a member of the projected Italian Confederation. That she could use that position to continue her leadership in Italy was proved by her success in using the German Confederation for purposes of leader- ship in Germany. The Pope was still a temporal ruler and his power indeed was to be augmented by the presidency of the Confederation. Thus the Austrian Emperor and the Pope stood in the way of Italian aspirations as before. No wonder that Cavour said, though incorrectly, that all the efforts Piedmont had made during the past ten years had gone for nought. But the Peace of Zurich was destined never to be carried out save in one respect that Lombardy was added to Piedmont. Victor Emmanuel saw what Cavour failed to see, that the chapter was not closed but that it might be carried further, that central Italy at least might be drawn into the enlarged Kingdom of Piedmont. Central The situation in central Italy was this: During the war the rulers of Modena, Parma, Tuscany, had been overthrown, and the Pope's authority in Romagna, the northern part of his dominions, had been destroyed. Assemblies called in those states by revolutionary leaders voted, in August 1859, in favor of annexation to Piedmont. Thus the provinces of central Italy hurled defiance at the two Emperors who had decided at Villafranca that the rulers of those countries should be restored. Piedmont declined their offer at the time, knowing the opposition of Napoleon, and fearing t& offend him, lest he might then withdraw from Italy entirely, thereby leaving Piedmont alone and exposed to Austrian NAPOLEON III AND PIEDMONT 229 attack. But unofficially Piedmont gave them encouragement to hold out for annexation. The Italians of the central states stood firm. It was Impossibil- evident that the former rulers could only be restored by ity . Ie ~ storing the force and Napoleon promised that force should not be used, old or a er< either French or Austrian, to accomplish their restoration. For months this anomalous situation continued, harassing to every one. The central states, under the leadership of Piedmontese statesmen who had gone to them to assume direction, revised and rendered uniform their laws, and created a common military force that they might in the end bring about fusion with Piedmont. Diplomacy sug- gested a congress which was never convened, and for some time things drifted. Slowly the whole confused situation began to clarify. Napoleon came to see that if the peoples were left to themselves they would never restore their rulers but would insist upon union with Piedmont; that, moreover, the federation under the presidency of the Pope could never be brought about except by force. He saw also that the restoration of the rulers to their duchies would be an advantage to Austria but not at all to France. He had no desire that Austria should be again predominant in the penin- sula. Other events co-operated to hasten a solution. In Eng- England's land, in June 1859, a new election had occurred and a ministry J . . . tion in had come into office which was very friendly to the cause of affairs. Italian unity, and which particularly wished the Italians to be strong enough to be independent of the French. The English Government protested against the employment of French or Austrian forces to repress the clearly expressed will of the people of central Italy and to restore the princes. This was England's great service to the Italians. " The people of the duchies have as much right to change their sovereigns," said Lord Palmerston, " as the English people or the French, or the Belgian or the Swedish. The annexa- tion of the duchies to Piedmont will be an unfathomable good to Italy." 230 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Cavour returns to office. Annexa- tion to Piedmont. Another event tending toward the solution of the question was the return of Cavour to power in January 1860, after an absence of six months. Cavour saw that the annexation of central Italy to Piedmont could be effected only with Napoleon's consent, which, therefore, must be secured. But Napoleon would not yet give it. It was clear that a bar- gain must be made. Piedmont could have the annexa- tions for a price and that price was the cession of Savoy and Nice to France, which Napoleon had not claimed before as he had not carried out the agreement of Plombieres, but which he now demanded as compensation for the creation of an important state on the southeastern border of France, and because he wished, by enlarging the national boundaries, to allay the sharp criticism which his Italian policy had aroused at home. It was finally agreed that plebiscites should be taken in the states of central Italy to see if they wished annexation to Piedmont, and in Savoy and Nice to see if they wished annexation to France. Thus, in theory, the principle would be upheld that peoples have a right to dispose of themselves. These plebiscites in Italy resulted as was expected. (March 11-12, 1860.) The vote was almost unanimous in favor of annexation. Modena, Parma, Tuscany and the Romagna were thus added to the Kingdom of Piedmont, which had already re- ceived Lombardy. The Pope issued the major excommuni- cation against the authors of this spoliation of his do- minions (Romagna), but Victor Emmanuel accepted the sovereignty thus offered him, and on April 2nd, 1860, the first parliament of the enlarged kingdom met in Turin. A small state of less than 5,000,000 had grown to one of 11,000,000 within a year. This was the most important change in the political system of Europe since 1815. As far as Italy was concerned it made waste paper of the treaties of 1815. It constituted the most damaging breach made thus far in the work of the Congress of Vienna. What PIEDMONT CEDES SAVOY AND NICE 231 that congress had decided was to be a mere " geographical expression " was now a nation in formation. And this was being accomplished by the triumphant assertion of two principles utterly odious to the monarchs of 1815, the right of revolution and the right of peoples to determine their own destinies for themselves, for these annexations were the result of war and of plebiscites. But Piedmont's triumph was not without an element of Cession bitterness for it had been bought with a price, and that price Sav °y & . . and Nice was the cession of Savoy and Nice, with a population of by the about 700,000, to France. Savoy was the cradle of the Treaty of ruling house and its abandonment was a great humiliation, Tunn > March 24 but it was, in Cavour's opinion, inevitable. Because of it 1860 Garibaldi, a citizen of Nice, attacked him in Parliament with remarkable vehemence. " You have made me," he said, " a stranger in the land of my birth." " The act," replied Cavour with impressive dignity, " that has made this gulf between us, was the most painful duty of my life. By what I have felt myself I know what Garibaldi must have felt. If he refuses me his forgiveness I cannot reproach him for it." Parliament supported Cavour, ratifying the cession by a majority of 229, more than four-fifths of the entire chamber. The plebiscites in Savoy and Nice took place a few days later and resulted in an almost unanimous vote for annexation to France. One result of this annexation of Effect Savoy and Nice was to prove very important for France. upon .5 P °" It alienated England from Napoleon completely. England did not wish to see her powerful neighbor grow larger. The depth and unfortunate effect of this estrangement Napoleon was to feel fully before many months had passed. More- over, might not this acceptance of Italian territory involve him in further Italian complications? Was he not morally compromised? That Cavour appreciated the advantage of the situation was shown by his reported remark to the French ambassador, " Now you are our accomplices." What had Cavour in mind for accomplices to do? He did not 838 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY The Sicilian Insurrec- tion. Giuseppe Garibaldi, 1807-1882. explain the cryptic utterance, but every one knew that he was still far from his cherished goal. Napoleon III would still be very useful. Sophisticated Guizot, then living in retirement, made at about this time an observation: '"There are," he said, " two men upon whom the eyes of Europe are fixed, the Emperor Napoleon and M. de Cavour. The game is being- played. I back M. de Cavour." THE CONQUEST OF THE KINGDOM OF NAPLES Much had been achieved in the eventful year just described, but much remained to be achieved before the unification of Italy should be complete. Venetia, the larger part of the Papal States, and the Kingdom of Naples still stood outside. In the last, however, events now occurred which carried the process a long step forward. Early in 1860 the Sicilians rose in revolt against the despotism of their new king, Francis II. This insurrection created an opportunity for a man already famous but destined to a wonderful exploit and to a memorable service to his country, Giuseppe Gari- baldi, already the most famous military leader in Italy, and invested with a half mythical character of invincibility and daring, the result of a very spectacular, romantic career. Garibaldi was born at Nice in 1807. He was therefore two years younger than Mazzini and three years older than Cavour, Destined by his parents for the priesthood he preferred the sea, and for many years he lived a roving and adventurous sailor's life. He early joined "Young Italy." His military experience was chiefly in irregular, guerilla fighting. He took part in the unsuccessful insur- rection, organized by Mazzini in Savoy in 183-i, and as a result was condemned to death. He managed to escape to South America where, for the next fourteen years, he was an exile. He participated in the abundant wars of the South American states with the famous "Italian Legion," which he organized and commanded. Learning of the up- rising of 1848 he returned to Italy, though still under the GIUSEPPE GARIBALDI penalty of death, and immediately thousands flocked to the standard of the " hero of Montevideo " to fight under him against the Austrians. After the failure of that campaign The de- he went, in 1849, to Rome to assume the military defense fense °* of the republic. When the city was about to fall he escaped witli four thousand troops, intending to attack the Austrian power in Venetia. French and Austrian armies pursued him. He succeeded in evading them, but his army dwindled away rapidly and the chase became so hot that he was forced to escape to the Adriatic. When he landed later, his enemies were immediately in full cry again, hunting him through for- ests and over mountains as if he were some dangerous game. It was a wonderful exploit, rendered tragic by the death in a farm-house near Ravenna, of his wife Anita, who was his companion in the camp as in the home, and who was as high-spirited, as daring, as courageous as he. Garibaldi finally escaped to America and began once more the life of an exile. But his story, shot through and through with heroism and chivalry and romance, moved the Italian people to unwonted depths of enthusiasm and admiration. For several years Garibaldi was a wanderer, sailing the seas, commander of a Peruvian bark. For some months, indeed, he was a candle maker on Staten Island, but in 1854 leader of he returned to Italy and settled down as a farmer on the ' The Hunt " ers of the little island of Caprera. But the events of 1859 once more A1 „ brought him out of his retirement. Again, as a leader of volunteers, he plunged into the war against Austria and immensely increased his reputation. He had become the idol of soldiers and adventurous spirits from one end of Italy to the other. Multitudes were ready to follow in blind confidence wherever he might lead. His name was one to conjure with. There now occurred, in 1860, the most brilliant episode of his career, the Sicilian expedition and the campaign against the Kingdom of Naples. For Garibaldi, Determines to go to worth an army, now decided on his own account to go to the most redoubtable warrior of Italy, whose very name was . ftS4 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY the aid of the Sicilians who had risen in revolt against their kin*;, Francis 11 oi Naples. QavouCT Hj s determination created a serious problem tor Cavour. I ho Government Oi Piedmont could not sanction an attack upon the Kingdom oi Naples, with which it was at peace. without seeming a ruthless aggressor upon an unoffending state, and without running tho risk oi a European inter- vention which might undo all tho work thus t'ar accomplished. In favour's opinion tho newly enlarged kingdom needed time for consolidation before undertaking any further task. On tho other hand) if Garibaldi determined to go it would be dangerous to try to prevent him. ami vet tho result oi a successful campaign might make him a rival oi Cavour and might be used to checkmate Piedmont. It was imperative that Piedmont should still direct the evolution oi Italy toward her future destiny. Cavour could not approve the expedition, and he was not prepared to condemn it. lie therefore adopted tho plan oi secretly conniving at the preparations, at tho same time holding Piedmont officially aloof from all connection with it. Thus ho could assure tho powers that Piedmont had nothing to do with it. If it should fad, he could not be reproached, whereas if successful, he might profit by it. lie had need oi all his customary wariness in this juncture. Tho Ex:v- On M:iv 5, I860, the expedition oi "The Thousand." tho hod blurts, embarked from Cionoa m two steamers. 1 hose '• Tho Thousand." weN *he volunteers, nearly 1,160 men, whom Garibaldi's fame had caused to rush into the now adventure, an adventure that seemed at the moment one oi' utter folly. The King oi Naples had 84,000 troops in Sicily and 100.000 more on the mainland. The odds against success seemed overwhelm- ing. Hut fortune favored the bravo. After a campaign oi a few weeks, in which he was several times in great danger, and was only saved by the most reckless fighting. Garibaldi stood master of the island, helped by the Sicilian insurgents, by volunteers who had flocked from the mainland, and by GARIBALDI CONQUERS NAPLES £35 the incompetency of the commanders of the Neapolitan troops. Audacity had won the victory, if'; assumed the position of Dictator in Sicily in the name of Victor Ern- manuel II (August 5, I860). Garibaldi now crossed the straits to the mainland de- Conquest termined to conquer the entire Kingdom of Naples (August '. 1 o r \ o Kingdom 1!), J 8CJ0). The King still hud an army of 100,000 men, of Naples. but it. had not, ev< n the itrength of a frail r<:c.d. There was practically no bloodshed. The Neapolitan Kingdom wbb not. overthrown; it. collapsed. Treachery, desertion, corrup- tion did th<: work. On September 6th, Francis II left Naples for Gaeta and the next day Garibaldi entered it by ra.il with only a few attendants, and drove through the streets amid a pand< •moniiim of enthusiasm. In less than five months he had conquered a kingdom of 11,000,000 people, an achievement unique in modern history. Garibaldi now began to talk of pushing on to Rome. To Garibaldi CaVOUr the situation seemed full of danger. Rome was occupied by a French garrison. An attack upon it would Kome. almost necessarily mean an attack upon France. A clash between Garibaldi's followers and the French troops which were maintaining the Pope's power in Rome- would probably bring an intervention of Napoleon, this time against the Italians. There must, therefore, he no attack upon Rome. But while Rome itself and its immediate neighborhood must be preserved inviolate for the Pope, Cavour did not think that the two eastern provinces of the Papal States, Umbria and the Marches, need he. They desired annexation to Pied- mont and were only kept down by an army of volunteers, drawn from Ireland, Austria, France and other Catholic countries. Ought people who wished to he- free from the Pope's rule to he kept in subjection by an army of mercena i Cavour felt that Victor Emmanuel must act. It would Interven- not do to have- Garibaldi to act as he wished, for that would ° Piedmont, mean an attack upon Rome and probably upon Venetia, 236 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY and that would range Italy against, not only France, but Austria, two great empires, and everything that had been so painfully accomplished would be imperiled. To prevent Garibaldi's advance which, once under way, would be beyond control, Victor Emmanuel must take charge of the revolu- tion in southern Italy. Yet if Victor Emmanuel's troops entered the Papal States all the Catholic countries of Europe, outraged at the despoiling of the Pope, might intervene and undo what had been already done. Cavour believed that if he left the Pope unmolested in Rome, Napo- leon would have no objection to the rest of the Papal States going into the new kingdom, if the population desired it. In this estimate he was correct. Understanding finally that Napoleon approved, if only the thing were done quickly, Victor Emmanuel's army crossed into the Papal States and defeated the Papal troops at Castelfidardo (September 18th, 1860). They then entered the territory of Naples. The climax to all this unification movement was now at hand. On October 11, 1860, Parliament voted overwhelmingly in favor of the annexation of all the provinces in central and southern Italy whose people should declare in favor of it by plebiscite. The plebiscite took place in the Kingdom of The annex- Naples on October 21-22, 1860, and was overwhelmingly in a ion o e f avor f annexation. On the mainland approximately Kingdom rr J of Naples 1,300,000 voted yes, 10,000 no ; in Sicily 432,000 yes, 600 no. and of A few days later the Pope's former subjects in the Marches Umbria and voted for annexat i on by 133,000 to 1,200; and in Umbria til 6 Marches. ^y 97,000 to 380. Majorities so staggering showed how unanimous was the desire for unification. After having conquered the Papal army at Castelfidardo, Victor Emmanuel had advanced with his army into the Kingdom of Naples for the double purpose of defeating the army still under Francis II at Capua and Gaeta, which Garibaldi had not been able to conquer, and of taking the direction of affairs of state out of the hands of Garibaldi who, successful in war, was eminently lacking «• H s , 1 ,„|Ihip.I/Vv 1 . 4%3£\S\\' I T7.U H LAX 11 tirrH.W, 'i".'i|7iiOii!' IrmiUmlf Bm*t I J /'w/. H #; ,x SOX >r OTfufe |"/ .«; REFERENCE m .Jemmi bt ■ . Sunt vim ft ' #»*//> • /^' \MtuMrtitum hiSnniinm inbt/br '/SSSSSiJm ♦..(•.> mm I |U \."/jt»Anr/*¥t h> Saniitiui | r^r-i dniw.niJiou to h'tM^ium tifltaiv , i to thttifrMnnii ksfiO THE KINGDOM OF ITALY PROCLAIMED 237 in political sagacity. It was imperative that Victor Em- manuel's authority should be supreme in Naples, that he might control the evolution of events. Both purposes were now achieved. The troops of Francis II were defeated at Capua on the first and second of November, and Siege of the siege of Gaeta, where Francis took his last stand, Gaeta - began. Garibaldi had demanded the resignation of Cavour from Victor Emmanuel and seemed disposed to insist upon certain conditions before handing over his conquest to him. The King's attitude was firm. He declined to consider the dis- missal of Cavour. Moreover, now that Victor Emmanuel was himself in the Kingdom of Naples with a large army, and was backed by the vote of the Parliament and the plebiscites favoring annexation, Garibaldi yielded. On November 7th, Victor Emmanuel and Garibaldi drove together through the streets of Naples. The latter refused all rewards and honors and with only a little money and a bag of seed beans for his farm he sailed away to Caprera. Gaeta fell on February 13, 1861, and the King fled to Rome, entering upon a life of exile which was to end only with his death in 1894. On the 18th of February, 1861, a new Parliament, repre- The senting all Italy except Venetia and Rome, met in Turin. „ inff om . 7 . of Italy The Kingdom of Sardinia now gave way to the Kingdom of proclaimed. Italy, proclaimed March 17th. Victor Emmanuel II was de- clared " by the grace of God and the will of the nation, King of Italy." A new kingdom, comprising a population of about twenty- two millions, had arisen during a period of eighteen months, and now took its place among the powers of Europe. The Pope refused to recognize this " creation of revolution," and excommunicated the criminal invaders of his states. Victor Emmanuel he denounced as " forgetful of every reli- gious principle, despising every right, trampling upon every law." Against his assumption of the title of King of Italy, IIS8 CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY with which ho has sought to soul his M sacrilegious usurpa- tions." Tius IX formally protested. 1 The But tho Kingdom of Italy was still incomplete. Venetia • om was still Austrian and the Patrimony of St. Peter was still still in- complete, subject to the Pope. This was a strip along the western coast, between Tuscany and Naples, twenty or thirty miles wide, and included the incomparable city of Rome. The Pope's power rested on the French garrison. The new- Kingdom, however, was not strong enough to take Venetia from Austria, nor disposed to defy the Emperor Napoleon by an attack upon Rome, The There were, indeed, some Italian nationalists who were question of >v illino; to forego permanently the possession of Rome as the capital. lVA.eglio called the desire for it simply M a classical fantasticality." Moreover, it was u a malarial town tit only for a museum." Not so thought Cavour, who believed that " without Rome there was no Italy." He declared that now that national independence had been secured the great object must be "to make the Eternal City, on which rest twenty-five centuries of glory, the splen- did capital of the Italian Kingdom." The position oi' the capital was not to be determined by the character of the climate or topography, but by moral reasons and the moral primacy of Rome among all Italian cities was unquestionable. They must have Rome, but on two conditions, that France should consent and that the Catholic world should have no lost (ground to believe that it meant the subjection of the Pope. Cavour hoped that the Pope would be willing to give up his temporal power on the guarantee that his spiritual authority should be carefully guarded and even extended. The principle of " a free church in a free state " absorbed his thought at this time. At his request Parlia- ment voted the principle that Rome should be the capital of Italy, a solemn official declaration from which there could be no retreat. This was Cavour's last great act. for he 1 Robinson Ud Beard) Readings i'^ Modem European History, II. 19& THE DEATH OF CAVOUR 239 now fell ill. Overwork, the extraordinary pressure under which lie had for months been laboring, brought on in- somnia; finally fever developed and he died on the morning Death of of June 6th, 1861, in the very prime of life, for he was only Cavour. fifty-one years of age. " Cavour," said Lord Palmerston, in the British House of Commons, " left a name ' to point a moral and adorn a tale.' The moral was, that a man of transcendent talent, indomitable industry, inextinguishable patriotism, could over- come difficulties which seemed insurmountable, and confer the greatest, the most inestimable benefits on his country. The tale with which his memory would be associated was the most extraordinary, the most romantic, in the annals of the world. A people who had seemed dead had arisen to new and vigorous life, breaking the spell which bound it, and showing itself worthy of a new and splendid destiny." 1 Throughout his life Cavour remained faithful to his funda- mental political principle, government by parliament and by constitutional forms. Urged at various times to assume a dictatorship he said he had no confidence in dictatorships. " I always feel strongest," he said, " when Parliament is sitting." " I cannot betray my origin, deny the principles of all my life," he wrote in a private letter not intended for the public. " I am the son of liberty and to her I owe all that I am. If a veil is to be placed on her statue, it is not for me to do it." Quoted by Cesaresco: Cavour, 216. CHAPTER XI BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY Reaction I N 1848 and 1849 the reformers of Germany, as of other eri "^" y countries, had made a vigorous effort to effect profound alterations in the political and social institutions of their country. Momentarily successful, their day of power proved brief, and by 1850 the old authorities were once more solidly established in their old positions. A practical absolutism reigned again throughout most of central Europe. In place of the German unity so long desired and for which the Frankfort Parliament had struggled with such earnest futil- ity, the old Diet of 1815, slow, cumbrous, impotent save for repression, quietly slipped back into the familiar, well- worn grooves, resuming its sessions in May 1851, and de- voting its attention to the removal of the debris left by the revolutionary hurricane which had just swept by. A period of reaction began again, even more far-reaching in its scope than that which had followed the Congress of Vienna of 1815. This period may be considered to have lasted from the diplomatic defeat of Prussia at Olmiitz in 1850 to 1858, when William I assumed the Regency of Prussia, and to 1859 when Austria, now as formerly the strong tower of ultra-conservatism, suffered an important diminution of power and prestige in the military defeats in Italy which have been described above. During this period the work of 1848 and 1849 was undone wherever possible, and a persecution of Liberals carried out so thoroughly that tens of thousands left the country. This inspired some alarm at first, but consolation was found in the thought that the removal of these disturbers of the public mind would only leave the fatherland politically in 240 PRUSSIA RECEIVES A CONSTITUTION 241 peace. This was the beginning of the large German emigra- tion to the United States, which has since attained such impressive proportions and been attended by such im- portant consequences. Austria and Prussia took the lead in the familiar work of repression. The King of Prussia, Frederick William IV, had, as we Prussia a have seen, granted a Constitution and created a Parliament ?? ns . u " ° ... . tional but during the recent convulsion, but it quickly became evident no t a par . that he had no intention of establishing the parliamentary liamentary system as it had been developed in England. He did not for state * a moment propose to weaken the royal power by dividing it with any assembly, even with one which, like this, represented only the rich. No new taxes or laws might be passed without the consent of the new chamber, but old ones might be continued without that consent. The Chamber had no con- trol whatever over the ministry. With machinery like this Parliament could not have prevented reaction even had it so desired; but constituted as it was, it became itself one of the instruments of reaction. That reaction began at once. The King was urged to abolish the Constitution outright, but this, mindful of his oath, he never did. However, a method of " interpreting n it virtually achieved the same end. The ministers gained great skill in the art of ruling with the Constitution against the Constitution. Laws which they disapproved were simply not executed or their contents were by " interpretation " molded to the heart's desire. The Constitution had pro- claimed the right of association and public meeting, but as a matter of fact this right was permitted only to those favorable to the Government. Public meetings were watched by agents of the Government, who, on the least pretext, might dissolve them. Everywhere the police were active and unscrupulous. Arbitrary arrest and imprisonment were frequent. A Berlin police regulation in 1851 permitted the The police application to prisoners of torture, deprivation of light, system, the strait -jacket, and corporal punishment up to forty 242 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY strokes. Men who were supposed to be democrats were hounded in every way. " No lawyer would give me work," wrote one of them ; " no business man had the courage to seek the aid of my legal knowledge ; no editor would consent to publish a book of mine." With great difficulty he suc- ceeded in bringing out three novels. At once the Govern- ment forbade their introduction into public libraries, forbade their sale. Certain physicians were denied the certificates necessary to the practice of their profession because, as democrats, their " morality " could not be guaranteed. Abuses of power succeeded each other rapidly. " God in Heaven," wrote Bunsen, " what a frightful situation for Germany ! " The mails were not respected. Postmen were ordered not to deliver letters to Liberals. Even reactionaries themselves felt the pinch at times. " I cannot write you much about politics," Bismarck informed his wife, " for all letters are opened." And again, " Do not forget, when you write me, that your letters are not read simply by myself but are also read at the post office, by spies of every feather; be, without exception, prudent in your remarks." The censorship abolished by the Constitution was not re- stored, but the oame end was otherwise achieved. Methods were followed in this respect, as in many others, which were copied from Napoleon III, who was applying them success- fully in France. Much ingenious reasoning was displayed at times by government officials. In one case the police Control announced that the law permitted the publication of news- papers but not their sale, and thus one Liberal paper was suppressed. By such means virtual absolutism was restored in Prussia after the liberal awakening of 1848 and 1849. No relief was found in the Chamber, for the Government secured large and dependent majorities there, by the same methods which Napoleon III used in France, by official candidacies and by various forms of bribery and intimida- tion. The system was thoroughly established. Prussia, of the press. ECONOMIC EVOLUTION OF PRUSSIA 243 with a Constitution, was really ruled without regard to its provisions. The governing forces were the King and the landed nobil- The P nv " ilcsrcd ity. These were the " Junkers," whom Bismarck later called lags the " pariahs of modern civilization," hide-bound conserva- tives, completely dominated by the ideas of old-time feudal- ism. The House of Lords was now one of their seats of power. Indignant at the former freeing of their serfs they labored with much success to regain old rights, such as the police power on their estates, and hunting privileges. They had a monopoly of the higher grades in the army. All these measures irritated various classes of society and unrest, not peace, was the ominous result. No wonder that Bernhardi ex- claimed, " The Constitution is nothing but a name," and that another who lived through it all wrote a little later, " The period from 1849 to 1858 was the most shameful in the his- tory of Prussia." But signs were not lacking of the dawning of a new day. The economic evolution of the country was proceeding on the whole unimpeded and quietly, and that evolution tended directly toward liberty, for it meant the transformation of Germany from an agricultural, feudal, and patriarchal into a great industrial nation. Even the Government itself facilitated this transformation which was in the end to be so prejudicial to its system, imitating in this, as in so many other respects, the example of Napoleon III, who thought that the best way to make people forget their loss of liberty was to enable them to get rich. But in the main this transformation was effected, not by governmental meas- ures, but by the unseen, unconscious operation of the ordinary laws of business. This economic transformation is the most important Economic feature of German history in the decade from 1850 to I860, trans " ... . . . . formation. for it began the creation of that industrial Germany which is so tremendous a fact in the world of to-day. This transforma- tion was apparent in many ways. Rich deposits of gold £44 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY Industrial develop- ment. had been discovered in California in 1848, and in Australia in 1851. It has been estimated that the world's production of the precious metal was about four times as great in 1856 as in 1847. The increase in the quantity of the medium of exchange had, among other important results, for Germany this, the sudden creation of a large number of banks and business corporations. In Bavaria, for instance, only six stock companies with a capital of five millions had been founded between 1839 and 1848; but from 1849 to 1858 forty-four were established with a capital of one hundred and seventy millions. The capital of the banks created in Germany from 1853 to 1857 aggregated about 750 millions. All this meant an immense increase in the resources available for industry. Germany had for various reasons remained industrially far behind neighboring countries, particularly France and England. Her population was largely rural, two-thirds of her inhabitants were agriculturalists. Whatever industries existed were small. There were very few large cities. Ber- lin, the capital of Prussia, had a population of about 450,000, and in the entire Confederation there were only six or seven cities of more than 100,000 inhabitants. Both exports and imports were few. Germany sold little but raw materials. All this was rapidly changed. Capital being easily pro- cured, hundreds of new enterprises were started. Particu- larly was the exploitation of the immense mineral resources of the country, thus far largely neglected, undertaken with great energy. Coal mines were opened up, factories and foundries arose on all sides. Alfred Krupp made the steel foundry, begun by his father in 1810, one of the most famous establishments of the kind in the world. Workmen, attracted by higher wages than could be procured in agriculture, flocked to the cities, which increased rapidly. Economists state that the period of speculation succeeding the revolution of 1848 was the most remarkable Germany has ever seen. The Ger- mans took naturally to modern business, showing their usual THE RISE OF THE BOURGEOISIE 245 qualities of patience, order, adaptability, and an abounding faith in the advantages to be derived from the application to economic life of the discoveries of science and from the use of scientific methods. The mileage of railroads rapidly in- creased, in Prussia alone in a few years from 114 miles to over 800, and the number of travelers increased fourfold. All this had important political and intellectual conse- Rise of a quences. It meant the rise of a modern capitalist class, a wealtn y rich bourgeoisie, which would insist and which would have clasg the power to insist that the state should no longer be run along medieval lines for the benefit of a feudal monarchy, and a feudal nobility of landlords. And the result of this economic revolution was to broaden men's horizon, and to weaken the local states-rights feeling. Manufacturers and merchants were anxious for the widest market, and impatient of laws and institutions that hindered business. They saw the inconveniences that flowed from the existing political organization of Germany, the petty state animosities and the powerlessness of the Confederation abroad. They wished a reorganization of the country so that Germany should have the weight in international affairs that was necessary for the development of her wealth. That they might compete in the world markets they must have the support of the Gov- ernment. The Government of the Confederation was impo- tent. This growing class therefore would hail with enthu- siasm any attempt to strengthen it. Thus business was undermining the established order in politics. The require- ments of modern industrialism were potent factors in the ultimate creation of German unity. At the same time a similar trend was unmistakable in Intellectual the intellectual evolution of Germany, and was shown in ac 1V1 y * the various fields of theology, science, history and litera- ture. From the romantic, the metaphysical, the specula- tive people they had been, Germans were becoming practical, positive, realist. The boldest innovations in the economic life were matched by the boldest discoveries in science. A 246 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY Influence of events in Italy upon German thought. The National Union. new heaven and a new earth were taking the place of the old. The German intellect was showing its enterprise, its daring in every line, and was heaping up great riches. An in- tellectual environment was being created in which the great realist of the century in Germany could breathe and work successfully. It would be difficult to show all this except at length, and this would be impossible in the present trea- tise. But the fact remains that Schopenhauer in philoso- phy, and Helmholtz and Yirehow in science, were laying intellectual foundations for the unification of Germany and the hegemony of Prussia. 1 The historians of the period, Sybel, Treitschke, Droysen, Freytag, produced histories in abundance which were really great patriotic pamphlets, therefore less valuable as histories than as organs for shaping public opinion toward great and decisive action in the field of politics. They were vigorousl}- patriotic, nationalistic in tone, Prussian in sympathy. Even Momm- sen and Curtius, who wrote in the field of ancient history, distinctly revealed the current preconceptions and aspira- tions of the day. 2 Opinion in Germany was greatly stimulated by the events in Italy. The Italian war of 1859, and the formation of the Italian Kingdom exerted a remarkable influence upon events outside of the peninsula. Here was a successful application of the doctrine of nationalities. Might not the precedent receive wider application? Poland, Denmark, Germany felt a powerful impulsion from beyond the Alps. This influence was shown in the very month of Villafranca. For July 1859 saw the genesis in Hanover of a new patriotic society, called the National Union, whose purpose was to create a national party for the purpose of " achiev- ing the unity of the fatherland and the development of its liberties." The society soon spread throughout Germany. Unity and liberty were its watchwords. Did not the Italian 1 Denis, La Fondation de TEmpire Allemand, Chap. III. 2 Guilland, L'Allemagne Nouvelle et ses Historiens. WILLIAM I OF PRUSSIA 247 campaign prove the necessity of the former? If Napoleon III could invade Italy, might he not with equal ease invade Germany? There must be a thorough military reorganiza- tion so that Germany should be safe from possible aggres- sion, and to accomplish this the Confederation, as a whole, must first be reorganized. Cavour was, in the opinion of the members of the National Union, the model whom German statesmen should imitate. Prussia ought to do for Germany what Piedmont had done for Italy. Let her become frankly liberal, then Liberals everywhere would support her, and she could make the fatherland. This was not the method fol- lowed, as we shall see. Germany was made by an autocratic not by a liberal government. And the reason was that the conservative class was stronger in Germany than in Italy, and happened to find two able leaders, William I and Bismarck, as the Liberals in Italy had found two of their kind, Victor Emmanuel and Cavour. Though the National Liberals in Germany influenced public opinion extensively and thus facilitated in the end the rise of German unity, they clashed with those who actually carried out the work, and were themselves defeated. The achievement of German unity was to be no imitation of an Italian example. The full import of all these changes in the economic life and in the intellectual outlook, this fermentation of ideas, was shortly to be shown in the reign, destined to prove most illustrious, of William I of Prussia. The preliminary stage was over, the period of action was about to begin. In 1857,Frederick William IV became,by reason of mental William I, disease, incapable of administering the Government. As the 1797 " 1888 - King had no son, his brother, William I, became his represent- ative. The following year William became Regent, which gave him complete independence of action. It was recognized that the King would never recover. He died in January 1861, and William became sovereign. The accession of the new prince was hailed with great enthusiasm, so deep and 848 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY genera] had been the disappointment in Prussia over the timidity, the reactionary character, and the fruitlessness of his predecessor's rule. The new ruler was intellectually the very antipodes of his brother, slow, solid, persistent, firm, rather than brilliant and imaginative. Common sense was his strongest quality as versatility had been that of his brother. William was the son of the famous Queen Louise, was born in 1797, and had served in the campaign against Napoleon in 1814. 1 He was now over sixty years of age. His entire lifetime had been spent in the army, which he loved passion- atelv. In military matters his thorough knowledge and competence were recognized, lie had resented deeply the action of his brother at Olmiitz, action dictated by the military weakness of Prussia. William believed that Prus- sia's destiny depended upon her army. The army was neces- sary for his purpose, which was to put Prussia at the head of Germany. " Now." lie had written in 184-9, " whoever wishes to rule Germany must conquer it : and that cannot be done with phrases." The mobilization of the Prussian troops in 1859 convinced him more than ever that the army needed strengthening. He now brought forward a definite military programme. The Prussia had been the first state, and was thus far the only one, to adopt the principle that all male citizens must be soldiers. By the law of 1814- universal compulsory three years" service in the active army was established. The soldier then passed into the reserve for two years, which meant that he would be summoned to military exercise for several weeks each year: he then passed into the landwehr for several years (from the ages of twenty-six to thirty- nine), receiving some little training intermittently. Then he passed into the landsturm, where he remained until the age of fifty, to be called out only in the case of direst neces- sity. This system had been in existence for forty-six years, with only slight modification. But the system had not, in practice, been thoroughly carried out. No account had been Prussian army. ARMY REFORMS 249 taken of the increase of population. In 1820 the popula- lion of Prussia was about 12,000,000. The number of yearly recruits had been fixed at 40,000 and regiments for that number had been established. But in 1860 the population was about 18,000,000, and if all able-bodied iiicn of military age were recruited, as by law they should be, there would be 6*3,000. As a matter of fact, however, The the number of recruits had been kept at 40,000, which meant ° lga oiy 1 \ service not that many thousand young men, by law required to serve enforced. three years under the colors, had been excused in practice from service, and that others had been required to serve only two years. This kept the army down to about 130,000 active soldiers on a peace footing, 215,000 in time of war. William I believed such a condition full of danger for Prussia. Considering himself primarily a soldier, the first soldier of Prussia, and responsible for her defense, he re- solved to carry through certain reforms. In 1859 he ap- pointed Albrecht von Roon Minister of War, in politics a convinced reactionary, in military matters a man of great Army knowledge and ability. In 1860 a plan for the reform of the army was submitted to the Prussian Parliament. Hence- forth the law requiring universal military service was to be rigorously enforced. Tin's would mean 63,000 recruits each year instead of 40,000, and would give an army of 190,000 in time of peace, 450,000 in time of war, the service in the reserve being lengthened from two to four years. Thus the military forces of Prussia would be doubled. To do this necessitated the creation of new regiments with their officers and colors. Tins would involve an increase in the budget, which could Opposition only be sanctioned bv Parliament. Rut the Chamber of m J J m Chamber. Deputies was from the beginning opposed to this change, though it voted appropriations once on the understand- ing that they were provisional only. The Government acted as if they were permanent. In 1862 the Chamber re- fused the moneys entirely. This meant that the new regi- 250 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY Determina- tion of William I. Otto von Bismarck- Schon- hausen, 1815-1898. ments must be disbanded, their officers dismissed, that what had been done must be undone, that the royal plan of army reform must be abandoned, although it had been put into force at least provisionally, that the Government must, in a most conspicuous matter, retrace its steps. Over this question a bitter and prolonged controversy arose between the Crown and the Chamber of Deputies, each side growing stiffer as the contest proceeded. The King was absolutely resolved not to abate one jot from his demands. He be- lieved that the organization of the army, and the system of national defense belonged exclusively to himself, as they had undoubtedly to previous Prussian kings ; that the fact that in 1850 a Constitution had come into existence creating a Parliament in no respect altered the situation ; that indeed the right had been expressly confirmed by that Constitution ; that Parliament was in duty bound to vote all appropriations necessary for him to discharge his duties as supreme ex- ecutive and commander-in-chief. Parliament, on the other hand, held that by the Constitution all grants must be voted by it, that if it were bound to vote them on the mere demand of the King its discretion and power would simply disappear entirely. Parliament must, in the interests of the people, insist upon the preservation intact of its dele- gated powers, and the control of the purse was the chief of these. A deadlock ensued. The King was urged to abolish Parliament altogether. This he would not do be- cause he had sworn to support the Constitution which es- tablished it. He thought of abdicating. He never thought of abandoning the reform. He had written out his abdica- tion and signed it, and it was lying upon his desk when he at last consented to call to the ministry as a final experi- ment a new man, known for his boldness, his independence, his devotion to the monarchy, Otto von Bismarck. Bis- marck was appointed President of the Ministry September 23, 1862: on that very day the Chamber rejected anew the credits asked for by the King for the new regiments. BISMARCK'S POLITICAL PRINCIPLES 251 The conflict entered upon its most acute phase and a new era began for Prussia and for the world. In this interview Bismarck told the King frankly that he was willing to carry out his policy whether the Parliament agreed to it or not. " I will rather perish with the King," he said, " than forsake your Majesty in the contest with parliamentary government." His boldness determined the King to tear up the paper containing his abdication and to continue the struggle with the Chamber of Deputies. The man who now entered upon the stage of European Bismarck's politics was one of the most original and salient characters P revious _ , . . . career. of his century. Born in 1815, he came of a noble family in Brandenburg, and as a young man seemed completely imbued with all the narrowness of his order, its vigorous insistence upon the preservation of existing institutions, its tenacious adherence to forms of belief that had long been undermined in Europe. Receiving a university education, he entered the civil service of Prussia only shortly to turn from its monotonous routine with invincible disgust. He then settled upon his father's estate as a country squire. For years he gave himself Up to the problem of retrieving the family fortune, and with ultimate success. In 1847 he emerged from his country life and began his political career as a member of the United Diet. He now had an opportu- nity to expound his political views, which he did with emphasis. No compromise with the Revolution was his watchword. More royalist than the King he resented the King's act of granting a Constitution to Prussia but, once granted, he would abide by it. But he had no notion that the Constitution should transform Prussia into a state like England, the model which Liberals were constantly urging other people to follow. " The references to England are our misfortune," he said. If Prussians were only English- men, and possessed all the institutions and qualities of Eng- Bismarck's lishmen, then " you might govern us in the English fashion." political Bismarck's political ideas centered in his ardent belief in op 11110118. 252 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY the Prussian monarchy. It had been the Prussian kings, not the Prussian people, who had made Prussia great. This, the great historic fact, must be preserved. What Prussian kings had done, they still would do. A reduction of royal power would only be damaging to the state. " The Prussian Crown must not allow itself," he said, k ' to be thrust into the powerless position of the English Crown, which seems more like a smartly decorative cupola on the state edifice, than its central pillar of support, as I consider ours." When the democrats declared that England had been made great by democracy he flatly contradicted them. England had grown great under an aristocratic constitution. " It remains to be seen whether this reformed constitution (1832) will maintain itself for centuries as did the earlier rule of the English aristocracy." He defended vehemently the Prussian nobility, a class at that time bitterly attacked. By them, and by their blood, the Prussian state had been built up. Bismarck was the uncompromising foe of the attempts made in 1848 to achieve German unity, because he believed those attempts involved a diminution in the importance of Prussia, and he was above all a Prussian. " The Frankfort crown may be very brilliant," he said, " but the gold which would give truth to its brilliancy can only be gained by melting down the Prussian crown," some- thing he could not contemplate without horror. " The scheme for a union annihilates the integrity of the Prussian kingdom . . . Prussians Ave are and Prussians we will His remain." His attitude toward the assembly, of which he was a member, is shown bv the words, " I know that what toward . ~ parlia- ^ have said to you will have no influence on your votes, mentary in- but I am equally convinced that your votes will be as completely without influence on the course of events." No European state had suffered a more complete humilia- tion than Prussia at Olmiitz, yet Bismarck vigorously de- fended the action of the Government. " Prussia ought to unite with Austria in order to crush the common enemy, stitutions. BISMARCK'S DISLIKE OF DEMOCRACY 253 the Revolution." " I regard Austria as the representative and inheritor of an ancient German power which has often gloriously wielded the German sword." The reason for this defense of Olinutz is highly significant. " The only sound principle of action for a great state is political egoism, and not romanticism, and it is unworthy of such a state to strive for anything which docs not directly concern it." ' A war with Austria in 1850 would have meant the ruin of Prussia. Therefore egoism, the sole legitimate motive force in politics, justified the convention of Olmiitz. "According to my con- viction," he said in a speech which he incorporated in part more than forty years later in his Reminiscences, " Prussian honor does not consist in Prussia's playing the Don Quixote all over Germany for the benefit of mortified parliament celebrities who consider their local constitution in danger. I look for Prussian honor in Prussia's abstinence before His all things from every shameful union with democracy; in natred of Prussia's refusal to allow, in the present and all other questions, anything to happen in Germany without her consent; and in the joint execution by the two protecting powers of Germany, with equal authority, of whatsoever they, Prussia and Austria, after joint independent delibera- tion, consider reasonable and politically justifiable." By such utterances, poorly delivered, for he was no orator, Bismarck made himself immensely disliked by all Liberals. On the other hand, such downright and un- compromising flouting of all the popular phrases of the day, such unqualified and defiant adherence to monarchy and aristocracy commended him to the King, who appointed him, in 1851, Prussian delegate to the Diet at Frankfort. Bismarck's career now broadened, and during the next eight years he studied and practised the art of diplomacy, in 1 Bismarck's political principles may be best studied in the speeches which he delivered during the years 1847-1851, and which may be found in Kohl, Die politischen Reden des Fursten Bismarck, Vol. I. Par- ticularly interesting are the speeches of September 24, 1849, and Decem- ber 3, 1850. 854 BISMARCK AM) GERMAN IMTY which he was later to win many sweeping victories. He made the acquaintance of all the important statesmen and politicians of Germany and studied their characters and ambitions. Bismarck He had not been long in Frankfort before his views in in the Diet. regard to Austria changed. He came to regard her as the constant ami determined enemy of Prussia, and to believe that her policy was to reduce Prussia to the position of a mere satellite, and Bismarck had no notion that a nation of 17,000,000 should occupy that position. At once this jingo Prussian bent all his energies to convince his superiors in Berlin oi this fact, lie soon saw that, though bound together in the same federation, the harmony of the two great German powers had been destroyed by the events of 1848. As early as 1853 he said in a report to Berlin that there was not room in Germany for the two powers — that one or the other must bend. Three years later he expressed his opinion even more clearly, M I only desire to express my conviction that ere long we shall have to tight Austria for our very existence: it is not in our power to avert that eventuality, for the course of events in Germany can lead to no other result." ' In 1859, as lie was leaving the Diet for the mission to St. Petersburg, he summed up the situation, " I see in our federal alliance that Prussia has an infirmity which sooner or later we shall have to heal ft'iro et igni, unless we begin in good time to seek a remedy for it." M Bismarck," wrote the Austrian delegate at the Diet, " believes that Prussia forms the center of the world." He did so regard it, and his activity largely made it so for others. Such was the man, who in 186- at the age of forty-seven, accepted the position of President of the Prussian Ministry at a time when King ami Parliament confronted each other in angry deadlock, and when no other politician would accept the leadership. For four years, from 1862 to 1866, the Quoted by Murdock, The Reconstruction of Europe, 190. THE PERIOD OF ( ONFLICT 255 conflict continued. The Constitution was not abolished, The Parliament was called repeatedly, the Lower House voter! peri ° ° iii , • , • , conflict. year after year against the budget, supported in this by the voters, the Upper House voted for it, and the King acted as if this made it legal. The period was one of virtual dictatorship and real suspension of parliamentary life. The King continued to collect the taxes, the army was thoroughly reorganized and absolutely controlled by the authorities, and the Lower House had no mode of opposition save the verbal one, which was entirely ineffective. Thus the increase in the army was secured. But an army Army is a mere means to an end. The particular end that Bis- reform carried marck had in view was the creation of German unity by throueh means of Prussia and for the advantage of Prussia. There must be no absorption of Prussia in Germany, as there had been of Piedmont in Italy, Piedmont as a separate state entirely disappearing. And in Bismarck's opinion this unity could only be achieved by war. He boldly denied in Parliament the favorite theory of the Liberals, that Prussia was to be made great by a liberal, free, parliamentary government, by setting an example of pro- gressiveness, as Piedmont had done, which would rally Ger- mans in other states about her, rather than about their own governments. In what was destined to be the most famous speech of his life he declared in 1863 that what Germans cared about was not the liberalism of Prussia but her power. Prussia must concentrate her forces and hold herself ready for the favorable moment. The boundaries of the kingdom, as determined by the Congress of Vienna, were not favorable to a sound political life. " Not by speeches and majority votes are the great questions of the day decided — that was the great blunder of 1848 and 1849 — but by blood and iron." This "blood and iron" policy was bitterly denounced by "Blood Liberals, but Bismarck ignored their criticisms and shortly and iron found a chance to begin its application. Displaying re- 5856 BISMAKCK AM) GERMAN TNITY Prussia's three wars. The Schleswig;- Holsteiu question. markable diplomatic astuteness and subtlety) unfolding sur- prising resourcefulness in using the exceedingly complicated international relations of his day in such a way as to further his Prussian ami German plans, lie proceeded to reshape Europe in most important particulars. lie was favored in this by the jealousies of the powers ami the general incompetence of their ministers. It was fortunate for Prussia that at a time when it was directed by one of the geniuses of the century, other countries were directed by mediocrities. His own ability, great as it was, would not alone have sufficed to accomplish the work of the next few years. The German Empire is the result of the policy of blood ami iron as carried out by Prussia in three wars which were crowded into the brief period id' si\ years, the war with Denmark in 1864*, with Austria in 1866, and witli France in 1870, the last two of which were Largely the result of his will and his diplomatic ingenuity and unscrupulousness, and the first of which he exploited consummately for the ad- vantage o( Prussia. The first of these grew out o( one of the most complicated questions thai haveever perplexed diplomatists and statesmen, the future o\ Schleswig ami Holstein. These were two duchies in the Danish peninsula, which is itself simply an extension of the great plain o( northern Germany. Ilolstein was in- habited by a population of about (>00,000, entirely German; Schleswig by a population of from 250,000 to 800,000 Ger- mans and 150,000 Danes. These bwo duchies had for cen- turies been united with Denmark, but they did not form an integral part of the Danish kingdom. Their relation to Denmark was personal, arising from the fact thai a Duke of Schleswig ami Holstein had become King of Denmark, just as an Elector oi Hanover had become a King of Eng- land. The King of Denmark was in the duchies simply duke. The Danes naturally wished to make this union a real one. to incorporate entirely the duchies with the king- THE SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN QUESTION 257 dom. But there were plain obstacles in the way. Holstein (not Schleswig) whs a part of the German Confederation; the King of Denmark as Duke of Holstein was represented in the Diet of Frankfort, as were the King of Prussia and the Emperor of Austria. Now the Germans in Schleswig wished to have that duchy also a part of the German Con- federation, and were warmly supported in this desire by the public opinion of Germans everywhere. On the other hand, the Danes of Schleswig wished to have the duchy annexed to Denmark, and were naturally supported in this by the Danes of that kingdom. The question had long been before Europe, but in 1803 Actlon of Don mfirk it became acute, when on November 13, 1863, the Danish concerning . Parliament adopted a new Constitution, which incorporated Schleswig. Schleswig with Denmark. Two days later the king, Frederick VII, died, but his successor, Christian IX, signed the Constitution. What would Germany do? Would it allow Germans to be annexed to a foreign country out- right? The Diet at once protested, and ordered an army sent into the duchies to prevent this consummation, and in doing this it had the enthusiastic; support of public opinion throughout Germany. Bismarck, however, declined to join in this policy. He saw in the situation a chance for the eventual aggrandizement of Prussia, and for a possible future quarrel with Austria. He, therefore, wished Prussia to follow an independent line. He urged Austria to join with Prussia in upholding the London Protocol of 1852, which both powers had signed, as had the other powers of Europe, a treaty which regulated the succession to the duchies, under certain conditions, the main condition being that Christian might be King of Denmark and Duke of Schleswig, but that the duchy should preserve its separatencss from Denmark. Bismarck's position was that Austria and Prussia had a Bismarck's right to demand the observance of the treaty which they had .. signed, and that they would support Christian if he would question, live up to the conditions. He induced Austria to join 258 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY Prussia and Austria at war with Denmark. him in supporting this Treaty of London, claiming that they were simply upholding the sacredness of international agree- ments. The two powers proclaimed their intention to adhere to that treaty, but demanded that the Danes withdraw the recent Constitution, which they declared was in defiance of it. The duplicity of Bismarck's policy lay in the fact that he had assured himself that the Danes would not make this concession, which, moreover, he did not wish them to make, as his whole purpose was to pick a quarrel from which Prussia might profit. To make assurance doubly sure, the ultimatum presented to Denmark demanded the withdrawal within forty-eight hours of the Constitution in- corporating Schleswig. This, as a matter of fact, was impossible, even if the Danes had unanimously desired it. The King could not do this of his own prerogative: he must have the assent of his Parliament. His Parliament had been dissolved and a new one had not been elected. Naturally, this could not be done in two days. At the expiration of that time Prussia and Austria declared war against Denmark in the name of the Treaty of London of 1852. But Bismarck knew that a war between two coun- tries abrogates existing treaties between them, a fact which he was prepared to utilize to Prussia's advantage in time. In the name of the Treaty of 1852 he made war against Denmark for the real purpose of breaking that very treaty. A war between one small state and two large ones could not be doubtful. Sixty thousand Prussians and Austrians invaded Denmark in February 1864, and, though their cam- paign was not brilliant, they easily won. The only danger was in a European intervention. A conference was held in London for the purpose of arranging a settlement by di- plomacy. But nothing was accomplished. Russia was grate- ful for Prussian aid in the recent Polish insurrection ; France and England were full of reproaches for each other. In such troubled waters Bismarck could fish successfully. He was able to block the proposed intervention. The war was THE FUTURE OF THE DUCHIES 259 successful for Prussia and Austria, and Denmark on Octo- ber 30, 1864, signed the Treaty of Vienna, whereby she Treaty of renounced all rights to Schleswig, Holstein, and the little vi enna, duchy of Lauenburg, contiguous to the latter, in favor ° Ct * 1864 * of Austria and Prussia, and agreed to recognize any dis- position they should make concerning them. Bismarck later regarded his handling of the Schleswig-Holstein matter as the diplomatic masterpiece of his career. The question now was what should be the future of the The duchies? Their inhabitants wished to form a separate future state under the Duke of Augustenburg and be admitted as £c£es. such to the German Confederation. The people of Ger- many were overwhelmingly in favor of this arrangement, and Austria favored it. But Bismarck's ideas were very different. He did not care for another German state. There were too many already, and this one would only be another enemy of Prussia and ally of Austria. Moreover, Bismarck wished to annex the duchies wholly or in part to Prussia. He desired aggrandizement in general, but this particular addition would be especially advantageous, as it would lengthen the coast line of Prussia, would bring with it several good harbors, notably Kiel, and would enable Prussia to expand commercially. Thus the two powers were at variance over the disposition of their spoils. Bis- marck, recognizing the impossibility of gaining his end directly, agreed to recognize the rights of Augustenburg on certain conditions, which he knew Augustenburg would never accept. Prussia and Austria thus differed from the Friction outset as to the future of Schleswig and Holstein. Sources between of friction were so numerous, tension became so great, that l™*™ war between them seemed imminent in 1865. But Austria Austria, did not feel in condition for war, and, though Bismarck favored it, the King of Prussia opposed it. He was not yet prepared for a fratricidal contest which did violence to his patriotic and national feelings. Consequently, the Convention of Gastein was made by the two parties 860 BISMARCK AM) GERMAN I'MTY August 1 i, lS(r>. Joint rule was given up in practice, though not in principle. The duchies belonged to the two powers, but henceforth Austria alone should administer llol- Prussia stein and Prussia Schleswig. Lauenburg was sold outright '-'* to Prussia by Austria for two ami a half million thalers. d burg , . . " , . . ,, r _ I his was the first ot Prussian annexations. I he treaty also eh.ise. signified a virtual abandonment o( the Duke o( Augusten- burg. Bismarck approved the Treaty o( Gastein, because, in his opinion, it ended nothing, lie called it a mere " stopping ot' cracks." He regarded it simply as a new trick in the game with Austria. That the Convention was universally denounced abroad ami in Germany as merely cold-blooded bargaining was a matter of indifference to him. Out o( the situation which it created he hoped to bring about the war with Austria, which ho had desired for the past ten years as being the only means whereby German unity could be achieved bv Prussia and for its advantage. In this he was successful within a year. There was not room in Germany, ho thought, for both powers, " one or the other must bend/' lie now directed his attention to the creation of an international situation which Would leave Austria iso- lated in the event oi' a conflict. Ho turned to diplomacy, and the result was an interview with Napoleon 111, ami an alliance with Italy. The attitude of France he regarded as most important. Consequently, ho took occasion to The seek a conference with Napoleon 111 at Biarritz. The meet- "-- at ing at Biarritz (Oct, 1865) has been considered, though in- correctly, to have had somewhat the same importance in Ger- man history that that of lMoiubieres has in Italian. What passed we know only imperfectly. No formal, written en- gagements were made. Bismarck returnedwith the conviction that Napoleon would remain neutral in ease of a war between Prussia and Austria, that the annexation of Schleswig and Hoistein would call forth no opposition from him, that he would even view it with favor as being in harmony with PREPARATIONS FOR WAR WITH AUSTRIA 261 favorite doctrine of nationalities. Bismarck told the Emperor that the constitution of the German Confedera- tion ought to be completely reformed. Napoleon seems to have entered no protest. Bismarck, holding that states- manship is simply enlightened egoism, believed that in re- turn for permission to make these changes France must be paid. Consequently, he dangled before the Emperor chances of enlarging the boundaries of France, but all this was vary vague, though quite friendly, and resulted in no preci e agreements. Bismarck sought a treaty of alliance with Italy for the Treaty coming encounter. Italy coveted Venetia, and in April itll Italy 1866, after much diplomatic manoeuvering, arising from the fact that neither power hud confidence in the honesty of the other, a treaty was made and signed on April S, 1866. It was to the effect that if Prussia should within three mouths go to war with Austria for the sake of reforms in the German Confederation, Italy should also declare war against Austria; that neither would make- a separate piace; that if the allies were successful, Italy should receive Venetia from Austria and Prussia an equivalent amount of .Austrian territory. From the moment tin's treaty was signed Bismarck de- voted all his efforts to bringing about the war with Austria within the three months. It was not difficult to find pre- texts. The Treaty of Gastein proved a most convenient aid. Prussia protested vigorously against Austria's method of administering Holstein. Austria resented the criticism as an impertinent interference in her own affairs. Rela- tions between the two powers thus became strained to the breaking point, and both began to arm. Still some weeks went by before hostilities commenced. Bismarck's ultimate purpose in all his actions was the Bismarck acquisition of the leadership in Germany for Prussia away P re P ares M ... for a war from Austria. lie was preparing a German civil war for with that end; but he wished to give it a broader basis than a Austria. BISMAKCK AND GERMAN UNITY Bismarck proposes a reform of the Con- federation. mere sordid quarrel about the northern duchies, in which no idea was apparent save self-aggrandisement. He now sought to give a new turn and a more important character to this rivalry of Austria and Prussia. He preferred to appear to be fighting for the reform of the German Con- federation rather than for the duchies. On April 9th, the very day after the signature of the treaty with Italy, and in consonance with one of its provisions, that very one, indeed, on which the whole treaty rested] he caused the Prussian plan for the reform of the Confederation to be in- troduced into the Diet at Frankfort. The plan was entirely unexpected. It was vague in all that concerned the rela- tions of the princes to each other, but definite in that it proposed that in addition to the Diet there should be chosen by universal suffrage a popular chamber to share in the management of common affairs. The amazement of Ger- man Liberals was unbounded, litre was the man who had spent his life deriding and defying parliaments and ridiculing democracy now adopting its extreme demand — universal suf- frage. The Liberals thought it a mere trick and did not take the proposal seriously. This was a turning point in Bis- marck's career. He was now presenting a scheme for the re- organization of Germany, and he saw that if Prussia was to gain the leadership she must make some sacrifices to the feelings of the other states. They would not willingly ac- cept the leadership of an autocratic, parliament-defying Prussia. By conceding universal suffrage, liberal opinion, hitherto hostile to Prussia, might be won. The full effect of this proposal was not seen until later. Prussia's power was not immediately increased, owing to the distrust which Bis- marck's career inspired in the minds of Liberals. It seems likely that Bismarck did not now fear universal suffrage, as he had seen how favorably it had worked in France for a despotic Emperor. Even after this there was delay. Bismarck was still waiting for the provocation to come from Austria. He THE AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR 269 wished to throw upon her the odium of beginning the <-j vil war wliirh lie was doing everything in his power to render inevitable. At, lait the moment came. On June 1, IHh'G, Austria brought the Schleswig-Holstein question before the Diet. At once Bismarck declared that this wa« a breach of the Treaty of Gastein. That agreement was, therefore, roid and Prussian troops were sent into Holstein, Austria's jurisdiction. Austria on .June 11 th moved in the Diet that the Federal forces be sent against Prussia. Prussia Prussia announced to the other states that every rote in favor of withdraws this motion would be regarded as a declaration of war. „ ,. ° Confedera- On June 14th the vote was taken 'and the motion carried, tion. Pronouncing this levying of war by the Confederation against one of its members illegal, Prussia declared the Confederation dissolved, again brought forward her reform plans, and prepared for immediate action. Tims the German civil war began. Bismarck had brought The about his dream of a conflict between peoples of the same us ro_ Prussian race to determine the question of control. If proved to war> In one of the shortest wars in history, one of the most de- cisive, and one whose consequences were most momentous. It is called the Seven Weeks' War. If began June 16, 1K(>0', was virtually decided on duly 3d, was brought to a close before the end of that month by the preliminary Peace Of Nikolshurg, duly 26th, which was followed a month later l»,y the definitive Peace of Prague, August C Z%. Prussia had no (Jerman allies of any importance. Several of the North (Jerman stales sided with her, hut these were small and their armies vu re unimportant. On the other hand, Austria was supported by the four kingdoms, Ha- vana, Wurtemberg, Saxony, and Hanover; also hy Hesse- CaSSel, HeSSe Darmstadt, Nassau, and Baden. But Prussia had one important ally, Italy, without whose aid she might not have won the victory. The Prussian army, however, was better prepared. For years the rulers of Prussia had 1 by the Congress of Vienna, t» which all the powers were parties, it could not be abolished by Prussia alone, proposed a new international congress to settle the terms of peace. Against this proposal Bismarck assumed an attitude so highly belliger- ent, threatening war a outraiuw that it was dropped. 1867-1S71. THE NORTH GERMAN CONFEDERATION 2G9 states, and was then submitted in 1807 to a National As- sembly chosen by manhood suffrage for the purpose. Passed by this body with some slight alterations, it was finally rati- fied without further amendment by the legislatures of the several states. The new federal organization was to consist of a Presi- The dent, the Kino; of Prussia, of a Federal Council (Bundes- Bu ^ es " » ' v rath. rath), and a Parliament (Reichstag). The Federal Coun- cil was really the old Diet of Frankfort, preserved in the new scheme. It was to be composed of delegates sent by the sovereigns of the different states, to be recalled at their pleasure, bound by instructions given them by their princes. The voting power of the different states was fixed arbitrarily and not according to population, differing from the Senate of the United States in that the number of votes allotted the different states greatly varied. There were to be 43 votes in alL Of these Prussia was to have 17, Saxony 4, Mecklen- burg-Schwerin and Brunswick 2, each of the others 1. In order to have a majority, Prussia would have to gain the support of five little principalities, which she could easily do. In regard to military organization, no change might be made in the laws without the consent of Prussia. Associated with this Bundesrath, or Council of Princes, The as it really was, was the Reichstag, or Parliament, com- posed of 297 members, elected by direct manhood suffrage and by secret ballot, for three years. Of the two bodies the Reichstag was much the less important, therein differing from the popularly elected chamber in other countries. The emphasis in this new organization of Germany was put upon the princes, the sovereigns, not upon the people. The people were given a place in the system, but a subordinate one. Bismarck always considered the Bundesrath the key to the Constitution. Large powers of legislation were given to the new government. All laws and all taxes must pass both chambers. The new Constitution went into force July 1, 1867. "Let 270 BISMARCK AND GERMAN UNITY us work quickly," Bismarck said while the Constitution was under disscusion, " let us put Germany in the saddle ; she will soon learn to ride," another Bismarekian prophecy destined to come true. Germany now entered upon a period of remarkable progress, which has continued to this day. Legislative activity supplemented and clinched the triumphs of diplomacy and war. The old Confederation had failed in two particulars, said Bismarck in the Parliament of 1867 : it had failed to insure the national safety, and it had failed to develop adequately the prosperity of the nation. These were not to be the failures of the new. Its military strength was amply assured. The armies of the different states were now all organized on the Prussian model, with the President of the Confederation as chief. He now commanded an army Alliance of 800,000 men. Moreover, Bismarck was able, by playing with South U p 0n their fear of France, to induce the South German states stat s *° cn ^ cr m *° a military alliance, offensive and defensive, with the North German Confederation. This increased the army to over a million. In a military sense Germany was unified. Laws were rapidly passed aiming to increase the material well-being, to enlist firmly on the side of the new experiment the capitalist, industrial classes. The growth of the modern industrial system had been, as we have seen, one of the forces making for unity. It had greatly helped to create the situation in which Bismarck had been able to work so effectively. The business world now demanded that the state reward it by the removal of many restrictions which had survived the Zollverein and which hampered economic Consoli- activity. Certain laws which restricted the free movement dating the f fj ie p e0 p} e WC re repealed, passports being suppressed, system * no absolute, unqualified right of every citizen to reside any- where in the Confederation guaranteed. This aided indus- tries by providing them a free and mobile labor market. In place of the medley of weights and measures of the different states, which were a hindrance to commerce, a uniform plan was adopted, based upon the metric and PROGRESSIVE LEGISLATION 271 decimal systems. A single monetary system was also de- creed in place of the great variety of currencies in vogue. The formation of business corporations was encouraged. Laws limiting the rate of interest were abolished. The postal system was reorganized. Commercial treaties were made with other nations. Workingmen were given the right to form unions. The results of all this activity were notable. The pecuniary advantage of large and influential classes lay in the success of the Confederation. Economic life bound the different states every year more tightly together. Meanwhile Germans were biding the time when by the addition of the South German states the political unity would be complete. This was to be the result of the Franco- German war of 1870. CHAPTER XII THE TRANSFORMATION OF THE SECOND EMPIRE We have traced the rise of Italy, the rise o\' Prussia. We have now to trace the decline and fall of the French Empire. The history of that Empire from its foundation in 185*2 to I860 has been described. It was a period of despotic government, and of great and uninterrupted success. The period from I860 to 1870 witnesses the gradual transforma- tion of the Empire from autocracy to liberalism, the rise of a vigorous party of opposition, a disastrous foreign policy, a growing demoralization within the state, ami a final, tragic collapse. Disastrous The turning point in the history of the Empire was the _ ,. Italian war. However beneficial to Italy, that war raised Italian war upon Napo- U P f° r Napoleon a host of enemies in France. One of leon III. its features had been the attack upon the temporal power of the Papacy. That power was not overthrown in fact, but it was in principle. The Pope had lost most of his states, the rest were in danger. Catholics were bitter in their denunciation of Napoleon. This was most damaging for him. as his strongest supporters had hitherto been the clergy, the clerical press, and the faithful. But other groups also were offended: monarchists, because of the overthrow of the kingdom of Naples and the duchies: patriots of various affiliations and members of the liberal constitu- tional party in Parliament, because they believed the erec- tion of a strong state to the southeast of France prejudicial to her best interests, it being better to have several weak states as neighbors than a single strong one. 273 EFFECT OF THE ITALIAN WAR OF 1859 273 Only the democratic party in France seemed pleased with Tne war this venture, and for reasons that might well give the Em- . . .. peror pause. This was the smallest of all the parties. It democratic was by its fundamental principles opposed to the very party. existence of the Empire. "To find partisans of an Italian war, one must seek them in those circles which are plotting the overthrow of the Empire," an official had reported to the Emperor before ever the war had begun. These demo- crats approved a war against Austria, the traditional op- ponent of liberalism. They favored a war that might dam- age another enemy of theirs, the Roman Catholic Church. They applauded it warmly because its tendency seemed to be inevitably democratic and -anti-clerical. They were pleased to have the Emperor enter upon a doubtful adventure, be- lieving that one adventure might lead to others, that he would alienate former supporters, and would therefore be forced to seek new ones, and that thus a situation favorable to them- selves might be created. But even they were disappointed at the outcome of the war and w r ere therefore critical. The Austrians were still in Venetia; the Pope was still in Rome. The Emperor's reputation as a ruler, of intelligent views Napoleon s and of decision of character, was damaged both at home and abroad. As the war progressed it revealed the lack in its author of any definite purpose to be vigorously adhered to, Napoleon III at first agreeing to drive the Austrians out of the peninsula and to free Italy from the Alps to the Adriatic, then stopping midway in the process and dictating the Preliminaries of Villafranca and the Peace of Zurich, only to permit them both to become immediately dead letters, and watching the revolution, unchained by his act, progress until the most sweeping change in Italian history had been effected and unification had been practically achieved. By a policy, alternately so reckless and so pusillanimous, he lessened his prestige, for he showed that though he could inaugurate momentous movements, he had not the power or sagacity or courage to control them. By participating in the over- 274 TRANSFORMATION OF SECOND EMPIRE England offended. Treaty of commerce offends Protec- tionists. throw of long-established, legitimate governments, he made legitimate governments everywhere suspicious and even hos- tile; by declaring that he was seeking only justice and not aggrandizement and then adding Savoy and Nice to France as payment for his services, he alienated England, as well as other states, which saw only hypocrisy in his acts and which feared that he was desirous of repeating the policy of conquest of his illustrious uncle. Such was the outcome of a policy, fortunate for the Italians, unfortunate for the Emperor. The next decade is a long commentary upon Napoleon's initial error. For ten years he was to experience to the full the embarrassments created by his ill-advised Italian policy. It was at this time that in a different sphere he offended another powerful interest at home. He made in I860, with unusual secrecy, a treaty of commerce with England. This treaty involved a great reduction of duties on many articles, and was a step in the direction of free trade. While popular with political economists, and while probably ad- vantageous to France as a whole, it was bitterly resented by the great manufacturers, who, given no warning and therefore no time to adapt themselves to changed conditions, believed that they would be utterly ruined. Four hundred of them came to Paris to seek an audience with the Em- peror in order to present their cause. They were un- successful. The audience was not granted, but they pub- lished a vehement protest against the new policy. " We are about to be condemned without having been heard." But while the manufacturers were indignant, many in France were grateful, notably the wine producers, who, according to the new treaty, would have a larger market in England than ever. But the Emperor had thus by 1860 offended large and influential classes: Catholics in their beliefs by his Italian policy ; manufacturers, protectionists, in their interests by his treaty of commerce, a treaty which, it was declared, sacrificed French interests to English, as the war, BEGINNING OF THE LIBERAL EMPIRE 275 it was likewise declared, had subordinated the welfare of France to that of Italy. Feeling that he was losing strength with the Conservatives, Napoleon Napoleon now began to seek the support of the Liberals, hitherto his bitter opponents. This was the beginning of the so-called Liberal Empire, marked, as the years went, by ever greater concessions, until at the end the character of the government was completely transformed. Thus in 1859 Napoleon issued an amnesty which permitted the Repub- licans who had been driven from France by the coup d'etat of 1851 to return. Many were prisoners in Algeria, in Guiana. Many were exiles in Belgium, Switzerland, Eng- land. From these countries the exiles now came back, but not all of them. " I shall return," said Victor Hugo, " when Liberty returns." Napoleon next took a step which seemed to indicate that he was finally to enter upon the work of crowning his regime with liberty, which he had declared to be the ideal of the Napoleonic system. In November 1860 he slightly enlarged the power of the legislature. By the decree of lowers of November 24th he gave the Senate and Legislative Body . . & » j increased. the right at the opening of each session to frame an address to the monarch in reply to his address from the throne. Such was the custom in England, and such had been the custom in France under the parliamentary monarchy from 1815 to 1848. This gave the legislature the chance once a year to discuss the whole policy of the Government, as each phrase of the address was being composed and debated. Everything could be passed in review at that time. Another innovation, hardly less noteworthy, was made at the same time. A full stenographic report of the sessions of the Legislative Body was henceforth to be published. The people were no longer to be required to content themselves with a concise, dry, analytical report of these sessions, relegated to the most obscure part of the paper, but now the eloquence of the Chamber might be known to all the country, im- 876 TRANSFORMATION OF SECOND EMPIRE passioned, incisive, instructive. Another article provided that henceforth ministers, representing the Government, should appear before the Chambers authorized to explain and defend its policy. Though by this famous decree Napoleon III divested him- self of none of his prerogatives, nevertheless the importance of Parliament was henceforth increased. This was the first and most important of the successive steps in the evolution of the autocratic into the liberal Empire. But the Emperor was mistaken in supposing that he could win the Liberals to his side. He was simply giving them greater oppor- tunities for opposition. Under the operation of this decree Revival of parliamentary life awoke again in France. Communication interest in between the Legislative Body and the country, broken since 1852, was re-established. Extraordinary interest was shown by the people in the next session of that Chamber, which was characterized by much brilliant oratory and keen criti- cism. It was noted with surprise that many of the most effective speeches were directed against this or that phase of the imperial government. The Emperor had evoked a spirit which it would be difficult to suppress. The Opposition in the Chamber was small numerically, but was aggressive. That it produced some effect was shown by the next elee- Hise of a tions, those of 1S6;3, when its number increased from five Partv *° thirty-five, of whom seventeen were out-and-out Repub- licans. This was, of course, a powerless minority in a chamber of nearly 260 members. But the popular vote was significant. The opponents of the Empire, Catholics, Protectionists, Monarchists, Republicans, had obtained about two million votes — almost a third of those cast. It was just this time, when various difficulties were arising about him more troublesome than any which he had previously encountered, that Napoleon chose for another enterprise most unnecessary, most reckless, and in the end most dis- astrous. He undertook to erect an empire five thousand THE MEXICAN EXPEDITION 277 miles away, in a country of which he knew but little, and in which political institutions had for half a century rested on a very shifting basis — Mexico. England, Spain, and France had certain grievances against The Mexico for her unjust treatment of their citizens resident Mexican expedition, there, and when the Mexican Government suspended by arbitrary decree the payment of interest on bonds held abroad, they proceeded to organize an intervention. They were the more able to do this than in ordinary times, owing to the fact that the United States, the natural opponent of any such intervention, was then involved in a civil war that forbade her attempting to prevent it. Consequently, in October 1861 these three powers signed the Treaty of London agreeing upon joint intervention for the sole pur- pose of securing adequate protection for Europeans resident in Mexico, and the proper discharge of financial obligations incurred by that country by previous treaties. The Allies expressly stated that they had no intention of making terri- torial conquests or of overthrowing the existing Mexican gov- ernment, which was a republic under Juarez as president. The expedition was sent out, arriving in December 1861 and January 1862. But by April it became clear to Spain and England that France had distinctly other purposes in this affair than those stated in the treaty of alliance. Na- poleon's real intentions, shortly apparent, were the over- throw of the republic and the establishment of a monarchy in Mexico under a European prince. The English and Spaniards would give no sanction to such a scheme, and consequently entirely withdrew in April 1862. The ex- pedition now became one purely French. The question of financial honesty on the part of Mexico was lost sight of, and a war began, a war of aggression, entirely uncalled for, but a war which in the end punished its author more than it did the Mexicans, one of the most dishonorable, as it was one of the most costly and disastrous, for the Second Empire. 278 TRANSFORMATION OF SECOND EMPIRE Napoleon's purposes. Napoleon overthrows the Mexican Republic. Napoleon III was a man of ideas, a man of imagination, with a mind ranging boldly and far at times. His ideas were frequently grandiose, yet vague and dim, his imagina- tion lively, yet frequently unsound, superficial, deceptive. While a prisoner in the fortress of Ham he had written and published a pamphlet concerning America. In this he proclaimed the necessity of digging a great canal to connect the Atlantic and Pacific. On it a " new Constanti- nople " might arise, near the borders of North America and South America, as ancient Byzantium had arisen at the point where Europe and Asia meet. The founder of such a place might work out for the new world what had been worked out in Europe — an equilibrium of the different forces — by strengthening the enfeebled Latin element and hemming in the overflowing Anglo-Saxon element. The theory of nationalities would thus win another vic- tory. Latins would hold in check the aggressive Anglo- Saxons. The colonies of Spain and France would be more secure, French commerce would find new outlets, the ma- terials for French industries would be more easily procured. And, said Napoleon, " We shall have established our benefi- cent influence in the center of America." Another reason may have influenced the Emperor. The Republic of Mexico had in some of its legislation deeply offended the Roman Catholic Church. Might he not win back the favor of Catholics forfeited by his Italian expedition by undertaking this one? This expedition for the overthrow of the Mexican Republic, pronounced by courtiers " the grandest thought of the reign," was a long drawn out folly. The French troops were checked at Puebla on May 5, 1862 — the first military defeat of the Empire. But, reinforced, they were victorious, and General Forey, the French commander, called together an assembly of Mexican notables of the opposition party, which decreed that Mexico should henceforth be an Empire, and which offered the imperial crown to Archduke Maximilian THE EMPIRE OF MEXICO 279 of Austria, brother of Francis Joseph, since 1848 Emperor of Austria. This assembly represented, perhaps, 350,000 people out of about 7,000,000. It offered a fatal gift. This young prince of thirty-one was of attractive and popu- lar manners, and of liberal ideas. Young, handsome, ver- satile, half poet, half scientist, he was living in a superb palace, Miramar, overlooking the Mediterranean, amid his collections, his objects of art, and with the sea which was his passion always before him. From out of this enchanting retreat he now emerged to become the central figure of a short and frightful tragedy. Mexico lured him to his doom. Influenced by his own ambition and that of his spirited wife, Carlotta, daughter of Leopold I, King of Belgium, and receiving definite promises of French military support until 1867, he accepted the imperial crown and arrived in Mexico in May 1864. This entire project, born in the brain of Napoleon III, Disastrous was to prove hopeless from the start, disastrous to all who outcome of participated in it, to the new Emperor and Empress, and to Napoleon. The difficulties confronting the new monarch were insuperable. A guerilla warfare was carried on suc- cessfully by Juarez, using up the French soldiers and put- ting them on the defensive. Even the communications of the French army with the sea were seriously threatened. Maximilian at last issued a decree that any enemies taken with arms would be summarily shot — a decree that made him hated by all Mexicans, and that gave to the war a character of extreme atrocity. A greater danger threatened the new empire when General Lee surrendered at Appomat- tox. The United States had looked from the first with disapprobation upon Napoleon's project. Now that the Interven- Civil War was over, she threatened intervention. Napoleon tion of the was unwilling to risk a conflict with this country, and con- states sequcntly promised to withdraw his troops speedily from Mexico. Maximilian could not remain long an Emperor without Napoleon's support. His wife, Carlotta, return- 5280 TRANSFORMATION OF SECOND EMPIRE ing to Europe to persuade Napoleon in frantic personal interviews not to desert them, received no promise of support from the man who had planned the whole adventure, and in the fearful agony of her contemplation of the impending doom of her husband became insane. Maximilian was taken by the Mexicans and shot June 19, 1867. The phantom empire vanished. Discom- A most expensive enterprise for the French Emperor. fiture of Na- jj. nft( j c .,t en j n ( {] 10 financial resources of France, already poleon III. . badly disorganized. It had prevented his playing a part in decisive events occurring in central Europe in 1861-66, in the Danish war, and the Austro-Prussian war, the out- come of which was to alter so seriously the importance of France in Europe by the exaltation of an ambitious, aggres- sive, and powerful military state, Prussia. It had damaged him morally before Europe by the desertion of his proteges to an appalling fate before the threats of the United States. His army hail once been repelled, before Puebla in 186$ s the first military defeat in his reign. He had squandered uselessly his military resources and had increased the national debt. It has been asserted that the Mexican ■war was as disastrous for Napoleon III as the Spanish war had been for Napoleon I. In 1868, after the great humiliation resulting from the Mexican war and from the futile attempts to play an effective part in European diplomacy in the crowded years of 1861-68, which will be described later. Napoleon III, feeling greatly the need of new sources of strength, could Additional only turn to the liberals with still larger concessions. Other motives influenced him to go further in this direction than he had previously gone. He hail declared at the begin- ning of his reign that autocratic power was to be merely provisional, that liberty should crown the edifice. Liberal- minded by nature, he saw that he could not safely postpone the day. Time was passing. Sixteen years had gone by and the system of 1852 was still almost entirely intact. concessions to liber- alism. GAMBETTA ATTACKS THE EMPIRE 281 Moreover, he was now becoming prematurely old, and was .suffering acutely from disease, a fact that must be borne in mind henceforth as helping to explain the vacillation and languor at critical times of this man, who had pre- viously acted with decision and promptness. Self-interest also would be served in another way. As his policy was now sadly compromised in every way, there would be evident advantage in making the assembly, the people, share the responsibility with himself. In 1867 the right of interpella- The right Hon was granted the Chamber, which gave its members the oi inter- power to question the ministers concerning; their acts and 1 ^ ° granted. policies at any moment. In 1868, upon the Emperor's recommendation, a law wa« passed freeing the press from a considerable number of restrictions that had previously weighted it; also a law permitting, under certain elaborate conditions, the right of holding public meetings. The Empire had thus entered upon a frankly liberal path. The result was not to strengthen, but greatly to weaken it. Many new journals were founded, in which it was assailed with amazing bitterness. A remarkable free- dom of speech characterizes the last two years of Napo- leon's reign. A movement to erect a monument to a republican deputy, Baudin, who had been shot on the barricades in 1851 at the time of the coup d'etat, seemed to the Government to be too insulting. It prosecuted the men who were conducting the subscription. One of these was defended by a brilliant, impassioned young lawyer and orator from the south of France, thirty years of age, who was shortly to be a great figure in politics, a founder of the Third Republic. Gambetta conducted himself not as a Dramatic lawyer defending his client, but as an avenger of the wrongs emer £ ence of France for the past seventeen years, impeaching bitterly Q am betta. the entire reign of Napoleon III. Particularly did he dwell upon the date of December 2d. The coup d'etat, he said, was carried through by a crowd of unknown men " without talent, without honor, and hopelessly involved in 888 TRANSFORMATION OF SECOND EMPIRE debts and crimes." " Those men pretend to have saved so- ciety. Do you save a country when you lay parricidal hands upon it? " The end of this remarkable discourse remains famous: " Listen, you who for seventeen years have been absolute master of France. The thing that character- izes you best, because it is evidence of your own remorse, IS the fact that you have never dared to say: We will place among the solemn festivals of France, we will celebrate as a national anniversary, the Second of December. . . . Well! this aniversary we will take for ourselves; we will observe it always, always without fail; every year it shall be the anniversary of our dead, until the day when the country, having become master itself once more, shall impose upon you the great national expiation in the name of liberty, equality, and fraternity." Bitter at- This address hail a prodigious effect. Nothing so defiant, tacks upon so contemptuous of the Government, had been heard in m France since 1851. Though Gambetta's client lost his case, it was generally felt that the Empire emerged from that court-room soundly beaten. It was clear that there was a party in existence bent upon revenge, and willing to use all the privileges a now liberal Emperor might grant, not gratefully, but as a means of completely annihilating the very Empire, a Republican party, aggressive, and growing, already master of Paris, and organizing in the depart- ments. The Third There was also in existence another party which pla} T ed Party. }l commanding and decisive part in the closing years of the reign, the Third Party, so called from the fact that it stood between the thorough-going supporters of the Empire and the Republicans, its active enemies. This party was willing to support the Empire loyally if Napoleon would make it frankly and completely liberal, that is, if he would substitute a completely parliamentary system of govern- ment for personal rule. This party was led by Ollivier, formerly a Republican. POPULAR APPROVAL OF THE EMPIRE 283 Two policies Fere now urged upon Napoleon, one by those of his immediate circle — a return to the strong meas- ures of 1852, a renouncement of all compromises with the Liberals; the other, the one advocated by the Third Party. The election! of \HC> ( .) reinforced the latter by showing that, though 4,438,000 votes had been cast for the official can- didates, 3,355,000 had been cast, for those opposed. Na- poleon adopted the plan of the Third Party, and by a senatus conmltum of September 8, 1869, supplemented by another of April 20, 1870, the political system of the Empire was completely transformed. The Senate was de- The trans - prived of its powers as guardian of the Constitution, and f , became a law-making chamber simply. The Legislative Body Empire became complete' master of itself, having the right to completed, choose its own officers, to make its own rules, to initiate legislation, and to demand explanations of the ministers, who were declared responsible. Finally, on January 2, 1870, Ollivier was himself made head of the ministry, and was supported by a majority of the Chamber. Ollivier felt that he could assure the Emperor a " happy old age," and his son a quiet accession to the throne. The approval of the people was now sought for these Popular changes. As the Constitution of 1852 had been ratified approvaL by popular vote, ought not the Constitution of 1870, so profoundly altered in the course of the last ten years, to be likewise approved? Believing that a vote of France on all these changes would only consolidate them and put be- hind the Emperor an immense; popular support, thus enabling him easily to dominate all the hostile parties which had recently become so aggressive and annoying, Napoleon now invited the people to vote on this proposition: "The I'nnch nation approves the liberal reforms made in the Constitution since 1860, and ratifies the senatus consultum of April 20, 1870." Then followed the Constitution in forty- five articles, assuring, among other things, the transmission of the imperial dignity in the direct line of Napoleon III. 284, TRANSFORMATION OF SECOND EMPIRE The The plebiscite took place May 8, 1870, and resulted over- * Jf C1 whehninglv in favor of the Empire, 7,;5")8,78() voted yes; of May, ° * x * 1970. 1,571)989 voted no. Napoleon III could claim that he had as many supporters in 1870 as in 1852. The Re- publicans, a small minority, opposed this plebiscite, not because they did not believe in the right of the people to rule, but because they considered it in this case a mere trick to gain an apparent absolution for the sins of the Empire. Every one must approve the reforms, but would not such a vote mean that reform need go no further? Now, said Gambetta, only one form of government adequately ex- presses universal suffrage — the Republic. This party, revolutionary in its aims, appeared now to be utterly dis- credited by the great success of the Empire in the plebiscite. Yet. its victory was very near. The Empire seemed solidly re-established upon the confidence of the people. In less than three months, however, it had declared a war against Prussia, in the midst of which it utterly collapsed and was Sudden succeeded by the Republic. To understand the reasons for col apse o ^ sudden and complete downfall, it is necessary to survey the Empire. . r . \ , ' the diplomacy of the period just preceding 1870, and to describe the general and immediate causes of that war. CHAPTER XIII THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR Concerning that diplomacy much Js known but much re- mains obscure. Not until the archives of France and Ger- many, the papers of Napoleon III, William I, Bismarck, and their ministers and agents are freely given to the world will it stand forth fully revealed. Yet fragmentary and un- satisfactory as our information is, the broad outlines of the story can be drawn with reasonable certitude Up to 1862 Napoleon had been uniformly successful. He had defeated Russia and Austria, supposed to be the two most redoubtable military powers in Europe, in the Crimean and Italian wars. In 1862, however, he entered upon the ill-starred Mexican expedition, the " grandest thought of the reign," as his courtiers mispronounced it. This weakened him in many ways, indicated above, but, particularly did it trammel him in his European diplomacy, at the very time when events were crowding upon each other thick and fast, altering profoundly the face of Europe. Napoleon, dis- tracted by a wasting, distant, and inglorious war, was not able to act with decision in regard to the remodeling of central Europe, the rise of Prussia. Moreover, his intel- lectual limitations, his lack of clear thought and persistent action, his half-hearted, wavering, shifting nature were now brought out in high relief against the hard, practical, clean- cut, restrained yet ruthless character of the leader of this Napoleon's evolution of Germany, Otto von Bismarck. His doctrine of unwise jidhcrciicc nationalities, on which he so prided himself, was now to turn to hig against him to his own undoing. He had acted upon that doctrine of doctrine in Italy with the result that an Italian Kingdom nation- was in existence. He now, with singular fatuity, helped 285 886 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR forward the development of another state on the frontiers of France — Prussia. In the Schleswig-Holstein affair of 1864 he secretly advised Prussia to take both duchies. " I shall always be consistent in my conduct," he had said in 1863. "If I have fought for the independence of Italy, if I have lifted up my voice for the Polish nationalities, I cannot have other sentiments in Germany, nor obey other principles." The strengthening of Prussia was a far more serious matter for France than the strengthening of Pied- mont, as Prussia held the left bank of the Rhine, the Rhine provinces, which Frenchmen regarded as rightfully theirs. Frenchmen protested against this dangerous policy of en- couraging the growth of the ambitious neighbor. In 1866 Napoleon had an excellent opportunity to re- cover from his initial mistake in Germany. In that year Prussia and Austria went to war, nominally over the ques- tion of these very duchies, in reality for the leadership of central Europe. Bismarck, long planning such a war, had The been particularly anxious about the attitude of France, and meeting at } 1JU | sought to divine the probable conduct of the French Emperor, in the famous interview at Biarritz (1865). We have no official details as to the result of that interview, but it is clear that Bismarck left it with the conviction that Napoleon would be neutral. This would free Prussia from any anxiety about her western boundary, and she could throw her whole force to the south against Austria and her allies. It is evident that Napoleon looked forward to such a war between the two German powers with compla- cency. He believed there was nothing to fear from Prussia. He even urged Italy to conclude the treaty with Prussia, apparently thinking that the two combined could hold out longer against Austria. Thus, in his opinion, the war would be long, exhausting both combatants. At the proper time he could intervene, and from the distress of the rivals could extract gain for France, possibly the left bank of the Rhine, which Frussia might be willing to relinquish in return NAPOLEON III IN 1866 287 for aid. His calculation was based upon his belief in the vast military superiority of Austria. The war came, and, contrary to expectation, it was short and swift. Prussia was victorious, not Austria. The battle of Koniggratz, or Sadowa, July 3, 1866, was decisive. Even then it was not too late for an intervention. Napoleon could have Napoleon's played a commanding part in determining the terms of peace * ailure to use jiis had he threatened to come to the aid of Austria, as Austria ODDOrtun ity desired. His Minister of Foreign Affairs said to him July in 1866. 5th: "Let the Emperor make a simple military demonstra- tion, and he will be astonished at the facility with which he will become arbiter and master of the situation without strik- ing a blow." King William later said that the war of 1866 was the ruin of France, " because Napoleon should have attacked us in the rear." This was what Bismarck most feared. But the golden hour slipped by. Napoleon missed one of the greatest opportunities of his entire career. Had he refused to sanction the annexations of Prussia unless compensated, he could have secured important additions to France. Pacifically inclined, racked by a disease which re- duced his powers of concentration and decision, perhaps distrustful of his army, which was depleted by the Mexican campaign and which had no eminent commander, his conduct was vacillating and weak. Accomplishing nothing for France, he yet irritated Prussia by a half measure of in- sisting that the new confederation should not extend south of the river Main. The year 1866 is a turning point in the history of Prussia, Tne 7 ear of Austria, of France, of modern Europe. It profoundly altered the historic balance of power. By the decisiveness point in of the campaign, and by the momentous character of its modern consequences, Prussia, hitherto regarded as the least im- ls ory * portant of the great powers, had astounded Europe by the evidence of her strength. She possessed a remarkable army and a remarkable statesman. That both were the most 288 TIIK FK AN CO (J KM MAN WAR " Revenge for Sadowa." Failure of Napoleon's diplomacy. powerful in Europe was not entirely proved) but the feeling was widespread that such was the case. The center of interest in central Europe shifted from Vienna to Berlin. The reputation of Napoleon III was seriously compromised. The instinct of the French people saw in the battle of Koniggratz, or Sadowa, as they called it, a humiliating defeat for France, though it was a battle exclusively be- tween Prussia and Austria, France being no party to the war. The iustinet was largely right. At least the Peace of Prague involved and indicated the diminution of the authority and importance of France. For a reorganiza- tion st> sweeping in central Europe, as the overthrow of Austria, her expulsion from Germany, and the consolidation and aggrandizement of Prussia, a powerful military state, upset the balance of power. A feeling of alarm spread through France. M Revenge for Sadowa," was a cry often heard henceforth. Its meaning was that if one state like Prussia should be increased in area and power, France also, for consenting to it, had a right to a proportionate increase, that the reciprocal relations might remain the same. The hold of the Emperor upon his own people was greatly Weakened; and Napoleon knew it. To recover this, to re- new his prestige by securing an increase oi' territory, he now resorted to diplomacy, seeking to appeal to the gener- osity or gratitude of Bismarck, having neglected to appeal to his fears. For a year negotiations went on, in 1S(>() and 1S()7, between the two powers, looking to some possible enlargement of the boundaries of France. These negotia- tions concerned, now the left bank of the Rhine, now Luxem- burg, now Belgium. Bismarck drew them out in order to gain time and also evidence with which to discredit Napoleon still further. Then, at the ripe moment, he blocked every proposal, and no course was left open to the French Emperor but to adapt himself to his unhappy posi- tion. Hut French governmental circles, greatly chagrined and embittered, came more and more to entertain the idea FRICTION BETWEEN FRANCE AND FRUSSIA 289 of war. The Emperor tried to persuade France that all these changes in central Europe had really increased the strength of France. The argument was labored, and, more- over, reacted most disastrously, for when in 1868 he urged the reform of the French army, largely along the lines of the Prussian organization, which had proved so successful, the Chamber acceded only in slight part, quoting his own assertion that France stood in Europe stronger than ever as a result of the Seven Weeks' War in Germany. Thus the one method of augmenting the influence of France was rejected, and Parliament must share the responsibility of the lack of preparation of 1870 with the Emperor and Liberals must share it with Conservatives. A few years earlier Napoleon might have forced such proposals through Parliament. In 1868 he was no longer in a position so to do. The Opposition was too numerous, and he had made too many enemies by his Italian and Mexican policies. Moreover, he had just increased the power of the legislature. And not for a moment admitting that the Empire was in danger, he could not use the greatest of all arguments — the safety of the state. From 1866 to 1870 the idea that ultimately a war would come between Prussia and France became familiar to the people and Governments of both countries. Many Frenchmen desired " revenge for Sadowa." Prussians were proud and elated at their two successful wars, and intensely conscious of their new position in Europe. The newspapers of both countries during the next four years were full of crimina- tion and recrimination, of abuse and taunt, the Government in neither case greatly discouraging their unwise conduct, at times even inspiring and directing it. Such an atmosphere was an excellent one for ministers who wanted war to work in, and both France and Prussia had just such ministers. Bismarck Bismarck believed such a war inevitable, and, in his opinion, re & ards a it was desirable as the only way of completing the unifica- France as tion of Germany, since Napoleon would never willingly con- inevitable. 890 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR The Spnnish candidacy of Leopold of Hohen- zollern. sen! to the extension of the Confederation to include the South German states. All that he desired was that it should come at precisely the right moment, when Prussia was entirely ready, and that it should come by act of France, so that Prussia could pose before Europe as merely defend- ing herself against a wanton aggressor. In his Remi- niscences he avows that he entertained this belief as early as 1866: "That a war with France would succeed the war with Austria lay in the Logic of history"; ami again, M 1 did not doubt that a Franco "German war must take place before the construction of a United Germany could be realized." The unification of Germany being his supreme aim, he was bound by Logic and ambition to sec that that war occurred. Unfortunately, there entered in 1870 into the Foreign Office o\' France a pronounced and bitter opponent of Prus- sia, the Duke of Gramont, a reckless ami unwise politician, whose brief career in otliee was to be very costly to his country. With two such willing ministers, a cause of war was not Long in being found. It was offered in a form which did not directly concern either Germany or France, the filling of the vacant throne o( Spain. In 1868 a revolution had occurred in Spain, which re- sulted in the overthrow and exile of the Queen Isabella II. The Provisional Government which then arose proceeded upon the task, always delicate, of finding a new ruler. It chose Prince Leopold of* Hohenzollern, a kinsman of the King of Prussia, who at first declined. Three times the offer of the Spanish crown was made to Leopold, twice in 1869, and again in March 1870. In an interview with Bismarck in May 1869 Benedetti. French ambassador at Berlin, made it apparent that the candidacy of the Prince would be resented by France. Bismarck nevertheless secured from Spain a fourth offer, and Leopold this time accepted, largely per- suaded thereto by Bismarck, sufficiently cognisant of the feel- ing of the French Emperor. The news that a Prussian Prince THE HOHENZOLLERN CAN DID ACY 291 had accepted the throne of Spain reached Paris by waj of Madrid, .Inly 2, 1870. Instantly great indignation was expressed in the newspapers. The excitement in Paris rapidly increased, Gramont declared in the Chamber that the election of the Prince was inadmissible as " upsetting to our disadvantage the present equilibrium of* forces in Europe," and imperiling " the interests and honor of France." To prevent it, " we shall discharge our duty without hesitation and without weakness." Benedetti was ordered by the French Government to proceed at once to Ems, a watering resort near the Rhine, where King William was at the time, and to make a formal demand that the candidacy be withdrawn. „ Now neither Napoleon III, more and more exhausted by disease, nor the Prime Minister, Ollivier, desired war, though both were anxious for a diplo- matic victory. Nor did William I desire it. Moreover, the Governments of England, Austria, Russia, and Belgium labored in the interests of peace. On July 12th the can- The candi- didacj was announced withdrawn by the father of Prince dac y witn * _ . , drawn. Leopold. The tension was immediately relieved: the war scare was over. Two men, however, were not pleased by this out- come, Gramont and Bismarck. This was, says a biogra- pher of Bismarck, " the severest check which Bismarck's policy had yet received ; he had persuaded the Prince to accept against his will ; he had persuaded the King reluc- tantly to keep the negotiations secret from Napoleon ; how- ever others might disguise the truth he knew that they had had to retreat from an untenable position, and retreat before the noisy insults of the French press and the open menace of the French Government." ' Bismarck con- sidered the reverse so great and humiliating that he thought he must in self-respect resign and retire into private life. He was to be saved from this by the folly of the French r ° lly of • , . ; J . . the Duke of ministry, and by his own unscrupulousness. The ministry Gramont. 1 Hendlam, Bismarck, 3'M. 292 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR lias achieved," said Guizot, now a very old man, living in retirement, " the finest diplomatic victory which has been won in my lifetime." This victory was now thrown away. The whole matter was unwisely reopened and rendered far more acute by the French ministry, supported by the Parisian war party, which now made an additional demand, namely, that the King of Prussia should promise that this Hohenzollern candidacy should never be renewed. This demand was presented to William I by Benedetti, July 13th, in Ems. The King refused but with entire courtesy. In the meeting of the French ministers, held on the evening of the 13th, it was not felt that this refusal made war necessary. Meanwhile King William had caused a description of the events of that day (July 13th) to be telegraphed to Bis- marck, who was in Berlin, leaving with him the decision as to whether the facts of the new French demand and his refusal to entertain it be published. Here was Bismarck's op- portunity, which he used ruthlessly and joyously to provoke the French to declare war. The form in which the Ems des- patch was published was intended by him to be " a red flag for the Gallic bull," and certainly fulfilled the intention. The Ems The Ems despatch was not falsified, as has been frequently espa ' asserted, but it was condensed in such a fashion that the negotiations at Ems appeared to have been sharp and dis- courteous and abruptly terminated, whereas they T had been courteous and respectful on both sides. While the text of the Ems despatch was not changed save by excision, the tone of it was greatly and intentionally altered, so that the Prussians thought that their King, the French that their ambassador, had been insulted. The effect of its publication on the 14th was instantaneous anil malign. It aroused the indignation of both countries to fever heat. As if it were not sufficient, the newspapers of both teemed with false, abus- ive, and inflammatory accounts of the events at Ems. The voice of the advocates of peace was drowned in the general clamor. Napoleon did not wish war, but he was very ill, FRANCE DECLARES WAR 293 and was swept from his real convictions by the war party. The war The Empress, it appears, urged it out of hatred of Prussia P arty in Piiris as a Protestant nation, and in the belief that it would strengthen the imperial throne. The ministry went with the current. No one in authority dared brave unpopularity in J '.iris, and consequently war credits were voted amid great excitement on July loth and France entered into the valley of the shadow. Ollivier, head of the French ministry, de- clared that he accepted this war " with a light heart." Thiers, demanding that the Chamber be informed of the con- tents of the despatches which were prompting such perilous action and declaring that having gained " the essential thing we ought not to break because of a mere detail of form — ought not to effect a rupture on a question of touchiness " France was hissed in the Chamber. War was declared by France declares virtually on July 15th, technically on July 19th. Only ten war upon members in the Chamber, among whom were Thiers and Gam- betta, voted against it. Paris resounded with cries, " On to Berlin ! " Victory seemed certain. The Minister of War was confident. The Minister of Foreign Affairs believed that within a few hours the triple alliance for which there had been negotiations for some time would be concluded with Austria and Italy. The war grew directly out of mere diplomatic fencing. The French people did not desire it, only the people of Paris, inflamed by an official press. Indeed, until it was declared, the French people hardly knew of the matter of dispute. It came upon them unexpectedly. The war was made by the responsible heads of two Governments. It was in its origin in no sense national in either country. Its im- mediate occasion was trivial. But it was the cause of a remarkable display of patriotism in both countries. The war upon which the French ministry entered with so light a heart, was destined to prove the most disastrous in the history of their country. In every respect it was _ J m t J t j r German begun under singularly inauspicious circumstances. France states join declared war upon Prussia alone, but in a manner that Prussia. isolated. 894 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR throw the South German states, upon whoso support she had counted, directly into the camp oi' Bismarck. They regarded the French demand, thai the King of Prussia should pledge himself for all time to forbid the Prince of Hoheniollern's candidature, as unnecessary and insulting. At once Bavaria and Baden and Wurtemberg joined the campaign on the side of Prussia. France Not only Prussia therefore but united Germany stood confronting France. Moreover, Bismarck's diplomacy was able to isolate France from the rest o( Europe. Bismarck published a draft of a treaty drawn up some years before, between Prussia and France, but never signed, which pro- vided for the annexation of Belgium to France. France protested, but in vain, that the treaty had boon dictated by Bismarck. This so worked upon English opinion, which has always opposed French extension northwards, that the English Government immediately proclaimed its neutrality. France hail counted upon the ultimate aid of Austria, but Bismarck gained the support of Russia to this extent that Russia threatened to invade Austria if Austria supported France. Italy, too, was neutralized by the fact that she could not safely move alone. Thus at the beginning of the mouth o( August it was clear that France would have no ally. The French military authorities made the serious mistake oi grossly underestimat- ing the difficulty oi the task before them. The Minister of War declared that France was ready, more than ready, that her preparations were more advanced than those of the enemy. The supreme folly oi' such an assertion was im- mediately shown. While the German armies mobilized and advanced toward the frontier with amazing swiftness, order, and ease, in the French army all was confusion. In Prussia everything hat! been for years prepared and orders only had to be taken out of their pigeonholes and dated. In France everything had to be improvised in the midst of unparalleled disorder. Particularly apparent was this in DISORGANIZATION OF THE FRENCH ARMY 295 the case of the reserves. It frequently happened that men The French living in the east of France must cross to the west and get army - their arms and uniform, then recross to the east to join their regiments. Not only was time lost, but the railway system was deranged by the crowds of men traveling to and fro for this purpose. Also the trains, thus crowded with soldiers, were prevented from transporting adequate supplies. The confusion, the lack of preparation, the defects of the military machine were incredible and were apparent from the very first day. Despatches from corps commanders are all in the same strain. " We need everything," wrote Gen- eral de Failly on July I9th. " We are in want of every- thing," telegraphed Bazaine on July 21st. " Everything is completely lacking," announced another a little later. Marshal Lebceuf who, as Minister of War, had declared that everything was ready even to the last button on the last gaiter, soon lost his optimism, and on July 28th tele- graphed that his troops could not advance because they lacked bread. Tents were frequently wanting, or there were tents without tent pins. Pots and kettles, medicines for men and for horses, means of transport, wagons, blankets, were frequently lacking. There were cannon without ammu- nition, horses without harnesses, machine guns without the men who knew how to fire them. Examples might be end- lessly multiplied. More, however, are needless to show the chaos that reigned in the French army. Frequently soldiers and even generals went astray, not able to find their places. " Have arrived at Belfort," telegraphed General Michel on July 21st. " Can't find my brigade ; can't find the general of the Division. What shall I do? Don't know where my regiments are." It has been observed that this document is probably unique in military records. But the French were inferior to the Germans in numbers The numer " also. They could put into the field hardly 300,000 men, feriority of and they had no reserves worth speaking of upon which to the French. 896 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR The Germans Invade France. draw. The Germans could put into the Hold nearly 4)60,000 men, ami had very Large reserves which could be gradually made into new armies. Again, on the French side there was confusion in the direction oi' the forces. The Emperor was very ill, o( the disease of which he died three years later, yet, irresolute and feeble, he was at the outset commander- in-chief. During the first two weeks of the war he made three different arrangements concerning the command of the Army o( the Rhine. The French had dreamed of a swift invasion of Germany. Once in central Germany they thought that the South German8 would rise to their aid, that then Austria and Italy would join, and the march to Berlin would begin. Nothing of the sort occurred. Their officers had maps o( Germany, which they never needed, few o( Prance. The Germans Crossed into Alsace and Lorraine, and between August ()th and September 8nd the French suffered reverse after reverse. On the former day MacMahon was defeated in the battle of Wfirth ami subsidiary engagements. The French fought bravely anil the Germans paid heavily for their success. Nevertheless, it was an unmistakable victory. MacMahon retreated rapidly to the great camp at Ch&lons, east of Paris. West oi' Worth the Germans defeated the French on the same day (August 6th) at Forbach and Spicheren, and drove the army back toward Metz, one of the strongest fortresses in France. The German armies pressed on. en- deavoring to prevent Basaine, now commander of Met/, from retreating and joining MacMahon. This they succeeded in doing in a series of very bloody battles, Borny, to the east of Met/, on August 1 Ft h ; Mars-la-Tours, to the west, on August Kith: ami Gravelotte, also to the west, on August 18th. The result was that Ba/aine, with the principal French army, was bottled up in Metz, surrounded by Germans. The Emperor, now fearing to return to Paris with these defeats undermining his throne, conceived the unwise plan of having MacMahon's army move from Chalons, eastward. THE PALL OF THE SECOND EMPIRE 297 to the relief of Metz. This it attempted hut did not accom- The battle pliah. On September 1st the battle of Sedan was fought, ° with the result that the French were surrounded by the Germans. On the next day, September 2nd, the French army surrendered to the Germans. Napoleon himself was taken prisoner of war. The French lost, on September 1st, about 17,000 in killed and wounded, and 21,000 captured by the enemy. On the 2nd over 81,000 officers and men surrendered and became prisoners of war. Disasters so appalling resounded throughout the world. France no longer had an army ; one had capitulated at Sedan; the other was locked up in Metz. The early defeats of August had been announced in Paris by the Government as victories. The deception could no longer be maintained. On September 3rd this despatch was received from the Emperor : " The army has been defeated and is captive ; I myself am a prisoner." As a prisoner he was no longer head of the government of France; there was, as Thiers said, a "vacancy of power." On Sunday, September 4th, tin Legislative Body was convened. But it had no time to deliberate. The mob invaded the hall shouting, " Down The fall of with the Empire! Long live the Republic!" Gambetta, the Empire - Jules Favre and Jules Perry, followed by the crowd, pro- ceeded to the Hotel de Villc and there proclaimed the Re- public. The Empress flf.rL A Government of National De- fense was organized, with General Trochu at its head, which was the actual government of France during the rest of the war. The Franco-German war lasted about six months, from the first of August 1870, when fighting began, to about the first of February 1871. It falls naturally into two periods, the imperial and the republican. During the first, which was limited to the month of August, the regular armies were, as we have seen, destroyed or bottled up. Then the Empire collapsed and the Emperor was a prisoner in Ger- many. The second period lasted five months. France, under 298 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR The Gov- ernment of National Defense. The fall of Metz. the Government of National Defense, made a remarkably courageous and spirited defense under the most discourag- ing conditions. The new Government of National Defense, thus impro- vised, and representing only a spontaneous movement of opinion, never legally sanctioned, was the government of France till the close of the war. It threw all the blame of the war on Napoleon, and declared itself ready for peace; only it would not consent to a peace involving the violation of the territory of France. " Not an inch of our soil will we cede," said Favre, " not a stone of our fortresses." As Germany intended annexations as a result of her victories, this utterance meant that the war must continue. The Germans, leaving a sufficient army to carry on the siege of Metz, advanced toward Paris. They began the siege of that city on September 19th. This siege, one of the most famous in history, lasted four months, and aston- ished Europe. Immense stores had been collected in the city, the citizens were armed, and the defense was energetic. The Parisians hoped to hold out long enough to enable new armies to be organized, and diplomacy possibly to intervene. To accomplish the former a delegation from the Government of National Defense, headed by Gambetta, escaped from Paris by balloon, and established a branch seat of government first at Tours, then at Bordeaux. Gam- betta, by his immense energy, his eloquence, his patriotism, was able to raise new armies, whose resistance astonished the Germans, but as they had not time to be thoroughly trained, they were unsuccessful. They could not break the immense circle of iron that surrounded Paris. After the overthrow of the Empire the war was reduced to the siege of Paris, and the attempts of these improvised armies to break that siege. These attempts were rendered all the more hopeless by the fall of Metz (October 27, 1870). Six thousand officers and 173,000 men were forced by impending starva- tion to surrender, with hundreds of cannon and immense THE SIEGE OF PARIS 299 war supplies, the greatest capitulation " recorded in the history of civilized nations." A month earlier, on Septem- ber 28th, Strassburg had surrendered, and 19,000 soldiers had become prisoners of war. The capitulation of Metz was particularly disastrous be- cause it made possible the sending of more German armies to reinforce the siege of Paris, and to attack the forces which Gambetta was, by prodigies of effort, creating in the rest of France. These armies could not get to the relief of Paris, nor could the troops within Paris break through to them. The siege became simply a question of endurance. The Germans began the bombardment of the city early The siege in January. Certain sections suffered terribly, and were Pans - ravaged by fires. Famine stared the Parisians in the face. After November 20th there was no more beef or lamb to be had; after December 15th only thirty grammes of horse meat a day per person, which, moreover, cost about two dollars and a half a pound; after January 15th the amount of bread, a wretched stuff, was reduced to 300 grammes. Peo- ple ate anything they could get, dogs, cats, rats. The market price for rats was two francs apiece. By the 31st of January, there would be nothing left to eat. Addi- tional suffering arose from the fact that the winter was one of the coldest on record. Coal and fire wood were ex- hausted. Trees in the Champs Elysees and the Bois de Boulogne were cut down, and fires built in the public squares for the poor. Wine froze in casks. On January 28th, with famine almost upon her, Paris capitulated after an heroic resistance. The armistice of Versailles was concluded which really closed the war. The armistice was designed to permit elections to be Election of held throughout France for an assembly that should pro- a National nounce upon the question of peace. As peace would involve the cession of French territory to the victors, the Government of National Defense felt that the people of France should themselves decide a matter so vital. Elections were accord- 300 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR Thiers chosen Chief of the Execu- tive. Treaty of Frankfort. ingly held on February 8, 1871. The peasants voted over- whelmingly for those favoring peaee. As Gambetta, leader of the Republicans, favored war to the bitter end, they voted largely against the republican candidates. Thus the first Assembly, elected under the Third Republic, was com- posed of a majority of Monarchists, divided into two wings, the Legitimists and the Orleanists, and a minority of Re- publicans. Only a handful of Bonapartists were chosen, so vast was the disgrace now attached to that name. The Assembly met at Bordeaux, February 12th, and, believing that if France continued the war she might ultimately be annihilated, believing that the fundamental necessity of self- preservation demanded an immediate cessation, voted over- whelmingly for peace. The Government of National Defense now laid down its powers, yielding to the National Assembly. This Assembly chose Thiers as " Chief of the Executive Power," and cm- powered him to negotiate with Bismarck for peace. The question of the permanent government of France was post- poned until a more convenient season. Thiers was now the most popular man in France. He had, in July 1870, done his utmost to prevent. France from going to war. He had, during the war, journeyed from one capital of Europe to an- other, London, St. Petersburg, Vienna, Florence, on a futile diplomatic mission, seeking to win foreign support for France. He was over seventy years of age, but was about to render his most valuable services to France. The terms of peace granted by Bismarck were extra- ordinarily severe. They were laid down in the preliminary Peace of Versailles, February 86, 1871. France must pay an indemnity of five thousand million francs ($1,000,- 000,000) within three years. She must cede Alsace and a large part of Lorraine, including the important fortress of Metz. She was to support a German army of occupa- tion, which should be gradually withdrawn as the instal- ments of the war indemnity were paid. After much contro- GERMANY AND ITALY ACHIEVE UNITY 301 versy these preliminaries were embodied in the final Treaty of Frankfort, signed May 10, 1871, and ratified by the Assembly of Bordeaux by 433 votes to 98. Meanwhile other events had occurred as a result of this Fal1 of the war. Italy had completed her unification by seizing the pow ^ *' city of Home, thus terminating the temporal rule of the Pope. The Pope had been supported there by a French garrison. This was withdrawn as a result of the battle of Sedan, and the troops of Victor Emmanuel attacked the Pope's own Completion troops, defeated them after a slight resistance, and entered r ' & unification. Rome on the 20th of September 1870. The unity of Italy was now consummated and Rome became the capital of the Kingdom. A more important consequence of the war was the com- Completion plction of the unification of Germany, and the creation of ° erman 1 ... unification, the present German Empire. Bismarck had desired a war with France as necessary to complete the unity of Germany. Whether necessary or not, at least that end was now secured. After the early German victories, and during the siege of Paris, negotiations were carried on between Prussia and the South German states, looking toward their entrance into the Confederation. In the case of Bavaria and Wurtemberg, states of considerable size, concessions had to be made, pre- serving to them certain powers not retained by the other states. Finally treaties were drawn up and the King of Bavaria, prompted and directed by Bismarck, urged the King of Prussia, in behalf of the princes, to assume the headship of united Germany, and to revive the Empire. Finally on the 18th of January 1871, surrounded by the princes of Germany and by the generals of the army, King William I was proclaimed German Emperor. This memorable ceremony is one of the supreme ironies of history as it occurred in the Hall of Mirrors, in the palace of Versailles, itself a mighty monument and symbol of the power and pride of Louis XIV, a power which 302 THE FRANCO-GERMAN WAR had been secured to some extent by the humiliation of Germany. The war of 1866 had resulted in the expulsion of Austria from Germany and from Italy. The war of 1870 completed the unification of both countries. Berlin became the capital of a federal Empire, Rome of a unified Kingdom. CHAPTER XIV THE GERMAN EMPIRE The Franco-German war completed the unification of Growth of Germany. That unification was, however, no by-product of a war, no astounding improvisation of a genius in politics Germany and diplomacy. The foundations had been laid before, since 1815. and the superstructure had been slowly and painfully built up. Many forces had long been co-operating, as we have seen, and had at last converged toward this triumphant issue. Most effective of all was the passion for nationality, which gave to the nineteenth century such elevation of emotion everywhere. But all these factors might have failed of. re- sults in the domain of politics had it not been for the rise of a forceful and sagacious statesman to a position of vast power in the Prussian state. How he used that power has been shown. The Constitution of the new state was adopted immediately Constitu- after the close of the war with France, and went into force .. _ the new April 16, 1871. In most respects it is simply the Constitu- German tion of the North German Confederation of 1867. The name Empire. Confederation gives way to that of Empire, and the name of Emperor is substituted for that of President. But the Em- pire is a confederation, consisting of twenty-five states, and one imperial territory, Alsace-Lorraine. The King of Prussia is ipso facto German Emperor. The Bundesrath and the Reichstag continue, enlarged by the admission of new members from the new states, but with practically the same powers. The Emperor declares war with the consent of The the Bundesrath ; he makes treaties which, if they concern Em P eror - matters that fall within the sphere of imperial legislation, must be ratified by Parliament. He is head of the army and navy. He is assisted by a Chancellor whom he appoints, and 303 304 THE GERMAN EMPIRE The Bun- ilosruth. The Reichstag. whom he removes, who is not responsible bo the Parliament but to him alone. Under the Chancellor arc various secretaries of state, who simply administer departments, but who do not form a cabinet responsible to Parliament. The Empire is a constitutional monarchy, but not a parliamentary one. Laws aii- made by the Bundesrath and the Reichstag. The Bundesrath consists of delegates appointed by the rulers of the different states. The votes of each state, ranging in number from one to seventeen, are east only as a unit ami that according to the instructions of the state govern- ment. The Reichstag LS the only popular element in the Empire. It consists of 897 members, elected for a term of tive years by the voters, that is, men twenty live years of age Or older. The powers of the Reichstag are inferior to those of most of the other popular chambers of Europe. It neither makes nor unmakes ministries. While it, in Con- junction with the Bundesrath, votes the appropriations, certain ones, notably those for the army, are voted for a period of years. Its consenl is required tor new taxes, whereas taxes previously levied continue to be collected without the consent of Parliament being secured again. The matters on which Parliament iiinv legislate are those eon cerning army, navy, commerce, tariffs, railways, postal BVStem, telegraphs, civil ami criminal law. On matters not within the jurisdiction of the Empire each state legislates as it chooses. 1 The German Empire is unique among federal governments in that it is a confederation of monarchical states, which, in.Mi:uo tun , nm . 0OVlM . , iro yerv unequal in site ami population, ranging states. . • . . from Prussia with a population of 87,000,000, and cover- ing two-thirds of the territory, down to Schaumburg-Lippe, with a population of 15. 000. Three members of the Empire are republics: Liibeelc, Bremen, ami Hamburg. The rest are monarchies. All have constitutions and legislatures, A confed- eration of 1 The constitution is given in Howard, The German Empire, MS-435, and in Poild. Modern Constitutions, l. 395 361. y \ '-W* 7 THE MAN EMPIRE 1910. . ibbreviations I! Brunswick I. Lippt If.A RfiuU c///< ■/■/«/<■ l.'l /'<■« .-. younger l.p>? S A .Wi.ii ■lllinliiiril SI I! .J FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC Significance nificance. Party and personal ambitions and interests of the sought to use it for purposes of their own, and thus the question of legal right and wrong was woefully distorted and obscured. The Anti-Semites used it to inflame the people against the Jews. They won the support of the Clericals, ingeniously suggesting that the so-called anti- religious legislation of the Third Republic, particularly that establishing secular education, was really the work of the Jews, influencing politicians by their money, and that the Jews were now getting control of the army, and that Dreyfus himself showed how they would use it for traitorous purposes. Further, reactionaries of all kinds joined the anti-Dreyfus party : Monarchists, anxious to discredit the Republic, that thus they might profit ; so-called Nationalists, anxious to change the government along the lines of Boulan- gism and to adopt a vigorous foreign policy. On the other hand, there rallied to the defense of Dreyfus those who believed in his innocence, those who denounced the hatred of a race as a relic of barbarism, those who believed that the military should be subordinate to the civil authority and should not regard itself above the law, as these army officers were doing; all who believed that the whole opposition was merely conducting an insidious, covert, dangerous attack upon the Republic, and all who believed that clerical influence should be kept out of politics. THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE Formation One result of the Drej'fus agitation was the creation in of the j.j ie c] iamDcr f Deputies of a strong coalition, called the « Bloc." . " Bloc," which consisted of the Radical Republican and Socialist parties. This coalition has, in the main, sub- sisted ever since, and has controlled the government. Its first conspicuous head was Waldeck-Rousseau, a leader of the Parisian bar, a former follower of Gambetta. In October 1900, Waldeck-Rousseau, then prime minister, made a speech at Toulouse which resounded throughout France. GROWTH OF THE RELIGIOUS ORDERS 365 and which foreshadowed a policy which has filled the recent history of France. The real peril confronting France, he Question said, arose from the growing power of religious orders — ° * 11 ? orders of monks and nuns. " In this country, whose moral unity has for centuries constituted its strength and great- ness, two classes of young people are growing up ignorant of each other until the day when they meet, so unlike as to risk not comprehending one another. Such a fact is explained only by the existence of a power which is no longer even occult, and by the constitution in the state of a rival power." By which was meant that the youth of France were growing up, divided into" two classes, whose outlook upon life, whose mental processes, whose opinions concerning pol- itics and morals were so widely at variance that the moral unity of the nation was destroyed. And the cause of this was the astonishing and dangerous growth in recent years of religious orders or Congregations, whose influence upon a considerable and increasing section of the young was highly harmful. Here was a power that was a rival of the State. Waldeck-Rousseau pointed out that these orders, not author- ized under the laws of France, were growing rapidly in wealth Growth of and numbers; that between 1877 and 1900 the number G f religious • e • orders, nuns had increased from 14,000 to 75,000 in orders not authorized; that the monks numbered about 190,000; that their property, held in mainmorte, estimated at about 50,- 000,000 francs in the middle of the century, had risen to 700,000,000 in 1880, and was more than a billion francs in 1900. This vast absorption of wealth, thus withdrawn from circulation, was an economic danger of the first im- portance. But the most serious feature was the activity of these orders in teaching and preaching. Waldeck-Rousseau believed that the education they gave was permeated with a spirit of hostility to the Republic; that the traditional hostility of the Roman Catholic Church to liberty was in- culcated ; that this Roman spirit was a menace in a country that believed in liberty ; that it constituted a political danger 366 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC The Law of Associa- tions. Religious orders for- bidden to engage in teaching. to the State which Parliament must face; that to preserve the Republic defensive measures must be taken. Holding this opinion, the Waldeck-Rousseau ministry secured the passage, July 1, 1901, of the Law of Associations, which provided, among other things, that no religious orders should exist in France without definite authorization in each case from Parliament. It was the belief of the authors of this bill that the Roman Catholic Church was the enemy of the Republic, that it was using its every agency against the Republic, that it had latterly supported the anti-Dreyfus party in its attempt to discredit the institutions of France, as it had done formerly under MacMahon. Gambetta had, at that time, declared that tin- enemy was the clerical party. " Clerical- ism," said M, Combes, who succeeded Waldeck-Rousseau in 190.^, " is, in fact, to be found at the bottom of every agitation and every intrigue from which Republican France has suffered during the last thirty-five years." Animated with this feeling the Associations Law was en- forced with rigor in 1902 and 1903. Many orders refused to ask for authorization from Parliament; many which asked were refused. Tens of thousands of monks and nuns were forced to leave their institutions, which were closed. By a law of 1901 it was provided that all teaching by religious orders, even by those authorized, should cease within ten years. The State was to have a monopoly of the education of the young, in the interest of the ideals of liberalism it represented. Combes, upon whom fell the execution of this law, suppressed about five hundred teaching, preaching, and commercial orders. This policy was vehemently denounced by Catholics as persecution, as an infringement upon liberty, the liberty to teach, the liberty of parents to have theifr children edu- cated in denominational schools if they preferred. This, as events were to prove, was only preliminary to a far greater religious struggle which ended in the com- plete separation of Church and State, the disestablishment of the former, the laicization of the latter. THE CONCORDAT OF 1801 367 The relations of the Roman Catholic Church and the State The down to 1905 were determined by the Concordat, concluded Concor at . of 1801. between Napoleon I and Pius VII in 1801, and put into force in 1802. The Concordat provided that the archbishops and bishops should be appointed by the State with the consent of the Pope; that the bishops should appoint the priests, but only with the consent of the Government ; that the State should pay the salaries of the clergy, both priests and bishops, who thus became a part of the administrative system of the country. Ecclesiastical property, cathedrals, parish churches, residences of bishops and priests, and seminary buildings had all been declared the property of the nation in 1789, and still remained such, but these buildings were to be placed at the disposal of the clergy. Thus the Church was harnessed to the State, which had extensive powers over it. This system remained undisturbed throughout the nine- teenth century, under the various regimes, but with the advent of the Third Republic serious friction began to de- velop. The Republicans believed in the thorough seculari- zation of the State, and they were resolved that the clergy should not use their power over men's minds and consciences in opposition to the acts or principles of the Republic. In their determination to abolish ecclesiastical influence in the State, many measures were passed, between 1881 and 1903 ; schools were made undenominational, no clergyman Anti- might teach in them, no religious exercises might be conducted in them ; prayers at the sessions of Parliament were abol- ished; hospitals were made secular; divorce, which had been abolished in 1814, was restored, and, as just described, the religious orders were brought into subjection to the State, and, indeed, largely dispersed. These acts were partly the reply of the Republicans to the anti-republican activity of the ecclesiastics which ran through the whole thirty years, partly the cause of that activity. The clergy were not friendly to the Republic, from which they drew their salaries. 368 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC The clergy in the Dreyfus affair. The abrogation of the Concordat. This is unquestionable. The Pope himself recognized it when, in 1893, he urged the clergy to accept the Republic as their lawful government. Many Republicans were not only intent upon maintaining the Republic, but were anxious to undermine religion, considering it an obstacle in the way of progress, of civilization. But many who were not opposed to religion believed that religion did not concern the State, but was a private matter. They held that the State had no right to tax people for the support of a Church in which many had no belief or interest; that the State had no right to favor one denomination over another or over all others ; that it must, in justice to all its citizens, be purely secular, entirely neutral toward all creeds and churches. There was ceaseless friction, then, for thirty years between Church and State. The opposition of the Republicans was augmented by the activity of the clergy in the Dreyfus affair. Diplomatic incidents, in themselves of comparatively slight importance, brought matters to a head. In April 190-i the President of France, Loubet, went to Rome to render a visit to Victor Emmanuel III, a " usurper " in the eyes of the Pope. The latter protested to the Catholic powers of Europe against what he called " a grave offense to the Sovereign Pontiff." The French in turn resented what they regarded as an impertinent interference with their conduct of their foreign relations. Other disturbing in- cidents followed. These incidents did not cause the rupture ; the} 7 merely furnished the occasion. Ever since June 1903, a parliamentary committee had been studying the problem and trying to draft a measure of separation of Church and State. A law was finally passed, December 9, 1905, which abrogated the Concordat of 1801. The State was henceforth not to pay the salaries of the clergy ; on the other hand, it relinquished all rights over their appointment. It undertook to pay pensions to clergy- men who had served many years, and were already well ad- vanced in age ; also to pay certain amounts to those who had THE ASSOCIATIONS OF WORSHIP 369 been in the priesthood for a few years only. In regard to the property, which, since 1789, had been vested in the nation, the cathedrals, churches, chapels, it was provided that these should still be at the free disposal of the Roman Catholic Church, but that they should be held and managed by so-called "Associations of Worship" (associations Associa- cultuelles), which were to vary in size according to the Ions ° population of the community. The law contained many provisions designed to prevent these associations from amassing more than a given small amount of wealth by legacies, gifts, or otherwise; and to prevent the clergy, now cut off from all official connection with the State, from using their influence against the Re- public. The Church must not become too powerful. It was stated that the property thus to be left in the hands of the associations amounted to over a hundred million dollars. The disestablished Church would not have to make this enormous expenditure for the construction of new places of worship. A year was given for the making of the necessary arrangements. 1 This law was not universally condemned by the Catholics of France. Many believed that the Church should adapt itself to it, at least provisionally. Seventy-four bishops decided to give it a trial if a certain alteration could be made in the character of the Associations of Worship. It is probable that this change would have been conceded Opposition by the Government, but this was not to be tested, for Pope Pius X condemned the law of 1905 unreservedly. He de- clared that the fundamental principle of separation of Church and State is " an absolutely false thesis, a very pernicious error." He denounced the Associations of Worship as giving the administrative control, not " to the divinely instituted 1 The Separation Law applied also to Protestant and Jewish churches, separating them from all connection with the State, discontinuing pay- ment by the State of the salaries of their clergymen. These sects were in favor of the law. 870 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC law of Jan. 2, 1907. Separation of Church and State. hierarchy, but to an association of laymen," and declared that this was a violation of the principle on which rested the Church which " was founded by Jesus Christ." The Pope's decision was final and decisive for all Catholics. It was based on fundamentals. No change in details could alter it. The bishops who had been willing to try the new law acquiesced in its condemnation. What would Parlia- ment do about it? The year was running out. Would the churches be closed? If so, would not France be drawn into a lamentable religious war, the outcome of which no one could foretell? The Government was determined to avoid that contingency. The Minister of Public Worship, Briand, decided to apply to the situation a law passed in 1881 regu- lating the holding of public meetings. Designed for secular meetings, there was nothing to prevent its being applied to religious. It was therefore announced that priests might make use of the churches after merely filing the usual appli- cation, which should cover a whole year. This compromise also was rejected by the Pope. Parliament therefore passed a new law, promulgated January 2, 1907. By it most of the privileges guaranteed the Roman Catholic Church by the Law of 1905 were abro- gated. The critical point was the keeping of the churches open for public worship. It was provided that their use should be gratuitous, and should be regulated by contracts between the priests and the prefects or mayors. These contracts would safeguard the civil ownership of the build- ings, but worship would go on in them as before. This system appears to be gradually gaining lodgment in the life of France. The result of this series of events and measures is this. Church and State are definitively separated. The people have apparently approved in recent elections the policy followed by their Government. Bishops and priests no longer receive salaries from the State. On the other hand they have liber- ties which they did not enjoy under the Concordat, such as SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE 371 rights of assembly and freedom from governmental par- ticipation in appointments. The faithful must henceforth support their priests, and bear the expenses of the Church. Whether private contributions will prove sufficient remains to be seen. The churches have been left them by this prac- tical but irrational device. Other ecclesiastical buildings, such as the palaces of bishops, the rectories of priests, and the edifices of theological seminaries, have been taken from ecclesiastical control, and are now used for educational or charitable purposes, or as government offices. The former palace of the Archbishop of Paris is at present occupied by the Minister of Labor. The famous seminary of St. Sulpice is now used in connection with the Luxembourg Museum. 1 ACQUISITION OF COLONIES IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY France, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, had The Freil ck possessed an extensive colonial empire. This she had lost to . England as a result of the wars of the reign of Louis XV, the Revolution, and the Napoleonic period, and in 1815 her possessions had shrunk to a few small points, Guadaloupe and Martinique in the West Indies, St. Pierre and Miquelon, off Newfoundland, five towns on the coasts of India, of which Pondicherry was the best known, Bourbon, now called Reunion, an island in the Indian Ocean, Guiana in South America, which had few inhabitants, and Senegal in Africa. These were simply melancholy souvenirs of her once proud past, rags and tatters of a once imposing empire. In the nineteenth century she was destined to begin again, and to create an empire of vast geographical extent, only second in importance to that of Great Britain, though vastly 1 See the admirable and detailed article by Professor Othon Guerlac in Political Science Quarterly, June 1908, entitled, " Church and State in France." The best and fullest account of this subject is to be found in Debidour, L'^glise catholique et l'£tat sous la troisieme r6publique Vol. II, 231-498. Most of the important documents are appended. ;: PRANCE UNDER TDK THIRD REPUBLIC inferior to that. The interest in conquests revived but slowly at tor L81& France had conquered so much in Europe from 1 7 i>'J to 181$ on'v to lose it as she had lost her colonies, that conquest in any form seemed but a futile and costly display oi misdirected enterprise. Nevertheless, in time the process began anew, and each oi the various regimes which have suc- ceeded one another since 1811! has contributed to the build- ing of the now empire. Algeria. The beginning was made in Algeria, on the northern coast \ . directly opposite Prance, and reached now in less than twenty-four hours from Marseilles. Algeria was nom- inally a part of the Turkish Empire, but the power o( the Sultan was insignificant. A native Dey was the real ruler. The population consisted oi Arabs, a nomadic ami pastoral people, descendants oi the Arabian conquerors oi the sev- enth century, and oi Berbers, an agricultural people, de- scendants of the natives who, more than twenty centuries before, hail fought the Carthaginians. All the people were Mohammedans. The capital was an important town, Algiers. Down to the opening of the nineteenth century Algeria. Tunis, ami Tripoli, nominally parts oi the Ottoman Empire, were in reality independent, ami constituted the Barbary States, whose main business was piracy. But Europe \^as no longer disposed to see her wealth seized and her citizens enslaved until she paid their ransom. In 1816 an English Meet bombarded Algiers, released no less than 3,000 Chris- tian captives, ami destroyed piracy. The French conquest oi Algeria grew out of a dispute concerning a loan made by the Dey to the Directory in 1797. This dispute ended in insults by the Dey to France, with the result that in 1890 the latter power sent a fleet oi a hundred ships, and rive hundred transports across the Mediterranean, and seized the capital. France hail not in- tended the conquest oi the whole country, only the punish- ment oi an insolent Dey, but attacks being made upon her from time to time, which she felt she must crush, she was ACQUISITION OF COLONI] 378 led on, step by step, until ihe had everywhere established her power. All through the reign of Louis Philippe this proa going on. Its chief feature iras an intermittent struggle of fourteen yean irith a native \>i>.<\y 1870, France bad staked out an empire of about 700,000 square kilometers, containing a population of about six million. Under the pr< lent Republic the work of expansion and Expansion fou ulidaf.ion has been carried much further than under all TMvA of the preceding regimes. There have been extensive annex- Eepubiic. ations in northern Africa, western Africa, the Indian Ocean, and in Indo-China. In northern Africa, Tunis has passed under the control of Prance. Tin's was one of the Barbary states, and was 374 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC nominally a part of the Turkish Empire, with a Bey as sovereign. After establishing herself in Algeria, France desired to extend her influence eastward, over this neigh- boring state. But Italy, now united, began about 1870 to entertain a similar ambition. France, therefore, under the ministry of Jules Ferry, an ardent believer in colonial expansion, sent troops into Tunis in 1881, which forced the Bey to accept a French protectorate over his state. The French have not annexed Tunis formally, but they control it absolutely through a Resident at the court of the Bey, whose advice the latter is practically obliged to follow. Western In western Africa, France has made extensive annexa- Afnca. tions in the Senegal, Guinea, Dahomey, the Ivory coast, and the region of the Niger, and north of the Congo. By occupying the oases in the Sahara she has established her claims to that vast but hitherto unproductive area. This process has covered many years of the present Republic. The result is the existence of French authority over most of northwest Africa, from Algeria on the Mediterranean, to the Congo river. This region south of Algeria is called the French Soudan, and comprises an area seven or eight times as large as France, with a population of some fourteen millions, mainly blacks. There is some discussion of a Trans- Saharan railroad to bind these African possessions more closely together. In Asia, the Republic has imposed her protectorate over the kingdom of Annam (1883) and has annexed Tonkin, taken from China after considerable fighting (1885). In Madagascar, the Indian Ocean, she has conquered Madagascar, an island larger than France herself, with a population of two and a half million. A protectorate was imposed upon that country in 1895, after ten years of disturbance, but after quelling a rebellion that broke out the following year, the protectorate was abolished, and the island was made a French colony. Thus, at the opening of the twentieth century, the empire EXTENT OF FRENCH COLONIAL EMPIRE 375 of France is eleven times larger than France itself, has an area of six million square kilometers, and a population of about fifty millions, and a rapidly growing commerce. Most of this empire is located in the tropics, and is ill adapted to the settlement of Europeans. Algeria and Tunis, however, offer conditions favorable for such settlements. They con- stitute the most valuable French possessions. CHAPTER XVI THE KINGDOM OF ITALY The Kingdom of Italy, as we have seen, was established in 1859 and 1860. Venetia was acquired in 1866, and Rome in 1870. In these cases, as in the preceding, the people were allowed to express their wishes by a vote, which, in both instances, was nearly unanimous in favor of the annexa- tion ; in the former case by about 647,000 votes to 60 ; in the latter by about 130,000 to 1,500. Difficulties The new kingdom had to face problems of the gravest confronting anc j mos t varied character, problems which the struggle the new kingdom. ^ or un fty, so absorbing, had obscured, but which now ap- peared in all their saliency. Political unity had been gained, but not moral unity. " We have united Italy," said D'Azeglio in 1861, " now let us unite Italians," by which was meant that peoples differing in their historical evolution, in their institutions, in their economic life, in their tempera- ments, and which had for centuries regarded each other with indifference or animosity, must be made to feel that they were one. These peoples had never been united since the fall of Home, and Venetians, Sicilians, Tuscans, Romans, Pied- montese, differed profoundly. The contrast was sharpest between the north and the south. They were like two differ- ent countries. " To harmonize north and south," said Cavour, " is harder than fighting with Austria or struggling with Rome." A fusion of such dissimilar elements could only be slowly achieved, and must be the result of many forces. But it must imperatively be the first object of Italian statesmen to create a common patriotism, and mutual interests. 376 DIVERSE ELEMENTS IN THE KINGDOM 377 Since 1815 there had been several states, each with its own government, its own diplomatic corps, its own courts, system of taxation, its own tariff', and coinage. This variety could not be preserved in the new kingdom, which was not a federal state, like Germany, but a single government, unitary. Only one section had had training in parliamentary govern- tnent, Piedmont, and that only since 1848. The others had Piedmont been under despotisms, severe as in Naples, enlightened as in alone 3,c customed. Tuscany. Piedmont had accomplished the great work of . constitu- unification, yet it was not, like Prussia, larger than all tional gov- tiie other states combined, but was a mere fraction of four eminent. or five millions out of twenty-two or more. It could not, therefore, impose its will upon the others as Prussia could upon Germany. Could elements so dissimilar, men so little likely to understand each other's poiat of view, so little dominated by the same ideals, work together effectively? Might they not tear down the whole edifice, the mere shell of which had been so painfully erected? Now that Italy was united, it must be thoroughly transformed that it might continue. " Unify to improve," said Cavour, " improve to consolidate." A work of organization, so vast and varied, would need, not years, but generations. In 1870, after the fall of Rome, Victor Emmanuel showed that he understood the situation. " Italy is united and free ; it remains for us henceforth to make her great and happy." This was the programme of the Government. This work, begun in 1861, has continued ever since, marked by notable achievements, by distressing failures, but, on the whole, by distinct and great progress. Only certain features of the later story can be indicated here. The work of construction was undertaken earnestly. In 1861 the Constitution of Piedmont was adopted, with slight variations, as the Constitution of Italy. There was to be a Tne Con_ parliament of two chambers, a Senate and a Chamber of Deputies. The suffrage for the latter was to be the same as it had been for the Lower House in Piedmont. The full 378 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY parliamentary system was introduced, ministers representing the will of the Lower Chamber and controlled by it, legisla- tion enacted by the two Houses. The first capital was Turin, then Florence in 1865, and finally Rome since 1871. The kingdom was divided for administrative purposes into fifty- nine districts, resembling the French departments, which were increased to sixty-nine after the annexation of Venetia and Rome. This broke up the old provincial lines, centralized the state, by giving the appointment of all prefects and mayors of cities to the national government, tended to destroy the spirit of local individuality, and to exalt Italy and Italian patriotism. The The most perplexing question confronting the new king- question d om concerned its relations to the Papacy. The Italian Kingdom had seized, by violence, the city of Rome, over which the Popes had ruled in uncontested right for a thousand years. Rome had this peculiarity over all other cities, that it was the capital of Catholics the world over. Any attempt to expel the Pope from the city or to subject him to the House of Savoy would everywhere arouse the faith- ful, already clamorous, and might cause an intervention in behalf of the restoration of the temporal power. There were henceforth to be two sovereigns, one temporal, one spiritual, within the same city. The situation was absolutely 1 unique and extremely delicate. It was considered necessary to determine their relations before the government was trans- ferred to Rome. It was impossible to reach any agreement with the Pope, as he refused to recognize the Kingdom of Italy, but spoke of Victor Emmanuel simply as the King of Sardinia, and would make no concessions in regard to his own The law of rights in Rome. Parliament, therefore, passed in Florence, Papal Guar- May 13, 1871, the Law of Papal Guarantees, a remarkable tin tecs act defining the relations of Church and State in Italy. The object of this law was to carry out Cavour's prin- ciple of a " free Church in a free State," to reassure Catholics that the new kingdom had no intention of controlling in THE LAW OF PAPAL GUARANTEES 379 any way the spiritual activities of the Pope, though taking from him his temporal powers. Catholics must feel that the Pope was no creature of the Italian government, but had entire liberty of action in governing the Church. Conse- quently his person is declared sacred and inviolable. Any attacks upon him are, by this law, to be punished exactly as are similar attacks upon the King. He has his own diplo- matic corps, and receives diplomatic representatives from other countries. He has his court, the Curia Romana, as the The Curia King has his. That he may communicate with the outside E- 01113 ^ 3 " world directly, and not through agencies controlled by the Kingdom, he has his own independent postal and telegraph service. Certain places are set apart as entirely under his sovereignty : the Vatican, the Lateran, Castel Gan- dolfo, and their gardens. Here no Italian official may en- ter, in his official capacity, for Italian law and admin- istration stop outside these limits. A similar exemption holds wherever a conclave or a church council is held. In return for the income lost with the temporal power, the Pope is granted 3,225,000 francs a year by the Italian Kingdom. This law has been faithfully observed by the Italian government. But neither Pius IX, nor Leo XIII, nor Pius X has been willing to accept it. The Pope considers himself the " prisoner of the Vatican," and since 1870 has not Tne ii prisoner left it to go into the streets of Rome, as he would thereby be . .. tacitly recognizing the existence of another ruler there, the Vatican." " usurper." The Pope has never accepted the annuity. He has even forbidden Catholics to vote in national elections, or to accept national offices, as that would be a recognition that an Italian nation exists. They may vote in municipal elections. Municipalities existed long before the Kingdom. The Pope has never recognized the existence of the king- dom, and the solution of the question of the relations of the Church and the State seems as remote as ever. The state- ment of Victor Emmanuel on entering the city as sovereign, July 2, 1871, still describes the situation. " Yes, we are 380 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Death of Victor Em- manuel II. The edu- cational problem. in Koine, and we shall remain."' The Italian Government has never feared the Pope, but it did for several years fear an intervention of Catholic powers, a danger which, with the lapse of time, has practically disappeared. Another difficult problem for the Kingdom was its financial status. The debts of the different states were assumed by it and were large. The nation was also obliged to make large expenditures on the army and the navy, on fortifications, and on public works, particularly on the building of rail- ways, which were essential to the economic prosperity of the country as well as conducive to the strengthening of the sense of common nationality. There were, for several years, large annual deficits, necessitating new loans, which, of course, augmented the public debt. Heroically did suc- cessive ministers seek to make both ends meet, not shrinking from new and unpopular taxes, or from the seizure and sale of monastic lands. Success was finally achieved, and in 1879 the receipts exceeded the expenditures. In 1878 Victor Emmanuel II died and was buried in the Pantheon, one of the few ancient buildings of Rome. Over his tomb is the inscription, " To the Father of his Country." He was succeeded by his son Humbert I, then thirty-four years of age. A month later Pius IX died, and was suc- ceeded by Leo XIII, at the time of his election sixty-eight years of age. But nothing was changed by this change of personalities. Each maintained the s} T stem of his predecessor. Leo XIII, Pope from 1878 to 1903, following the precedent set by Pius IX, never recognized the Kingdom of Italy, nor did he ever leave the Vatican. He, too, considered himself a prisoner of the " robber king." Another urgent problem confronting the new kingdom was that of the education of its citizens. This was most imperative if the masses of the people were to be fitted for the freer and more responsible life opened by the political revolution. The preceding governments had grossly neg- lected this duty. In 1861 over seventy-five per cent, of EDUCATIONAL REFORMS 381 the population of the Kingdom were illiterate. In Naples and Sicily, the most backward in development of all the sections of Italy, the number of illiterates exceeded ninety per cent, of the population ; and in Piedmont and Lom- bardy, the most advanced sections, one-third of the men and more than half of the women could neither read nor write. " Without national education there exists morally no nation," Mazzini had said. " The national conscience cannot be awakened except by its aid. Without national education, common to all citizens, the equality of civic duties and rights is an empty formula." In 1877 a compulsory education law was passed. This was extended by a new law passed in 1904. But as the support of primary schools rests with the communes, and as, in many cases, they have evaded their responsibility, the system of universal education has not been established in practice. Italy has done much during the last thirty years, but much remains to be done. Illiteracy, though diminish- ing, is still widely prevalent. Recent statistics show that forty per cent, of the recruits in the army are illiterate. Satisfactory results will probably not be obtained until the Government itself assumes the support and direction of the schools instead of leaving them in the hands of the local authorities. In 1882 an electoral reform, which had long been dis- Extension cussed, was passed. Hitherto the suffrage had been lim- ° „ 1 to suffrage. ited to property-holders twenty-five years of age and older, paying an annual tax of at least forty lire. Under this system less than two and a half per cent, of the population possessed the right to vote. So widespread was illiteracy that it was not considered wise to proclaim universal suffrage. The property qualification was now reduced from forty lire to nineteen lire eighty centesimi, and the age quali- fication was lowered to twenty-one, and an additional method of securing the franchise was also established, namely an educational qualification. All men of twenty-one who have THE KINGDOM OF ITALY The Triple Alliance. Francesco Crispi. Ambitious military and colonial policy. had a primary school education were given the franchise. This reform more than tripled the number of voters at once, from 627,838 to 2,049,461. Of these about two- thirds secured the right through meeting the educational qualification. While, therefore, the suffrage is not universal it tends to become so with the spread of elementary education. This period of internal reforms was interrupted by foreign politics. In 1882 Italy entered the alliance with Germany and Austria. The reasons were various : pique at France, dread of intervention in behalf of the Pope, and a desire to appear as one of the great powers of Europe. The result was that she was forced to spend larger sums upon her army, remodeled along Prussian lines, and her navy, thus disturbing her finances once more. Italy now embarked upon another expensive and hazard- ous enterprise, the acquisition of colonies, influenced in this direction by the prevalent fashion, and by a desire to rank among the world powers. Shut out of Tunis, her natural field, by France, she, in 1885, seized positions on the Red Sea, particularly the port of Massawa. Two years later she consequently found herself at war with Abyssinia. The minister who had inaugurated this movement, Depretis, died in 1887. He was succeeded by Crispi, one of the few striking personalities Italian politics have produced since the time of Cavour. Crispi threw himself heartily into the colonial scheme, extended the claims of Italy in East Africa, and tried to play off one native leader against another. To the new colony he gave the name of Eritrea. At the same time an Italian protectorate was established over a region in eastern Africa called Somaliland. But all this involved long and expensive campaigns against the natives. Italy was trying to play the role of a great power when her resources did not warrant it. The consequence of this aggressive and ambitious military, naval, and colonial policy was the creation again of a deficit in the state's finances, which increased alarmingly. The deficits of four years, COLONIAL POLICY ending January 1, 1891, amounted to the enormous sum of over seventy-five million dollars. To meet the situation new taxes had to be imposed upon a people already heavily over- burdened. The reaction of this upon internal politics was disastrous. The resultant economic distress expressed itself The in deep dissatisfaction with the monarchy, and in the growth resultant distress of republican and socialistic parties. Riots broke out in 1889 in Turin, Milan, Rome, and in the southern province of Apulia. Crispi adopted a policy of stern repression, which Policy of restored quiet on the surface, but left a widespread feeling re P ression ' of rancor behind. He fell from office in 1891, but, his suc- cessor being unable to imp'rove the financial situation and the internal conditions of the country, he came back into power in 1893 and ruled practically as a dictator until 1896. His policy was the same as before, vigorous repression of all opposition to the existing system. He made no attempt to remove the causes of discontent. But Crispi only gave fuller range to his excessive ambi- tions in the colonial field. Extending the field of occupation in East Africa he aroused the bitter opposition of Menelek, War with ruler of Abyssinia. The result was disastrous. The Italian Abyssinia, army of 14,000 under Baratieri, was overwhelmed in 1896 by Menelek with 80,000, no less than 6,000 of the Italian troops perishing. This crushing defeat sealed the doom of Crispi, who immediately resigned. The Marquis di Rudini became prime minister and attempted a policy of pacifica- tion. Italy renounced her extreme claims, restricted her colonial area, and secured the release of the soldiers who were prisoners of war in the hands of Menelek. The re- pressive policy at home was abandoned, and an attempt was made to investigate the causes of discontent. But this policy was suddenly cut short by formidable and sanguinary riots that broke out in various parts of Italy in May 1898. The movement was general, though most bloody in Milan. Its cause was the wretchedness of the people, which in turn was largely occasioned by the heavy taxation resulting from tion of Humbert I. 884 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY these unwise attempts to play an international role hope- lessly out of proportion to the country's resources. In the south and center the movement took the form of M bread riots," but in the north it was distinctly revolutionary. M Down with the dynasty," was a cry heard there. All these movements were suppressed by the Government, but only after much bloodshed. They indicated widespread distress and dissatisfaction with existing conditions. Assassina- J n July 1900, King Humbert was assassinated by an Italian anarchist who went to Italy for that purpose from Paterson, New Jersey. Humbert was succeeded by his son Victor Emmanuel III, then in his thirty-first year. Victor Em- 'p] ie new King had been carefully educated and soon ' showed that he was a man of intelligence, of energy, and of firmness of will. He won the favor of his subjeets by the simplicity of his mode of life, by his evident sense of duty, and by his sincere interest in the welfare of the people, shown in many spontaneous and unconventional ways. He became forthwith a more decisive factor in the government than his father had been. He was a democratic monarch, in- different to display, laborious, vigorous. The opening decade of the twentieth century was characterized by a new spirit which, in a way, reflected the buoyancy, and hopefulness, and courage of the young King. But. the causes of the new optimism were deeper than the mere change of rulers and lay in the growing prosperity of the nation, a prosperity, which, despite appearances, had been for some years pre- paring and which was now witnessed on all sides. The worst was evidently over. The national finances were being con- servatively managed. Since 1S97 the receipts have con- stantly been larger than the expenses. Between 1901 and 1907 the surpluses were successively thirty-two, sixty-nine, thirty-three, forty-seven, sixty-three, and one hundred and one, million lire. This situation, so highly creditable, was brought about by strict economy and by heavy taxation. The market price of the five per cent, bonds, which had fallen INDUSTRIAL EXPANSION 385 as low as seventy-two in 1894, rose to par and above par. A beginning was also made in the imperative work of reducing taxes and of shifting somewhat their incidence, which was grossly unjust to the poorer classes. These facts were full of encouragement, but they repre- Industrial sented an effect as well as a cause. Behind a flourishing expansion, budget stood an expanding economic activity. Italy was becoming an industrial nation. This is the vital fact in the situation to-day. Metallurgy has made such progress in recent years that in the two lines of naval and railway construction Italy is no longer dependent upon foreign countries. The development of these two industries has given a powerful impulse to activity in other directions. The silk and cotton and chemical manufactures have rapidly ad- vanced. The merchant marine has greatly increased. More remarkable than the progress made in the last twenty years, and more engaging the public attention, is the progress that seems destined in the future, and for this reason : industry depended, up to the close of the nineteenth century, upon steam and steam depends upon coal. Italy is at a great disadvantage compared with other countries because she lacks the two indispensable elements — coal and iron — which she is therefore obliged to import. This is a tremendous handi- cap. But the last two decades of the century revealed to the world the possibility of the use of electricity as a source of energy for industrial pursuits. From electricity, " white coal," as it is sometimes called, Italy expects her transforma- Advent of tion into a great industrial power for, while Nature has re- fused her coal, she has given her immense water power in the streams which flow rapidly from the Alps and Apennines. It has been estimated that the amount of energy she can draw from this source will be from three to five million horse- power. The motive power used in the manufacturing estab- lishments of the United States in 1900 was, according to the census report, eleven million, three hundred thousand horse-power. It is appropriate that the land of Volta and 386 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Increase of the population. Problem of emigration. Galvani should see her future in the new agency which is already profoundly altering the conditions of modern in- dustry and which her mountain streams will furnish her so abundantly. This transformation into a great industrial state is not only possible but is necessary, owing to her rapidly increasing population, which has grown, since 1870, from about 25,- 000,000 to nearly 35,000,000. The birth rate is higher than that of any other country of Europe. But during the same period the emigration from Italy has been large and has steadily increased. Official statistics show that, between 1876 and 1905, over eight million persons emigrated, of whom over four million went to various South American countries, especially Argentina, and to the United States. Perhaps half of the total number have returned to their native land, for much of the emigration is of a temporary character. Emigration has increased greatly under the present reign, while the economic conditions of the country have begun to show improvement. This is explained by the fact that the industrial revival described above has not yet affected southern Italy and Sicily, whence the large proportion of the emigrants come. From those parts which have experi- enced that revival the emigration is not large. Only by an extensive growth of industries can this emigration be stopped or at least rendered normal. Italy finds herself in the posi- tion in which Germany was for many years, losing hundreds of thousands of her citizens each year. With the expansion of German industries the outgoing stream grew less until, in 1908, it practically ceased, owing to the fact that her mines and factories had so far developed as to give employ- ment to all. Though the conditions of Italian life present many grave problems, yet it is clear that the prosperity of the country is increasing. Discontent is not as widespread or a^ clam- orous as at the close of the nineteenth century. Even the enormous emigration is not evidence exclusively of poverty, THE PRESENT SITUATION 387 but is, to some extent, due to the ease and cheapness of our present means of communication, and bears witness to the difference between Italian wages and foreign wages, to the fact that the labor market to-day is mobile, is, in fact, a world market. Victor Emmanuel III, by associating himself Italia actively with all works of national betterment, has strength- ened the hold of the monarchy upon the people. The repub- lican agitation appears moribund. And the governing classes of the state have profited by their mistakes, and have learned the truth of Cavour's assertion — that the first attribute of a statesman is " tact to discern the possible." CHAPTER XVII AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 AUSTRIA TO THE COMPROMISE OF 1867 Austria's Austria, perilously near dissolution in 1848, torn by punis me revolutions in Bohemia, Hungary, the Lombardo-Venetian of Hungary. _ m b J ' kingdom, and its influence in Germany temporarily para- lyzed, had emerged triumphant from the storm, and by 1850 was in a position to impose her will once more upon her motley group of states. She learned no lesson from the fearful crisis just traversed, but at once entered upon a course of reaction of the old familiar kind. Absolutism was everywhere restored. Italy was ruled with an iron hand, Prussia was humiliated in a most emphatic manner at Olmutz, the German Confederation was restored, and Austrian primacy in it conspicuously reaffirmed. Hungary felt the full weight of Austrian displeasure. She was con- sidered to have forfeited by her rebellion the old historic rights she had possessed for centuries. Her Diet was abol- ished, her local self-government, in her county assemblies, was suppressed, Croatia, Transylvania, and the Servian country were severed from her, and the Kingdom itself was cut up into five sections, each ruled separately. Hungary was hence- forth governed from Vienna and largely by Germans. She was for the next few years simply a vassal of Austria, whose policy was to crush and extinguish all traces of her separate nationality. Francis Joseph, however, found it in the end impossible to break the spirit of the Magyars, who bent beneath the autocrat but did not abate their claims. During the revolution, Francis Joseph had granted a constitution to the whole Empire (March 4, 1849). This was revoked 388 FRANCIS JOSEPH'S CHANGE OF POLICY 389 December 31, 1851 " in the name of the unity of the empire and monarchical principles." For ten years absolutism and centralization prevailed throughout the dominions of the youthful ruler. One achievement of the revolution remained untouched, the abolition of feudalism, the liberation of the peasantry, a great economic and social change benefiting millions of people. To perpetuate a system of this character the Government Failure of must sedulously avoid any disaster that would weaken its tne war in power, any crisis in which it would need the support of all its subjects. This it did not do. The crisis of 1859, the failure of that year in Italy, sealed the doom of a system universally odious, and which was now seen to be unable to maintain the integrity of the Empire. As a result of the war Austria was forced to cede Lombardy to Piedmont, and afterward to remain inactive while the Italians made waste paper of the Treaty of Zurich, which she had con- cluded with France. She was compelled to continue this passive attitude because of the utter demoralization of her finances, and particularly because of the threatening situation in Hungary. Austria's distress was Hungary's opportunity. Thousands of Hungarians had joined the armies opposed to her, and rebellion was likely to break forth at any moment in Hungary itself. Peace had to be secured at any price. This time the Austrian government profited by experience. Francis In order to increase the strength of the state by actively Joseph re- interesting his various peoples in it so that they would be . . . . policy, willing to make sacrifices for it, Francis Joseph resolved to break with the previous policy of his reign, to sweep away abuses, redress grievances, and introduce liberal re- forms. But the problem was exceedingly complicated, and was only slowly worked out after several experiments had been tried which had resulted in failure. The chief diffi- culty lay in the adjustment of the claims of the different races over which he ruled. How could these be granted, and 390 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 Federalism or centrali- zation? Austria "oecomes a constitu- tional state Hungary refuses to co-operate. yet the power of the monarchy remain strong, Austria remain a great European power, able to speak decisively in European councils? Opinion was divided as to the method to pursue. There were at least two parties — those who wished to em- phasize the principle of federalism in the government, and those who wished to emphasize the principle of unity. The federalists demanded that the equality of all the countries within the Empire should be recognized, that each should make its own internal laws, and should administer them. Austria would then be a federal state with home rule as the recognized basis of the government of the several parts, and with a central parliament for purely imperial affairs. The other party, emphasizing the idea of unity, believed that the central government should possess large powers in order to play a commanding role among the European states. That the unity of the Empire might be preserved, and emphasized home rule should be limited in scope, the central government must be endowed with great authority. The Emperor at first tried the federal system in I860. This experiment not working to his satisfaction, he in- augurated a new system in 1861. Under this there was to be a parliament for the whole Empire, divided into two chambers, meeting annually. Its functions were important. The two chambers were to be a House of Lords, appointed by the Emperor, and a House of Representatives of 343 members to be chosen by the local diets. (Hungary 85, Transylvania 20, Croatia 9, Bohemia 54, Moravia 22, Galicia 38). The local diets were to continue for local affairs but with reduced powers. By this constitution, granted by the Emperor, Austria became a constitutional monarchy. Absolutism as a form of government was aban- doned. But this constitution was a failure, and chiefly because of the attitude of the Hungarians. To the first parliament Hungary declined to send representatives, an attitude she maintained steadily for several years until a new arrange- THE RESISTANCE OF HUNGARY 391 ment was made satisfactory to her. Why did she refuse to recognize a constitution that represented a great advance in liberalism over anything the Empire had known before? Why did she refuse to send representatives to a parliament in which she would have weight in proportion to the number of her inhabitants? Why did she steadily refuse to accept an arrangement that seemed both liberal and fair? It must be constantly remembered that Hungary consists of several races, and that of these races the Magyars have always been the dominant one, though in a numerical minority. This dominant race was divided into two parties, one of irreconcilables, men who bitterly hated Austria, who would listen to no compromise with her, whose ideal was absolute in- dependence. These men, however, were not now in control. They were discredited by the failures of 1849. The leaders of Hungary were now the moderate liberals, at whose head stood Francis Deak, the wisest and most influential Hun- garian statesman of the nineteenth century. These men were willing to compromise with Austria on the question of giving the requisite strength to the government of the whole Empire to enable it to play its role as a great European power, but they were absolutely firm in their opposition to the constitution just granted by Francis Joseph, and im- movable in their determination to secure the legal rights of Hungary. Their reasons for opposing the new constitu- Reasons tion, which promised so vast an improvement upon the old for her ref US 3.1 unprogressive absolutism that had reigned for centuries, for thwarting the Emperor, who was frankly disposed to enter the path of liberalism, are most important. They asserted that Hungary had always been a separate The nation, united with Austria simply in the person of the Hungarians • ssscrt their monarch, who was king in Hungary as he was emperor in „ . . his own hereditary states ; that he was king in Hungary only rights." after he had taken an oath to support the fundamental laws of Hungary, and had been crowned in Hungary with the iron crown of St. Stephen ; that these fundamental laws and 392 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 institutions were in part centuries old, had in a sense been redefined in the laws of 1848, which Ferdinand I had formally accepted in their new statement ; that no change could be made without the consent of both contracting parties ; that the Emperor-King as merely one party to the contract had no right to alter them in jot or tittle by any exercise of his own power ; that they were therefore still the law of the land; that Hungary was an historic state, with definite boundaries, including Transylvania and Cro- atia ; " that a people which has had a past is never able to forget its history " ; that the new constitution was one " granted " by Francis Joseph, and if granted, might be withdrawn ; that whatever its abstract merits were, it was unacceptable by reason of its origin ; that, moreover, it was designed for the whole Empire, and that its effect was to And demand make Hungary a mere province of Austria; that what e res oia- wag wan ^ e d was not a constitution, but the constitu- tion of their . . constitu- tion of Hungary, which had, since 1848, been illegally tion. suspended. This party differed from the revolutionary party of 1848 and 1849 in that it recognized that the times did not permit a merely " personal " union of Austria and Hungary, but that the interests of each demanded a certain " real " union, a certain strength for the central government that should enable it to act with decision and authority in foreign affairs, and the party was prepared to make concessions enough to render this possible. Only, the concessions must come later, after the Emperor had formally recognized the historic rights of Hungary, and must come then only after fair discussion. The unity represented by the new parlia- ment it would never consent to. In that assembly it would be a minority outnumbered by " foreigners," for all the other peoples of the Empire were, in its eyes, foreigners ; it would not fuse its individuality in the general mass of all the inhabitants ; it was determined to preserve the historic personality of Hungary. Francis Joseph must first consider THE COMPROMISE OF 1867 393 himself personally bound to accede to the laws of 1848, which his predecessor, Ferdinand, had ratified. The new experiment of an imperial parliament finally broke down beneath the impact of this persistent Hungarian refusal to accept it. For four years, from 1861 to 1865, there was a deadlock, neither side giving way. The con- A deadlock, dition of the country grew worse, the deficit continued to increase. The Emperor, recognizing the failure of his plans, Francis recognizing that Hungary was really a separate nation, — Jos eph strongly conscious of her own distinct history and person- ality and utterly unwilling to enter a unified monarchy however liberal, — finally determined to adapt himself to the situation. Negotiations were begun with the Hungarians, the object of which was to harmonize their claims with the unity and power of the Empire. These negotiations be- gan in 1865, were interrupted in 1866 by the Austro-Prus- sian war, and were completed in 1867. Indeed, the war facili- tated the great work, as showing once more how heavy was the cost to the Empire of Hungarian disaffection, how im- perative it was for the power of the monarchy that Hungary should be contented. Moreover, as by that war Austria was expelled from Germany, it was imperative for the mon- archy to gain additional strength elsewhere. The negotia- tions resulted accordingly, in 1867, in the Compromise or The Ausgleich, which is the basis of the Empire to-day. It was m °™ P ™" accepted by the Emperor and the Parliaments of both coun- 1867 tries. Francis Joseph was in the same year crowned King of Hungary. Thus was created a curious kind of state defying classifica- tion. Neither federalism nor unity was the outcome of the long constitutional struggle, but dualism. The Empire The Dual was henceforth to be called Austria-Hungary, and was to be onarc y * a dual monarchy. Austria-Hungary consists of two dis- tinct, independent states, which stand in law upon a plane of complete equality. They have the same flag. They have the same ruler, who in Austria bears the title of Emperor, 394 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 in Hungary that of King. Each has its own parliament, its own ministry, its own administration. Each governs itself in all internal affairs absolutely without interference from the other. But the two are united, not simply in the person of the monarch. They arc united for certain affairs regarded as common to both. There is a joint ministry composed of three departments: Foreign Affairs, War, and Finance. Each state has its own parliament, but there is no parliament in common. In order then to have a body that shall super- vise the work of the three joint ministries there was The Dele- established the system of "delegations."' Each parliament gations. chooses a delegation of sixty of its members. These dele- gations meet alternately in Vienna and Budapest. They are really committees of the two parliaments. They sit and debate separately, each using its own language, and they communicate with each other in writing. If after three communications no decision has been reached a joint session is held in which the question is settled without debate by a mere majority vote. Other affairs, which in most countries are considered com- mon to all parts, such as tariff and currency systems, do not fall within the competence of the joint ministry or the delegations. They are to be regulated by agreements concluded between the two parliaments for periods of ten years, an awkward arrangement creating an intense strain every decade, for the securing of these agreements is most difficult The This Compromise was satisfactory only to the Germans Compromise am j j.] ie Magyars, each the dominant party in its section, satisfactory _ _ , .... only to the ou * eac h also in a numerical minority. dominant One of the important results therefore of the expulsion races. f Austria from Germany after the Austro-Prussian war of 18()6 was the internal transformation of the Austrian Empire itself. The German element in that state was weak- ened, the Hungarians had to be appeased, and as a conse- THE DUAL MONARCHY 395 quence the Ausglcich or Compromise of 1867 was worked out. By this the former Austrian Empire was divided into two states, the Empire of Austria and the Kingdom of Hungary, the two together known henceforth as Austria- Hungary. The small river Leitha forms in part the bound- ary between the two, Hungary being known as Transleithania, Austria as Cisleithania. The capital of Austria is Vienna; of Hungary, Budapest. The Constitution of the collective state is the Compromise of 1867, already described. Each state also possesses a constitution of its own. In Austria the Constitution Constitution of 1861 was liberally revised by five laws passed of Austria « in 1867, by which full parliamentary government was es- tablished, the Emperor choosing his ministry from the majority party or group in Parliament. The Parliament or Reichsrath was to consist of two chambers, a House of Lords and a House of Representatives, which numbered at that time 203 members. These were chosen, not directly by the voters, but by the diets or local legislatures of each of the seventeen provinces into which Austria is divided, for each province has its local legislature for local purposes. In Hungary the Constitution of 1848 was restored, with Constitution some alterations. Thus Hungary had a parliament of two chambers, the Table of Magnates, composed chiefly of nobles, and the Table of Deputies, elected directly by the voters, all males twenty years of age and paying a certain amount in taxes. Though this amount was small it resulted in the exclusion of about three-fourths of the adult males. Thus in neither state did universal suffrage exist. A demand for this has since been repeatedly made in both countries with results that will appear later. Neither of the two states had a homogeneous population. The In each there was a dominant race, the Germans in Austria, dominan t the Magyars in Hungary. The Compromise of 1867 was satisfactory to these alone. In each country there were subordinate and rival races, jealous of the supremacy of these two, anxious for recognition and for power, and ren- Divisive effect of the principle of nationality in Austria- Hungary. Austria since 1867. 396 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 dcred more insistent by the sight of the remarkable success of the Magyars in asserting their individuality. In Hun- gary there were Croatia, Slavonia, and Transylvania; in Austria there were seventeen provinces, each with its own diet, representing almost always a variety of races. Some of these, notably Bohemia, had in former centuries had a separate statehood, which they wished to recover; others were gaining an increasing self-consciousness, and desired a future controlled by themselves and in their own interests. The struggles of these races were destined to form the most important feature of Austrian history during the next forty years. It should be noted that the principle of nation- ality, so effective in bringing about the unification of Italy and Germany, has bended in Austria in precisely the opposite direction, the splitting up of a single state into many. Dual- i.Mii was established in 1867, but these subordinate races refuse to acquiesce in that as a final form. They wish to change the dual into a federal state, which shall give free play to the several nationalities. The fundamental struggle all these years has been between these two principles — -dualism and federalism. These racial and nationalistic struggles have been most confusing, crossing each other in various ways, and rendered more complex by their connection with other forces, such as liberalism, clericalism, socialism. In the interest of clearness, only a few of the more important can be treated here. The Empire of Austria and the Kingdom of Hungary, having had different histories since 1867, may best be treated separately. THE EMPIRE OF AUSTRIA SINCE 1867 The first years in Austria under her new constitution were years of liberal reforms. The constitution guaranteed com- plete religious liberty. To give effect to this guarantee laws were passed greatly restricting the powers of the Roman Catholic Church. Henceforth all forms of religion were THE DEMANDS OF BOHEMIA 397 on a basis of legal equality; each person might freely Liberal choose his church and that of his children, or might decline e & lslatlon - connection with any. The public schools were to be open to all citizens without regard to creed. Churches might maintain schools of their own if they wished to. A form of marriage by civil authorities was established for those cases in which the priest refused to officiate. By these laws religious liberty and secular education were established. The Pope denounced them as " abominable," and declared them null and void " for the present and the future." Despite these fulminations they went into force. At this time also other useful laws were passed, regulating the finances, altering the judicial system, and introducing trial by jury, and reorganizing the military system along the successful Prussian lines of universal military service of three years, with service in the reserve for several years longer. At the same time the Austrian Government was con- Demands of fronted by questions far more baffling. Various nationali- tne Czechs, ties, or would-be nationalities, demanded that they should now receive as liberal treatment as Hungary had received in the Compromise of 1867. The leaders in this movement were the Czechs of Bohemia, who, in 1868, definitely stated their position, which was precisely that of the Hungarians before 1867. They claimed that Bohemia was an historic and independent nation, united Avith the other states under the House of Hapsburg only in the person of the monarch. They demanded that the kingdom of Bohemia should be restored, that Francis Joseph should be crowned in Prague with the crown of Wenceslaus. The Galicians in the north, the Slovenes and Serbs in the south, brought forward similar, though not as sweeping, demands. These groups, imitating the successful methods of the Magyars, refused to sit in the Austrian Parliament in Vienna, declining to recognize the authority of institu- tions in the creation of which they had had no share. The moral authority of the new Parliament was therefore greatly J398 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 The Emperor prepares to concede them. Opposition of Germans and Magyars. Triumph of dualism. reduced. The agitation became so great that the Emperor decided to yield to the Bohemians. On September 14*, 1871, he formally recognized the historic rights of the Kingdom of Bohemia, and agreed to be crowned king in Prague, as he had been crowned king in Budapest. Arrangements were to be made whereby Bohemia should gain the same rights as Hungary, independence in domestic affairs and union with Austria and Hungary for certain general pur- poses. The dual monarchy was about to become a triple monarchy. But these promises were not destined to be carried out. The Emperor's plans were bitterly opposed by the Germans of Austria, who, as the dominant class and as also a minority of the whole population, feared the loss of their supremacy, feared the rise of the Slavs, whom they hated. They were bitterly opposed, also, by the Magyars of Hungary, who de- clared that this was undoing the Compromise of 1867, and who feared particularly that the rise of the Slavic state of Bo- hemia would rouse the Slavic peoples of Hungary to demand the same rights, and the Magyars were determined not to share with them their privileged position. The opposi- tion to the Emperor's plans was consequently most emphatic and formidable. It was also pointed out that the manage- ment of foreign affairs would be much more difficult with three nations directing rather than two. The Emperor yielded to the opposition. The decree that was to place Bohemia on an equality with Austria and Hungary never came. Dualism had triumphed over federalism, to the im- mense indignation of those who saw the prize snatched from them. Where the Bohemians had failed, obviously the weaker groups — Galicians, Serbs — could not succeed. The Compro- mise of 1867 remained unchanged. The House of Hapsburg to this day rules over a dual, not over a federal state. A radical change in the constitution was thus definitely rejected. Gradually the extreme demands of the various races subsided. The Czechs lost much of their power by THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM 399 splitting into two groups. The constitutional regime slowly struck root. For some years it was the Germans who con- trolled the Austrian Farliament and the ministry. In 1873 a change was made in the electoral system. Hitherto the Electoral rcf orm members of the Reichsrath, or Imperial Parliament, had been elected by the diets of the different provinces. This was objected to as giving the Reichsrath the appearance of a congress of delegates, rather than of a real parliament. Moreover, any diet, by refusing to elect delegates (as Bo- hemia had frequently done), could so reduce the national representation as to destroy its moral authority. The new law of 1873 withdrew this "power from the provincial diets and gave it directly to those who had the right to elect the diets. Now the right to choose the members of these diets was not vested in a general mass of electors, but was vested in certain groups or classes, four in number — the landowners, the cities, the chambers of commerce, and the rural districts. Each class elected a certain number of members of the diets. It was now provided that each should henceforth elect a cer- tain number of members of the Reichsrath. All that the change of 1873 accomplished was to substitute direct elec- tion by the four classes for indirect election by the diets. The number of members of the Reichsrath was increased from 203 to 353. The number of voters in each class and the relative weight of the individual voter varied enormously. Thus in 1890, in the class of landowners, there was one deputy to every 63 voters, one to 27 in the class of chambers of commerce, one to 2,918 in that of cities, one to 11,600 in that of rural districts. With such a system further demands for reform were inevitable, and have, as we shall see, figured prominently in later history. The German element maintained control of the Austrian Parliament as long as it remained united, but breaking up finally into three groups, and incurring the animosity of the Emperor by constantly blocking his measures, its minis- try fell in 1879, and was succeeded by one of a very different 400 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 The Taaffe ministry. The Slavs favored. Growth of radical parties. character under Taaffe. This ministry lasted fourteen years, from 1879 to 1893. While Taaffe steadily refused to alter the Constitution of 1867 in the direction of federal- ism, his policy nevertheless greatly stimulated the growth of the federalist spirit. Relying for parliamentary support upon the Czechs and Poles against the Germans, he was forced to make concessions to them. In Bohemia the Czechs were favored in various ways. They secured an electoral law which assured them a majority in the Bohemian Diet and in the Bohemian delegation to the Reichsrath; they obtained a university, by the division into two institutions of that of Prague, the oldest German university, founded in 1356. Thus there is a German University of Prague and a Czechish (1882). By various ordinances German was dethroned from its position as sole official language. After 1886 office- holders were required to answer the demands of the public in the language in which they were presented, either German or Czechish. This rule operated unfavorably for German officials, who were usually unable to speak Czechish, whereas the Czechs, as a rule, spoke both languages. In Galicia the Poles, though a minority, obtained control of the Diet, supported by the Taaffe ministry, and proceeded to oppress the Ruthenians ; in Carniola the Slovenes pro- ceeded to Slavicize the province. Thus the Slavs were favored during the long ministry of Taaffe, and the evolu- tion of the Slavic nationalities and peoples progressed at the expense of the Germans. . Under this long administration the financial condition of Austria improved. The chronic deficit disappeared and receipts exceeded expenditures for the first time in many years. In social legislation the policies of Bismarck were imitated by the compulsory insurance of workingmen and the repression of Socialists, for it was also at this time that the Socialist party became prominent. This was, here as else- where, a radical democratic party, demanding universal suffrage, obligatory and free education, the complete laiciza- MOVEMENTS IN BOHEMIA 401 tion of the state. This party was not local, like the racial and nationalistic groups, but was intcrprovineial, thus cut- ting across the parties already existing and increasing the confusion. In Bohemia there was a movement in favor of democracy, Division which was independent of the Socialists. The Czechs had among the long been divided into Old and Young Czechs. They had worked together as against the Germans, but now that they were in the main victorious in this, they flew apart. The Young Czechs were a democratic party, demanding universal suffrage, secular schools, liberty of the press and of public meetings. After" 1887 this party, profiting by the concessions of the Taaffe ministry, began to agitate fiercely in favor of a reconstrution of Bohemian nationality, whereas the Old Czechs were willing to abide by the Com- promise of 1867. By 1891 the Young Czechs had swept the Old Czechs completely from the field. An attempt by the Government to stop this movement had resulted in total failure. The Germans of Bohemia, on the other hand, opposed with vehemence the nationalist aspirations of the Czechs. So fierce did race struggles become that in 1893 the Government was forced to proclaim the state of siege in Prague. The situation became so difficult for the Taaffe ministry that it resigned in 1893. Thus racial movements and democratic movements were in full swing at the close of this long ministry. To satisfy the latter, Taaffe, just before his fall, brought forward a radical electoral reform, which would have increased the number of voters from about 1,500,000 to 4,500,000. The proposal failed, but, the agitation continuing, the succeeding ministry in 1896 carried through a more limited measure. The existing four electoral classes were left as they were ; Electoral but a fifth class was created, which was (to elect 72 additional reform, members to Parliament. This class was to include all men of twenty-four years of age or older. It included, therefore, all those of the four other classes, members of which, conse- 402 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1849 quently, posssessed under the now system a double vote. The result was to make the system of representation more complex than ever, without giving numbers anything like their due weight. Thus five million and a half voters would choose 72 members, whereas the 1,700,000 voters of the four other classes would choose J35J3 ; the class of great landed proprie- tors, numbering only about 5,000, would choose 85 members. Obviously, such a system would not satisfy the growing demand for a democratic suffrage. It was a mere temporary expedient. Universal The agitation for universal suffrage continued to increase suffrage. during the next decade, and was finally successful. By the law of January 26, 1907, all men in Austria over twenty- four were given the right to vote, and the class system was abolished. The most striking result of the first elections on this popular basis (May 1907) was the return of 87 Socialists, who polled 1,041,948 votes, nearly a third of those cast. This party had previously had only about a dozen representatives. The race parties, such as the Young Czechs, lost heavily. Whether this means that the period of extreme racial rivalry is over and the struggle of social classes is to be the feature of the future, the future only will show. THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY SINCE 1867 Hungary, a country larger than Austria, larger than Great Britain, found her historic individuality definitely recognized and guaranteed by the Compromise of 1867. She had successfully resisted all attempts to merge her with the other countries subject to the House of Hapsburg. She is an independent kingdom under the crown of St. Stephen. The sole official language is Magyar, which is neither Slavic nor Teutonic, but Turanian in origin. The political history of Hungary since the Compromise has been much more simple than that of Austria. Race and language questions have been fundamental, but they have been decided in a summary manner. The ruling race in THE POLICY OF THE MAGYARS 403 1867 was the Magyar, and it has remained the ruling race. The Though numerically in the minority in 1867, comprising Magyars, only about six million out of fifteen million, they were a strong race, accustomed to rule and determined to rule. The majority of the population, on the other hand, was split up into several races, consisted mostly of peasants, and had no political training, and no able leadership. Only in Croatia was there a Slavic people, with separate institutions and a The strong individuality. The Magyars recognized this fact, Croatians. having learned a useful lesson from the failure of 1849, and concluded with Croatia in 1868 a compromise very similar to the one they had themselves concluded with Austria in the year preceding. In regard to all the other races, the dom- inant people resolved to Magyarize them early and thor- The policy oughly, a policy it has since steadily persisted in. The Mag- ? agyar« yars have insisted upon the use of the Magyar tongue in public offices, courts, schools, and in the railway service — wherever, in fact, it has been possible. They have refused to make any concessions to the various peoples, and have, indeed, tried to stamp out their peculiarities. Besides pursuing this policy of vigorous amalgamation, they have developed the country economically. The Government has taken over the great railways, has made them productive, and has used them to further this process of Magyarization by encouraging the country people to come into the cities, where the Magyar influence is strongest. They have steadily supported the Compromise of 1867, by which they have greatly profited. They have reduced the authority of ecclesiastics in the state by establishing civil marriage, and the registration of births, deaths, and marriages by state authorities, rather than by the clergy. But Hungary has not yet been Magyarized. Race ques- Race tions are still important. The Croatians wish larger in- ^ uestl0ns - dependence than they now have. There are powerful parties among the Roumanians in Transylvania, which desire sepa- ration from Hungary and incorporation in the Kingdom of 404 AUSTRIA HUNGARY SINCE 1849 Struggle over the question of language. Territorial gains had losses. Roumania to the oast. Ami many of the Slavs in the south desire annexation bo the Kingdom of Servia, Moreover] in recent years a party has arisen among Magyars themselves, under the leadership oi Francis Kos- suth, son oi Louis Kossuth of 184S, which is opposed to the Compromise of 1867] and wishes to have Hungary more independent than she is. This party demands that Hungary shall have her own diplomatic corps, shall control her rela- tions with foreign countries independently of Austria, and shall possess the right to have her own tariff. Particularly does it demand the use of Magyar in the Hungarian part of the army oi the dual monarchy- -a demand pressed pas- sionately, but resisted thus far with unshakable firmness by the Emperor, Francis Joseph] who considers that the safety of the state is dependent upon having one language in use in the army, that there may not be confusion and disaster on the battlefield. Scenes oi great violence have occurred over this question, both in Parliament and outside of it, but the Emperor has not yielded. Government was brought to a deadlock, and. indeed, for several years the Ausgleieh could not be renewed, save by the arbitrary act oi the Emperor, for a year at a time. Francis Joseph finally threat- ened, if forced to concede the recognition of the Hungarian language, to couple with it the introduction oi universal suffrage into Hungary, for which there is a growing popular demand. This the Magyars do not wish, fearing that it will rob them oi' their dominant position by giving a powerful weapon to the politically inferior but more numerous races, and that they will, therefore, ultimately be submerged by the Slavs about them. Less than twenty-rive per cent, of the adult male population oi' Hungary at present possess the vote. The House oi Hapsburg has lost since 1815 tho rich Lombardo-Venetian kingdom (1859-66). It has gained, however, Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a result oi the Russo- Turkish war oi \S~i", these Turkish provinces were handed ANNEXATION OF BALKAN PROVINCES 405 over by tin- Congress of Berlin of 1878 to Austria-Hungary to " occupy n and " administer." The Magyars opposed the assumption of these provinces, wishing no more Slavs in the monarchy, but despite their opposition they were taken over, so strongly was the Emperor in favor of it. This acquisition of these Balkan countries renders Austria-Hun- gary a more important factor in all Balkan politics, and in the discussions concerning the so-called Eastern Question, namely, the future of European Turkey. In October 1908 Austria-Hungary declared them formally annexed. CHAPTER XVIII ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 England in Great Britain appeared in 1815, to the superficial ob- 1815. server, in a brilliant light. She had persisted, when others had faltered, in her bitter hostility to Napoleon. She had been the soul of the coalitions, and the crowning victory of Waterloo seemed to place her at the very head of the nations of Europe. Her energy and her wealth seemed to be unbounded. Her population had been only 14,000,000 at the beginning of the great war ; at the end it was 19,000,- 000. Her debt, it is true, had increased with appalling rapidity. Over a billion dollars in 1792, it was over four billion in 1815. 1 The annual interest charge amounted to over 150,000,000 dollars. Her expenditures during those years exceeded seven billion dollars. But while her debt and the yearly expenditures grew at an unprecedented rate, the wealth of the country grew more rapidly, and the burden of the state was more easily borne than ever. For the period had been one of extraordinary material develop- ment. The growth of her industry at home and her com- merce abroad had made her easily the first industrial and the first commercial power in the world. This industrial and commercial supremacy, fully revealed during the Na- poleonic wars and the period just succeeding, rested upon a series of remarkable inventions and discoveries made by Englishmen in the latter part of the eighteenth century, inventions so momentous, so far reaching in their results, that they effected what has been justly called the Industrial devolution. Revolution. This transformation and development of in- iDebt in 1792, £239,650,000; in 1815, £861,000,000. 406 The Industrial THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 407 dustry has brought with it a complete change in the material conditions of life. The change is most striking in the domain of manufacture. Previously nearly everything was made by hand. Now a succession of English inventors — Hargreaves, Arkwright, Crompton, Cartwright — invented machines which completely altered the methods of production in the two basic industries of England, the manufacture of cotton and woolen goods. These machines could produce more in a given time than many hand laborers could do. The machine was substituted for the hand of man, as the chief feature in production. But there was a limit to which, under existing conditions, machine industry could be developed. That limit was determined by the amount of motive force available for running the machines, usually too large and heavy to be operated by hand. The only motive force then A new used, in addition to that of men and animals, was that of the motlve force, wind and falling water, exploited by windmills and water- wheels. But such force was precarious, and not easily controlled. The wind might be too high, or there might be no wind. The river might do damage by floods, or might run dry. Industry needed a new motive force, limit- less in quantity and capable of regulation. This it found in steam. For a long time the expansive power of steam had attracted attention, and there had been some speculation during the last hundred years as to the possibility of using it. A blacksmith, Newcomen, had made a tolerable steam en- gine in 1705, which could be used in pumping water, and was so used in many mines during the century. But it was James Watt, a mathematical instrument maker, who con- structed the first efficient and economical steam engine. Applying for his first patents in 1769, he continued to study the problem and improve the engine until his death The steam in 1819. From about 1781 steam engines began to be en e me - used in manufacturing, especially in cotton and woolen fac- tories. The invention of Watt had supplied the world with a new motive force of incalculable effectiveness. The industrial primacy of Great Britain. Advantages derived from the Revolu- tionary and Napoleonic wars. 408 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1888 These inventions and processes were for a while monopo- lized by Great Britain, for it was not until after the down- fall of Napoleon that they came into general use on the Continent. Manufacturing on a large scale, she was able to outstrip all possible rivals. She first developed the so- called factory system, and first utilized its advantages. These inventors, says an historian of modern England, " did more for the cause of mankind than even Wellington. Their lives had more influence on their country's future than the career of the great general. His victories secured his country peace for rather more than a generation. Their inventions gave Great Britain a commercial supremacy which neither war nor foreign competition has yet destroyed.'' 1 u It is our improved steam engine." wrote Francis Jeffrey in the Edinburgh Review in 1819, " that has fought the battles of Europe, and exalted and sustained, through the late tre- mendous contest, the political greatness of our land. It is the same great power which enables us now to pay the interest of our debt, and to maintain the arduous struggle in which we are still engaged with the skill and capital of countries less oppressed with taxation." " But England profited not only from the genius of her inventors. The long war itself had greatly contributed to her commercial expansion. England had not been invaded; her industries had not been injured, their activity interrupted or rendered precarious, as had been the case in all the coun- tries of the Continent. She prospered both because she was unmolested and because they were molested, so that they were forced to rely upon her for many things which in normal times they would have manufactured for themselves. The war. too, had given her the command of the seas. The carrying trade of the world was almost entirely hers. 1 Walpole's History of England since 1S15, I. 66; on the whole subject of this series of inventions and the expansion of industry see Wal- pole, T. 44-67. * Quoted by Cheyney. Readings in English History, 614-615. THE RENOWN OF PARLIAMENT 409 The material development of England filled other nations with envy. Her empire also was commanding in its range and universality. As one after another of the countries of Europe became the enemy of Britain, she attacked its colonies. Thus at the close of the long war she had en- riched herself with valuable possessions, hitherto belonging to France and Holland. 1 The proud position that England held was ascribed, in The renown the general opinion of Europe, to the excellence of her °* Parlia " government. This government enjoyed a great reputa- tion on the Continent. It had remained erect throughout a period when other governments, one after another, had collapsed. It had followed a uniform, persistent policy from the beginning to the end, with a single slight interrup- tion, while the policy of other nations had veered and changed, and changed and veered again. It seemed that there must be some peculiar merit in a system that remained immutable in a world of change. Europeans heard of England as a land of freedom, of representative government, of local self-government. The renown of her Parliament had filled the world. It was known that her Parliament was her real ruler, that though the king reigned he did not govern, that the real executive was the ministry of the hour, that ministries rose and fell according to the will of Parlia- ment. The fact that England was so successful under this parliamentary and cabinet system of government, which was supposed to be the mouthpiece of the English people, gave great impetus to the demand for similar institutions on the Continent. England was the model to which Liberals and reformers everywhere were prone to point. Yet on examination it was seen that this structure was far from fair, that it was. honey combed with abuses, marked by glaring discriminations between social classes, that Eng- i an d f the land was a land of privilege, a land of the old regime, that Old Regime. 1 On general material condition of Great Britain in 1815, Walpole, I, 22-113. 410 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 18838 her institutions required radical change to bring them into proper adjustment with the new age and its ideas. While the French across the Channel had, by supreme and violent exertions, asserted that the modern state must rest upon the principle of equality, and had, in order to give that principle definite lodgment in the facts oi the national life, reduced the aristocracy and humbled the church, in England the ruling class maintained its position unshaken. England remained a land of the old regime until 1S8~. forty years after the great transformation in France. Commanding Power rested with the aristocracy, composed of the no- position of biHtv anJ tho trv- Thi , dass \ AT lv controlled local the nobility. - 7 , * . government and local taxation. The ** local self-govern- ment " oi England, so much praised and idealized abroad. as if it were government of the people by the people, did not exist. In the counties the country nobility rilled the most important offices in the local governing boards and in the militia. Smaller offices were occupied by its depend- ents. In the boroughs, too. its influence was generally de- cisive with the close corporations which controlled most of them. Its power was glaringly apparent at the top, in Parliament. The House of Lords was composed almost exclusively of large landed proprietors. This was the in- The House expugnable bulwark of the prevailing social class. But the of Commons. House of Commons was also another stronghold hardly less secure. This body, supposed, as its name shows. to be representative of the commoners of England, con- spicuously belied its name. Its composition was so extraor- dinary that it merits full description, particularly as the great reform movement of the next generation concerned it primarily, its thorough alteration being correctly felt to be the condition absolutely precedent to all other reforms. The system The House of Commons in 1815 consisted of 658 mem- of represen- bers . 489 of fl^ wew returnod bv England, 100 bv Ire- tation. ^ . land. 45 by Scotland. £4 by Wales. There were three kinds of constituencies — the counties, the boroughs, and the THE HOUSE OF COMMONS 411 universities. In England each county had two members, and nearly all of the boroughs had two each, though a few had but one. Representation had no relation to the size of the population in either case. A large county and a small county, a large borough and a small borough, had the same number of members. In times past the king had possessed the right to summon this town and that to send up two burgesses to London. Once given that right it usually retained it. If a new town should grow up, the monarch might give it the right, but he was not obliged to. Since 1625 only two new boroughs had been created. Thus the constitution of the House of Commons had become stereotyped at a time when population was in- creasing and was. also shifting greatly from old centers to new. An increasing inequality in the representation was a feature of the political system. Thus the county and borough representation of the ten southern counties of England was 237, and of the thirty others only 252; yet the latter had a population nearly three times as large as the former. All Scotland returned only 45 members, while the single English county of Cornwall (including its boroughs, of course) returned 44. Yet the population of Scotland was eight times as large as that of Corn- wall. 1 The suffrage in the counties was uniform, and was enjoyed The county by those who possessed land yielding them an income of forty shillings a year. But as this worked out it gave a very restricted suffrage, for England was the land of large estates, and the tendency toward the absorption of small estates in large ones was steadily increasing. The small farmer, holding his land in his own right, who was so common in France, had become almost universally in England a mere tenant of a large landholder. Accurate statistics are lack- ' These numbers include not only the county representatives proper but also the representatives of the boroughs located in the respective counties. 41* ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1888 ing, but Gneist estimates that at least four-fifths of the cultivable land of the United Kingdom belonged to not more than 7.000 of the nobility and gentry. The county voters, then, were chiefly the men who had large country estates, and not the farmers and peasantry who tilled them. The county representation was consequently a stronghold of tJie aristocracy. Counties in which there were bo few voters could often be easily controlled by the wealthy land- owners. Indeed, in many counties the election of the land- owners' nominee was accepted as so much a matter of course that there were no opposing candidates. In at least three Scotland C0Unti ! s thcro bad been no contest for over a hundred years. In Scotch counties the condition was even worse. There the suffrage was not determined by ownership of land, but by the possession of a so-called u superiority," or direct grant from the crown, producing at least 400 pounds a year. The result was that there were not three thousand county voters in all Scotland; yet the population of Scot- land was nearly two million. Fife had £40 voters. Crom- arty 9. In the county of Roxburgh in 1831 the result of the election was a "great majority" of 40 to 19. Yet that county had a population of more than 40.000. The climax was reached in Bute, where there were *1 voters out of a population of 14.000. only one of whom lived in the county. On a certain occasion only one voter attended the election meeting of that county. He constituted him- self chairman, nominated himself, called the list of voters, and declared himself returned to Parliament. i T n bor^iV SU0h ™ the Situati ° n iu the counti0 * of <*«** Britain, •which returned 186 members to the House of Commons. But more important were the boroughs, which returned 467 members. 1 In the counties the suffrage was uniform; in the boroughs, on the other hand, there was a bewildering variety in the methods whereby the right to vote was se- cured. In the boroughs, too. the influence of the landowning 1 The universities returned o members. BOROUGH REPRESENTATION 413 and wealthy class was even greater and more decisive than in the counties. The boroughs were of several kinds or Nomination types — nomination boroughs, rotten or close boroughs, bor- boroughs, oughs in which there was a considerable body of voters, boroughs in which the suffrage wa* almost democratic. It was the existence of the first two classes that contributed the most to the popular demand for the reform of the House. In the nomination boroughs, the right to choose the two burgesses was completely in the hands of the patron. Such places might have lost all their inhabitants, yet repre- sentation, being an attribute of geographical areas rather than of population, these places were still entitled to their two members. Thus Corfe Castle was a ruin, Old Sarum a green mound, Gatton was part of a park, while Dun- wich had long been submerged beneath the sea, yet these places, entirely without inhabitants, still had two mem- bers each in the House," because it had been so decided centuries before, when they did have a population, and because the English Parliament took no account of changes. Thus the owner of the ruined wall, or the green mound, or this particular portion of the bottom of the sea, had the right of nomination. In the rotten or close boroughs the members were elected Rotten by the corporation, that is, by the mayor and aldermen, boroughs, or the suffrage was in the hands of voters, who, however, were so few, from a dozen to fifty in many cases, 1 and generally so poor that the patron could easily influence them by bribery or intimidation to choose his candidates. Elections in such cases were a mere matter of form. Wal- pole states that in 1793 245 members were notoriously returned by the influence of 128 peers. Thus peers, them- selves sitting in the House of Lords, had representatives sitting in the other House. Lord Lonsdale thus returned nine members, and was known as " premier's cat-o'-nine- tails." Others returned six, five, four apiece. Some would 1 Ninety members represented places of less than 50 voters each. Unrepre- sented cities. Bribery. 4U ENGLAND TO THE REFORM HILL OF 18S9 sell their appointments to the highest bidder, and a common price was 10,000 pounds for two seats for a single parlia- ment. Borough-mongering was common. 1 It was stated in 1817 that seats were bought ami sold like tickets to the opera. Thus at the period at which this history opens a considerable majority oi the members of the House oi Commons was returned through the influence of a small body oi patrons. These were noblemen, or wealthy land- owners, who aspired to become noblemen and chose this method oi acquiring political power, that thus they might in the end be raised to the peerage. In the third class oi boroughs, those with a fairly large electorate, there was much bribery, while the fourth class oi practically democratic boroughs was very small. On the other hand, there were large industrial cities with no representation at all. such as Manchester, with a popula- tion oi 1 10,000, Birmingham with 100,000. Leeds with 75,000, Sheffield with about 70,000.' Bribery, as has been said, was customary. The polls were kept open for fifteen days. Where there were contests the expenses were borne by the candidates. These were sometimes enormous. A case is on record in which the two candidates spent £00,000 pounds in a single election. Rich men were willing to make these vast expenditures. For once in Parliament they were on the road to political power and social eminence. Thev or their sons might enter the peerage, ■ Some of the most honorable and useful members bought their seats as the only way of getting into Parliament on an independent basis. though they utterly detes t ed the system. See the ease of Romilly. Cheyney. Readings in Fnglish History, pp. 644-646. ■ The salient fact about the suffrage in boroughs before TS:V: is that it varied greatly from place to place. Molesworth considers the follow- ing a tolerably complete list of these qualifications: " House-holders, resident house-holders, house-holders paying scot and lot: inhabitants, resident inhabitants, inhabitants paying scot and lot: burgesses, capital burgesses. burgagc-holders: freeholders, freemen, resident freemen; cor- porations. DOtwaUopers, payers of poor rates." Molesworth. History of England, I, t>t> note. THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 415 and numerous sineeun s might fall in the direction of the family. For this reason men who were making their fortunes in industry sought to enter the class of landed proprietors by purchasing large estates. Thus the established order gained additional support in the ambition of the newly aris- ing moneyed class. Well might the younger Pitt exclaim: " This House is not the representation of the people of Great Britain ; it is the representation of nominal boroughs, of ruined and exterminated towns, of noble families, of wealthy individuals, of foreign potentates." The govern- ment, of England was not representative, but was oligarchical. Closely identified with the State, and, like the State, thor- The oughly permeated with the principle of special privileges, ls c was another body, the Church of England. Though there was absolute religious liberty in Great Britain, though men might worship as they saw fit, the position of the Anglican Church was one greatly favored. Only members of that church possessed any real political power. No Catholic could be a member of Parliament, or hold any office in the state or municipality. In theory Protestants who dis- sented from the Anglican Church were likewise excluded from holding office. In practice, however, they were enabled to, by the device of the so-called Act of Indemnity, an act passed each year by Parliament, pardoning them for having held the positions illegally during the year just past. The position of the Dissenter was both burdensome arid humiliat- Dissenters, ing. He had to pay taxes for the support of the Church of England, though he did not belong to it. He had to register his place of worship with authorities of the Church of England. He could only be married by a clergy- man of that church, unless he were a Quaker or a Jew. There was no such thing as civil marriage, or marriage by dis- senting rhrgyrnen. A Roman Catholic or a Dissenter could not graduate from Cambridge, could not even enter Ox- ford, owing to the religious tests exacted, which only Anglicans could meet. The natural result of the supremacy Abuses within the Church. The people neglected. 416 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 18SS of this religion was that those embraced it who were in- fluenced by self-interest, who wore ambitious for political preferment, for social advancement, or for an Oxford or Cambridge education for their sons. It was " ungentleman- like " to bo a Dissenter. Not only was the Church of England privileged with reference to other churches, but within the Church itself there were great inequalities. Bishops and archbishops received large salaries, ranging from ten to one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a year. These prizes went to the younger sons or proteges of the great families. The assumption was, as Sir Leslie Stephen says, that " a man of rank who takes orders should be rewarded for his con- descension." On the other hand, there were thousands of parish clergymen with wretchedly low salaries. The latter had little chance of promotion. There were pluralities and absenteeism in this Church, exactly as in the Roman Catholic Church in pre-revolutionary France. The clergy were eminently respectable, but eminently worldly, a social, if not a spiritual, force in the life of England, an interested bulwark of the established order. The great institutions of England, therefore, were con- trolled by the rich, and in the interest of the rich. Leo-is- latum favored the powerful, the landed nobility, and the rich class of manufacturers that was growing up, whose interests were similar. The immense mass of the people received scant consideration. Their education was woe- fully neglected. Probably three-fourths of the children of England did not receive the slightest instruction. Laborers were forbidden to combine to improve their conditions, which the state itself never dreamed of improving. Even their food was made artificially dear by tariffs on breadstuffs passed in the interests of the landlords. The reverse side of the picture of English greatness and power and prosperity was gloomy in the extreme. England was in need of sweep- ing and numerous reforms to meet the demands of modern CRITICS OF ENGLISH INSTITUTIONS 417 liberalism, whether in politics, in economics, or in social institutions. The conditions just described had not escaped challenge. In the last quarter of the eighteenth century, two writers in particular, of great vigor and originality, Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham, had subjected English institutions and policies to trenchant and damaging criticism. Adam Adam Smith had published in 1776 his " Wealth of Nations," Smith - a comprehensive condemnation of the prevalent economic theories and practices of Great Britain. He denounced protection and defended free trade, and urged liberty in the economic life in place of constant and minute govern- mental regulation. Bentham criticized government and Jeremy jurisprudence and morals. Aroused by Blackstone's pane- Bentham * gyric of the British Constitution as the perfection of human wisdom, he published in 1776 a " Fragment on Govern- ment," in which he showed unsparingly its defects. He laid down in this, and in other books in later years, the principle that " the greatest happiness of the greatest num- ber is the foundation of morals and legislation"; that " the end of all government is utility, or the good of the governed." Obviously, English government was not based on any such principle. Bentham applied his principle of utility to all the institutions of England in succession — the monarchy, the church, the courts, parliament — showing how harmful rather than useful each was. He was con- structive also, showing how the grievous defects could be remedied. The views of Smith and Bentham made no impression Effect of upon Parliament, but they gradually influenced the rising French generation. They contributed greatly to the reforms upon effected from about 1825 to 1850. They would probably England, have been effective much earlier had it not been for the French Revolution, which, working much good for France, worked nothing but evil for England. English conservatism became stiff and implacable. Liberal demands must be. 418 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 Economic distress after 1815. resisted, because, as any one could see, they led to anarchy and violence and a Reign of Terror. From 1793 to 1815 the liberal reformers of England were silenced by the odium attached to the deeds of their French neighbors. Salutary changes were delayed for a whole generation. The Tory party, opposed to all change, was assured of a long lease of power, one that lasted, indeed, until 1830. The demand for reform was resumed, however, after the final victory over Napoleon at Waterloo, and became more and more emphatic. It drew its main strength from the deep and widespread wretchedness of the people. Con- trary to all expectations, the peace did not bring with it happiness and prosperity, but rather intense suffering and the hatred of class and class. The reasons for this are not far to seek. As long as war continued England was the manufacturer and the common carrier of the world. Now that the war was over this practical monopoly was destroyed, the foreign market was restricted by the renewed activity of European manufacturers and merchants, who could now conduct their business in security. The export trade fell off rapidly. Then the English Government re- duced its expenditures suddenly by one-half, greatly injur- ing all those industries which had furnished it the materials of war. . Thus manufacturers, losing customers at home and abroad, were forced, some into bankruptcy, others to curtail their activity, in other words, to dismiss thousands of workmen. And at this very moment, when laborers lack of em- were being thrown out of employment or were finding their ployment. wa g e s reduced, their number was being increased by the disbandment of the militia and the reduction in the army and navy. The navy alone was reduced from 100,000 men in 1815 to 33,000 in 1816. At the time when the number of laborers was greater than the demand, 200,000 or more men were added to the labor market. Furthermore, the next few years saw a series of bad harvests. By these, and by the Corn Law of 1815, bread was made dearer. THE DEMAND FOR REFORM 419 Add also the fact that the modern industrial or factory system was painfully supplanting the old system of house- hold industries and temporarily throwing multitudes out of employment, or employing them under hard, even in- human conditions, and it is not difficult to understand the widespread, desperate discontent of the mass of the popu- lation. A Parliament, organ of the rich minority, refused to help them; it even forbade them to help themselves, for it was a misdemeanor for workmen to combine. If they did, they would be sent to jail. Labor was unorganized. The prevalence of such conditions naturally furthered The demand the demand for reforms, long held in check by the war. Now that the war was over, the time seemed to have come for legislation remedial of the many abuses in English in- stitutions, and of the existing economic distress. But the ministry and Parliament saw only danger in change, and set themselves grimly against all concessions. The years from 1815 to 1820 are years of repression and alarm, as pronounced in England as in most of the countries of Europe. The demand for reforms came primarily from the poor William and disheartened masses, who possessed a remarkable leader Cobbett. in the person of William Cobbett, the son of an agricultural laborer. For some years Cobbett had published a liberal periodical called " The Weekly Political Register," in which he had opposed the Government. In 1816 he reduced the price of his paper from a shilling to twopence, made his appeal directly to the laboring class, and became their guide and spokesman. The effect was instantaneous. For the first time the lower class had an organ, cheap, moreover brilliantly written, for Cobbett's literary ability was such that a London paper, the Standard, declared that for clearness, force, and power of copious illustration he was unrivaled since the time of Swift. Cobbett was the first great popular editor, who for nearly thirty years, with but little interruption, expressed in his weekly paper the wishes and the emotions of the laboring MO ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 183^ classes. Ho was ■ groat democratic loader, a powerful popular editor, a pugnacious and venomous opponent of the existing regime, a champion of the cause of parliamentary reform. Farliamen- For Cobbett persuaded the working people that they must tary reform, g^ ^ y^ ^^ ^ voto 00 f oro t ] 10y cou y get soc i ;l l ant i economic reforms. Parliamentary reform must have prece- dence. Let the people get political power, let them change Parliament from the organ oi a narrow class into a truly national assembly, and then they could abolish the evils from which they suffered, and put useful statutes into force. He demanded, therefore, universal suffrage. Other lead- ers appeared also, and a considerable fermentation of ideas among the unpropertied and working classes characterized those years. Certain radicals took more active measures which aroused disproportionate alarm in the minds of the ministry, who scented a new French Revolution in every popular commo- tion, and were ready to go to almost any length to stamp out the troublesome spirit. The distress of the masses led Popular dis- to disturbances. Riots broke out in 1816. Farm buildings, t ances. barns, stacks, business premises were sot on tire. Machines were broken by workmen who thought them the cause of their woes. Obnoxious tradesmen were attacked. The ministry, thinking it necessary in the interests of property to make an example, arrested seventy-throe of the wretched rioters of Fly, secured the condemnation to death of thirty-four of them, and the actual execution of rive. Such was the reply of the British Government to the prevalent discontent. Similar disturbances occurred elsewhere, and wore similarly suppressed. A political demonstration of a radical char- acter was held in Spa Fields in London in the same year (1816). The Government prosecuted the leaders for treason, but the jury declined to convict. Somewhat later when the Prince Kegent was returning from Parliament, where he had declared that the English electoral svsteni THE MASSACRE OF PETERLOO 421 was the most perfect the world had ever seen, the people threw stones at his carriage, breaking one of its windows. The legislation occasioned by these occurrences was harshly Suspension repressive. No less irrave a measure was passed than one sus- of HaDeas i • i ti v l Corpus. pending the Habeas Corpus Act, an act which no Parliament in Great Britain, since that of 1817, has felt it necessary to suspend. An act for the suppression of seditious meet- ings was hardly more defensible. It was the object of this bill to prevent political discussion by the public. Only with the special permission of a magistrate could a debating club meet or a lecture be given or a reading room be opened. The ministry even declined to make any exception of lectures on medicine, surgery, and chemistry. Such legislation only the gravest necessity could justify, and such necessity did not exist. That it could be used to damage political oppo- nents of the existing ministry was soon made evident. The suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act drove Cobbett, the most aggressive opponent of the ministry, into temporary exile. Two years later a more important event occurred in Man- The Chester. A public meeting was held in St. Peters Field, Massacre of ...» v Peterloo. August 16, 1819, for the purpose of petitioning for parlia- mentary reform and the redress of grievances. This meet- ing had been declared illegal by the authorities, yet the organ- izers had determined to hold it nevertheless. Fifty thousand men, women, and children came together accordingly to listen to Hunt, a popular orator. The police attempted to arrest Hunt and the other leaders. The crowd closed in around them, jeering. The magistrates apparently lost their heads. They ordered a body of cavalry and yeomanry to rescue the police. The result, however, was that the troops charged the crowd which was unarmed. There was a scene of fear- ful confusion ; several defenseless people were killed at once ; many more were injured. This so-called Massacre of Peter- loo angered the people, and in the end furthered the agita- tion for reform, but the Government warmly approved the 422 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 The Six Acts. Death of George III. The dawn of an era of reform. Defiance of the Holy Alliance. action of the magistrates and induced Parliament to pass the famous Six Acts or Gag Laws which represent the climax of this sorry reaction in England, and which strin- gently restricted the freedom of speech, of the press, and of public meeting, which had long been the boast of England. Such was the answer of the Tory aristocracy under Lord Liverpool to the demands of the discontented and distressed. No attempt on the part of the privileged classes to examine the grievances of the people, to seek to remove the causes of the universal discontent, but only harsh and repressive legislation that encroached gravely upon the traditional liberties of the British people. The conquerors of Napoleon were easily frightened. Their policy of coercion was suc- cessful. The radical party was silenced. It reappeared ten years later, however, and contributed immensely to the cause of parliamentary reform which then became irre- sistible. In 1820 George III died at the age of eighty-one. He had for many years been insane, and the regency had been exer- cised by his son, who now became George IV, and who reigned from 1820 to 1880. After 1820 a change gradually came over the political life of England. The Tory party still retained its great majority in Parliament, but it showed a tendency toward liberalism. With returning prosperity after the resump- tion of specie payments in 1819, the disturbances of the last few years ceased, and the panic, into which the governing classes had been thrown by the French Revolution, passed away. Several of the more reactionary members of the ministry died or resigned, and their places were taken by men of a younger and more liberal generation. Canning, Peel, and Huskisson made the Tory party an engine of partial reform. Under Canning, as Foreign Secretary from 1822, England assumed the position that each nation is free to determine its own form of government, a doctrine opposed to that of the Holy Alliance of the right of inter- THE DAWN OF LIBERALISM 423 vention in the affairs of other states whose acts might be thought to imperil the principle of monarchy. Canning freed England from all connection with the Holy Alliance. He recognized the independence of the Spanish colonies in America. If Spain could reconquer them she might. But no foreign country, declared Canning, should subdue them for her. " I called the New World in," he said, " to re- dress the balance of the Old." The main significance of Canning's administration of the Foreign Office is that at least one of the great powers with boldness and success defied the smug and timorous reactionary policy of the absolute monarchies of the Continent. Similar interven- tions in Portuguese and Greek affairs served the cause of liberalism in those countries. While Canning was making England's foreign policy more Economic liberal, Huskisson was introducing greater liberty into com- reform s. merce by carrying bills" in 1823 altering the Navigation Laws, which threw restrictions about the carrying trade, and by reducing the duties on many articles of import. This was not free trade, but it was a step in that direction. The more strongly protected interests maintained their ground for a generation longer. When Huskisson began his reforms about 1,500 Acts of Parliament regulated the administration of the tariff system ; the number was now reduced to eleven, thus greatly simplifying that department. Another important reform of these years was that of the Tne Penal Penal Code. The code then prevailing was a disgrace to England, and placed her far behind France and other coun- tries. There was a crying need for reform. The punish- ment of death could be legally inflicted for about two hun- dred offenses — for picking a man's pocket, for stealing five shillings from a store, or forty shillings from a dwelling house, for stealing a fish, for injuring Westminster Bridge, for sending threatening letters, for making a false entry in a marriage register. 1 1 Walpole, II, 140-1, footnote, gives a partial list of these offenses. 424 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 Reformed by Sir Robert Peel. Religious inequality. The religious disabilities of Dis- senters. This code, as a matter of fact, was not enforced. It was shown, for instance, that in the twelve years, from 1805 to 1817, 655 persons had been indicted for stealing five shillings from a shop. Of these 113 had been sentenced to death, but the sentence had not been carried into effect in a single instance. While this was an evidence that the humane feeling of the age condemned the law and would not enforce it, still the code, by its very harshness, tended to encourage indifference to law. Two great reformers, Romilly and Mackintosh, had labored for fifteen years to persuade Parlia- ment to alter this barbarous code, but with only disheartening results. But now Sir Robert Peel took up the reform, and proposed and carried, in 1823, the abolition of the death penalty in about a hundred cases. The Tory party now accepted proposals it had previously fiercely combatted. It is a curious fact that even before this more humane policy was adopted with reference to the misdeeds and weaknesses of men, a law for the prevention of cruelty to animals, the first of its kind, had been passed (1S22). Another reform of these years no less significant lay in the direction of greater religious liberty. In 1815 there was in England religious freedom but not religious equality. People might worship as they saw fit. Nevertheless, as we have seen, men paid a penalty for belonging to any other than the established Church of England. Political priv- ileges were conditioned upon creed. It has been only by a series of acts passed in the nineteenth century that England has thrown open her political life to all, irrespective of church connections or religious beliefs or professions. The first step taken was the removal of the disabilities from which Protestant Dissenters suffered. These were imposed by the so-called Test and Corporation Acts. These acts, put upon the statute book at a time when there was grave fear of a violent assault upon Protestantism, had been intended to destroy the political power of the Catholics. As a qualifica- tion for holding most offices, municipal and national, the REMOVAL OF RELIGIOUS DISABILITIES 425 sacrament must be received according to the rites of the Anglican Church, and the oaths of supremacy and allegiance taken. The Test Act required a declaration against transub- stantiation. Though these acts were designed to exclude Catholics, they went further and excluded as well Dissenters generally. Yet with singular inconsistency Dissenters were permitted to be members of Parliament, and thus to partici- pate in the making of the laws of England. For a long time, however, they did not vigorously object to the injustice and inconvenience which they suffered, inasmuch as they hated and feared Catholics more than they coveted political power, and believed that the repeal of the Test Act would inevitably lead to the emancipation of the Catholics, which they did not wish to see. Moreover, as has been already stated, a convenient device was made to fit their case. They were, as a matter of practice, permitted to hold office, though in so doing they were lawbreakers. Then Parliament would pass an act of indemnity pardoning them for what they had done. This had for a long while been the established custom ; consequently the Test Act no longer operated to the exclusion of Dissenters from office, but was only a badge of religious inferiority. In 1828 the Test and Corporation Acts were Repeal of repealed as being no longer in harmony with the age or the Test with the wishes of Dissenters. Henceforth every person on c orDora t;i on entering upon office must make a declaration " on the true Acts, faith of a Christian " that he would not use his authority in any way against the Established Church. These words had the effect of excluding Jews from office, thereby occa- sioning in the years to come a new agitation and a new reform. Thus the monopoly of the Church had in one particular been broken. The repeal of the Corporation and Test Acts was an act of complete justice to Protestant Nonconform- ists, but of only partial justice to Roman Catholics. Though Catholic the latter could now hold most offices they were still ex- disabillties « eluded from Parliament, for their exclusion from Parliament depended not on the Test Act but upon an act passed in 426 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 1679, and which was still in force, requiring all members of Parliament to take the oath of supremacy and to make a declaration against transubstantiation and the adoration of the Virgin Mary. Thus, while after the repeal of the Test Act in 1828, Catholics might be appointed to municipal and national offices, they might not sit in either House of Parlia- ment. They were not upon an equality with Protestants in political matters, and had no share in the legislation of the empire. Moreover, their position was anomalous and con- tradictory. In Ireland all forty shilling freeholders pos- sessed the suffrage. Thus a large number of Catholics could vote for members of the House of Commons, but practically they could only vote for Protestants, as Protestants alone would subscribe to the oath and declaration required of all members. Nevertheless it was not illegal for Catholics to vote for one of their own faith and elect him. They would, of course, be throwing away their suffrage as such a person would certainly, for the reason given, not be pennitted to take his seat. Catholic Emancipation, as the removal of these disabilities was called, had for forty years been a prominent question in English politics. Some of the great statesmen of Eng- land had tried to solve it favorably to Catholic claims, notably Pitt and Canning, but without success, owing to the prevalent bigotry. George III and George IV were violently opposed, George III declaring that he should reckon any man his personal enemy who should propose any measure of relief, and they were supported by the more conservative Tories. The question entered upon the acute stage in 1828. The Duke of Wellington was prime min- ister and Sir Robert Peel was the most important member of the cabinet. Both were opposed on principle to Catholic emancipation. The ministry wished to postpone all dis- cussion of the question. But events were just then occur- ring in Ireland which would have rendered further postpone- ment of the settlement an act of sheer madness. An agitation, CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION 427 widesweeping and portentous, convulsed this long suffering people. A man of remarkable powers of leadership had arisen and had forced the crisis. Daniel O'Connell is one Daniel of the most extraordinary men in Irish history. A thrilling O'Connell. orator and a shrewd and energetic lawyer he could inflame vast multitudes of men, yet could lead them safely past snares and pitfalls. Believing that Ireland could only obtain justice by an overwhelming display of force he founded the Catholic Association to advocate Catholic claims. This soon became so powerful a political body as to alarm the Government. A law was accordingly passed in 1825 order- ing its dissolution. The law was from the start a dead letter. The Association, dissolved, immediately reappeared in another form. Monster meetings were held, where the witchery of O'Connell's oratory was displayed and his marvelous power of control of an excitable and injured people conspicuously manifested. These monster demon- strations were marked by no excesses. They constituted an indignant and resolute protest against unfair legislation. O'Connell now decided upon an act so bold that he believed it would mean the end of the agitation. A vacancy occurred in the parliamentary representation from the county of Clare. O'Connell decided to be a candidate. He was tri- O'Connell umphantly elected. He was a Catholic, therefore debarred elected to . . Parliaments by the laws from membership. The electors voted for him despite the fact that they were throwing their votes away. They aimed to produce a moral effect and they succeeded. It was evident that O'Connell could be similarly returned in almost every other county in Ireland should the occasion occur, that the people were in earnest, and united. It was the fear that this was the attitude of a united people on the very brink of a revolt rather than any sense of the justice of the cause that prompted Wellington and Peel to bring in the famous Emancipation Bill, to force it through an unwilling Parliament, and to impose it upon an unwilling King. Wellington candidly admitted that he was driven to 12S ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 Emancipa- tion carried The restriction of the suffrage in Ireland. Tory- opposition to the reform of Parlia- ment. this step by fear of civil war. George IV felt, as he afterward said, like a person with a pistol at his breast. Like most persons in such a predicament he yielded (1829). Catholics were henceforth admitted to both Houses of Parliament, and with a few exceptions they might now fill any municipal and state office. The act established real political equality be- tween Catholics and Protestants. But at the very time that Catholics were given the right to sit in Parliament, they were in large majority deprived of the suffrage, for the property qualification for voters in Ireland was raised from forty shillings to two hundred. Thus in removing one grievance a new one was created, certainly an ineffective method of pacif} T ing Ireland. One hundred and ninety thousand forty-shilling freeholders were disfranchised offhand. It is to be said, however, that this Tory Parliament would not have consented to Catholic Emancipation had it not known beforehand that this blow would be dealt to democracy. The reforms that have just been described were carried through by the Tory party. There was one reform, how- ever, more fundamental and important, which it was clear that that party would never concede, the reform of Parliament itself. The significant features of the parliamentary system have already been described. That they required profound alteration had been held by many of the Whigs for more than fifty years. But the Whigs had been powerless to effect anything, having long been in the minority. A combination of circumstances, however, now brought about the downfall of the party so long dominant, and rendered possible the great reform. George IV died on June 26, 1S30, and was succeeded by his brother William IV (1830-1837). The death of the monarch necessitated a new election of Par- liament. Many of the influential Tory politicians, indig- nant that Wellington and Peel had consented to the emancipation of the Catholics, wished to punish their leaders by sending up members to the Commons who would be INFLUENCE OF REVOLUTION OF 1830 429 opposed to them. Wellington's foreign policy increased the unpopularity of the ministry. Moreover, just at this time the distress of the working classes was great, and they were demanding parliamentary reform with renewed vigor. Sud- Influence of denly the French Revolution of 1880 occurred. It exerted the French . „ . . . Revolution a great influence in England. To the distressed and dis- of 1830> contented it was an encouragement to further activity. But its influence upon the well-to-do middle class was more important as it proved that great changes could be effected without bringing social anarchy in their train. Thus the specter of revolution that had haunted the imag- ination of the solid, conservative class of Englishmen was finally laid by a revolution both reasonably orderly and most salutary. This class was no longer unwilling to co-operate with the working people. It now took up with energy the demand for reform. The elections of 1830, held under such circumstances, resulted in a Tory loss of fifty members in the Commons. Though that party still had a majority it was not likely to last long, as many Tories were opposed to Wellington. Parliament met in November 1830, and the question of re- form was immediately introduced. The Duke of Wellington The Duke showed his position by a remarkable eulogy of the English of Wellin ff- Parliament as one which " answered all the good purposes reform of legislation, and this to a greater degree than any legisla- ture had ever answered, in any country whatever," that it possessed and deservedly possessed " the full and entire con- fidence of the country." He would go still further and say " that if at the present moment he had imposed upon him the duty of forming a legislature for any country — and particularly for a country like this, in possession of great property of various descriptions — he did not mean to assert that he could form such a legislature as they possessed now, for the nature of man was incapable of reaching such ex- cellence at once, but his great endeavor would be to form some description of legislature which would produce the same 430 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 Fall of the Tory- ministry. The First Befonn Bill. Provisions. results.'' L T nder these circumstances he would himself never bring forward any measure changing that system, but he " should always feel it his duty to resist such measures when proposed by others." * The result of this speech, which was entirely sincere but seemed the very abdication of the intellect, was to arouse such widespread indignation that the Wellington ministr} T was shortly swept from office, and the Whigs came in. Thus was broken the control the Tory party had exercised with one slight interruption for forty-six years. Earl Grey, who for forty years had demanded parlia- mentary reform, now became prime minister. A ministry was formed with ease, and included many able men, Durham, Russell, Brougham, Palmerston, Stanley, Melbourne, and on March 1, 1831, a Reform Bill was introduced in the House of Commons by Lord John Russell. It aimed to effect a redistribution of seats on a more equitable plan, and the establishment of a uniform franchise for boroughs in place of the great and absurd variety of franchises then existing. The redistribution of seats was based on two principles, the withdrawal of the right of representation from small, de- cayed boroughs, and its bestowal upon large and wealthy towns hitherto without it. Accordingly the bill proposed to deprive all boroughs having a population of less than 2,000 of their separate representation in Parliament : to deprive all boroughs of less than 4,000 inhabitants of one of their two members. It was estimated that 110 boroughs would be affected, and that 168 seats would be abolished. 2 The ministry proposed that these should be given to the counties and the great unrepre- 1 Quoted in May, Const. Hist, of Eng., I, 331-335. Kendall, Source Book of English History. Xo. 199. 1 The list read by Lord John Russell of the boroughs which it was proposed wholly or partially to disfranchise, with the number of voters and " the prevailing influence " of each, that is the landowner, who had practical control, may be found in Molesworth, Hist, of Eng., I, 70-73; also, in part, in Cheyney, Readings in English History, 686-688. INTRODUCTION OF REFORM BILL 431 sented boroughs. The bill amazed the House by its thor- oughgoing character and encouraged the reformers. Neither side had expected so sweeping a change. The introduction of the bill precipitated a remarkable parliamentary discus- sion, which continued with some intervals for over fifteen months, from March 1, 1831, to June 5, 1832. Lord John Russell in his introduction of the measure, Lord John after stating that the theory of the British Constitution Russell's was no taxation without representation, and after showing that in former times Parliament had been truly representa- tive, said that it was no longer so. " A stranger who was told that this country is unparalleled in wealth and industry, and more civilized and more enlightened than any country was before it — that it is a country that prides itself on its freedom, and that once in every seven years it elects repre- sentatives from its population to act as the guardians and preservers of that freedom — would be anxious and curious to see how that representation is formed, and how the people choose their representatives, to whose faith and guardian- ship they entrust their free and liberal institutions. Such a person would be very much astonished if he were taken to a ruined mound and told that that mound sent two repre- sentatives to Parliament; if he were taken to a stone wall and told that three niches in it sent two representatives to Parliament ; if he were taken to a park where no houses were to be seen, and told that that park sent two representatives to Parliament. But if he were told all this, and were aston- ished at hearing it, he would be still more astonished if he were to see large and opulent towns, full of enterprise and industry and intelligence, containing vast magazines of every species of manufactures, and were then told that these towns sent no representatives to Parliament." Lord John Russell estimated that the electorate would be enlarged by about a half a million additional voters by this measure, for it proposed the extension of the suffrage as well as the redistribution of seats. 4S2 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1838 Sir Robert The Hist man who arose to oppose the bill was the repre- Inglis's sentative of the University of Oxford, Sir Robert lnglis, speech . , ° who represented the opinions and prejudices of the country gentlemen so vitally affected by the measure. He denied flatly that the population of a town had ever had anything to do with its representation or that representation and taxation were in any way connected in the British Constitu- tion. " Tan the noble lord show that any town or borough lias been called into parliamentary existence because it was large or populous, or excluded from it because it was small? The noble lord has tried to make much of the instance of Old Sarum. In one and the same year, the SSrd Edward I, a writ was issued to both Old and New Sarum, and in neither case was it conferred on account of population or taxation. On the contrary, 1 believe it was given, in the first instance, to oblige some Earl oi Salisbury by putting his friends into the House. Ami in an account of the borough it was stated that it hail lately been purchased by Mr. Pitt, the possessor of the celebrated diamond ot' that name, who has attained an hereditary seat in the House of Commons as much as the Earl of Arundel possessed one in the House of Peers by being the owner of Arundel Castle. How then can it be said that, according to the constitution of the country noble- men are not to be represented and their interests regarded in this House. ... It is in vain after this to talk of the purity of representation in former times. I defy the noble fcepresenta- lord to point out at any time when the representation was tion never botter th . m jt is {U prosont> j S;IV> therefore, that what is better. . . proposed is not restorative. The House and the country may judge what it is, but I will state in one word that it is Ki-iolution, a revolution that will overturn all the natural influence of rank and property." Sir Robert proceeded to show that some of the greatest men in parliamentary annals had entered the House as representatives of these nomination and close boroughs, the elder Fitt, who sat indeed for this very Old Sarum, which was to be embalmed as a classic iu DEBATES ON REFORM BILL 433 these debates, the younger Pitt, Burke, Canning, Fox, that thus they had a chance to show their talents and were later chosen the representatives of large towns. But no such towns would ever have chosen them had they not previously had this opportunity to prove their ability. " It is only by this means that young men who are unconnected by birth or residence with large towns can ever hope to enter this House unless they are cursed — I will call it cursed — with that talent of mob oratory which is used for the purpose of influencing the lowest and most debasing passions of the people." Hunt, one of the radical leaders, former hero of the field Hunt's of Peterloo, and now a member of the House, took part in speec the debate. "How is this House constituted?" he asked, " How are many honorable members elected? Look at the borough of Ilchester and the boroughs of Lancashire and Cornwall, and see what classes of men return members to this House. I will tell the House a fact which has come to my knowledge, and which bears on that particular point. In the borough of Ilchester . . . many of the voters are of the most degraded and lowest class, who can neither read nor write, and who always take care to contract debts to the amount of £35 previous to an election, because they know that those debts will be liquidated for them. Is that, then, the class of men which the House is told represents the property of the country? I am one who thinks that this House ought to be what it professes to be — the Commons House of Parliament, representing the feelings and interest of all the common people of England." Another member, Sir C. Wetherell, denounced the pro- posed loss of their positions by 168 members as " corpora- tion robbery," as a new Pride's purge, as an imitation of the illegalities of the Cromwellian period, as republican in prin- ciple, " destructive of all property, of all right, of all privilege." Sir Robert Peel pointed out that the close boroughs not 434- ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 Sir Robert Peel's criticism. Macaulay on the Bill. only brought out young talent that otherwise could get no opportunity to show itself, but that they furnished refuges for distinguished members, who by some caprice of fortune had lost their hold upon their constituencies — and that thus these men could continue in the service of the nation. " During 150 years the constitution in its present form has been in force; and I would ask any man who hears me to declare whether the experience of history has produced any form of government so calculated to promote the happiness and secure the rights and liberties of a free and enlightened people." Stanley, later Lord Derby, replying to the con- tention that the nomination boroughs opened an opportunity to very able men to enter Parliament who might not find any other way, said, " Whatever advantage might be derived from this mode of admission would be more than balanced by this disadvantage — that the class of persons thus intro- duced would, whatever may be their talents and acquire- ments, not be looked upon by the people as representatives." Macaulay delivered a speech on the second day of the debate that made his reputation as one of the foremost orators of the House. Replying to Sir Robert Inglis he said, " My honorable friend . . . challenges us to show that the constitution was ever better than it is. Sir, we are legislators, not antiquaries. The question for us is, not whether the constitution was better formerly, but whether we can make it better now?" Shall "a hundred drunken potwallopers in one place, or the owner of a ruined hovel in another," be invested with powers " which are withheld from cities renowned to the furthest ends of the earth for the marvels of their wealth and of their industry? " " But these great cities, says my honorable friend . . . are virtually, though not directly, represented. Are not the wishes of Manchester, he asks, as much consulted as those of any town which sends members to Parliament? Now, Sir, I do not understand how a power which is salutary when exercised virtually can be noxious when exercised DEFEAT OF THE REFORM BILL 435 directly. If the wishes of Manchester have as much weight with us as they would have under a system which should give representatives to Manchester, how can there be any danger in giving representatives to Manchester? " Refer- ring to the utility of the close boroughs as affording careers to men of talent he said that " we must judge of the form of government by its general tendency, not by happy acci- dents," and that if " there were a law that the hundred tallest men in England should be members of Parliament, there would probably be some able men among those who would come into the House by virtue of this law." Thus the debate went on, an unusual number of members Ministry participating. But the bill did not have long to live. The defeated, Opposition was persistent, and on April 19th the ministry dissolved was defeated on an amendment. It resolved to appeal to the people. Parliament was dissolved and a new election ordered. This election took place in the summer of 1831 amid the greatest excitement and was one of the most momen- tous of the century. From one end of the land to the other the cry was, " The bill, the whole bill, and nothing but the bill." There was some violence and intimidation of voters, and bribery on a large scale was practised on both sides. The question put the candidates was, " Will you support the bill or will you oppose it? " The result of the election was an overwhelming victory for the reformers. On June 24, 1831, Lord John Russell introduced the Second second Reform Bill, which was practically the same as the first. The Opposition did not yield, but fought it inch by inch. They tried to wear out the ministry by making dilatory motions and innumerable speeches which necessarily consisted of mere repetition. In the course of two weeks Sir Robert Peel spoke forty-eight times, Croker fifty-seven times, Wetherell fifty-eight times. However, the bill was finally passed, September 22nd, by a majority of 106. It was then sent up to the House of Lords where it was quickly House of killed (October 8, 1831). Lords. 436 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1S32 It was the Lords who chietiy profited by the existing system of nomination and rotten boroughs, and they were enraged at the proposal to end it. They were determined not to lose the power it gave them. The defeat of the bill by the Upper House caused great indignation throughout the country. Apparently the Lords were simply greedy oi their privileges. Again riots broke out in London and other towns, expressive of the popular feeling. Newspapers appeared in mourning. Bells were tolled. Threats oi personal violence to the Lords were made, and in certain instances carried out. Troops were called out in some places. England, it was widely felt, was verg- ing toward a civil war. Third Parliament was now prorogued. It reassembled December Bin 6th. and on the l&th, Lord John Russell rose again and in- troduced his third Reform Bill. Again the same tiresome tactics of the Opposition. But the bill finally passed the House of Commons, March &S, 18S&, by a majority of 116. Again the bill was before the Lords, who showed the same disposition to defeat it as before. The situation seemed hopeless. Twice the Commons had passed the bill with the manifest and express approval of the people. Were they to be foiled by a chamber based on hereditary privilege? Riots, monster demonstrations, acrimonious and bitter de- nunciation, showed once more the temper of the people. There was only one way in which the measure could be carried. The King might create enough peers to give its supporters a majority in the House of Lords. This, how- ever, William IV at first refused to do. The Grey ministry consequently resigned. The King appealed to the Duke of Wellington to form a ministry. The Duke tried but failed. The King then gave way, recalled Earl Grey to power and signed a paper stating. M The King grants per- mission to Earl Grey and to his Chancellor, Lord Brougham, to create such a number of peers as will be sufficient to insure the passing of the Reform Bill." The peers were PROVISIONS OF THE REFORM BILL 437 never created. The threat sufficed. The bill passed the The Bil l Lords, June 4, 1832, about 100 of its opponents absenting P a8Sed - themselves from the House. It was signed and became a law. The bill had undergone some changes during its passage. In its final form it provided that fifty-six nomination or close boroughs with a population of less than 2,000 should lose their representation entirely; that thirty-two others, with a population of less than 4,000 should lose one seat each. The seats thus obtained were redistributed as fol- Hedistribu- lows : twenty-two large towns were given two members each ; on ■ 1111 * oCJAtS. twenty others were given one each, and the larger counties were given additional members, sixty-five in all. Scotland and Ireland were by companion bills given increased repre- sentation. One hundred and forty-three seats were thus re- dist ributed. There was no attempt to make equal electoral districts, but only to remove more flagrant abuses. Con- stituencies still varied greatly in population. The total membership of the House was not altered but remained 658. The Reform Bill also altered and widened the suffrage. The Previously the county franchise had depended entirely upon * oun ^ the ownership of land; that is, was limited to those who owned outright land of an annual value of forty shillings, the forty-shilling freeholders. The county suffrage was now extended to include also copyholders and leaseholders, i. e., farmers and tenants of land whose tenure was for sixty years, and of the annual value of ten pounds, and to tenants- at-will holding land worth fifty pounds a year. Thus in the counties the suffrage was dependent still upon the tenure of land, but not upon outright ownership. There were, it is seen, several methods of acquiring the county franchise. In the boroughs a far greater change was made. The The previous local franchises were all abolished, the personal oroU6: .. franchise, rights of living voters being guaranteed, and a new uniform suffrage was adopted. The right to vote was given to all ten pound householders, which meant all who owned or 438 ENGLAND TO THE REFORM BILL OF 1832 rented a house or shop or other building of an annual rental value, with the land, of ten pounds. Thus the suffrage was practically given in boroughs to the great middle class. There was henceforth a uniform suffrage in boroughs, and a varied suffrage in counties. The law applied only to England. In the same session similar reform bills were passed for Scotland and Ireland. In order to reduce bribery, voting in each constituency was limited henceforth to two days. Not a The Reform Bill of 1832 was not a democratic measure, but it made the House of Commons a truly representative body. It admitted to the suffrage the wealthier middle class. The number of voters, particularly in the boroughs, was con- siderably increased ; but the laborers of England had no votes, nor had the poorer middle class. The average ratio of voters to the whole population of Great Britain was about one to thirty. The measure, therefore, though regarded as final by the Whig ministry, was not so regarded by the vast majority, who were still disfranchised. No further alteration was made until 1867, but during the whole period there was a demand for extension. In 1831 and 1832 the people, by their monster meetings, riots, acts of violence, had helped greatly to pass the bill only to find when the struggle was over that others and not themselves had profited by their efforts. The passage of the Reform Bill showed clearly the pre- dominance in the state of the House of Commons over both King and Lords in case the House has the evident and em- phatic support of the people. CHAPTER XIX ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO GREAT REFORMS (1832-1867) England had entered upon a period of Whig government An Era that was destined to be almost as prolonged as the preceding whig 1 . government, period of Tory rule. The Tories had been in power from 1784 to 1830, with but one short interval. From 1830 to 1874 the Whigs controlled the government, with the excep- tion of short periods which amounted in all to eight years. In the elections of 1832, held under the new conditions, the Whigs were overwhelmingly victorious. The Tories re- turned only about 150 members. The terms Tory and Whig now gradually gave way to the terms Conservative and Liberal, which are still in use. The reforming activity of the Whigs, which had achieved the notable triumph of the great change in the House of Commons, continued unabated for several years. Several measures of great importance were passed by the reformed Parliament during the next few years. One of the first of these was the abolition of slavery in 1833. It had been long held by the British courts that slavery could not exist in the British Isles, that the instant a slave touched the soil of England he became free. More- over, after a long agitation, England had abolished the slave trade in 1807. Henceforth it was a crime to kidnap negroes in Africa and sell them into slavery. But slavery Slavery in itself existed in the West Indies, in Mauritius and in South the colonies. Africa. There were about 750,000 slaves in these colonies. To free them was a far more difficult matter than to stop the African slave trade, for it was considered an interference 439 440 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS with the rights of property, and it might ruin the prosperity of the colonies. Two causes were now working for the abolition of slavery, a growing sensitiveness to the moral iniquity of the institution and the decreasing influence of its leading supporters, the West Indian planters, owing to the fact that their trade with Great Britain had fallen off greatly since 1815. For many years an anti-slaverj agitation had been in progress, ably led by Wilberforce, Buxton, and Zachary Macaulay, father of the historian, who had created the public opinion indispensably necessary to any reform. Various acts of legislation had been passed looking toward the improvement of the position of slaves in the crown colonies, but not providing for the abolition of the institu- tion itself. These measures were indignantly and hotly resented by the planters, who denounced the action of the English government in vituperative terms, unwise conduct, as it still further alienated public opinion in the mother Abolition country. A bill was passed in August 1833 decreeing that of slavery. s l averv should cease August 1, 1834. It provided for the immediate emancipation of all children of six years and under ; for a period of apprenticeship for all others for seven years, during which three-fourths of their time was to belong to their former masters, one-fourth to themselves. This, is was argued, would give them the preparation necessary for a wise and intelligent use of freedom, but the provision did not work well in practice and was ultimately allowed to lapse. A gift of twenty million pounds was made to the slave owners as compensation for the loss of their property. Conscience was aroused at the same time by a cruel evil right at home, the employment, under barbarous conditions, of children in the factories of England. Child The employment of child labor in British industries was labor. one f t ne reS ults of the rise of the modern factory system. It was early seen that much of the work done by machinery PROBLEM OF CHILD LABOR 441 could be carried on by children, and as their labor was cheaper than that of adults they were swept into the factories in larger and larger numbers, and a monstrous evil grew up. They were, of course, the children of the poorest people. Many began this life of misery at the age of five or six, more at the age of eight or nine. In- credible as it may seem, they were often compelled to work twelve or fourteen hours a day. Half hour intervals were allowed for meals, but by a refinement of cruelty they were expected to clean the machinery at such times. Fall- ing asleep at their work they were beaten by overseers or injured by falling against the machinery. In this in- human regime there was no time or strength left for educa- tion or recreation or healthy development of any kind. The moral atmosphere in which the children worked was harmful in the extreme. Physically, intellectually, morally, the result could only be stunted human beings. This shocking abuse had been attacked spasmodically and Previous unsuccessfully for thirty years. In 1802 a law was passed atta( *s J - 1 ^ . upon the limiting the number of hours to twelve a day, and providing system# that work should not begin before six in the morning, nor continue after nine at night. It applied, however, to but few mills. In 1816 a bill was introduced providing that no child should be employed for more than ten hours a day in any factory. The House of Lords limited this to cotton mills and extended the hours to twelve. Later it was voted that each child should have a quarter of a holiday on each Saturday. Such was the pitifully small protection guaranteed children workers by the laws of England. This monstrous system was defended by political econ- The . . e . j. system omists, manufacturers, and statesmen in the name ot indi- defended# vidual liberty, in whose name, moreover, crimes have often been committed, the liberty of the manufacturer to conduct his business without interference from outside, the liberty of the laborer to sell his labor under whatever conditions he may be disposed or, as might more properly be said, 442 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS The Factory Act, 1833. The decay of local self-govern- ment. compelled to accept. A Parliament, however, which had been so sensitive to the wrongs of negro slaves in Jamaica, could not be indifferent to the fate of English children. Thus the long efforts of many English humanitarians, Rob- ert Owen, Thomas Sadler, Fielden, Lord Ashley, resulted in the passage of the Factory Act of 1833, which prohibited the employment in spinning and weaving factories of children under nine, made a maximum eight hour day for those from nine to thirteen, and of twelve for those from thirteen to eighteen. The bill also provided for the sanitary conditions of the factories, for a certain amount of recreation and education, and, most important, it created a system of factory inspectors whose duty it was to see that this law was enforced. This was a very modest beginning, yet it represented a great advance on the preceding policy of England. It was the first of a series of acts regulating the conditions of laborers in the interests of society as a whole, acts which have become more numerous, more minute, and more drastic from 1833 to the present day. The idea that an employer may conduct his business entirely as he likes has no standing in modern English law. The reform spirit, which rendered the decade from 1830 to 1840 so notable, achieved another vast improvement in the radical transformation of municipal government. The local self-government of England enjoyed great fame abroad but was actually in a very sorry condition at home. Not only was the Parliament of 1830 the organ of an oligarchy, but so was the system of local government. Usurpations of power by a single class had gone on flourishingly under the Tudor and Stuart and even Hanoverian kings. The whole political structure, local as well as general, was honeycombed with notorious abuses. The municipal and the parliamentary systems were closely bound together. The unreformed boroughs were natural supports of an unreformed House of Commons. Now that Parliament had been reformed it was natural that the same party should attempt to bring MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT 443 about the abolition of the evils of local government. In The earlier centuries all the freemen of the borough had enioved necess y .... J for reform, full rights of citizenship, and local government had been popu- lar in character. But with the lapse of time the term " free- men " had become technical and applied only to a few in each borough, and frequently to non-residents. Thus Cambridge, with a population of about 20,000, had only 118 " free- men," Portsmouth, with 46,000, only 102. Many of these were poor, paid small taxes, and were in no sense representa- tive citizens, yet they alone possessed the right to vote in municipal elections. Thus, in Cambridge, the freemen paid only about two thousand pounds of the twenty-five thousand of the city taxes. But in many cases even the " freemen " had no political power, but only privileges of a pecuniary nature, such as a right to share in certain charitable funds and of exemption from tolls. In very numerous cases the local government was entirely in the hands of the cor- poration, that is, the mayor and the common council. The mayor was chosen by the council and the councilors sat for life and had the right to fill all vacancies in their body. The government in such cases was literally a close corpora- tion. Thus, throughout all England, a very small minority had an absolute monopoly of political power in towns and cities. These municipal governments were notoriously corrupt. Municipal Elected for life and self-elected they had no sense of re- & overn " ■i -t • r™ • j* ments sponsibuity to the community at large. Iheir proceedings no t or i usly were generally secret. They levied taxes but rendered no corrupt. account of how they expended them. Neglecting the needs of the community for proper policing, paving, lighting, sanitation, they used the funds largely for self-gratification or personal advantage or the advantage of the party which they favored. In many of the smaller boroughs the mayor alone was practically the entire government. Generally speaking, those Englishmen who lived in boroughs were not only not self-governed, but were wretchedly misgoverned. 444 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS This system received its death-blow from the reform of Parliament. The two systems hung together, were mutually interdependent. The reform of one had, as an inevitable consequence, the reform of the other. The power of the privileged class in the House of Commons had rested largely upon the case with which they had been able to secure control of these little local oligarchies, which had had the right to elect the members of the boroughs to the House. In 1833 a commission was appointed to investigate the whole subject, which it did with convincing thoroughness. The reform j n \S{)5 a law was passed, the Municipal Corporations of municipal . , . . , ., _ . «.«,««. government. ' sccond m importance only to the Reform Bill. This act provided for the election of town councilors by all the inhabitants who had paid taxes during the preceding three years. This established a property and residence quali- fication. The town council was to elect the mayor. The town council and the constituency together formed the corpora- tion. The proceedings of the council were to be public; the accounts were to be published and audited. Not only were property owners but property renters included in the new electorate. Those who rented property that was on the tax lists as worth ten pounds a }-car had the right to vote as well as those who paid taxes themselves ; in other words, a man who paid a rent of about a dollar a week for his house or his store was now enfranchised. This bill did not apply to London, reserved for special treatment, nor to sixty-seven boroughs, which were very small, but con- cerned ITS boroughs, the large majority. It is estimated that about two million people were affected by it. The bill was not a democratic measure, but it gave borough govern- ment, as the bill of 1832 had given parliamentary, to the wealthy and the middle classes. It effectually restored self-government. The basis of representation has been widened since 1835. A similar act for Scotland, sweep- ing away abuses even more glaring, had been passed in 1833. ACCESSION OF QUEEN VICTORIA 445 In the midst of this period of reform occurred a change Accession in the occupancy of the throne. King William IV died June of Queen Victoria 20, 1837, and was succeeded by his niece, Victoria. The young Queen was the daughter of the Duke of Kent, fourth son of George III. She was, at the time of her accession, eighteen years of age. She had been carefully educated, but owing to the fact that William IV disliked her mother, she had seen very little of court life, and was very little known. Carlyle, oppressed with all the weary weight of this unintelligible world, pitied her, quite unnecessarily. " Poor little Queen ! " said he, " she is at an age at which a girl can hardly be trusted to choose a bonnet for herself; yet a task is laid upon her from which an archangel might shrink." Not such was the mood of the Queen. She was buoyant and joyous, and entered with zest upon a reign which was to prove the longest in the annals of England. She impressed all who saw her with her dignity and poise. Her Her political education was conducted under the guidance, first p ° * „ r ° education, of Leopold, King of Belgium, her uncle, and after her acces- sion, of Lord Melbourne, both of whom instilled in her mind the principles of constitutional monarchy. The question of her marriage was important and was decided by herself. Sum- moning her cousin, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, into her presence, she offered him her hand — " a nervous thing to do," as she afterward said, yet the only thing as " he would never have presumed to take such a liberty " himself as to ask for the hand of the Queen of England. The marriage, cele- brated in 1840, was a marriage of affection. " She is as full of love as Juliet," said Sir Robert Peel. Her married life was exceptionally happy, and when the Prince Consort died twenty-one years later, she was inconsolable. During these years he was her constant adviser, and so complete was the harmony of their views that he was practically quite as much the ruler of the country as was she. The early years of the new reign were years of trouble and unrest. The accession of Victoria brought to an end 41G ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS Hanover. The Radicals and the Reform Bill. the connection between England and Hanover, which had existed since the elector of Hanover had become king of Great Britain in 1714;, under the name of George I. As the Salic law obtained in Hanover that kingdom now passed to the uncle of the Queen, the Duke of Cumberland, Ernest Augustus. This was, on the whole, more a gain for England than a loss, as it freed her from vexatious en- tanglements on the Continent. Far more serious was the disruption of the colonial empire, threatened by the Canadian Rebellion of 1837. This will be described elsewhere. More serious still was the widespread unrest and discontent in England itself, an unrest that found expression in the Chartist Movement. The Reform Bill of 1832 had been carried by a combina- tion of Liberals and Radicals, the latter furnishing in those exciting days the appearance and the reality of physical force, the monster meetings, the riots, which had made the Tories feel that a civil war would result if they did not yield to what was manifestly the people's will. A breach between these two elements now ensued. The Radicals looked upon the measure, to the passing of which they had so greatly contributed, as merely a step in the right direction, from which they themselves had gained nothing. They were a genuinely democratic party, aiming at the introduction into England of truly democratic government, popular con- trol of the House of Commons and legislation in the interest of the people, that is, the great mass of the workers of Great Britain. But when, after 1S32, they attempted to bring forward measures for a wider suffrage as a necessary pre- liminary to all this, they met with uncompromising opposi- tion on the part of their former allies. Lord John Russell took occasion to say publicly in 1837 that the Reform Act of 1832 had been made as extensive as possible in the hope that it might be final; and that the question of the franchise ought not to be reopened. The leader of the Liberals had spoken. It was clear that the Conservatives would be of THE CHARTISTS 447 the same mind on this matter. There had been a reform in 1832 in the interest of the middle classes. Clearly there was to be no reform in the interest of the lower classes. The middle classes had said so. The Radicals felt that a middle class Parliament would consider simply the interests of the middle class, and they desired a democratic Parlia- ment to legislate for the masses of the laborers of England, whether in town or country, for the laborers were the nation. The breach between the former allies became complete. The The Radicals dubbed Lord John, " Finality Jack." They began Radicals a vehement agitation for further reform. Workingmen's further associations, socialist societies, the discontented generally reform, worked together. In a pamphlet entitled The Rotten House of Commons (December 1836), Lovett, one of their leaders, proved from official returns that, out of 6,023,752 adult males living in the United Kingdom, only 839,519 were voters. He also showed that despite the reform of 1832 there were greajx'' inequalities among the constituencies, that twenty members were chosen by 2,411 votes, twenty more by (86J)72. The immediate demands of the Radicals were expressed in " The The People's Charter," or programme, a petition to Parliament People's drawn up in 1838. They demanded that the right to vote be given to every adult man, declaring, " we perform the duties of freemen, we must have the privileges of freemen " ; that voting be secret, by ballot rather than orally as was then the custom, so that every voter could be free from intimida- tion, and less exposed to bribery ; that property qualifica- tions for membership in the House be abolished ; and that the members receive salaries so that poor men, laborers them- selves and understanding the needs of laborers, might be elected to Parliament if the voters wished. They also de- manded that the House of Commons should be elected, not for seven years, as was then the law, but simply for one year. The object of this was to prevent their representa- tives misrepresenting them by proving faithless to their 448 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS Character of the Chartist agitation. The lack of able leadership. pledges or indifferent or hostile to the wishes of the voters. Annual elections would give the voters the chance to punish such representatives speedily by electing others in their place. "The connection between the representatives and the people, to be beneficial, must be intimate," said the petition. Such were the five points of the famous Charter designed to make Parliament representative of the people, not of a class. Once adopted, it was felt that the masses would secure control of the legislature and could then improve their conditions. The Chartists had almost no influence in Parliament, and their agitation had consequently to be carried on outside in workingmen's associations, in the cheap press, in popular songs and poems, in monster meetings addressed by im- passioned orators, in numerous and unprecedented!}' large petitions. One of these was presented in 1839. It was in the form of a large cylinder of parchment about four feet in diameter, and was said to have been signed by 1,286,000 persons. The petition was summarily rejected. Notwith- standing this failure another was presented in 1842, signed, it was asserted, by over three million persons. Borne through the streets of London in a great procession it was found too large to be carried through the door of the House of Commons. It was therefore cut up into several parts and deposited on the floor. This, too, was rejected. The Chartist movement lasted about ten years, from 1838 to 1848. It had periods of quiet, followed by periods of great activity. The latter were generally contemporary with hard times. The whole movement was born of the great distress and misery of the English working class. Unfortunately it lacked able leadership. Many of its sup- porters were men of ability, devotion, and disinterested- ness, but during most of the time the real leader was Feargus O'Connor, an able orator, but a weak, vain, unstable man, who knew better how to alienate those who naturally wished to co-operate than to consolidate and THE FAILURE OF THE CHARTISTS 449 magnify a party. The Chartists themselves divided into two groups : those who wished to use only peaceful methods in their agitation, and those who wished to make an ultimate appeal to physical force, believing the other method en- tirely ineffective. Whenever the physical-force Chartists attempted to act according to their principle they were severely punished. The Chartists could look to neither great party for aid. The The movement smoldered on for ten years, blazing up P etltlon °* threateningly in times of unusual distress. Indeed, it was a kind of barometer, measuring the misery of the people and their sense of injustice. After 1848 the movement sub- sided. Encouraged by the French Revolution of that year the Chartists held a great national convention or people's parliament in London, and planned a vast demonstration on behalf of the Charter. "Half a million men were to accom- pany a new petition to Parliament, which it was expected would be overawed and would then yield to so imposing a demand of an insistent people. The Government was so alarmed that it entrusted the safety of London to the Duke of Wellington, then seventy-nine years of age. His arrange- ments were made with his accustomed thoroughness. One hundred and seventy thousand special constables were en- rolled, one of whom was Louis Napoleon, who before the year was out was to be President of the French Republic. The result was that the street demonstration was a failure, and the petition, examined by a committee of the House, was found to contain, not 5,706,000 signatures, as asserted, but less than two million. It was summarily rejected. The movement died out owing to ridicule, internal quarrels, but particularly because of the growing prosperity of the country, which resulted from the abolition of the Corn Laws and the adoption of Free Trade. It is difficult to appraise the value and significance of this The sicniiics.Ticc movement. Judged superficially and by immediate results the of the Chartists failed completely. Yet most of the changes they movement. *50 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS England's policy of Protection. The Corn Laws. advocated have since boon brought about. There are now no property qualifications for members of the House of Commons, and the secret ballot has boon secured; the suffrage is enjoyed by the immense majority of men, though not by all; the payment oi members has in principle been approved by the llonse of Commons (1906) j though not yet put in force. Parliaments are still elected for seven years. It seems that some of the tremendous impetus of England toward democracy] which grew so marked toward the close oi the nineteenth century, was derived from this movement oi which Carlyle wrote in 1889: "The matter of Chartism is weighty, deep-rooted, far-extending; did not begin yesterday; will by no means end this day or to- morrow." Simultaneously with the Chartist Movement another was going on which had a happier issue. The adoption of the principle of free trade must always remain a great event in English history, and was the culmination oi a remarkable movement that extended over forty years, though its most decisive phase was concentrated into a few years oi intense activity. The change was complete from a policy which England in common with the rest of the world had followed for centuries. In 1815 England believed thoroughly in protection. Hundreds oi articles were subject to duties as they entered the country, manufactured articles, raw materials. English shipping was also protected by the Navigation Laws. The most important single interest among all those protected was agriculture. Parliament in 1815 was a parliament of landlords, and their legislation was naturally favorable to their interest. Corn is a word used in England to describe wheat and bread stuffs generally. The laws imposing duties on corn were the keystone oi the whole system of protection, because they affected the most influential class in the nation and the one. moreover, which made the laws. The advocates of free trade necessarily therefore delivered their fiercest ECONOMIC REFORMS 451 assaults upon the Corn Laws. If these could be overthrown it was believed that the whole system would fall. Not until they were abolished would England be a free trade country. The Corn Law of 1815 forbade the importation of foreign corn until the price should have reached ten shillings a bushel. Later, in 1828, in place of the fixed duty, was put the so- called sliding scale, the duty on foreign grain going up as the price of domestic grain fell, and decreasing as the home price rose. But the object was the same, high protection of British grain growers. This was the particular feature which the reformers attacked. But for a long while the land- lord class was so entrenched in political power that the law remained impregnable. Small and piecemeal attacks were therefore made upon other parts of the system. Huskisson Huskisson's in 1823-5 succeeded in carrying through a modification of reform8 « the Navigation Laws of- 1651. Previously all commerce between England and her colonies had to be carried on in English ships ; and all commerce between England and any other country had to be carried on by English ships or by those of the country concerned. An act was passed in 1823 empowering the Government to conclude reciprocity treaties with foreign countries, admitting their ships to British ports on the same conditions as British ships, if they would put British shipping on the same footing of equality with their own in their ports. This opened the way for the ultimate abolition of all restraints upon navigation. Huskisson also succeeded in securing legislation reducing duties on almost all foreign manufactures and on many raw materials. These changes were a beginning in the direction of freer trade, but they did not touch the strongest interest, the landowners, protected by the Corn Laws. For the next few years public interest was absorbed in Sir Robert the various reforms already described. In 1841 the Whig s , , . ministry, party, then under the leadership of Lord Melbourne, the successor to Earl Grey, was overthrown, and Sir Robert Peel, leader of the Conservatives, became prime minister. 452 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS The Anti- Corn-Law League. The arguments for Free Trade. His ministry lasted from 1841 to 1846. The financial con- dition of the state was bad, and the distress of the laboring classes general and acute. To provide a surplus in place of a deficit, and to relieve trade Peel carried through an extensive tariff reform. In 1842 there were about 1,200 articles subject to tariff duties. Peel succeeded in abolish- ing or reducing the rates on about 750 of them. But the most important interest still remained essentially unaffected. The great struggle for free trade came over the Corn Laws. In 1839 there was founded, in Manchester, a great manu- facturing center, the Anti-Corn-Law League. Its leader was Richard Cobden, a young business man, successful, trav- eled, thoughtful. Cobden was convinced that the Corn Laws interfered with the growth of British manufactures. He was soon joined by John Bright, like himself a manu- facturer, unlike him, one of the great popular orators of the nineteenth century. The League, under these two leaders, and Villiers, a member of Parliament, began an earnest agitation. It attempted to convince Englishmen that they should completely reverse their commercial policy in the interest of their own prosperity. The methods of the League were business-like and thorough. Its campaign was one of persuasion. It distributed a vast number of pamphlets, setting forth the leading arguments. Lecturers were sent to the large cities and to small country towns. In a single year four hundred lectures were delivered to 800,000 persons. A purely voluntary movement, gifts poured in until in 1845 the League was spending a million and a quarter dollars. Year after year this process of argumentation went on. This free trade party consisted of manufacturers and merchants. The manufacturers felt that they did not need protection against foreigners, as they believed that their own processes were so far superior that the latter could •not compete with them. The home market would re- main theirs even if French and German manufacturers were at entire liberty to send their commodities into England THE CAMPAIGN FOR FREE TRADE 453 duty free. They also believed that it was absolutely essen- tial for them to gain foreign markets, and that this could not be done under the existing system. Increase your foreign markets, they said, and you increase the employment of Englishmen in English factories, a thing of utmost im- portance as the population is growing rapidly. You will only be permitted to export freely to other countries if you consent to take freely in payment the commodities of those countries, their grain, their timber. If you will take these, they will purchase your woolens, your cottons, your hard- ware, and will not attempt to manufacture these themselves. If you do not, you will foster the growth of foreign com- petitors in manufacturing and will make them rivals in the markets of Europe, a suicidal policy. " In France," said one orator, " there are millions willing to clothe themselves in English garments, and you have millions of hungry mouths to take their corn. In Hungary, not being able to sell their corn to England, the people are turning their capital to manufacturing their own cloth." Replying to the argu- ment that the removal of the Corn Laws would mean the ruin of English agriculture, which it was necessary to en- courage in order that the country might produce an adequate food supply for its own needs, and not become dependent on other countries for the very necessaries of life, they pointed to Holland, declaring that it was " dependent upon every country, that there were no corn laws, yet no scarcity of food, that wages were high and trade brisk." One of the most effective arguments was that the time had come when the increasing population needed cheap food. This agitation extended over seven years. It was con- The Irish ducted quite independently of political parties. It does famme - not seem, however, that the repeal of the Corn Laws could have been carried had it not been for a great natural calamity, the Irish famine of 1845. " Famine itself, against which we had warred, joined us," said John Bright. The food of the vast majority of the Irish people was the 454 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS potato. More than half of the eight million inhabitants of Ireland depended on it alone for sustenance, and with a large part of the rest it was the chief article of diet. A failure in the potato crop could mean nothing less than famine. In the fall of 1845 this was precisely what impended, for a potato disease had set in and it was evident that the crop would be hopelessly ruined. Potatoes could not be obtained from foreign countries which, fearing for them- selves, were forbidding their exportation. At the same time the English grain crops were very poor, and foreign grain could not be bought by these Irish peasants, so high was the duty. The alternatives seemed unavoidable, either star- vation for multitudes or cheap grain, which could be ob- tained only by the repeal of the Corn Laws. The famine came, and tens of thousands perished of starvation. Great charitable gifts from England and America aimed to relieve Repeal of the distress but proved inadequate. Finally, in 1846, Sir L Robert Peel carried against bitter opposition the repeal of the Corn Laws by a combination of Conservative and Liberal votes." But in so doing he split his party. The bill was passed by 223 Liberals and 104 Conservatives, against °.£9 Conservatives. Peel had come into office in 1841 the head of a party pledged to the support of the Corn Laws; in 1846 he repealed them against the passionate opposition of two-thirds of his own party. The vengeance of the pro- tectionists was not long in coming. Peel was shortly over- thrown by their votes, after having revolutionized the com- mercial policy of Great Britain. Peel had been converted to the theory of free trade some time before the Irish crisis. That crisis simply gave an irresistible practical reason for putting the theory into immediate effect. There still remained after this many duties for pro- tective purposes in the English tariff, but the keystone of the whole system was removed. In 1849 the Navigation 1 Until 1848 there was still to be n duty, but a slight one, on corn. Then a nominal one of a shilling a quarter. This was abolished in 1869. ABOLITION OF PROTECTIVE DUTIES 455 Laws were finally abolished, and the ships of all the world Remaining might compete with English ships for the carrying trade protective . t» • ■ i i i duties to England and her colonics, might enter British harbors gradually as freely as British ships might. In 1853 Mr. Gladstone removed, succeeded in having the duties removed from 123 articles, and reduced on 133 others. In 1860 the number of com- modities subject to the tariff was reduced to 48. In 1866 the duty on lumber was abolished. England now has a tariff, but it is for revenue only, not for the protection of English industries. Nearly all of the revenue from the tariff, which now amounts to over a hundred and sixty million dollars, comes from the duties on tobacco, tea, spirits, wine, and sugar. England is absolutely dependent upon other countries for her food supplies. It was evident as early as 1845 that English agriculture could not support England's population. The twenty years succeeding the repeal of the Corn Labor Laws were years of quiescence and transition. Compar- legislation, atively few changes of importance were made in legisla- tion. Those of greatest significance concerned the regula- tion of employment in factories and mines. Such legisla- tion, merciful in its immediate effects and momentous in the reach of the principles on which it rested, was enacted particularly during the decade from 1840 to 1850. The initial step in such legislation had been taken in the Factory Act of 1833, already described, a law that regulated some- what the conditions under which children and women could be employed in the textile industries. But labor was un- protected in many other industries, in which gross abuses prevailed. One of the most famous parliamentary reports of the nineteenth century was that of a commission ap- pointed to investigate the conditions in mines. Published Regulation in 1842, its amazing revelations revolted public opinion and of labor * . in mines, led to quick action. It showed that children of five, six, seven years of age were employed underground in coal mines, girls as well as boys ; that women as well as men 456 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS Factory laws. Morley on the labor code. labored under conditions fatal to health and morals; that the hours were long, twelve or fourteen a da}', and the dangers great. They were veritable beasts of burden, drag- ging and pushing carts on hands and knees along narrow and low passageways, in which it was impossible to stand erect. Girls of eight or ten carried heavy buckets of coal on their backs up steep ladders many times a day. The revelations were so astounding and sickening that a law- was passed in 184S2 which forbade the employment of women and girls in mines; ami which permitted the employment of boys of ten for only three days a week. Once embarked on this policy of protecting the econom- ically dependent classes, Parliament was forced to go further and further in the governmental regulation of private in- dustry. In 1844 a law was passed which restricted the labor of children in factories to half of each day, or six and a half hours, or the whole of every other day, the labor of women to twelve hours, and also restricting night work still further. The Factory Act of 1847, altered somewhat by an act of 1850, practically established a ten-hour day for labor, a demand long urged by the laboring class and bitterly opposed by manufacturers as ruinous to industry, as certain to lower wages, and to drive capital to foreign countries, by economists as in violation of the "laws" of political economy, by both as a violation of the right of free contract. Since then a long series of similar statutes has been enacted by the English Parliament, which it is here impossible to describe, so extensive and minute, that Morley, writing nearly thirty years ago, and speaking of the Factory and Work- shop Consolidation Act of 1878, an act of more than fifty printed pages, virtually a labor code, could say: "We have to-day a complete, minute, and voluminous code for the protection of labor; buildings must be kept pure of effluvia ; dangerous machinery must be fenced ; children and young persons must not clean it while in motion ; their hours LABOR LEGISLATION 457 are not only limited, but fixed; continuous employment must not exceed a given number of hours, varying with the trade, but prescribed by the law in given cases ; a statutable number of holidays is imposed ; the children must go to school, and the employer must every week have a certificate to that effect; if an accident happens, notice must be sent to the proper authorities ; special provisions are made for bake-houses, for lace-making, for collieries, and for a whole schedule of other special callings ; for the due enforcement and vigilant supervision of this immense host of minute prescriptions, there is an immense host of inspectors, cer- tifying surgeons, and other authorities, whose business it is ' to speed and post o'er land and ocean ' in restless guardianship of every kind of labor, from that of the woman who plaits straw at her cottage door, to the miner who descends into the bowels of the earth, and the seaman who conveys the fruits and materials of universal industry to and fro between the remotest parts of the globe." 1 Since 1878 the principle of governmental regulation has been much more extensively applied. The labor code of to-day is contained in the Factory and Workshop Act of 1901, called by Dicey " the most notable achievement of English socialism." 2 This mid-century period of English history, so sterile Growth of in political interest, is thus seen to be highly significant in ra r . ' ... unions, the economic sphere. It was the period in which trade- unionism grew rapidly, solidified itself, perfected its ma- chinery, and discussed and clarified the demands of the laboring class. The effect of this preliminary work was apparent later. Workingmen were receiving in their unions a kind of education in politics and management that was 1 Morley, Life of Cobden, Ch. XIII. 2 The Combination Act of 1800 which, in connection with the law of conspiracy then in force, made a trade union an unlawful association, was repealed in 1824. Since then such organizations have not been ille- gal. They have grown greatly and now enjoy strong legal protection. See Dicey, Law and Opinion in England, 95-102; 190-200; 266-272. 458 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS a valuable training for the use of the suffrage, when they should get it, as they did in lS(i7. Meanwhile they came to attach less importance to purely political privileges, such as those demanded by the Charter, and to study far more carefully social questions, arising from the relations of capital and labor. During these years a remarkable change of opin- The growth ion was going on. The beauties of individualism were seen of collectiv- to be less attractive; the advantages of collectivism or social- ism were more and more emphasized. The economic and social beliefs of large classes of the population were under- going a profound transformation. The revolution of thought was one tending distinctly toward socialism. 1 This trans- formation was proceeding quietly, and its significance did not become apparent until after the passage of the Reform Bill of 1S6T. This period of comparative inaction in England was a time of great and stirring events and changes abroad, the period of the revolutions of 1848, of the Crimean War, in which England played a leading part, of the making of Italy, the rise of Prussia, the dismemberment of Denmark, the humiliation of Austria, the Civil War in the United States. The foreign policy of the ministry was active, the domestic very subordinate. Jews ad- Yet during these years certain internal reforms were car- mitted to r j et j through, which are worthy of mention. In 1858 under of Commons * ne Derby -Disraeli ministry Jews were permitted to sit in the House of Commons ; the oath required of members containing the words " on the true faith of a Christian," was altered, and thus another piece of religious intolerance was removed, another step in the secularization of the state taken, and a controversy of twenty-five years terminated. Another reform of the same session was the abolition of the property qualification for members of Parliament. Thus 1 On this subject see the remarkable Chapter VII, in Dicey, Law and Opinion in England, entitled, " The Growth of Collectivism." On Trade Unionism see Bright, History of England, IV, 401-406. POSTAL SAVINGS BANKS 459 one point of the Charter was registered quietly. The gov- ernment of India also was greatly altered. During many of these years Gladstone was Chan- Gladstone, cellor of the Exchequer (1852-1855; 1859-1866), and in Chancellor , . . ... . , ' of the Ex- this capacity was winning the name or the greatest finance cneauer minister since Peel, and was laying deep the foundations of his later power. His policy was economy, and the com- pletion of the free trade policy, which he believed would augment the prosperity of England. By the year 1860 the tariff list had been reduced to 48 articles. Largely through Gladstone's efforts the excise duty on paper was abolished, thus furthering the publica- tion of books and papers at a price within the reach of the masses. Gladstone also carried through a great scheme Postal of using the post offices of England as savings banks. Thus savings each locality could have its saving banks without the crea- tion of an entirely new and elaborate machinery. The system went into force in 1861, and has proved very success- ful in encouraging thrift among the working classes. Be- fore the end of 1862, 180,000 accounts had been opened. Since then the deposits have increased each year. In 1907 these postal savings banks had deposits of £157,500,000, and the number of depositors was nearly 10,700,000. De- posits may be made from a shilling upward. The interest is small, but the security, that of the State, is perfect. Every little hamlet thus has its institution for savings, the local post office. Walpole calls this use of the post office " the most efficient machinery for the encouragement of thrift that the world had ever seen, or the imagination of man had ever conjectured." Two years later, in 1864, Mr. Gladstone was able to follow up this success by another. gt a te using the same machinery of the post office for the selling insurance, of small life insurance policies, to the maximum amount of a hundred pounds. Thus workingmen with small incomes were enabled to insure their lives cheaply, and with a sense of absolute safety. kn> ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS While from the point of view of politics) of interna] re- forms effected bj legislation, this period} from 1846 to 1866, is unusually barren and insignificant, changes of great im- portance were occurring in the domain of industry and sci- ence. The printing press was being perfected, which cheap- ened vastly the cost oi product ion oi newspapers and hooks, rendering the large circulation possible, which is SO character- istic and vital a feature of the modern world, and which has contributed immensely to the democratic evolution oi Falk- land. Railway construction advanced rapidly, the drawing power oi locomotives was greatly augmented, iron ships were supplanting wooden, machinery was applied to agri- culture, the sewing machine, which astonishingly lightened the work oi the home, ami which inaugurated a revolution in the clothing trade, was being very widely adopted, imple- ments of war were being increased in power ami deadliness. During this period the Atlantic Cable was finally laid, after great and distressing failures, by an American, Cyrus Field, supported by British capitalists. As a consequence, cables were later laid in every direction, which were to bind the whole world together by their rapid transmission of news, profoundly altering the conditions of commerce and international relations. 1 During the period of transition just described, England was outgrowing old forms ot' thought and organization, was evidently tending toward democracy. Yet this general trend was not mirrored in her political life and institu- tions. Parliament remained what the Reform Bill of 1888 had made it. From 1889 to 18(57 there was no altera- tion either in the franchise or in the distribution of seats in the House of Commons. This was the era of middle class rule, as its predecessor had been one oi aristocratic rule. But during this period the demand was frequently made that the suffrage be extended. Not more than one man 1 On this remarkable chapter of history sec Walpole, History of Twenty-flYe Years. I. Ch. 7. THE EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE 461 in six then had the right to rote. The demand was pressed *&* demand by the Chartists from 1888 to 1848. After that, from J^ time to time, proposal! irere made in Parliament to suffrage. enlarge the electorate. Bills to this effect irere introduced in 1852, 1854, 1859, and 1860, wit none of them pro- gressed far. Both parties treated them gingerlj and with trepidation. Furthermore, the exceptional position held by one man in English public life during these years, Lord Palm- erston, was a deterrent, for Palmerston was strongly opposed to change in the institutions of England. Ho commanding was his personality that it ram': in a way to be tacitly understood that no change should be attempted as long as he remained in politics. But in I860 Lord Palmerston died, and shortly afterward Lord Derby and Earl Russell ed from the scene- of politics. In place of the old- time statesmen, two younger men, neither of whom feared innovation, occupied the center of the stage, Gladstone and Disraeli. Their rivalry constitutes the central thread of parliamentary history for many years. Then, too, the success of the United States in the Civil Effect of War greatly encouraged the democratic party in England, War for it was considered a triumph of democracy over aris- tocracy. Moreover, in that war the sympathy of the work- ing classes in England had been steadfastly with the North, though they suffered greatly from the war, while the upper classes had largely favored the South. The people, in other words, had been right, when the favored class had not, and when the ministry had so handled its relations with the United States as to leave an ugly feeling and a grave diplomatic difficulty behind to harass the coming years. Were not people who had shown such moral and intellectual qualities worthy of any share in the government of England? Thus the question of the further extension of the suffrage came once more prominently before the English people and Parliament. In 1866 Mr. Gladstone, leader of the House of Commons, 462 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS Gladstone introduces a reform bill. The bill defeated. under Earl Russell as prime minister, brought forward a bill to enlarge the electorate. Earl Russell had himself of recent years been favorable to reform. By the bill of 1832 the suffrage was given in the boroughs to those owning or " occupying " houses or buildings yielding ten pounds a year. From 1832 to 1867 England was consequently ruled by the " ten pound householders." But five out of every six men could not meet this qualification, and were, therefore, without political power. The masses of working- men could not afford to pay ten pounds a year for the houses in which they lived. The measure now introduced proposed but a slight change. In boroughs the suffrage was to be extended to seven pound householders. This would add only about 150,000 to the number of voters. The county franchise was not to be treated even as liberally as the borough. The timidity of this measure, and the half-hearted way in which it was urged, encouraged all the opponents of change, and failed to arouse any counteracting interest among the unenfranchised out- side of Parliament. The Conservatives were united against it, and a body of the Liberals joined them. There was no sign that the people wanted the measure, therefore this coalition did not hesitate to defeat it. The ministry resigned and Derby became prime minister, with Disraeli as leader of the House of Commons. The Conservatives were now in power, and the opponents of reform thought that they had effectually stemmed the advance toward democracy. Never were politicians more completely deceived. The people instantly became alert and indignant at the rejection of even so modest a measure. Gladstone, in his final speech on the bill, had exclaimed defiantly to his opponents, " You cannot fight against the future; time is on our side," a phrase that now became a battle cry. Gladstone, aroused, lost all his timidity and became a fiery apostle of an extensive reform. A determined effort was made to influence the people, and it succeeded. REFORM BILL OF 1867 463 Mr. Bright, with ill-concealed menace, incited the people to renew the scenes of 1832. " You know what your fathers did thirty-four years ago, and you know the result. The men who, in every speech they utter, insult the workingmen, describing them as a multitude given up to ignorance and vice, will be the first to yield when the popular will is loudly and resolutely expressed. If Parliament Street, from Charing Cross to the venerable Abbey, were filled with men seeking a Reform Bill these slanderers of their countrymen would learn to be civil, if they did not learn to love free- dom." Under the influence of such incitement the people speedily lost their indifference, and great popular demonstra- tions of the familiar kind occurred in favor of the bill. The people were manifestly in earnest. Seeing this, and feeling that reform was inevitable, and Reform that, such being the case, the Conservative party might carried bv as well reap the advantages of granting it as to allow those advantages to accrue to others, Disraeli in the following year, 1867, introduced a reform bill. This was remodeled almost entirely by the Liberals, who, led by Gladstone, de- feated the proposals of the ministry time after time, and suc- ceeded in having their own principles incorporated in the measure. The bill as finally passed was largely the work of Gladstone, practically everything he asked being in the end conceded, but it was the audacity and subtlety and resource- fulness of Disraeli that succeeded in getting a very radical bill adopted by the very same legislators who the year before had rejected a moderate one. The bill as finally passed in August, 1867, closed the Provisions rule of the middle class in England, and made England a of the democracy. The franchise in boroughs was given to all blU ' householders. Thus, instead of ten pound or seven pound householders, all householders, whatever the value of their houses, were admitted; also, all lodgers who had occupied for a year lodgings of the value, unfurnished, of ten pounds, or about a dollar a week. In the counties the suffrage 464 ENGLAND BETWEEN TWO REFORMS Redistribu- tion of seats. was given to all those who owned property yielding five pounds clear income a year, rather than ten pounds, as previously ; and to all occupiers who paid at least twelve pounds, rather than fifty pounds, as hitherto. Thus the better class of laborers in the boroughs, and practically all tenant farmers in the counties, received the vote. By this bill the number of voters was nearly doubled. 1 So sweeping was the measure that the prime minister him- self, Lord Derby, called it a " leap in the dark." Carlyle, forecasting a dismal future, called it " shooting Niagara." Robert Lowe, whose memorable attacks had been largely instrumental in defeating the meager measure of the year before, now said, " we must educate our masters." It should be noted that during the debates on this bill, John Stuart Mill made a strongly reasoned speech in favor of granting the suffrage to women. The House considered the proposi- tion highly humorous. Nevertheless, this movement, then in its very beginning, was destined to persist and grow. Acts, similar in principle though differing in detail, were passed in 1868 for Scotland and Ireland. Also there was at this time some redistribution of seats from small boroughs to large towns and counties. There is little doubt that the Conservatives expected to be rewarded for passing the Reform Bill of 1867, as the Liberals had been for passing that of 1832, thought, that is, that the newly enfranchised would, out of gratitude, continue them in office. If so, they were destined to a great disappoint- ment. The elections of 1868 resulted in giving the Liberals a majority of a hundred and twenty. Mr. Gladstone now became the head of the most notable Liberal ministry of modern times. 'Just before 1867 the county voters numbered 768,705; the borough voters 60J,088. By 1871 the former had increased to 1,055,467; the latter to 1,470,956. CHAPTER XX ENGLAND UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI Mr. Gladstone possessed a more commanding majority The Great than any prime minister had had since 1832. As the en- Ministry* largement of the franchise in 1832 had been succeeded by a period of bold and sweeping reforms, so was that of 1867 to be. Mr. Gladstone was a perfect representative of the prevailing national mood. The recent campaign had shown that the people were ready for a period of reform, of im- portant constructive legislation. Supported by such a ma- jority, and by a public opinion so vigorous and enthusiastic, Gladstone stood forth master of the situation. No states- man could hope to have more favorable conditions attend his entrance into power. He was the head of a strong, united, and resolute party. The ministry contained a re- markable array of able men. Mr. Bright was there, one of the most eloquent orators who have spoken the English tongue; Mr. Forster, Mr. Goschen, Mr. Lowe, and Lord Clarendon were also members. The man who thus became prime minister at the age of fifty-nine was one of the notable figures of modern English history. His parents were Scotch. His father had hewed out his own career, and from small beginnings had, by energy and talent, made himself one of the wealthiest and most influential men in Liverpool, and had been elected a member of Parliament. Young William Ewart Gladstone re- William ceived " the best education then going " at Eton College and Ewart Oxford University, in both of which institutions he stood out Gladstone > 1809-1898 among his fellows. At Eton his most intimate friend was Arthur Hallam, the man whose splendid eulogy is Tennyson's 465 466 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI Entrance into Parliament. Leader of the Liberal Party. Gladstone's First Ministry, 1868-1874. 'In Memoriam. His career at Oxford was crowned by brilliant scholarly successes, and here he also distinguished him- self as a speaker in the Union, the university debating club. In one of the discussions he denounced the Reform Bill of 1832, then pending in Parliament, as destined to change the form of government and subvert the social order. Be- fore leaving the university his thought and inclination were to take orders in the church, but his father was opposed to this and the son yielded. In 1833 he took his seat in the House of Commons as representative for one of the rotten boroughs which the Reform Bill of the previous year had not abolished. He was to be a member of that body for over sixty years, and for more than half that time its leading member. Before attaining the premiership, there- fore, in 1868, he had had a long political career and a varied training, had held many offices, culminating in the Chancellor- ship of the Exchequer and the leadership of the House of Commons. Beginning as a Conservative (Macaulay called him in 1838 the " rising hope of the stern and unbending Tories "), he came under the influence of Sir Robert Peel, a man who, conservative by instinct, was gifted with unusual prescience and adaptability, and who possessed the courage required to be inconsistent, the wisdom to change as the world changed. Gladstone had, after a long period of transi- tion, landed in the opposite camp, and was now the leader of the Liberal Party. By reason of his business ability, shown in the management of the nation's finances, his knowl- edge of parliamentary history and procedure, his moral fervor, his elevation of tone, his intrepidity and courage, his reforming spirit, and his remarkable eloquence, he was eminently qualified for leadership. When almost sixty he became prime minister, a position he was destined to fill four times, displaying marvelous intellectual and physical energy. His administration, lasting from 1868-1874, is called the Great Ministry. The key to his policy is found in his remark to a friend when the summons came from THE COMPLEX PROBLEM OF IRELAND 467 the Queen for him to form a ministry : " My mission is Dominance to pacify Ireland." The Irish question, in fact, was to of Insh /-ti i < i questions, be the most absorbing interest of Mr. Gladstones later political career, dominating all four of his ministries. To understand the question, a brief survey of Irish history in the nineteenth century is necessary. Ireland was all through the century the most discontented and wretched part of the British Empire. While England constantly grew in numbers and wealth, Ireland decreased in popula- tion, and her misery increased. In 1815 Ireland was in- habited by two peoples, the native Irish, who were Catholics, and settlers from England and Scotland, who were for the most part Anglicans or Presbyterians. The latter were a small but powerful minority. The fundamental cause, of the Irish question lies in the fact that Ireland is a conquered country, that the Irish Ireland a are a subject race. As early as the twelfth century the con< l uere, » ° J "| country. English began to invade the island. Attempts made by the Irish at various times during six hundred years to repel and drive out the invaders only resulted in rendering their subjection more complete and more galling. Irish insurrections have been pitilessly punished, and race hatred has been the consuming emotion in Ireland for centuries. The contest has been unequal, owing to the far greater re- sources of England during all this time. The result of this turbulent history was that in 1815 the Irish were a subject people in their own land, as they had been for centuries, and that there were several evidences of this so conspicuous and so burdensome that most Irishmen could not pass a day without feeling the bitterness of their situa- tion. It was a hate-laden atmosphere which they breathed. The marks of subjection were various. The Irish did Tne not own the land of Ireland, which had once belonged to s ' ' _ ° question. their ancestors. The various conquests by English rulers had been followed by extensive confiscations of the land. Particularly extensive was that of Cromwell. These lands 4(jS UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI The religious question. The political question. wore given in large estates to Englishmen. The Irish were mere tenants, and most of them tenants-at-will, on lands that now belonged to others. The Irish have always regarded themselves as the rightful owners of the soil of Ireland, have regarded the English landlords as usurpers, and have tie- sired to recover possession for themselves. Hence there has arisen the agrarian question, a part of the general Irish problem. Again, in 1S15 the Irish were the victims of religious in- tolerance. At the time of the Reformation they remained Catholic, while the English separated from Rome. At- tempts to force the Anglican Church upon them only stif- fened their opposition. Nevertheless, in 1815 they were paying tithes to the Anglican Church in Ireland, though they were themselves ardent Catholics, never entered a Protestant church, and were supporting their own churches by voluntary gifts. Thus they contributed to two churches, one alien, which the}' hated, and one to which they were devoted. Thus a part of the Irish problem was the re- ligious question. Again, in 1815 the Irish did not make the laws which governed them. In 1800 their separate Parliament in Dub- lin was abolished, and from 1801 there was only one Par- liament in Great Britain, that in London. While Ireland henceforth had its quota of representatives in the House of Commons, it was always a hopeless minority. More- over, the Irish members did not really represent the large majority of the Irish, as no Catholic could sit in the House of Commons. There was this strange anomaly that, while the majority of the Irish could vote for members of Parlia- ment, they must vote for Protestants— a bitter mockery. The Irish demanded the right to govern themselves. Thus another aspect of the problem was purely political. The abuse just mentioned was removed in 1829, 1 when Cath- 1 Catholics wore permitted to hold offices after 1898 by the abolition of the Test Acts. THE IRISH FAMINE 469 olic Emancipation was carried, which henceforth permitted Catholic Catholics to sit in the House of Commons. The English manc P a " ° tion. statesmen granted this concession only when forced to do so by the imminent danger of civil war. The Irish consequently felt no gratitude. Moreover, at the moment when Catholics were being admitted to Parliament, most of them lost their vote by the much higher franchise qualification enacted at the same time, for the qualification was raised in Ireland from forty shillings to ten pounds, though for England it remained at forty shillings. Shortly after Catholic Emanci- pation had been achieved, the Irish, under the matchless leadership of O'Connell, endeavored by much the same meth- ods to obtain the repeal of the Union between England and The repeal Ireland, effected in 1801, and to win back a separate legis- movement, lature and a large measure of independence. This move- ment, for some time very formidable, failed completely, owing to the iron determination of the English that the union should not be broken, and to the fact that the leader, O'Connell, was not willing in last resort to risk civil war to accomplish the result, recognizing the hopelessness of such a contest. This movement came to an i:nd in 1843. However, a number of the younger followers of O'Connell, chagrined at his peaceful methods, formed a society called " Young Ire- land," the aim of which was Irish independence and a repub- lic. They rose in revolt in the troubled year, 1848. The revolt, however, was easily put down. As if Ireland did not suffer enough from political and social evils, an appalling catastrophe of nature was added. The Irish famine of 1845-7, to which reference has already The Irish been made, was a tragic calamity, far-reaching in its famine, effects. The repeal of the Corn Laws did not check it. The distress continued for several years, though gradually growing less. The potato crop of 1846 was inferior to that of 1845, and the harvests of 1848 and 1849 were far from normal. Charity sought to aid, but was insufficient. The government gave money, and later gave rations. In March 470 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI 1847 over 700,000 people were receiving government sup- port. In March and April of that year the deaths in the workhouses alone were more than ten thousand a month. Peasants ate roots and lichens, or flocked to the cities in the agony of despair, hoping for relief. Multitudes fled to England or crowded the emigrant ships to America, dying by the thousand of fever or exhaustion. It was a long drawn out horror, and when it was over it was found Decline of that the population had decreased from about 8,300,000 in the popula- 18 4 5 to lcss than 6 ? (3oo,000 in 1851. Since then the de- tion. crease occasioned by emigration has continued. By 1881 the population had fallen to 5,100,000, by 1891 to 4,700,- 000, by 1901 to about 4,450,000. Since 1851 perhaps 4,000,000 Irish have emigrated. Ireland, indeed, is probably the only country whose population decreased in the nine- teenth century. For many years after the famine, and the failure of " Young Ireland " in 1848, Irish politics were quiescent. Year after year the ceaseless emigration to the United States continued. Finally, there was organized among the Irish The Fenian in America a secret society, called the Fenians, whose pur- movement. p OSe was t achieve the independence of the republic of Ireland. The Irish in the two countries co-operated, and in 1865 and 1866 were active. James Stephens, the leader in Ireland, announced that the flag of the Irish republic would be raised in 1865. The Government, alarmed, took stringent measures, arresting many of the leaders, and even securing from Parliament the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in Ireland. In May 1866 the Fenians in the United States attempted an invasion of Canada. About 1,200 of them crossed the Niagara River, but were soon driven back, though only after blood had been shed. Several, taken prisoners, were tried by courts-martial and shot. In 1867 various Fenian outrages occurred in Ireland and in England. There were many arrests, trials, and some execu- tions. The chief significance of the Fenian movement was THE IRISH CHURCH 471 the alarm it aroused in England, and the vivid evidence it gave of the unrest and deep-rooted discontent of Ireland. The Irish question thus became again an exciting topic for discussion, a problem pressing upon Parliament for solution. When Gladstone came into power in 1868 he was resolved to pacify the Irish by removing some of their more pro- The Upas nounced grievances, the three branches of the Irish Upas tree, tree# as he called them — the Irish Church, the Irish land laws, and Irish education. The question of the Irish Church was the first one attacked. The Irish This was the Anglican Church established and endowed in Church - Ireland at the time of the Reformation. It was a branch of the Church of England. Its position was anomalous. It was a state church, yet it was the church not of the people, but of a small minority. Established to win over the Catholics to Protestantism, it had signally failed of its purpose. Its members numbered less than an eighth of the population. There were many parishes, about 150, in which there was not a single member. There were nearly 900 in which there were less than fifty members. Yet these places were provided with an Anglican clergyman and a place of worship, generally the former Catholic church building. The Church was maintained by its endowment and by the tithes which the Catholics, as well as the Protest- ants, paid. Sidney Smith said of this institution: "On an Irish Sabbath the bell of the neat parish church often summons to service only the parson and an occasional con- forming clerk; while two hundred yards off, a thousand Catholics are huddled together in a miserable hovel, and pelted by all the storms of heaven," and he added, " There is no abuse like it in all Europe, in all Asia, in all the discovered parts of Africa, and in all that we have heard of Tim- buctoo." This favored corporation did not even discharge its religious functions with zeal. Many a clergyman used his position simply for the salary attached, employed a curate to perform his duties, and himself lived in England. 478 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI The tithe The Irish resisted tlie payment of tithes, and the result was the so-called tithe war, in which the peasant's property, his cow or goat, his chickens or kettles, were seized and sold for payment. Even such methods were not successful. In 1888 only about 18,000 out oi 104.000 pounds due could be collected. At length, in 1S;>8. the system was abandoned. The tithes were made a tax upon the land, which simply meant that the peasants no longer paid them directly, but paid them indirectly in the form of the in- creased rent demanded by the landlord. The Catholics were still supporters of a wealthy and alien corporation. Meanwhile, their own priests were exceedingly poor, and their own services had to be held in the open air or in wretched buildings. The existence oi this alien church was regarded as humiliating and oppressive. Gladstone in 1869 procured the passage of a law abolish- ing tithes, even in this roundabout form, and disestablishing and partly disendowing the Church. The Church henceforth ceased to be connected with the State. Its bishops lost their seats in the House of Lords. It became a voluntary organization ami was permitted to retain a large part of its property as an endowment. The rest was to be appropriated as Parliament should direct. It was to have all the church buildings which it had formerly possessed. It was still very rich, but the connection with the Church of England was to cease January 1, 1STL The bill, though very favorable to the Church, was denounced as sheer robbery, as M highly offen- sive to Almighty God." as the " greatest national sin ever com- mitted." Nevertheless, it passed ami became law. One branch of the famous Upas tree hail been lopped off. Gladstone now approached a far more serious and per- plexing problem — the system of land tenure. Ireland was land tenure. a i mos {. exclusively an agricultural country, yet the land was chiefly owned, not by those who lived on it and tilled it, but by a comparatively small number of landlords, who held large estates. Manv of these were Englishmen, ab- Disestab- lishment of the Irish Church. System of THE LAND QUESTION 473 sentees, who rarely or never carne to Ireland, and who re- garded their estates simply as so many sources of revenue. The business relations with their tenants were carried on by agents or bailiffs, whose treatment of the tenants was fre- quently harsh and exasperating. In the minds of the Irish their landlords were foreigners, who had acquired by robbery land which they regarded as rightly belonging to themselves. This initial injustice they never forgot. There had been from the beginning a wide gulf between the two. As, how- ever, there were almost no industries in Ireland, the inhab- itants were obliged to have land. They were, therefore, in an The land economic sense, at the mercy of the landlord. There was, ° wne y properlj speaking, no competition among landowners to rent their land, forcing them, therefore, to treat their tenants with some liberality and consideration. There was competition only among the applicants for land, applicants so numerous that they would offer to pay much more for a little plot on which to raise their potatoes, which furnished the chief food, than the value of the land justified. The result was that in many cases they could not pay the stipulated rent and were evicted. Their position only became still more deplorable, for land they must have or starve; consequently, they would promise a higher rent to some other landlord, with, in the end, another eviction as a result. Now, eviction was easy, because these petty farmers were tenants-at-will, that Tenants-at- is, tenants who must leave their holdings at the will and will, pleasure of the landlord, or on short notice, generally six months, obviously a most insecure form of tenure. Lands were not rented for a year or five years or ten, but only as long as the owner should see fit. Occupation could be terminated abruptly by the landlord, starvation faced the peasant. Moreover, Irish landlords rented, as was cor- rectly stated at the time, not farms, that is, land and the necessary buildings and improvements, but simply land. The tenant put up at his own expense such buildings and made such improvements in the way of fences, draining, clearing, 474 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI fertilizing, as lie could, or wished ; in very many cases the land would have had no value whatever, but for these improve- ments. Yet, as the law then stood, when a landlord evicted his tenant he was not obliged to pay for any buildings or improvements made during the tenant's occupation. He simply appropriated so much property created by the tenant. It would be hard to conceive a more unwise or unjust system. It encouraged indolence and slothfulness. The land was wretchedly cultivated, because good cultivation of it was penalized. Wiry should a tenant work hard to improve the quality of his holding, to erect desirable farm buildings, when he knew that this would merely mean a higher rent or his evic- tion in favor of some one who would offer a higher rent, in which case all his improvements would benefit others and not himself? In other words, it was a positive disadvantage to a tenant to be prosperous. If prosperous, he made efforts to conceal the fact, as did the peasants in pre-revolutionary France. Now, the social effects of this system were dis- astrous in the extreme. Chronic and shocking misery was the lot of the Irish peasantry. " The Irish peasant," says an official English document of the time, " is the most poorly nourished, most poorly housed, most poorly clothed of any in Europe ; he has no reserve, no capital. He lives from day to day." His house was generally a rude stone hut, with a dirt floor. The census of 1841 established the fact that in the case of forty-six per cent, of the population, the entire family lived in a house, or, more properly, hut of a single room. Frequently the room served also as a barn for the live stock. Stung by the misery of their position, and by the in- justice of the laws that protected the landlord, and that gave them only two hard alternatives, surrender to the landlord, or starvation, and believing that when evicted they were also robbed, and goaded by the hopeless outlook for the future, the Irish, in wild rage, committed many atrocious agrarian crimes, murders, arson, the killing or maiming of cattle. This in turn brought a new coercion THE LAND ACT OF 1870 475 Ia/w from the English Parliament, which only aggravated the evil. Such was the situation. Mr. Gladstone, desiring to gov- ern Ireland, not according to English, but according to Irish ideas, faced it resolutely. He had an important argu- ment at hand. While the system just described was the one prevailing throughout most of Ireland, a different one had grown up in a single province, Ulster, the so-called The THster system of " tenant right." The tenant's right was un- s y stcm - disturbed possession of his holding as long as he paid his rent, and fair payment for all permanent improvements, in case he should relinquish his holding, whether voluntarily or because of inability to pay the rent. This was mere custom, not law. But the result was that the peasants of Ulster were hard-working and prosperous, whereas in the rest of Ireland the contrary was the case. The out- going peasant received, as a matter of fact, for his improve- ments from five to twenty times the amount of his annual rent. It paid him, therefore, to make them. Mr. Glad- stone took this local custom and made it a law for all Ireland. In the Land Act of 1870 it was provided that Land Act of if evicted for any other reason than for the non-payment of 187 °- rent, the tenant could claim compensation for disturbance from the landlord, and also that he was to receive compensa- tion for all improvements of a permanent character on giving up his holding. It was hoped that thus the peasants would have a sense of security in their occupation, and that with security would come prosperity and peace. There were certain other clauses in the bill, not greatly approved by Gladstone, but strongly urged by Mr. Bright, whose influence with the people Gladstone did not wish to alienate. Bright desired that the Irish peasants should The Bright gradually cease to be tenants of other people's land, and clauses, should become landowners themselves. This could only be done by purchasing the estates of the landlords, and this obviously the peasants were unable to do. The Bright CXDER GLADSTONE ANP DISRAELI Hi i as re v. •'... - ry. IlM L&md A;: .-> ■ount, ho in turn i\ the S ailments. \. . guarded had ill into this bill, thus propos r.-.vli anient with On - g vouslv attacked^ s g ig a ton.. - landlord if the ".-.■v.'..--.. 5, - id D a . ' . > revoht- 1: . ; . s, Pi v'. e nature g S Vlv by leg 5 ger do 1 a ill with his own. In r - and uncontrolled owners . g is he pa js - ■ . ■■: V - . r>hip. 1: J M lo it 5, .-. but by | n Qg To which the replj that one's absolute rig - conducing ctkms bo in the intc s - s ole, and that the s, d the lav s - It rst time to land. fro- g - «nd j and erictions th;r landlords la their -. if he • vent. cn'.N was eaa for a landlord g ~ ' ~ s ra at the tenant could not EDUCATIONAL REFORM 477 meet Nor did the land purchase clauses prove effect Only seven sales irere mode up to 1877. Nevertheless, the bill was rery important, because of the its prin- principlei upon which it was based. One principle was cl r p ^* nt m " that the landlord's ownership of the soil was not absolute and unrestricted, that the tenant a partner in the land lie tilled, in the soil of Ireland Another was Hie desirability of enabling the tenant to become com- plete owner. The land-purchase lection of the act proved ineffective, largely because rery timidly applied, but it con- tained an idea that was to grow more and more attractive and to be applied in a long series of laws destined in the end to be highly ful. In the principles on which it R :, the Land Act of 1870 was path-breaking. Another measure of this active ministry was designed to Educational provide a national system of elementary education. The Tt orm educational system of England was deplorably inadequate and inefficient, inferior to that of many other countries. England possessed the famous endowed schools of Eton, Rugby, Harrow, but these and others were for the aristo- cratic and prosperous middle classes. But she possessed no national system of public schools for the mass of the population. It was long the accepted opinion in England that education was no part of the duty of the State. The work that the State neglected charged in a Church measure, by the various religious denominations. Whatever £C 00 s * education the children of the working class received, they re- ceived in schools maintained by voluntary gifts, generally in connection with a church. Most of the schools were Anglican, some were Wesley an, some Catholic, some Jewish. In 1833 Parliament appropriated the sum of 20.000 pounds in aid of schools established by voluntary effort. The sum was ludicrously small. Prussia at that time was spending many times as much for its popular education, and Prussia was a far poorer country and a smaller one. Nevertheless, Parliament tacitly recognized by this vote that the State 478 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI The system inadequate. The question becomes urgent. The Forster Education Act of 1870. had a duty to perform in educating its citizens. The sum was enlarged to 30,000 pounds in 1839. Once embarked upon this course, there could be no turning back. The parliamentary grant grew greatly, and, between 1860 and 1865, it averaged annually not far from 700,000 pounds. With this encouragement the number of voluntary schools increased, but was, nevertheless, totally inadequate to the needs of the nation. It came to be generally admitted that this system would not suffice for the education of the people. In 1869 it was estimated that of 4,300,000 children in need of education, 2,000,000 were not in school at all, 1,000,000 were in schools that received no grant from the government, were uninspected, and were generally of a very inferior character, and only 1,300,000 were in schools aided by the State and inspected by the State. Moreover, whatever facilities existed were unevenly distributed; many districts being entirely without schools. Many forces combined now to make the question of popu- lar education urgent. When the working classes in the boroughs were given the suffrage in 1867, the cause of edu- cation received a great stimulus. " We must educate our masters," was the watchword. Foreign countries were cited as examples. The northern states, which had conquered the southern in the American Civil War, were the home of the common school, and on the Continent men spoke of the victory of Prussia over Austria at Sadowa as the triumph of the Prussian schoolmaster, meaning that the Prussian army was the more intelligent. Moreover, the trades-unions, representing workingmen, favored popular education. The Gladstone ministry carried, in 1870, a bill designed to provide England for the first time in her history with a really national system of elementary education. The sys- tem then established remained without essential change until 1902. It marked a great progress in the educational facili- ties of England. The bill did not establish an entirely new educational machinery to be paid for by the State and THE FORSTER EDUCATION BILL 479 managed by the State. It divided the country into school districts. It did not propose to establish new schools in each district to be administered by the State. Its aim was not to provide England with new secular schools, but to pro- vide her with a sufficient number of schools of good quality. It incorporated in its scheme the already existing church Church schools. "Our object," said Mr. Forster, who was in scnools un- charge of the bill, " is to complete the voluntary system, and in th to fill up the gaps." Each district was to be considered system. by itself. If, at the end of a year, it was found to possess already a sufficient number of schools, it was to be left alone. Such schools must submit to State inspection, and would then receive parliamentary aid. If the district were found to be inadequately supplied with schools of this character, then a new agency was to be created. Local school boards were to be elected with power to establish new schools, and to levy local taxes for the purpose. Thus there would be two sets of schools, church schools supported by voluntary contributions, by grants of Parlia- Board ment, and by children's tuition fees, and " board schools," . .,. , , J ... established, supported by grants of Parliament, tuition fees and local taxes. The main difficulty encountered by educational reformers in 1870, as had been the case before, and as is the case to-day, was the question of religious instruction. There The was a party among the Liberals who wished to have edu- ques \ on . * t J ° t of religious cation entirely secular, but this party was in the minor- instruction. ity. The supporters of the voluntary schools wished to have those schools permitted to teach the tenets of the de- nomination as they had done in the past. There was in- serted in this bill a so-called conscience clause, providing that The where voluntary schools included as a part of their teaching instruction in the religious beliefs of the denomination con- ducting them, parents might have their children excused from such instruction. To facilitate the operation of this provision all religious instruction must be given at the 480 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI beginning or at the close of the school session. Thus the children of Methodists and Baptists could attend an Anglican school without being obliged to be instructed in the Anglican beliefs. But should there be any religious instruction in the new board schools, schools to be supported in part by local taxes? A strong party demanded that these schools at least be entirely secular, but Parliament did not so decide. The The bill as passed provided that the board in each district Cowper- should decide whether there should be religious instruction amendment or no *' ^ut * na * ^ ^ permitted such instruction, " no catechism or religious formulary which is distinctive of any particular denomination," should be taught. 1 In other words there might be reading of the Bible and comment on it, but no instruction in any creed or dogma. Moreover, in board schools, as in voluntary, there should be a conscience clause, and a time schedule enabling parents to have their children excused from such exercises. Education The law of 1870 did not establish either free, or com- ' pulsory* or secular education. It adopted, under the restric- nor com- r J r ' pulsory. tions indicated, denominational or voluntary schools, and nor secular, allowed them to give denominational teaching, with, however, a conscience clause which rendered it possible, as has been said, for the son of a Methodist to attend an Episcopalian school. It permitted undenominational religious teaching in the board schools, but here, too, the conscience clause was attached. The schools were not free, but pupils were to pay tuition. It was held undesirable to relieve parents of all feeling of responsibility for the education of their children. School boards might, however, establish free pub- lic schools in districts where exceptional poverty prevailed or might pay the fees of poor children. The Education Act of 1870 was a compromise between conflicting views. It did not create a national system of 1 The Cowper-Temple amendment, which also provided that voluntary schools should receive no assistance from local taxes. ARMY REFORMS 481 education throughout the land. It kept the denominational system and added another system to it. The bill was more acceptable to the opponents of the Liberal ministry, mainly Churchmen, than to its supporters and Non-Conformists. John Bright thought it the " worst act passed by any Liberal Parliament since 1832." Under it, however, popular edu- cation made great advances. In twenty years the number of schools more than doubled, and were capable of accommo- dating all those of school age. In 1880 attendance was made compulsory, and in 1891 made free. The system just described remained in force till 1902, when a new education bill was passed. Another reform carried through by this ministry, was Army that of the army, by the introduction of a short service reform, with the colors, and a longer term in the reserve. Here we see, as we do everywhere in Europe, the tremendous in- fluence of the Prussian military system, which had proved so victorious in the campaign culminating at Koniggratz. It had long been supposed that an army of veterans was the best. But Prussia had proved the contrary. There military service was compulsory but limited to a few years in the active army. Then the young men passed into the reserve, and might be called out if necessary. Military service was their profession for only a brief period. The Prussian army was consequently an army of young men in the prime of physical condition. Prussia's example has been followed since in all the great European armies. Universal obligatory service Introduc- has never been adopted in England, but the period of active tlon of service of those enlisting was reduced by Gladstone so that service# the army became one of young men. But no real reform in the army could be accomplished without an additional change in its structure. Men ob- tained promotion in the British army by purchasing posi- tions of higher rank. There was a definite schedule of . prices fixed by royal ordinance. To be an ensign in the infantry cost 450 pounds, to be a lieutenant-colonel 4,500 482 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI Abolition of the purchase system. Civil Service reform. pounds. But the regulation price was by no means the actual price. So eager were men to secure these positions that they offered much more. Having paid for his position an officer considered it his property, to be sold for what he could get for it. He had a vested interest. Manifestly this system was unfair to poor men, who might be meritorious and able soldiers, as practically the desirable positions in the army were open only to the wealthy class. Naturally the growing democratic feeling of England, expressed in many ways by this ministry, was impatient of a system which rendered the army an appendage of the aristocracy. Gladstone brought in a bill to abolish purchase, paying present owners at the market price. " The nation," said he, " must buy back its own army from its own officers." Bitterly opposed by the officers and by their influential friends inside and outside Parliament, the ministry suc- ceeded, however, in getting its bill through the Commons only to have it practically defeated in the House of Lords. Mr. Gladstone then took a step for which he was severely criticised. He advised the Queen to abolish purchase by royal ordinance, which could be done, as the whole system rested on royal ordinance, not upon an act of Parliament. In this way the system was abolished (1871), and promotion by merit substituted for promotion by purchase. In the same session in which the military career was thrown open to merit, regardless of wealth or rank, civil and academic careers were also made free to all classes. In 1870, by an Order in Council, the system of appointment to most positions in the Civil Service was put on the basis of standing in open competitive examinations. This system had earlier been applied to the Indian service. The step now taken was strongly opposed, and one argument was that it would result in eliminating the aristocratic class from the service and would fill all positions with a lower social class. Mr. Gladstone never shared this opinion, be- lieving, indeed, that the better educated class would have INTRODUCTION OF THE BALLOT 483 all the stronger hold upon the higher positions, as has proved to be the case, the greater part of the successful candidates for those positions being Oxford and Cambridge men. In 1871 the universities of England were made thoroughly The uni= national. The last remaining religious tests, which operated versities onlv to the advantage of the members of the Church of jo ^ open. England, were abolished. Henceforth men of any religious faith or no religious faith could have all the advantages of university training and university degrees. This was another step in religious and intellectual liberty. It abolished another monopoly of the Established Church. The universities be- longed henceforth to all Englishmen. Another reform carried through by this ministry was the Introduc- Ballot Act of 1872. Voting up to this time had been tion of th « viva voce. Each voter declared his candidate in public at the polling place. For over forty years the question of making the ballot secret had been discussed. Indeed, it was considered at the time of the Reform Bill of 1832. For years Grote, the historian of Greece, had brought the matter up annually for discussion in the House of Commons. The secret ballot was one of the demands of the Chartists. But the movement made no progress as the years went by. The argument for open voting was that, as voting is a trust, it must be discharged in a manner known of all men, that thus it makes for courage and a due sense of responsibility. If you render a man's vote secret you undermine the citizen's courage, you foster evasion. This was Lord Palmerston's view. It was at one time also Gladstone's, who made the ingenious discovery that the secret ballot had led to the fall of the Roman Republic. But the facts were apparent to all the world that public voting led to extensive bribery and scandalous corruption. Intimidation, also, could flourish Reasons under such a system, and now that the poorer people were for secret enfranchised by the act of 1867 they plainly needed further protection in the exercise of their right. As Morley says, " Experience showed that without secrecy in its exercise, the 484 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI Gladstone's ■waning popularity. The Irish University Bill. suffrage was not free. The farmer was afraid of the landlord, and the laborer was afraid of the farmer; the employer could tighten the screw on the workman, the shopkeeper feared the power of his best customers, the debtor quailed before his creditor, the priest wielded thunder- bolts over the faithful. Not only was the open vote not free, it exposed its possessor to so much bullying, molesta- tion, and persecution that his possession came to be less of a boon than a nuisance." 1 It was evident that whatever the abstract arguments might be, the concrete ones were all in favor of the secret ballot. A bill was finally passed in 1872 providing for the Australian system in voting, so called because of its use first in the colony of Victoria. Though Mr. Gladstone was losing popularity with every new reform, alienating in each case those affected disad- vantageous^ by the measure in question, he still went on. He now approached the question of the third branch of the Upas tree, the system of Irish education. In February 1873 he introduced the Irish University Bill, designed to give adequate facilities to Ireland for higher education. That the facilities were not adequate was clear. There were in Ireland two universities, that of Dublin, which con- sisted of a single college, Trinity, a Protestant institution, though admitting Catholics to its courses and degrees, and Queen's University, established in 1845, and consisting of three colleges, at Belfast, Cork, and Galway. These were entirely secular ; the Catholics called them " godless." The Catholics, constituting the mass of the population, desired a university of their own, endowed and authorized to grant degrees. There had been established some years before a so-called Catholic University of Dublin, but it was not em- powered to grant degrees. Mr. Gladstone proposed in 1873 that there should be established a new university for the whole of Ireland, with which these various institutions and 1 Morley, Gladstone, II, 366, IRISH UNIVERSITY BILL 485 others should be affiliated. The new university was to be amply endowed. The bill made shipwreck, however, on the religious difficulty. It was provided that each college might The be denominational and teach dogma if it chose, but the religious university was to be undenominational. Owing to the re- ligious passions involved it was held that the university course should not include teaching in theology, moral philosophy, or modern history. The colleges might teach these subjects but not the university. There was added the remarkable provision that any professor might be suspended or removed from his position if he wilfully offended, in speaking or writing, the religious convictions of any student. This bill satisfied no one., Catholics pronounced against General dis- it, saying that they wanted a Catholic university, not an satisfaction undenominational one. Protestants, on the other hand, felt bill that at the very time they were liberalizing Oxford and Cambridge by opening them to all, regardless of religious affiliations, they ought not to encourage bigotry and sec- tarianism in an Irish university. Moreover, the " gagging " clauses were bitterly denounced. A university which should teach neither modern history nor philosophy, and whose professors should not have freedom of speech would be in the eyes of reasonable men ridiculous and not worth establishing. The opposition was very general and violent. Disraeli, feeling that the moment had come when it would be possible to overthrow the ministry, reviewed the whole record in a caustic speech, denouncing all its reforming measures as simply " harassing legislation," endangering all the institu- tions of England. To which John Bright retorted that if the Conservatives had been in the wilderness they would have condemned the Ten Commandments as " harassing legislation." The bill was defeated, and Gladstone resigned, but as the Conservatives would not take office at that moment he came back into power for a few months. Not only did Gladstone's domestic legislation give offense to many interested sections of the population, and thus raise 486 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI Unpopular- up enemies, but his foreign policy was characterized by many ity of as weak, humiliating for England, lowering her prestige, particularly his adoption of arbitration in the controversy policy. with the United States over the Alabama matter. The grievances of the United States against England be- cause of her conduct during our Civil War were a dangerous source of friction between the two countries for many years. Mr. Gladstone agreed to submit them to arbitration, but as The the decision of the Geneva Commission was against England Alabama (1872), Ins ministry suffered in popularity. Nevertheless, Mr. Gladstone had established a valuable precedent. This was the greatest victory yet attained for the principle of settling international difficulties by arbitration rather than by war. In this sphere also this ministry advanced the interests of humanity, though it drew only disadvantage for itself from its service. The All the accumulated disaffection of six years found vent elections of [ n i\ ie elections of 1874. The Liberals were defeated by a 1874 majority of fifty. The Conservatives entered office with Disraeli as prime minister and remained in power till 1880. Thus fell Gladstone's first and most successful adminis- tration, with a record of remarkable achievement in legisla- tion and in administrative reform. The Disraeli Mr. Disraeli now found himself prime minister, chief of ministry. a p ar ty controlling by safe majorities both Houses of Parlia- ment. His administration lasted from 1874 to 1880. It differed as strikingly from Gladstone's as his character differed from that of his predecessor. This was owing to several facts. The criticisms which his party had leveled at its opponents, of disturbing everything by harassing legisla- tion, imposed upon him the obligation of leaving tilings alone, of inactivity in domestic legislation where possible, of effect- ing only mild reforms where reforms were necessary at all. Colonial and foreign affairs were the chief occupation of this ministry. Disraeli found the situation favorable and the moment opportune for impressing upon England the DISRAELI AND IMPERIALISM 487 political ideal, long germinating in his mind, succinctly called imperialism, that is the transcendant importance of Imperial- breadth of view and vigor of assertion of England's position xsm * as a world power, as an empire, not as an insular state. In 1872 he had said: "In my judgment no minister in this country will do his duty who neglects any opportunity of reconstructing as much as possible our colonial empire, and of responding to those distant sympathies which may become the source of incalculable strength and happiness to this land." This principle Disraeli emphasized in act and speech during his six years of power. It was imperfectly realized under him ; it was partially reconsidered and revised by Gladstone upon his return to power in 1880. But it had definitely received lodgment in the mind of England before he left power. It gave a new note to English politics. This Importance is Disraeli's historic significance in the annals of British ° . e . . . . . colonies politics. He greatly stimulated interest in the British col- emphasized. onies. He invoked " the sublime instinct of an ancient people." The first two years of his administration were singularly uneventful. The work of the preceding six years was ac- cepted and left in the main untouched. Laws were passed in the direction of economic improvement, to enable certain large towns to provide laborers with better dwellings, if they should wish to, to improve certain Friendly Societies so that the savings of the poor would be more secure, to pro- vide a system of land registration, so that land titles might be more certain. Disraeli had said that if Gladstone had been less eager to reform everything in England and more insistent upon main- taining her prestige abroad, it would have been better. He criticised the party as secretly undermining the Empire, as believing the Empire a burden, as looking upon the colonies simply in a financial light as a great and dubious expense. In opposition he spoke of the " cause of the Tory party " as the " cause of the British Empire," and he declared the " issue is not a mean one." ft88 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI Now in power himself he set about reversing what he considered to have boon the unimaginative, unpatriotic pol- icy of his predecessors. His first conspicuous achievement Purchase of in foreign affairs was the purchase of the Sue/ canal shares. the Suta 'pj 10 g uei calla ] ] 1;u | been built by the French against ill— slnres concealed English opposition. Disraeli had himself declared that the undertaking would inevitably be a failure. Now that the canal was built its success was speedily apparent. It radically changed the conditions of commerce with the East. It shortened greatly the distance to the Orient by water. Hitherto a considerable part of the commerce with India. China, and Australia had been carried on by the long voyage around the Cape o( Good Hope. Some went by the Red Sea route, but that involved transhipment at Alexandria. Now it could all pass through the canal. About three- fourths of the tonnage passing through the canal was Eng- lish. It was the direct road to India. There were some 400.000 shares in the Canal Company. The Khedive of Egypt held a large block o\' these, and the Khedive was nearly bankrupt. Disraeli bought, in lS7o, his 177.000 shares by telegraph for four million pounds, and the fact was announced to a people who had never dreamed of it, but who applauded what seemed a brilliant stroke, somehow checkmating the French. It was said that the high road to India was now secure. Financially it was an advan- tageous bargain. The shares are now worth more than seven times what was paid for them. 1 The political significance of this act was that it determined at least in principle the future of the relations of England to Egypt, and that it seemed to strike the note of imperial self-assertion which was Dis- raeli's chief ambition, and which was the most notable char- acteristic of his administration. At the same time Disraeli resolved to emphasize the im- 1 The exact number of shares acquired was 176.603; amount paid 3«976y58fl pounds. England, therefore, paid about $119 per share (par value $100). The stock was quoted in 1909 at $790. THE IMPERIAL TITLE 489 portance of India, England's leading colony, in another way. He proposed a new and sounding title for the British .sovereign. She was to he Empress of India. The Opposi- The Queen tion denounced this as " cheap " and " tawdry," a vulgar proclaimed piece of pretension. Was not the title of King or Queen India> borne by the sovereigns of England for a thousand years glorious enough? But Disraeli urged it as showing "the unanimous determination of the people of the country to retain our connection with the Indian Empire. And it will be an answer to those mere economists and those diplo- matists who announce that India is to us only a burden or a danger. By passing this bill then, the House will show, in a manner that is unmistakable, that they look upon India as one of the most precious possessions of the Crown, and their pride that it is a part of her empire and governed by her imperial throne." The reasoning was weak, but the proposal gave immense satisfaction to the Queen, and it was enacted into law. On January 1, 1877, the Queen's assumption of the new title was officially announced in India before an assembly of the ruling princes. In Europe Disraeli insisted upon carrying out a spirited foreign policy. His opportunity came with the reopening Beopening of the Eastern Question, or the question of the integrity of the of Turkey, in 1876. For two years this problem absorbed Q Uegti0IU the interest and attention of rulers and diplomatists, and England had much to do with the outcome. This subject may, however, be better studied in connection with the general history of the Eastern problem in the nineteenth century. 1 Disraeli, who in 1876 became Lord Beaconsfield, continued in power until 1880. The emphasis he put upon imperial and colonial problems was to exert a considerable influence upon the rising generation, and upon the later history of England. But it involved him in several undertakings, 1 See Chapter XXVIII. 490 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI particularly wars in Afghanistan and South Africa, which did not prove successful, and which contributed to his over- Fall of the throw and the temporary eclipse of his party. In the Disraeli elections of 1880 the Liberals attacked the whole policy of the last six years with vehemence. The result of the elections was the return of a Liberal majority of over a hundred. In April 1880, Mr. Gladstone became prime minister for the second time. *- *-"' The Second Mr. Gladstone's greatest ability lay in internal reform, Gladstone as ]^ s previous ministry had shown. This was the field 1880-1885 °^ n * s mcnna tion, and, as he thought, of the national wel- fare. Peace, retrenchment, and reform, the watchwords of his party, now represented the programme lie wished to fol- low. But this was not to be. While certain great measures of internal improvement were passed during the next live years, those years on the whole were characterized by the dom- inance ot' imperial and colonial questions, with attendant wars. Mr. Gladstone was forced to busy himself with foreign policy far more than in his preceding administration. Serious questions confronted him in Asia and Africa. These may best be studied, however, in the chapter on the British Empire. 1 Two pieces of internal legislation of great importance enacted during this ministry merit description, the Irish Land Act of 1881, and the Reform Bills of 1884-5. Failure of The legislation of his preceding ministry had not pacified Land Act of Iro i. uul . Indeed, the Land Act of 1870 had proved no 18~0 final settlement, but a great disappointment. It had estab- lished the principle that the landlord's ownership in Ireland was not absolute and unrestricted but was a kind of limited partnership. The tenant was to be compensated if deprived of his farm except for non-payment of rent, and was to be compensated, in any case, for all the permanent improvements which he had made upon the land. But this was not sufficient to give the tenant any security in his holding. It 1 Chapter XXII. THE LAND ACT OF 1881 491 did not prevent the raising of the rent at the will of the landlord. The bill was not far-reaching enough adequately to safeguard the interests of the tenant; moreover, it con- tained too many exceptions and restrictions. The bill, in fact, proved no solution, but only the first of a long line of measures enacted since, aiming at the removal of the agrarian difficulties under which the island suffered. In his new measure Gladstone sought to give the peasant, The Land in addition to the compensation for improvement previously ct of secured, a fair rent, a fixed rent, one that is not constantly subject to change at the will of the landlord, and freedom of sale, that is, the liberty of the peasant to sell his holding to some other peasant. These were the " three F's," which had once represented the demands of advanced Irishmen, though they no longer did. Henceforth, the rent of an Irish farm was not to be fixed by the ordinary law of supply and demand, by an agreement between landlord and tenant, but was to be determined by a court, established for the purpose. It was hardly proper to call this " fair " rent. It might not necessarily be fair, as the Land Court might lean too much in favor of the landlord, or in favor of the peasant. It was, however, a judicial rent. Rents, once Rents to be judicially determined, were to be unchangeable for fifteen judicially years, during which time the tenant might not be evicted except for breaches of covenant, such as non-payment of rent. There was also attached to the bill a provision similar to the one in the preceding measure of 1870, looking toward the creation of a peasant proprietorship. The Government was to loan money to the peasants under certain conditions and on easy terms, to enable them to buy out the landlords, thus becoming complete owners themselves. The bill was attacked with unusual bitterness. Land- Denounced owners, believing that it meant a reduction of rents, deter- mined not by themselves but by a court, called it confisca- property, tion of property. " It is a bill," said the Duke of Argyll, " by which three persons are authorized to settle the value 492 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI of the whole country." It was attacked because it estab- lished the principle that rents were not to be determined, like the price of other things, by the law of supply and demand. Rents were not to be what the landlord might de- mand and the peasant agree to pay, but were to be reasonable, and their reasonableness was to be decided by outsiders, judges, having no direct interest at all, that is, in last resort, by the State. The bill was criticized as altering ruthlessly the nature of property in land, as establishing dual owner- ship. The only alternative, however, was the single owner- ship of the landlord, that is, his right to do as he liked with the land, the very thing which had, it was asserted, occasioned the many sufferings of Ireland, and the endless series of coercion acts by which it had been so long ruled arbitrarily. The bill passed. It did not pacify Ireland, which was now putting forth new demands of a political nature and was in the full swing of the Home Rule move- ment. It did not bring immediate but only ultimate im- provement. Meanwhile disturbances, and even atrocious crimes, continued, evidences of the profound unrest of the unhappy island. It was Mr. Gladstone who carried through the third great reform act of the nineteenth century, by which England has been transformed from an oligarchy into a democracy. The Reform Bill of 1832 had given the suffrage to the wealthier members of the middle class. The Reform Bill of 1867 had taken a long step in the direction of democracy by giving the vote practically to all householders in bor- oughs. But those who lived, not in boroughs, but in the country, were not greatly profited by this measure. In England there are three classes of people who have to do with the land. First, the landlords, the owners of large estates. These men belonged to the nobility and gentry, and had controlled the House of Commons before 1832, when that house was called the landlords' Parliament. Sec- ond are the farmers, men who rent their farms from the land- REFORM BILL OF 1884 493 lords, and who conduct the agriculture of the country, but do not, as a rule, do the actual work of tilling the soil. These men were largely enfranchised by the Reform Bill of 1832. Third, there are the laborers, employed by the farmer to do his work, day laborers. Now the Act of 1867 did not give them the suffrage, though it did give it largely to the day laborers in the boroughs by establishing the house- hold and lodger franchise, a franchise so low that many workingmen could meet it. The franchise in boroughs was much wider than the franchise in counties. There was apparently no valid reason for giving a vote to workingmen living in boroughs and not to those living in country villages or on farms. Mr. Gladstone's bill of 1884 aimed at the The county abolition of this inequality "between the two classes of con- franchise stituencies, by extending the borough franchise to the counties so that the mass of workingmen would have the right to vote whether they lived in town or country. The county franchise, previously higher, was to be exactly assimilated to the borough franchise. The bill passed, and in connection with bills enacted for Scotland and Ireland, doubled the number of county voters, and increased the total number of the electorate from over three to over five millions. Mr. Gladstone's chief argument was that the bill would lay the foundations of the government broad and deep in the people's will, and " array the people in one solid compacted mass around the ancient throne which it has loved so well, and around a constitution now to be more than ever powerful, and more than ever free." The franchise bill of 1884 was accompanied, as had been those of 1832 and 1867, by a redistribution of seats in Redistribtr- the House of Commons. By the Redistribution Act of tion of 1885 inequalities of representation of the same type as those rendered familiar in connection with the Reform Bill of 1832, inequalities which had grown up in the last genera- tion, were redressed, and certain new principles were adopted. Towns containing fewer than 15,000 inhabitants were to 494. UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI lose their separate representation and be merged in the counties in which they were situated. Towns whose popula- tion ranged between 15,000 and 50,000 were to return one member only. Such were the two disfranchising clauses. There were some exceptions, but the result of the whole was the extinction of 160 seats. These were distributed among the more populous boroughs and counties. The Act of 1885 provided that henceforth boroughs with more than 15,000, and less than 50,000 inhabitants, should have one member ; those with more than 50,000 and less than 165,000, two members; those with more than 165,000, three, with an additional member for every 50,000 inhab- itants above that number. Thus London, in place of the previous 22 members, was to have 62, to which it was en- titled if population was to be the basis. Liverpool was to have nine, Glasgow seven, and so on. The same was to hold with the counties. Yorkshire was to have 26 mem- bers, Lancashire 23. The result was that the great in- dustrial centers, towns and counties, received representation approximate to their importance. The Redistribution Act of 1885 further applied in most cases the principle of single member divisions. Previously, if a borougli had had two members it yet formed one con- stituency. All the voters had the right to vote for two members. Such boroughs were now divided into as many constituencies as they were allowed members. While pre- viously some counties had been divided as being incon- veniently large, no boroughs had been. The Act of 1885 applied the new principle to towns and counties alike, each constituency returning, with few exceptions, only one mem- ber. For instance, Liverpool, which had previously sent three members to Parliament, and which now was to send nine, was divided into nine distinct constituencies, each re- turning one member; Lancashire was now split into twenty- three divisions, with a single member from each. The membership of the House of Commons was increased PRESENT STATE OF THE SUFFRAGE 495 at this time to 670, where it still remains. The number in 1815 was 658. This was not changed in 1832, nor in 1867, but after 1867 it had been reduced to 652 by the disfranchise- ment of several boroughs for corrupt practices. Since 1885 there has been no new redistribution of seats, and the equality of districts, roughly worked out in 1885, has since disappeared in many cases. There is no periodical readjustment according to population, as in the United States after each census. To-day some elec- toral districts are ten, or even fifteen, times as large as others ; many are two or three. Constituencies range from about 13,000 to over 217,000. Since 1885 also there has been no extension of the suffrage. The evolution of the parliamentary franchise, which we have traced through the three great measures of 1832, 1867, and 1884, has progressed no further. It should not be forgotten that there is no single, uniform, universal qualification for Various voting. A man gets the right to vote by being able to meet ciualinca- one of several qualifications, and he may have several votes, votin „ if he satisfies the qualifications in different constituencies (plural voting). He may vote if he owns land of forty shillings annual value, if he holds land of the value of five pounds by a lease of sixty years, of fifty pounds by a lease of twenty years, if he is a householder, no matter what the value of the house is, if he is an " occupier " of a house or building or store, of the annual value of ten pounds, if he is a lodger of lodgings of the annual value, unfurnished, of ten pounds. Some enjoy the right under the provisions of the Act of 1884, some under those of the Act of 1867, some even under those of the Act of 1832. " The present condition of the franchise is indeed," says President Lowell, " historical rather than rational. It is complicated, uncertain, expensive in the machinery required, and excludes a certain number of people whom there is no reason for excluding, while it admits many people who ought not to be admitted, if any one is to be debarred. But the hardship or injustice affects individuals 496 UNDER GLADSTONE AND DISRAELI alone. No considerable class in the community is aggrieved, and neither political party is now anxious to extend the franchise. The Conservatives are not by tradition in favor of such a course, and leading Liberals have come to realize that any further extension would be likely to benefit their opponents." ' 1 Lowell, The Government of England, I, 213-14. CHAPTER XXI ENGLAND SINCE 1886 The Gladstone ministry fell from power in 1885 chiefly because of the unpopularity of its Egyptian policy, which will be described elsewhere. Lord Salisbury, since Lord Beaconsfield's death in 1881 leader of the Conservative party, formed a ministry. This lasted but a few months, for The First the general elections at the close of the year showed that . 1 . . & f administra- tis Liberals would have in the new Parliament 335 votes, tj on- the Conservatives 249, and the Irish Home Rulers 86. Thus the Liberals exactly equaled the other two parties combined. The Irish held the balance of power. It is necessary at this point to trace the history of this new party, which was destined to exert a profound influence upon the course of British politics. During Gladstone's first ministry there was formed in The Home Dublin the Home Government Association of Ireland, three i -r. T Movement, years later reconstituted as the Home Rule League, and demanding an Irish Parliament for the management of the internal affairs of Ireland. The Irish had constantly smarted under the injury which they felt had been done them by the abolition of their former Parliament, which sat in Dublin, and which was abolished by the Act of Union of 1800. The feeling for nationality, one of the dominant forces of the nineteenth century everywhere, acted upon them with unusual force. They disliked, for historical and sentimental reasons, the rule of an English Parliament, and the sense as well as reality of subjection to an alien people. They felt that England must give them rights of self- government or else must rule them by coercion. The party grew into importance under Disraeli's administration, hav- 497 498 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Charles Stuart Parnell. ing 51 members in Parliament, who supported the principle of Home Rule. Their leader at first was Mr. Butt, who brought their demands before the House of Commons. The party did not wish the separation of Ireland from England, but a separate parliament for Irish affairs, on the ground that the Parliament at Westminster had neither the time nor the understanding necessary for the proper considera- tion of measures affecting the Irish. It became much more aggressive when Charles Stuart Parnell became its leader in 1879. Parnell was a Protestant, of English education, a landowner. Unlike the other great leaders of Irish his- tory — Grattan, O'Connell — he was no orator, and was of a cold and haughty nature, but of an inflexible will. For twelve years he played a great part in the politics of Eng- land and Ireland. Discontented with the slow, easy, ineffective methods of urging Home Rule hitherto followed, Parnell persuaded the Adoption of party to adopt a more vigorous and defiant attitude. His the policy poliov was to keep the Home Rule party entirely separate of obstruc- tion, from the other parties, and to use the modes of procedure of the House of Commons in order to block the work of the House; in other words, to resort to endless dilatory motions and roll-calls and speeches, in short, obstruction. The rules of the House rendered this possible, as every mem- ber could propose as many amendments as he chose to any bill, and could speak on those proposals as long as he chose. The policy was carried out by the Irish members relieving each other systematically. In 1879 it was estimated that Parnell had spoken five hundred times, and that two others had spoken over three hundred times each. The purpose of this recourse to such methods was to paralyze the action of Parliament until it gave heed to Irish demands, to pre- vent or delay all legislation on even the most necessary subjects until their grievances were redressed, and to show conclusively that one Parliament was insufficient for the business of both countries. The House was obliged to change THE HOME RULE PARTY 499 its rules in order to prevent this blocking of public business by a small fraction of its members. In the Parliament of 1880 the Home Rulers numbered Gladstone 63. Mr. Gladstone, still believing that land legislation ify would solve the Irish question, showed the intention of carry- Ireland, ing further the policy begun in his first administration. He caused the Land Act of 1881 to be passed. But the Home Rulers all through his term pursued him even more vehe- mently than they had his predecessors. They accepted the bill as a mere instalment. But the first three years of Gladstone's second administration were years of unexampled bitterness. The Irish resorted to every means to get their object, intimidation, violence, mutilation of cattle, burning of houses, even the murder of landlords and some of the Government officials in Ireland, notably Lord Frederick Cavendish and Thomas Burke, shockingly assassinated in broad daylight in Phoenix Park, Dublin, in 1882. Gladstone replied by a policy of coercion. Conciliatory legislation and stern repression of violence were his principles of action. After 1883 the condition of Ireland became somewhat calmer, but only after a confused and bitter struggle, which had aroused all the hostile feelings of both the Irish and the English. The Irish, it was clear, were prepared to fight to the knife, were biding the time when they might force Home Rule from Parliament by holding the balance of power in the House of Commons. In the next Parliament, which met in 1886, they were in this position. They had 86 members, all but one of whom represented Irish constituencies. Mr. Gladstone entered upon his third ministry February The Third 1, 1886. It lasted less than six months, and was wholly Gladstone ministry, devoted to the question of Ireland. It was evident that the Irish question would dominate Mr. Gladstone's third ministry, as it had dominated his first and largely his second. This would have been so even if the Home Rulers had not held the balance of power in the House of Commons. It would have dominated 500 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 The Home Rulers hold the balance of power Home Rule or Coercion? Introduc- tion of the Home Rule Bill. the Conservatives had not the Liberals won in the general election. Mr. Gladstone had expressed during the cam- paign his desire that either one or the other of the two great English parties should have so large a majority that the vexatious question could be handled without the aid of Irish votes. There is, indeed, evidence to show that he was quite willing that the Conservatives should solve this question if they would only honestly face it. He wished to raise it out of the realm of party conflict. That was not to be, however, and the election had resulted in creating just the situation he had dreaded and deplored. The Irish held the balance of power, and any proposals he might make would now be represented as simply a bribe for political position. Such a consideration, however, he proudly ignored, and it had no hold upon serious politicians of either party, for his noble record for fifty years gave it emphatic denial. This was the situation as it presented itself to his mind. The Irish people had expressed their almost unanimous wish by returning a solid body of 85 Home Rulers out of the 103 members to whom they were entitled. Mr. Gladstone had tried in previous legislation to rule the Irish according to Irish rather than English ideas, where he considered those ideas just. He believed the great blot upon the annals of England to be the Irish chapter, written, as it had been, by English arrogance, hatred, and unintelligence. Recon- ciliation had been his keynote hitherto. Moreover, to him there seemed but two alternatives — either further reform along the lines desired by the Irish, or the old, sad story of hard yet unsuccessful coercion. Mr. Gladstone would have nothing more to do with the latter method. He, there- fore, resolved to endeavor to give to Ireland the Home Rule she plainly desired. On the 8th of April, 1886, he intro- duced the Irish Government Bill, announcing that it would be followed by a Land Bill, the two parts of a single scheme which could not be separated. The bill, thus introduced, provided for an Irish Parlia- HOME RULE BILL 501 ment to sit in Dublin, controlling a ministry of its own, and legislating on Irish, as distinguished from imperial affairs. A difficulty arose right here. If the Irish were to have Shall the a legislature of their own for their own affairs, ought they 8lt still to sit in the Parliament in London, with power there m j n8 t e r? to mix in English and Scotch affairs? On the other hand, if they ceased to have members in London, they would have no share in legislating for the Empire as a whole. " This," says Morley, " was from the first, and has ever since re- mained, the Gordian knot." The bill provided that they should be excluded from the Parliament at Westminster. On certain topics it was further provided that the Irish Parliament should never legislate, questions affecting the Crown, the army and navy, foreign and colonial affairs; nor could it establish or endow any religion. After two years it was to have control of the Irish police. Ireland must contribute a certain proportion to the imperial ex- penses, one-fourteenth, instead of two-seventeenths, as had been the case since 1801. Mr. Gladstone did not believe that the Irish difficulty would be solved simply by new political machinery. There was a serious social question not reached by this, the land question. He introduced immediately a land bill, which Land was to effect a vast transfer of land by purchase from land- Purcna8e Bill, lords to peasants, and which might perhaps involve an ex- penditure to the State of about 120,000,000 pounds. The introduction of these bills, whose passage would mean a radical transformation of Ireland, precipitated one of the fiercest struggles in English parliamentary annals. Opposition They were urged as necessary to settle the question once to the for all on a solid basis, as adapted to bring peace and contentment to Ireland, and thus strengthen the Union. Otherwise, said those who supported them, England had no alternative but coercion, a dreary and dismal failure. On the other hand, the strongest opposition arose out of the belief that these bills imperiled the very existence of the 508 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Union. The exclusion of the Irish members from Parlia- meni seemed to many to be the snapping of the cords that held the countries together. Did not this bill really dis- member the British Empire? Needless to say, no British statesman could urge any measure of that character. Glad- stone thought that his bills meant the reconciliation of two peoples estranged for centuries, and that reconciliation meant the strengthening rather than the weakening of the Empire, that the historic policy of England towards Ireland had only resulted in alienation, hatred, the destruction of the spiritual harmony which is essential to real unity. But, said his opponents, to give the Irish a parliament of their own, and to exclude them from the Parliament in London, to give them control of their own legislature, their own executive, their own judiciary, their own police, must lead The union inevitably to separation. You exclude them from all par- in danger! tieipation in imperial affairs, thus rendering their patriotism the more intensely local. You provide, it is true, that they shall bear a part of the burdens of the Empire. Is this proviso worth the paper it is written on? Will they not next regard this as a grievance, this taxation without representation, and will not the old animosity break out anew? You abandon the Protestants of Ireland to the revenge of the Catholic majority of the new Parliament. To be sure, you provide for toleration in Ireland, but again is this toleration worth the paper it is written on? Probably the strongest force in opposition to the bill was the opinion widely held in England of Irishmen, that they were thoroughly disloyal to the Empire, that they would delight to use their new autonomy to pay off old scores by aiding the enemies of England, that they were traitors in disguise, or undisguised, that they had no regard for property or contract, that an era of religious oppression and of con- fiscation of property would be inaugurated by this new agency of a parliament of their own. These feelings were expressed in characteristic ways by the leader of the Opposi- English dislike of the Irish. OPPOSITION TO HOME RULE BILL 503 tion, Lord Salisbury, and by Mr. Gladstone's close friend and previous political ally, John Bright. Lord Salisbury expressed all the contempt of an aristocrat belonging to a superior race. " Ireland, he declared, is not one nation, but two nations. There were races like the Hottentots, and even the Hindoos, incapable of self-government. He would not place confidence in people who had acquired the habit of using knives and slugs. His policy was that Par- liament should enable the government of England to govern Ireland. 'Apply the recipe honestly, consistently, and resolutely for twenty years, and at the end of that time you will find that Ireland will be fit to accept any gifts in the way of local government or repeal of coercion laws that you may wish to give her.' " 1 He added that rather than spend the money in buying out the Irish landlords, it would be far better to spend it in assisting the emigration of a million Irishmen. Mr. Bright's opposition differed John in temper, and was far more damatnnff in its effects. He Bn & n t s . . opposition, had long been known as the friend of Ireland, as a dis- believer in the policy of coercion, as an advocate of meas- ures adapted to relieve the discontent of the people. But he disliked intensely the idea of a second parliament in the United Kingdom, which he did not think would be successful or work harmoniously with the Parliament in London ; he believed a new parliament would prove most oppressive to Irish Protestants ; he spoke with extreme bitterness of the Irish party in Parliament, and its policy for the last six years ; he did not believe these men either loyal or honorable or truthful, and he did believe that, if they obtained a Par- liament of their own, they would use it against England. Bitter personalities abounded in the debate. One mem- ber characterized the plan as the offspring of " verbosity and senility," as the " foolish work " of " an old man in a hurry." It was evident that the Home Rule Bill had aroused an amount of bitterness unknown in recent English history. 1 Morley, Life of Gladstone, III, 317, 318. 504 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Disruption of the Liberal Partv The Conservative party opposed it to a man. And the Liberal party was in full process of disruption because of it. Even before the measure was brought in, many men who had hitherto worked side by side with Mr. Gladstone in his previous ministries, withdrew and went over to the Con- servatives. These men called themselves Liberal-Unionists, Liberals, but not men who were prepared to jeopardize the Union, as they held that this measure would do — Lord Hart- ington (later the Duke of Devonshire), Mr. Bright, Joseph Chamberlain, Mr. Goschen, and many others. All the jour- nals of London, with the exception of one morning and one evening paper, were vigorously opposed. The crucial question was, how large the secession from the Liberal party would be? Would it be large enough to offset the Irish vote which would be cast for the measure? Finally a vote was taken on the 8th of June, on the second reading of the bill. It was found that 93 Liberals had joined the Opposition, and that the Home Rule Bill was beaten by 343 votes to 313. The total poll was thus enormous, 656 out of the 670 members of the House. Between one-third and one- fourth of the Iaberal party had withdrawn from it on account of this fateful measure. Mr. Gladstone dissolved Parliament and appealed to the people. The question was vehemently discussed before the voters. The result was disastrous to the Gladstonian Home Rulers. 191 Gladstonians and 85 Irish Home Rulers were returned, and 316 Conservatives and 78 Liberal-Unionists. Thus a majority of over a hundred was rolled up against Gladstone's policy. Taking England alone, the result was even more striking. There he had only 125 seats out of 455 ; in London only 11 out of 62. On the other hand, Scotland approved in the ratio of 3 to 2, Wales of 5 to 1. Mr. Gladstone did not consider that such a result settled the issue irrevocably. Lord Salisbury had said that if Parliament would rule Ireland resolutely for twenty years, at the end of that time SECOND SALISBURY MINISTRY 505 she would be fit to accept any gifts in the line of local The Second government or repeal of coercion acts that Parliament might Salisbury see fit to give her. He was now prime minister, and in a joogigoo position to put his opinion into force. Coercion more severe than that of previous years was the policy adopted by this ministry, largely under the direction of Mr. Arthur James Balfour, Chief Secretary for Ireland. That the measures followed were stringent was shown by a statement The of Sir George Trevelyan that of the eighty-five Irish Na- P oli(j y °* tionalist members, one out of every seven was in prison, on his way to prison, or on his way out of prison. Need- less to say, no reconciliation was to be effected by such methods. The exasperation of the Irish was only intensi- fied. Nevertheless, the system steadily applied was success- ful at least in restoring quiet. In 1890 it was found possible to relax it somewhat. But the policy of this ministry was not simply negative. The idea that buying out the landlords and enabling the peasants to become full owners of their farms would solve the agrarian question, and that the agrarian question was at the root of Irish discontent, was no discovery of a Conservative ministry. Clauses with this in view had been inserted in Gladstone's Land Acts of 1870 and 1881, and the Land Bill of 1886 was a gigantic measure designed to effect this on a grand scale. That measure, however, frightened the taxpayers by the amount of the expenditure involved, and, moreover, it necessarily fell with the Home Rule Bill, of which it was intended to be the companion piece. Gladstone's earlier acts had not had great effect, as the State had offered to advance only two-thirds of the purchase price. The present plan provided that the State should advance the whole of it, to be repaid by instalments until at the end of forty-nine years the peasant would have his land as an unencumbered freehold. Thirty-three million pounds were set aside for the purpose. The landlords were not required to sell, but the issue has proved them willing to 506 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Land Purchase Act. County government reformed. do so in a large number of cases. The Government buys the land, sells it to the peasant, who that instant becomes its legal owner, and who pays for it gradually. He actually pays less in this way each year than he formerly paid for rent, and in the end he has his holding unencumbered. This bill was passed in 1891, and in five years some 35,000 tenants were thus enabled to purchase their holdings under its provisions. The system was extended much further in later years, particularly by the Land Act of 1903. From 1903 to 1908 there were about 160,000 purchasers. A most important piece of legislation carried by this ministry was the County Councils Act of 18SS. This act rendered the county governments of England and Wales democratic. Those governments had previously been en- tirely unrepresentative in character. They had been mainly in the hands of the landlord class, members of which were appointed by the Queen as magistrates or justices of the peace. As such they met four times a year in quarter sessions, and there regulated county affairs, levying taxes, discharging certain judicial functions, regulating the liquor trade, and the building and repair of highways, and super- vising the actions of the officials of smaller areas. County government was in the hands of an oligarchy. The new act placed it in the hands of all ratepayers, who were to elect county councils for a term of three years, which were to conduct the local administration, with the exception of granting liquor licenses, a function which was to remain in the hands of the justices of the peace. Thus county government was made democratic. As local self-govern- ment had been established in the boroughs in 1835, it was now- established in the counties. This was one of the most im- portant achievements of this ministry. In 1S89 a similar bill was passed for Scotland. Ireland lay outside this legislation. This ministry passed other bills of a distinctly liberal character: among them an act absolutely prohibiting the em- ployment of children under ten. an act designed to reduce the THE FOURTH GLADSTONE MINISTRY 507 oppression of the sweat-shop by limiting the labor of women Social to twelve hours a day, with an hour and a half for meals, le & i8lation « an act making education free, and a small allotment act intended to create a class of peasant proprietors in Eng- land. These measures were supported by all parties. They were important as indicating that social legislation was likely to be in the coming years more important than political legislation, which has proved to be the case. They also show that the Conservative party was changing in character, and was willing to assume a leading part in social reform. In respect to another item of internal policy, the Salis- Increase of bury ministry took a stand which has been decisive ever since. In 1889 it secured an immense increase of the navy. Seventy ships were to be added at an expense of 21,500,000 pounds during the next seven years. Lord Salisbury laid it down as a principle that the British navy ought to be equal to any other two navies of the world combined. In foreign affairs the most important work of this min- istry lay in its share in the partition of Africa, which will be described elsewhere. The general elections of 1892 resulted in the return to The Fourth power of the Liberals, supported by the Irish Home Rulers, 61adstone and Mr. Gladstone, at the age of eighty-two, became for 1892-1894. the fourth time prime minister, a record unparalleled in English history. As he himself said, the one single tie that still bound him to public life was his interest in securing Home Rule for Ireland before his end. It fol- lowed necessarily from the nature of the case that pub- lic attention was immediately concentrated anew on that question. Early in 1893 Mr. Gladstone introduced his second Home Rule Bill. Again the crucial difficulty was The second found to be that of the retention or non-retention of Irish Home Rllle Bill representatives in the Parliament in London. There were three possible methods — total exclusion, inclusion for all purposes, or inclusion for certain specified purposes. The 508 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Panda- mental objections. bill of 1886 was based on the first (with slight exceptions), and immediately the cry had been raised, and had been most effective, that the unity of the kingdom was threatened. In the new bill the third method was adopted. It was provided that Ireland should send eighty members to West- minster, but that they were not to vote on questions ex- pressly confined to England and Scotland, on taxes which were not to be levied in Ireland, or on appropriations for other than imperial concerns. 1 On this point the debate raged for a whole week. Mr. Gladstone was forced to change ground completely, and to propose the unconditional admission of the Irish members to the Parliament in London, with right to vote on all matters. Exclusion, as in 1886; partial inclusion as pro- posed in 1893; total inclusion as finally accepted by the ministry, these were the three possible ways of treating this crucial question. On this fundamental matter Lord Morley has written as follows : " Each of the three courses was open to at least one single, but very direct objection. Exclusion, along with the exaction of revenue from Ireland by the Par- liament at Westminster, was taxation without representation. Inclusion for all purposes was to allow the Irish to meddle in our affairs, while we were no longer to meddle in theirs. Inclusion for limited purposes still left them invested with the power of turning out a British government by a vote against it on an imperial question. Each plan, therefore, ended in a paradox. There was a fourth paradox, namely, that whenever the British supporters of a government did not suffice to build up a decisive majority, then the Irish vote, descending into one or other scale of parliamentary balance, might decide who should be our rulers. This para- dox — the most glaring of them all — habit and custom have made familiar." 2 ir The bill of 1893 provided for two chambers in the Irish parliament; the bill of 1SS6 had provided for one chamber. 1 Morley, Gladstone, III, 498. DEFEAT OF HOME RULE BILL 509 The opposition to the bill was exceedingly bitter and Bitterness prolonged. Very few new arguments were brought forward ° t e . on either side. Party spirit ran riot. Mr. Chamberlain was called Judas, and he in turn called Gladstone Herod. Lord Salisbury called the proposal " an intolerable, an im- becile, an accursed bill." Lord Randolph Churchill declared that the Irish leaders were " political brigands and nihilists," and that the ministry was " as capricious as a woman, and as impulsive and as passionate as a horde of barbarians." Mr. Gladstone, who, incidentally, kept his temper, ex- pressed with all his eloquence his faith in the Irish people, his belief that the only alternative to his policy was coercion, and that coercion would be forever unsuccessful, his con- viction that it was the duty of England to atone for six centuries of misrule. After eighty-two days of discussion, marked by scenes of Passed by great disorder, members on one occasion coming to blows e om " to the great damage of decorous parliamentary traditions, the defeated by bill was carried by a majority of 34 (301 to 267). A the Lords, week later it was defeated in the House of Lords by 419 to 41, or a majority of more than ten to one. The bill was dead. Gladstone attempted to carry through various English measures, but here again he was foiled by the hereditary chamber. A single legislative reform was enacted, the Parish Parish Councils Bill of 1894. This established in every parish of more than 300 inhabitants a council elected by the taxpayers, and gave them certain powers of self-government. This was the natural supplement to the County Councils Act of 1888, completing the process of constitutional reform which began in 1832. Agricultural laborers were henceforth to have a political training in participating in the management of local affairs. Mr. Gladstone's fourth ministry was balked successfully at every turn by the House of Lords, which, under the able leadership of Lord Salisbury, recovered an actual power 510 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Resigna- tion of Gladstone. The Rosebery Ministry. it had not possessed since 1832. In 1894- Mr. Gladstone resigned his office, thus bringing to a close one of the most remarkable political careers known to English history. His last speech in Parliament was a vigorous attack upon the House of Lords. In his opinion, that House had become the great, obstacle to progress. " The issue which is raised between a deliberative assembly, elected by the votes of more than 6,000,000 people,'' and an hereditary body, " is a controversy which, when once raised, must go forward to an issue." This speech was his last in an assembly where his first had been delivered sixty-one years before. Gladstone died four years later, and was buried in West- minster Abbey ( 1 898 ) . He was succeeded in the premiership by Lord Rosebery, whose ministry lasted only sixteen months. The withdrawal of Gladstone showed the many rifts in the Liberal party, which a leader of less prestige and less commanding per- sonality could not close. The party was discouraged by its failure to achieve Home Rule, was balked by the House of Lords, was divided into groups desiring various things, and was feebly supported by the people. Such a ministry could not long endure. Rosebery alienated the Irish by de- claring that he agreed with Lord Salisbury, that before Home Rule should be granted Ireland, " England, as the predominant member of the partnership of the three king- doms, will have to be convinced of its justice." The Rosebery ministry accomplished very little. Its campaign against the House of Lords was half-hearted and ineffective. In one sphere, where the Lords were by custom forbidden to interfere in financial matters, it made an im- portant change. England was now involved in the wide- spread militaristic movement, which is one of the striking features of the closing nineteenth century. In England it took the form of very largely increasing the navy, and the principle was now being accepted which has since become an axiom in British policy, of making the British fleet the THE ROSEBERY MINISTRY 511 equal of any two foreign fleets combined. This involved much larger taxation. In the budget of 1894, the work of Sir William Vernon Harcourt, the principle of graduation was introduced into the inheritance taxes. The tax im- posed by the state was to vary from one per cent, on estates of five hundred pounds to eight per cent, on estates of over a million pounds. This change was bitterly resented by the wealthy. In June 1895 the Rosebery ministry was defeated on a The Con- minor matter and seized the occasion to resign. Lord sery atives Salisbury became prime minister. A general election was . power, at once held, which proved to be a crushing defeat for the Liberals. The Conservatives and the Liberal-Unionists, or the Unionist party, as it was generally called, so thorough had become the amalgamation of the two, had a majority in the new Parliament of about a hundred and fifty, a larger majority than any party had had in any parliament since the one chosen immediately after the Reform Bill of 1832. This party was to remain uninterruptedly in power until December 1905. Lord Salisbury was now prime minister for the third The Tnird time. He remained such until 1902, when he withdrew from -_. . ^ ry Ministry. public life, being succeeded by his nephew, Mr. Arthur James Balfour. There was, however, no change of party. Lord Salisbury had an immense majority in the House of Com- mons. His ministry contained several very able men. He himself assumed the Foreign Office, Mr. Chamberlain the Colonial Office, Mr. Balfour the leadership of the House of Commons. The withdrawal of Mr. Gladstone and the divisions in the Liberal party reduced that party to a posi- tion of ineffective opposition. The Irish question sank into the background. Much social and labor legislation was enacted. The commanding question of this period was to be that of imperialism, and the central figure was Mr. Joseph Chamberlain, a man remarkable for vigor and au- dacity, and the most popular member of the cabinet. 512 ENGLAND SINCE 1SS6 Chamberlain, who had made his reputation as an advanced Liberal, an advocate of radical social and economic reforms, now stood forth as the spokesman of imperialism. His office, that of Colonial Secretary, gave him excellent opportunities to emphasize the importance of the colonies to the mother country, the desirability of drawing them closer together, of promoting imperial federation. War in A period oi great activity in foreign and colonial affairs . . . began almost immediately after the inauguration of the new Africa. # & , • .... ministry. The most important chapter in this activity concerned the conditions in South Africa, which led, in 1899, to the Boer War, and which had important consequences. This will better be described elsewhere. 1 The Conservatives, resolutely opposed to the policy of an independent parliament in Ireland, and conscious that in this they had the support of the people, declined abso- lutely to consider Home Rule. But they proposed to " kill Home Rule by kindness," as the phrase ran. Rigorous coercion for the suppression of disorder was united with a Land Purchase Bill, of the now familiar type, aiming to facilitate, more than previous bills had done, the buying out of the landlords and the creation of a peasant pro- Irish local p r ietorship of the soil of Ireland (1896). More important « t " was the Irish Local Government Act of 189S, which aimed to give some measure of local self-government to the Irish by establishing there, as had been done in England, county councils and district councils, but not parish councils. These bodies, which were to possess considerable powers in the management of local affairs, were to be elected on a franchise identical with the parliamentary franchise, except that Peers and women might vote. This was, of course, no substitute for Home Rule, nor was it intended to be. The South African war, from 1S99 to 1902, absorbed the attention of England until its successful termination. In- ternal legislation was of slight importance. During the 1 Pages 541-544. EDUCATION ACT OF 1902 518 war Queen Victoria died, January 22, 1901, after a reign Death of of over sixty-three years, the longest known in British ftueen i • . ii iiii, i Victoria, history, and only exceeded elsewhere by the seventy-one years' reign of Louis XIV of France. She had proved during her entire reign, which began in 1837, a model con- stitutional monarch, subordinating her will to that of the people, as expressed by the ministry and Parliament. " She passed away," said Mr. Balfour in the House of Commons, " without an enemy in the world, for even those who loved not England loved her." The reign of Edward VII, then in his sixty-second year, began. A very important measure passed by this Conservative Education ministry was the Education Act of 1902. The Forster ffL° Act of 1870, which had remained the basis of the elementary educational system of- England since its passage, had adopted the voluntary or denominational schools, and had added, where these were not adequate, board schools. Both were to receive generally fees from their pupils and grants from Parliament. In addition, the voluntary schools were to receive voluntary gifts as hitherto, and the board schools local taxes levied for the purpose by the boards. As the years went by, the voluntary schools found that they were being handicapped by the fact that the board schools had larger financial resources than they. The parliamentary grants w r ere conditioned in amount by the sums raised in the other ways by the two kinds of schools. Now the board schools could, by raising more from taxation, earn larger grants from Parliament, while the voluntary schools, relying upon private subscriptions, could not gain increased appropriations unless they could get larger sub- scriptions. While they were able to do this for a while, they were not able to in the long run. In 1900 the average amount per pupil was somewhat less than thirty years be- fore. They were thus at a disadvantage compared with the board schools. The voluntary schools, which were for the most part connected with the Church of England, began 514 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 Abolition of the School Boards. to demand further help from Parliament. In 1897 they were given an additional subsidy, which, in their opinion, was not large enough. Their agitation continued and re- sulted finally in the passage of the Act of 1902, By this the school boards, established in 1870, were abol- ished, and their powers were vested in the county and borough councils, that is, in the regular local government bodies. These were to support both sets of schools, the former board and the voluntary, out of local taxes, parlia- mentary grants continuing. In other words, local taxes were to be raised for denominational schools, as well as for undenominational, parliamentary grants, as hitherto, also going to both. The actual management of the former board schools was to be in the hands of a committee of the county or borough council. That of the church schools was to be in the hands of a committee of six, two of whom were to represent the county or borough council, while four were to represent the denomination. In other words, people were to be taxed for both sets of schools, but were to control only one. The bill gave great offense to Dissenters and be- lievers in secular education. It authorized taxation for the advantage of a denomination of which multitudes of tax- payers were not members. It was held to be a measure for increasing the power of the Church of England. The conscience clause was applied to all schools, as hitherto. The opposition to this law was intense. Thousands re- fused to pay their taxes, and their property was, therefore, sold by public authority to meet the taxes. Many were imprisoned. There were over 70,000 summonses to court. The agitation thus aroused was one of the great causes for the crushing defeat of the Conservative party in 1905. Yet the law of 1902 was put into force and is at this moment the law of England, the Liberals having failed in 1906 in an attempt to pass an education bill of their own to supersede it. The educational system remains one of the contentious problems of English politics. Mean- OLD AGE PENSIONS 515 while, under the operation of the laws passed in review, Decline illiteracy, very general in the middle of the nineteenth ° . century, has almost entirely disappeared. In 1843, 32 per cent, of the men, 49 per cent, of the women, were illiterate, whereas in 1903 only two per cent, of the former and three of the latter were in this condition. Since December 1905 the Liberal party has been in power, The Liberal first under the premiership of Sir Henry Campbell-Banner- party in man, and, since his death early in 1908, under that of Mr. p Herbert Asquith. This party won in the General Elections of 1906 (January and February) the largest majority ever obtained since 1832. The most important achievement of this administration thus far has been the passage in 1908 of the Old Age Pensions Act, which marks a long step Old Age forward in the extension of state activity. It grants, under tensions certain slight restrictions, pensions to all persons of a cer- tain age and of a small income. Denounced as paternal- istic, as socialistic, as sure to undermine the thrift and the sense of responsibility of the laborers of Great Britain, it was urged as a reasonable and proper recognition of the value of the services to the country of the working classes, services as truly to be rewarded as those of army and navy and administration. The act provides that those whose income does not exceed twenty-five guineas a year shall receive a weekly pension of five shillings, that those with larger incomes shall receive proportionately smaller amounts, down to the minimum of one shilling a week. Those whose income exceeds thirty guineas and ten shillings a year re- ceive no pensions. Such pensions are granted only to British subjects, who have resided in Great Britain for twenty years, who are at least seventy years of age, and are not in receipt of poor relief. It was estimated by the prime minister that the initial burden to the state would be about seven and a half million pounds, an amount that would necessarily increase in later years. The post office is used as the distributing agent. This law went into force 516 ENGLAND SINCE 1886 on January 1, 1909. On that day over half a million men and women wont to the nearest post office and drew their first pensions of from one to live shillings, and on every Friday henceforth as long as they live they may do the Same, It was noticed that these men and women accepted their pensions not as a form of charity or poor relief, but as an honorable reward. The statisties of those claiming under this law are instructive and sobering. In the county of London one person in every one hundred and seventeen was a claimant; in England and Wales one in eighty-six; in Scotland one in sixty-seven; in Ireland one in twenty-one. An Irish Another aet passed by this administration was that estab- university. lishing an Irish university, which Catholics would feel free to attend. Thus was solved in 1908 a problem which Glad- stone had attempted to solve in 1S73, but without success. The Birrell Aet really establishes two universities — one in Belfast, consisting oi the former Queen's College in that city, this for Protestants: and one for Catholics, to have its seat in Dublin, and to possess three colleges, one in Cork, one in Galway. and a new college in Dublin. Each college will, in reality, be an almost independent university, practically, though not nominally, controlling appointments, the function of the university body being that of co-ordina- tion and supervision only. No chapel is to be erected on the grounds of any college. No professorships of the- ology may be created out of public moneys. Such may be created by private gifts, but their occupants may not sit with the other professors on academic boards. The present ministry has made repeated efforts to alter the elementary educational system, based on the law of 1902, but has been blocked by the House of Lords. That law is, therefore, still in force. Questions of suffrage are becoming increasingly promi- nent, and are apparently verging toward a further enlarge- ment of the electorate. In recent years the demand for woman suffrage has been pressed with great vigor and con- SUFFRAGE QUESTIONS 517 Idence. Women already posseti the franchise for most local elections, but cannot yet vote for members of Parliament. J'or twenty years plural voting has been denounced by the Liberals, who desire t f j restrict each voter to a single Rote. In 190fj the House of Commons passed a bill abolish- ing this inequality. It was thrown out promptly by the House of Lords. It is likely that some comprehensive Inform, accompanied by a redistribution of seats, will be effected in the near future. CHAPTER XXII THE BRITISH EMPIRE IX THE NINETEENTH CENTURY The We have thus far concerned ourselves with the history expansion f the European continent. But one of the most remark- able features of the nineteenth centurv was the reaching out of Europe for the conquest of the world, and the opening of the present century sees the process far advanced. What is known as European civilization is in its characteristic features becoming the civilization of all countries and con- tinents. The age of world politics, of world commerce, has come : the age of a common world culture appears likely ultimately to prevail. This extraordinary transfor- The growth mation is being effected by a variety of agencies, by the _ col .a-*^^^" ■-— ^ - ■ - <-<-. ■■ im r V -- ' ^,. Afmnw jK„, m , , / //Arty/ ,&Vjf ■ ^' Mongolia I Ihiopiak. twwunn vy^ywii,., , &»* -c- . J' & ft /, ; OCY-AN cj.ii'.i '■-lb- r. r •'"••" u^S^r; --/;,,, ■ •'■•■;■„ V""-' j -■ ' t < ' '''i;!';' i asmaiu i laiyuarie /. X *l V .\ \|l C Y V C () C E A N French Rontuguese Dutch BRITISH NORTH AMERICA 523 the Sepoys ; and so long as large sections of the people dis- trust one another more than they do the English, disaffection has little chance of achieving any notable result." * Not only has England completed her control of India in Annexation the nineteenth century, but she has added countries round of Burma about India, Burma toward the east, and, toward the west, Baluchistan. Baluchistan, a part of which has been annexed outright, and the remainder brought under a protectorate. She has also imposed a kind of protectorate upon Afghanistan, as a re- sult of two Afghan wars (1839-42 and 1878-80). BRITISH NORTH AMERICA In 1815, as already stated, Great Britain possessed, on the continent of North America, six colonies : Upper Canada, Lower Canada, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland ; and the Hudson Bay Company's territories stretched to the north and northwest with unde- fined boundaries. The total population of these colonies was about 460,000. The colonies were entirely separate from each other. Each had its own government, and its relations were not with the others, but with England. The oldest and most populous was Lower Canada, which included Mont- real and Quebec and the St. Lawrence valley. It was the French colony conquered by England in 1763. Its popula- tion was French-speaking, and Roman Catholic in religion. The two most important of these colonies were Lower Upper and Canada, largely French, and Upper Canada, entirely Eng- ^ower lish. Each had received a constitution in 1791, modeled along lines familiar to Englishmen at home. There was a Governor appointed by the monarch, an Executive Council, appointed by the same authority and corresponding to the cabinet, a Legislative Council, likewise appointed by the Crown and for life, intended as the nearest approach to the House of Lords possible in a frontier country, and a House of Assembly, the members of which were elected by the people. 1 Lowell, The Government of England, II, 424-425. 5*4 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY Constitu- tional difficulties in Upper Canada. In lower Canada. Neither in Upper nor in Lower Canada did the constitu- tion work well. In Upper Canada there were perpetual conflicts between the two Houses on the one hand, ami the Governor on the other. The Governor could virtually veto the actions of the legislature, and considered himself re- sponsible primarily to the English Government, not to the people of the province. He consulted the Executive Coun- cil only infrequently, and followed its opinion only when he chose to. What the two Houses were constantly struggling for was the creation of an executive, responsible, not to the monarch in England, but to themselves, and to this end they wished to make the Executive Council resemble the ministry in England. This struggle between executive and legislature was the fundamental problem in this prov- ince, which had, however, other grievances, such as the prac- tical monopoly in office-holding which a few families had succeeded in acquiring. In Lower or French Canada there was also a constitu- tional struggle, embittered by race animosity. The French, overwhelmingly predominant in population, controlled only the House of Assembly, while the three other branches of the Government, the Governor, Executive Council, and Legis- lative Council, all appointive and not elective, were con- trolled by the English element. The chief struggle in this colony was between the Assembly, controlled by the French, and the Legislative Council, controlled by the English. The French demanded that the Legislative Council be made elective, expecting, if that were done, to have the majority in it. They demanded also that the executive, with the exception of the Governor, be made responsible to the legis- lature. The French, unable to get control of any branch of the government except the Assembly, resolved to use this to force the concessions they desired. They refused to make the appropriations necessary for the running of the government. Year after year, from 183°. on, no moneys were voted for the payment of judges and civil officers. The THE DURHAM MISSION 525 •truggle was .similar to that witnessed in the eighteenth century in many of the thirteen colonies to the south. The conflict was between the representative and the non- The representative parts of the government. It was funda- coloni8ts desire mentally a constitutional question. The colonies did not se if. eovcrn . po ess complete legislative power, as the upper chamber, ment. non-elective-, could block the lower chamber, representing the people. Nor had the legislature, as a whole, what it had in England — control over the executive. " The colonies have the mockeries, the shadows of English institutions, not the realities; the names, not the substances," said Lord Durham later. The principle which makes the English system of government workable, responsibility of the ex- ecutive to the legislature, was lacking. The people had no efficient control of their rulers. England had not yet solved the problem of colonial government. In 1837 disaffection had reached such a point that revolu- The tionary movements broke out in both colonies. These were eas- reDellion °* 1837 ily suppressed by the Canadian authorities without help from England, but the grievances of the colonists still remained. The English Government, thoroughly alarmed at the The Durham danger of the loss of another empire, adopted the part of Mi88i01l « discretion and sent out to Canada a commissioner to study the grievances of the colonists. The man chosen was Lord Durham, whose part in the reform of 1832 had been brilliant. Durham was in Canada five months. His acts were vehe- mently criticised in Parliament, the ministry, which had appealed to him to undertake the mission, did not loyally support him, and he shortly returned to England, humiliated and in official disgrace, the victim of the party and personal politics of England. He had " marred a career, but made a xord nation." The Durham Report, submitted to Parliament on Durham's his return, entitles him to the rank of the greatest colonial Ile P ort - statesman in British history. It contained a full description of the situation in Canada, and proposed sweeping changes in colonial policy. «6 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTUM - - - ? ? ." ? .* > ? 5 ministerial ::y. six ] 5,1 h*m declared " natural s all these i - Ho pointed out that the execul ras • - £ Englishmen - Housm s Su< were I la. "It is difficult,* 1 ■■-. * Eng lis j ; . that t". . S res legis necessary I la had fa ig " i . :h the e r the - 5 the powers - - - rhis 5 .: I turd Duri - popular chamber. " '. Kg - ..." •" T -.-.: sounds like a tru- ism r. s biofj r, "but it was the first recog - - \ d that this Report has been caD boos! docu- 2 - , " .1 parts gl -" ' s ass structrre states ship in all that relates l Ri3 ; to Transvaal Colony in 1900". and Orange River Colony in 1907. DOMINION OF CANADA The Act of 1840. based largely upon Durham's Report, bad united Upper and Lower Canada, or Ontario and Quebec, into one colony, had swept away the two legislatures and established a single one for the united colony. This union oi two colonies so very dissimilar, the one English, the other largely French, did not work smoothly, and there was a strong feeling that each part should have a legislature of its own for purely local purposes. Founding: Lord Durham had also suggested federation of all the o omimon y^^ American colonies as a final settlement. Various of Canada. 15,37. reasons prevented this tor many years, among others the very defective means of communication, but the desire for federation gradually increased. The growth ot' population, the improvement of ways of communication by the building of railroads, the example of the successful federation across the border to the south, and the possible danger of attack from that side, as sug- gested by the Fenian movement and the Alabama conten- tions, all caused Canadian public opinion to express itself in favor of union. The English Parliament was therefore merely voicing Canadian sentiment when in 18(37 it passed the British North America Act. Indeed, that act had been drawn up in Canada and was ratified by the English Par- liament without change. By it Upper and Lower Canada, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick were joined into a con- federation called the Dominion of Canada. There was to be a central or federal parliament sitting in Ottawa. There were also to be local or provincial legislatures in each prov- ince to legislate for local affairs. Questions affecting the whole Dominion were reserved for the Dominion Parliament. The central or Dominion Parliament was to consist of a British North America Act. THE DOMINION OF CANADA 529 Senate and a House of Commons. The Senate was to be The composed of seventy members nominated for life by the Domimon - „ ,,-,, • , , , . , Parliament. Governor-General, himself appointed by the monarch, and representing the Crown. The House of Commons was to be elected by the people. In some respects the example of the English Government was followed in the constitution, in others that of the United States. This federation differs from ours in one very important particular. By our con- stitution certain definite powers are granted the federal gov- ernment. All others are vested either in the states or the people of the states. In the Dominion certain powers are granted to the provinces. All others are vested in the federal government. Though the Dominion began with only four provinces Growth of provision was made' for the possible admission of others. the Domin- Manitoba was admitted in 1870, British Columbia in 1871, Prince Edward Island in 1873. In 1846, by the settlement of the Oregon dispute, the line dividing the English possessions from the United States was extended to the Pacific Ocean, and in 1869 the Dominion acquired by purchase (£300,000) the vast territories belong- ing to the Hudson Bay Company, out of which the great provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan have been carved and admitted into the union (1905). The Dominion now includes all of British North America except the island of Newfoundland, which has steadily refused to join. It thus extends from ocean to ocean. Except for the fact that she receives a Governor General from England and that she possesses no treaty powers, Canada is practically independent. She manages her own affairs, and even imposes tariffs which are disadvantageous to the mother country. That she has imperial as well as local patriotism, however, was shown strik- ingly in her support of England in the recent South African war. She sent Canadian regiments thither at her own ex- pense to co-operate in an enterprise not closely connected with her own fortunes. 530 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY The founding of the Canadian union in 1867 rendered possible the construction of a great transcontinental railway, the Canadian Pacific, built between 1881 and 1885. This has in turn reacted upon the Dominion binding the different provinces together, and contributing to the remarkable de- velopment of the west. At present another transcontinental railway is being built farther to the north. Canada is con- nected by steamship lines with Europe and with Japan and Australia. Her population has increased from less than five hundred thousand in 1815 to more than five million. Her prosperity has grown immensely, and her economic life is becoming more varied. Largely an agricultural and timber producing country, manufactures are now developing under the stimulus of protective tariffs, and her vast mineral resources are in process of rapid development. AUSTRALIA An eminent English historian, Sir Spencer Walpole, has written that " the greatest fact in the history of England is that she is the mother of the United States. It may be similarly added, that the greatest fact in the history of the nineteenth century is the foundation of a new Britain — which may eventually prove a greater Britain — in the Southern Hemisphere." l Whether Australia will prove a greater Britain or not, only the future can show, but the opening of the twentieth century sees a new " colonial nation " in existence, prosper- ous, energetic, ambitious. The creation of that new empire has been the work of the nineteenth century, an empire nearly as extensive territorially as the United States or Canada, about three-fourths as large as Europe, and inhabited almost entirely by a population of English descent. No systematic exploration of this southern continent, Terra Australis, was undertaken until toward the close of 1 History of England, VI, 336. AUSTRALIAN COLONIZATION 531 the eighteenth century, but certain parts had been sighted or traced much earlier by Spanish, Portuguese, and particu- larly by Dutch navigators. Among the last, Tasman is to be mentioned, who in 1642 explored the southeastern portion, though he did not discover that the land which was later to bear his name was an island, a fact not known, indeeed, for a century and a half. He discovered the islands to the east of Australia, and gave to them a Dutch name, New Zealand. The Dutch called the Terra Australis New Hol- land, claiming it by right of discovery. But they made no attempt to occupy it. The attention of the English was The voyages first directed thither by the famous Captain Cook, who made of Captain three voyages to this region between 1768 and 1779. Cook sailed around New Zealand, and then along the eastern coast of this New Holland. He put into a certain harbor, which was forthwith named Botany Bay, so varied was the vegeta- tion on the shores. Sailing up the eastern coast, he claimed it all for George III, and called it New South Wales because it reminded him of the Welsh coast. Seventeen years, how- ever, went by before any settlement was made. As Australia was remote, it was considered by English a convict statesmen a good place to which to send criminals, and it colony, was as a convict colony that the new empire began. The first expedition for the colonization of the country sailed from England in May 1787 with 750 convicts on board, and reached Botany Bay in January 1788. Here the first settlement was made, and to it was given the name of the colonial secretary of the day, Sydney. For many years fresh cargoes of convicts were sent out who, on the expira- tion of their sentences, received lands. Free settlers came too, led to emigrate by various periods of economic de- pression at home, by promises of land and food, and by an increasing knowledge of the adaptability of the new con- tinent to agriculture, and particularly to sheep raising. By 1820 the population was not far from 40,000. During the first thirty years the government was military in character. 5S£ BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY Reasons for their federation. The free settlers were strongly opposed to having Aus- tralia regarded as a prison for English convicts. They were not a desirable class of immigrants, and their presence tended to prevent men from coming whose immigration would have been desirable. As Englishmen came to see that this was an expensive and ineffective way of punishing criminals, and as the free men in Australia vehemently denounced the custom as a stigma upon their adopted land, it was finally abolished in New South Wales in 184-0. The custom lin- gered on, however, in other colonies, and did not entirely disappear until 1853. This question of the transportation of criminals was one of the important questions in Australia during the first part of its history. Australia had thus far been mainly a pastoral country, producing wool and hides. But, in 1851 and 1852, rich deposits of gold were found, rivaled only by those discovered a little earlier in California. A tremendous immigration ensued. The population of the colony of Victoria (cut off from New South Wales) increased from 70,000 to more than 300,000 in five years. Australia has ever since remained one of the great gold producing countries of the world. Thus there gradually grew up six colonies, New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Western Aus- tralia, and the neighboring island of Tasmania. These were gradually invested with self-government, parliaments and responsible ministries in the fashion worked out in Canada. The population increased steadily, and by the end of the century numbered about four million. The great political event in the history of these colonies was their union into a confederation at the close of the cen- tury. Up to that time the colonies had been legally un- connected with each other, and their only form of union was the loose one under the British Crown. For a long time there was discussion as to the advisability of binding them more closely together. Various reasons contributed to convince the Australians of the advantages of federation. THE AUSTRALIAN FEDERATION 533 They have been summarized by Mr. Bryce as follows: "the gain to trade and the general convenience to be expected from abolishing the tariff's established on the frontiers of each col- ony, the need for a common system of military defense, the ad- vantages of a common legislation for the regulation of rail- ways and the fixing of railway rates, the advantages of a common control of the larger rivers for the purposes both of navigation and of irrigation, the need for uniform legis- lation on a number of commercial and industrial topics, the importance of finding an authority competent to provide for old age pensions and for the settlement of labor disputes all over the country, the need for uniform provisions against the entrance of colored races (especially Chinese, Malays, and Indian coolies), the stimulus to be given to industry and trade by substituting one great community for six smaller ones." 1 Moreover, the desire for nationality, which has accom- plished such remarkable changes in Europe in the nineteenth Creation century, was also active here. An Australian patriotism ° e had grown up. Australians desired to make their country common- the dominant authority in the Southern Hemisphere. They wealth, longed for a larger outlook than that given by the life of the separate colonies, and thus both reason and sentiment combined toward the same end, a close union, the creation of another " colonial nation." Union was finally achieved after ten years of earnest dis- cussion (1890-1900). The various experiments in federation were carefully studied, particularly the constitutions of the United States and Canada. The draft of the constitution was worked over by several conventions, by the ministers and the governments of the various colonies, and was finally submitted to the people for ratification. Ratification being secured, the constitution was then passed through the British Parlia- ment under the title of "The Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act " ( 1900). The constitution was the work of the Australians. The part taken by England was simply one 1 Bryce, Studies in History and Jurisprudence, I, 478-479. Parliament. 584 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY of acceptance. Though Parliament made certain sugges- tions of detail, it did not insist upon them in the case of Australian opposition. The The constitution established a federation consisting of the six colonies which were henceforth to be called states, not provinces, as in the case of Canada. It created a federal Parliament of two houses, a Senate consisting of six senators from each state, and a House of Representatives apportioned among the several states according to population. The powers given to the Federal Government were carefully de- fined. The new system was inaugurated January 1, 1901. x NEW ZEALAND Not included in the new commonwealth is an important group of islands of Australasia called New Zealand, situated 1,200 miles east of Australia. England began to have some connection with these islands shortly after 1815, but it was not until 1839 that they were formally annexed to the British Empire. In 1854 New Zealand was given responsible gov- ernment, and in 1865 was entirely separated from New South Wales and made a separate colony. Emigration was method- ically encouraged. New Zealand was never a convict colony. Population increased and it gradually became the most demo- cratic colony of the Empire. In 1907 the designation of the colony was changed to the Dominion of New Zealand. New Zealand consists of two main islands with many smaller ones. It is about a fourth larger than Great Britain and has a population of about 900,000, of whom about 47,000 are aborigines, the Maoris. Its capital is Welling- ton, with a population of about 60,000. Auckland is an- 1 A valuable description of this constitution is to be found in Bryce, Studies in History and Jurisprudence, " The Australian Commonwealth." Abstract of this in Beard, Intro, to Eng. Hist., pp. 645-662. See also Bright, Hist, of Eng., V, 197-199. The constitution itself may be found in Dodd, Modern Constitutions. On inauguration of the new govern- ment see Annual Register 1901, 414-455. RECENT LEGISLATION OF NEW ZEALAND 535 other important city. New Zealand is an agricultural and grazing country, and also possesses rich mineral deposits, including gold. New Zealand is of great interest to the world of to-day because of its experiments in advanced social reform, legisla- tion concerning labor and capital, landowning and commerce. State control has been extended over more branches of in- dustry than has been the case in any other country. The Government owns and operates the railways. 1 The Advanced roads are run, not for profit, but for service to the people. . As rapidly as profits exceed three per cent, passenger and freight rates are reduced. Comprehensive and successful attempts are made by very low rates to induce the people in congested districts to live in the country. Workmen going in and out travel about three miles for a cent. Children in the primary grades in schools are carried free, and those in higher grades at very low fares. The Government also owns and operates the telegraphs and telephones and conducts postal savings banks. Life in- surance is largely in its hands. It has a fire and accident insurance department. In 1903 it began the operation of some state coal mines. Its land legislation is remarkable. Its main purpose is to prevent the land from being monopo- lized by a few, and to enable the people to become land- holders. In 1892 progressive taxation on the large estates was adopted, and in 1896 the sale of such estates to the Gov- ernment was made compulsory, and thus extensive areas have come under government ownership. The State transfers them under various forms of tenure to the landless and working classes. The system of taxation, based on the System of principle of graduation, higher rates for larger incomes, taxation, properties, and inheritances, is designed to break up or prevent monopoly and to favor the small proprietor or producer. 1 In 1908 the Government owned 2,474 miles. There were 113 miles of private lines. 536 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY In industrial and labor legislation New Zealand has also made radical experiments. Arbitration in labor disputes is compulsory if either side invokes it, and the decision is binding. Factory laws are stringent, aiming particularly at the protection of women, the elimination of " sweating." In stores the Saturday half holiday is universal. The Gov- ernment has a Labor Department whose head is a member of the Cabinet. Its first duty is to find work for the un- employed, and its great effort is to get the people out of the cities into the country. There is an Old Age Pension Law, enacted in 1898 and amended in 1905, providing pen- sions of about a hundred and twenty-five dollars for all men and women after the age of sixty-five whose income is less than five dollars a week. All this governmental activity rests on a democratic basis. There are no property qualifications for voting, and women have the suffrage as well as men. The referendum has been adopted. The more advanced parties demand a further extension in the line of social reform ; the nationalization of lands and mines, of marine and coastal and intercolonial services; state clothing and boot factories, flour and woolen mills, bakeries, iron-works, and ship building yards. The Austra- lian colony of Victoria has enacted much legislation re- sembling that described in the case of New Zealand. BRITISH SOUTH AFRICA As an incident in the wars against France and her ally and dependent, Holland, England seized the Dutch possession in South Africa, Cape Colony. This colony she retained in 1814, together with certain Dutch possessions in South Amer- ica, paying six millions pounds as compensation. This was the beginning of English expansion into Africa, which was to attain remarkable proportions before the close of the century. This Dutch colony had been founded as early as 1652 as a port of call for Dutch ships trading with the CAPE COLONY 537 Orient. Immigrants came from Holland, and after the revo- cation of the Edict of Nantes under Louis XIV, many Huguenots joined them. These Frenchmen v/ere gradually completely absorbed in the Dutch population, losing all dis- tinguishing characteristics. England kept the colony in 1814 for the same purpose that the Dutch had founded it, as a port of call, for English commerce with India went by this route, there being then no Suez canal. The population at the time she took possession consisted of about 27,000 people of European descent, mostly Dutch, and of about 30,000 African and Malay slaves owned by the Dutch, and about 17,000 Hottentots. Immigration of Englishmen began forth- with. Friction between the Dutch (called Boers, i.e., peasants), Friction and the English was not slow in developing. The forms of local government to which the Boers were accustomed were abolished and new ones established. English was made the sole language used in the courts. The Boers, irritated by these measures, were rendered indignant by the abolition of slavery in 1834. They did not consider slavery wrong. Moreover, they felt defrauded of their property as the com- pensation given was inadequate — about three million pounds — little more than a third of what they considered their slaves were worth. Even that was made payable in London, a device which enabled London bankers to get a good share. For all the abolition of slavery meant a loss of property, for many a total loss. The Boers resolved to leave the colony and to settle in the interior, where they could live unmolested by the intruders. This migration or Great Trek began in 1836, and continued The Great for several years. About 10,000 Boers thus withdrew from Cape Colony. Rude carts drawn by several pairs of oxen transported their families and their possessions into the wilderness. Some went northeastward and settled in Natal only to find that they were not, for their pains, to be free from English control. In 1842 the English sent troops into 538 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY Natal, and in the following year proclaimed it a colony. Many of the Boers trekked again to join their fellow Boers who, while they were going into Natal, had gone into the Orange River country. Such were the beginnings of the Orange Free State, whose capital was Bloemfontein. But again they were followed. The English, in 1848, declared this region a part of the British Empire, under the name of the Orange River Sovereignty. Many of the Orange River Boers, refusing to live under the British flag, trekked again, joining those who, in the earlier migration, had gone farther north across the Vaal, founding a state destined to become famous as the Transvaal or South African Republic, and where it seemed for many years they would be permitted to enjoy the independence which they had made such efforts to secure. For, in 1852, Great Britain, apparently considering the Transvaal not worth annexing, formally recognized its in- dependence, its entire right to manage its own affairs, by a treaty, the Sand River Convention, and two years later k abandoned the Orange River Sovereignty, by the Convention of Bloemfontein. From this time date the two Boer repub- lics of South Africa, the Orange Free State and the Trans- vaal or South African Republic. From 1854 to 1899 the Orange Free State pursued its peaceful career unmolested, its independence not infringed upon. The Transvaal, too, was left in the splendid isolation it so much enjoyed, but not for so long a time, for in 1877 England, under Lord Beaconsfield's administration, abruptly declared it annexed to the British Empire, on the ground that its independence was a menace to the peace of England's other South African possessions, as the Boers were fre- quently involved in wars with the natives who, once aroused, constituted a general menace. A delegation of Boers was sent to England to protest and demand the restoration of their independence. One of the delegates was Paul Kruger, •who, as a boy of ten, had followed his father's cattle as they MAJUBA HILL 539 were driven across the prairie in the Great Trek of 1836. The delegation was told in London by the British ministry that the annexation was irrevocable. The Boers' hatred of the English naturally grew more intense, and they fell to meditating plans for the future. But in 1880 Lord Beaconsfield was overthrown and Mr. Gladstone came into power. Mr. Gladstone had denounced the annexation, and was convinced that a mistake had been made which must be rectified. He was negotiating with the Boer leaders, hoping to reach, by peaceful means, a solution that would be satisfactory to both sides, when his problem was made immensely more difficult by the Boers themselves, who, in December 1880, rose in revolt and defeated a small detachment of British troops at Majuba Hill, February 27, Majuba 1881. In a military sense this so-called battle of Majuba Hill. Hill was an insignificant affair, but its effects upon English- men and Boers were tremendous and far-reaching. Glad- stone, who had already been negotiating with a view to re- storing the independence of the Transvaal, which he con- sidered had been unjustly overthrown, did not think it right to reverse his policy because of a mere skirmish, however humiliating. He therefore restored to the Boers their independence, Policy but with the express reservation of the " suzerainty " of the of * ... . . . Gladstone British Crown, a word carrying no precise meaning, but a d m i n i S tra- resented in the Transvaal as a limitation upon its perfect tion. independence, and so understood in England. The Boers were allowed complete self-government with this restriction. Gladstone's action was severely criticised by Englishmen who did not believe in retiring, leaving a defeat unavenged. They denounced the action of the ministry as inimical to the welfare of the South African colonies and damaging to the prestige of the Empire. Gladstone did not believe that he should be deflected from an act of justice and conciliation merely because of a military misfortune of no importance in itself, and he considered that giving up negotiations pre- 540 BRITISH EMPIRE IX NINETEENTH CENTURY The viously begun, promises previously made, would be an act Pretoria f Da d faith. He therefore concluded the Pretoria Conven- tion of 18S1 with its mysterious word u suzerainty." The Boers, on the other hand, considered that they had won ^ their independence by arms, by the humiliation of the traditional enemy, and wore accordingly elated. In holding this opinion they were injuring themselves by self-deception and by the idea that what they once had done they could do again, and they were angering the British by keeping alive the memory of Majuba Hill. That name came to be spoken with passion on both sides. The Pretoria Convention did not work smoothly, and The london consequently a new agreement was drawn up in 1884. This, Convention, the London Convention, restored to the Transvaal the old name of South African Republic, omitted the preamble of the Pretoria Convention, in which the word suzerainty occurred, and inserted a provision, which was destined to gain tre- mendous importance later, to the effect that " white men were to have full liberty to reside in any part of the republic, to trade in it, and to be liable to the same taxes only as those exacted from citizens of the republic." l Mr. Gladstone's biographer in summing up the history of the relations of England and the Transvaal says that the Sand River Convention of 185°. conferred independence, that the Proclamation of 18TT took independence away, that the Pretoria Convention of 1881 " in a qualified way gave it back," and that the London Convention of 1884 " qualified the qualification over again till independence, subject to two or three specified conditions, was restored." 2 The Boers The London Convention was naturally regarded as a desire nn- victory bv the Boers, and encouraged them to believe that qualified in- . , .... , . , , . , , m, dependence. m time ™ e restrictions it contained could be removed. I he word " suzerainty " being omitted and ki republic " being given them, thev felt that they were once more masters in 1 Morley, Gladstone III, 45. * Ibid. THE ENGLISH AND THE TRANSVAAL 541 their own house. On the other hand, they were not entirely independent, as England expressly had the control over their foreign relations. Moreover, the phrase concerning immi- gration contained the germ of future trouble, which in the end was to result in the violent overthrow of the republic, for a momentous change in the character of the population was impending. The South African Republic was entirely peopled by The Boers. Boers, a people exclusively interested in agriculture and grazing, solid, sturdy, religious, freedom-loving, but, in the modern sense, unprogressive, ill-educated, suspicious of for- eigners, and particularly of Englishmen. The peace and contentment of this rural people were disturbed by the discovery, in 1884, that gold in immense quantities lay hidden in its mountains, the Rand. Immediately a great influx of miners and speculators began. These were chiefly The Englishmen. In the heart of the mining district the city Uitlanders. of Johannesburg grew rapidly, numbering in a few years over 100,000 inhabitants, a city of foreigners. Troubles quickly arose between the native Boers and the aggressive, energetic Uitlanders or foreigners. The Uitlanders gave wide publicity to their grievances. Great obstacles were put in the way of their naturalization; they were given no share in the government, not even the right to vote. Yet in parts of the Transvaal they were more numerous than the natives, and bore the larger share of taxation. In addition they were forced to render military service, which, in their opinion, implied citizenship. They looked to the British Government to push their demand for reforms. The Boer Government was undoubtedly an oli- garchy, but the Boers felt that it was only by refusing the suffrage to the unwelcome intruders that they could keep control of their own state, which at the cost of much hardship they had created in the wilderness. In 1895 occurred an Thg event Avhich deeply embittered them, the Jameson Raid — Jameson an invasion of the Transvaal by a few hundred troopers Raid. 542 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY Sir Alfred Milner's reports. under Dr. Jameson, the administrator of Rhodesia, with the evident purpose of supporting the Uitlanders, and prob- ably of overturning the Boer Government. The raiders were easily captured by the Boers, who with great magnanimity handed them over to England. This indefensible attack and the fact that the guilty were only lightly punished in Eng- land, and that the man whom all Boers held responsible, Mr. Cecil Rhodes, was shielded by the British Government, en- tered like iron into the souls of the Boers and only hard- ened their resistance to the demands of the Uitlanders. These demands were refused, and the grievances of the Uitlanders, who now outnumbered the natives perhaps two to one, continued. A special commissioner, sent out from England in 1897, Sir Alfred Milner, informed his Government early in 1899 that "the spectacle of thousands of British subjects kept permanently in the position of helots, constantly chafing under undoubted grievances, and calling vainly to her Maj- esty's Government for redress, does steadily undermine the influence and reputation of Great Britain, and the respect for the British Government." Milner was of the opinion that the Boers were aiming ultimately at nothing less than the union of all the Boers, including those of Cape Colony, the ultimate expulsion of the English from South Africa, and the establishment of a great Boer state. " I can see nothing which will put a stop to this mischievous propa- ganda but some striking proof of the intention of her Majesty's Goverment not to be ousted from its position in South Africa." This claim that the real point at issue was the maintenance of England's position as the paramount power in South Africa exerted a great influence at home. To stop this " mischievous propaganda," which was under- mining British influence, the policy of the Transvaal Gov- ernment must be changed, and it could only be changed by giving the Uitlanders political power. Therefore the right of the suffrage was insisted upon by the English Government, THE SOUTH AFRICAN WAR 543 " no selfish demand," said Milner, as it is " asking for noth- ing from others which we do not give ourselves." Confer- ences were held in 1899 at Bloemfontein. But this demand the Boers would not grant, believing that it was a matter of self-preservation, that its bestowal would simply mean the handing over of the country to the foreigner. War broke out in October 1899. The Orange Free State, The South no party to the quarrel, threw in its lot with its sister African Boer republic. This war was lightly entered upon by both sides. Each grossly underestimated both the resources and the spirit of the other. The English Government had made no prepara- tion at all adequate, apparently not believing that in the end this petty state would dare oppose the mighty British Empire. The Boers, on the other hand, had been long pre- paring for a conflict, and knew that the number of British troops in South Africa was small, totally insufficient to put down their resistance. Moreover, for years they had deceived themselves with a gross exaggeration of the sig- nificance of Majuba Hill as a victory over the British. Each side believed that the war would be short, and would result in its favor. The war, which they supposed would be over in a few months, lasted for nearly three years. England suffered at the outset many humiliating reverses. The war was not characterized by great battles, but by many sieges at first, and then by guerilla fighting and elaborate, systematic, and difficult conquest of the country. It was fought with great bravery and brilliancy on both sides. For the English, Lord Roberts and Lord Kitchener were the leaders, and of the Boers several greatly distinguished themselves, obtaining world wide reputations, Christian de Wet, Louis Botha, Delarey. The English won in the end by sheer force of numbers. Victory of Awakening from the costly misapprehension of the first days the En & lish « concerning the nature of their problem, they proceeded 5U BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY Annexation of the Transvaal and the Orange Free State. to make war on a scale absolutely unprecedented in their annals. No general in English history has ever commanded so many troops as did Lord Roberts. During the war England sent about 450,000 men to South Africa. Three hundred and forty thousand came from Great Britain ; the others from the colonies, Canada, Australia, India, and Cape Colony. In the closing months Lord Kitchener had more than £50,000 men against perhaps ten or twelve thousand opponents. Peace was finally concluded on June 1, 1902. The Trans- vaal and the Orange Free State lost their independence, and became colonies of the British Empire. Otherwise the terms offered by the conquerors were liberal. Generous money grants and loans were to be made by England to enable the Boers to begin again in their sadly devastated land. Their language was to be respected wherever possible. The work of reconciliation has proceeded with remarkable rapidity since the close of the war. Responsible govern- ment, that is. self-government, was granted to the Transvaal Colony in 1906 and to the Orange River Colony in 1907. This liberal conduct of the English Government has had the most happy consequences, as is shown very convincingly by the spontaneity and the strength of the movement for closer union, which culminated in 1909 in the creation of a new " colonial nation " within the British Empire. In 1908 a convention was held in which the four colonies were represented. The outcome of its deliberations, which lasted several months, was the draft of a constitution for the South African Union. This was then submitted to the colonies for approval and, by June 1909. had been ratified by them all. The constitution was in the form of a statute to be enacted by the British Parliament. It became law September 20, 1909. The South African Union is substantially a unified, rather than a federal state. While the provinces are preserved their powers are very limited. The central government con- sists of a Governor-General appointed by the Crown; an THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA 545 Executive Council ; a Senate of forty members, eight from each province, and eight appointed by the Governor in Coun- cil, and serving for ten years and a House of Assembly, con- sisting of 121 members, of whom 51 represent Cape of Good Hope Province, 36 Transvaal Province, 17 Orange Free State Province, and 17 Natal Province. Both Dutch and English are official languages and enjoy equal privileges. Difficulty was experienced in selecting the capital, so intense was the rivalry of different cities. The result was a com- promise. Pretoria was chosen as the seat of the executive branch of the government, Cape Town as the seat of the legislative branch. The creation of the South African Union is the most recent triumph of the spirit of nationality which has so greatly transformed the world since 1815. The new commonwealth has a population of about 1,150,000 whites and more than 6,000,000 people of non-European descent. Provision has been made for the ultimate admission of Rhodesia into the Union. IMPERIAL FEDERATION At the opening of the twentieth century Great Britain possesses an empire far more extensive and far more pop- ulous than any the world has ever seen, covering about thirteen millions of square miles, if Egypt and the Soudan be included, with a total population of over four hun- dred and twenty millions. This Empire is scattered every- The far where, in Asia, Africa, Australasia, the two Americas, and un f . British the islands of the seven seas. The population includes a Empire. motley host of peoples. Only fifty-four million are English- speaking, and of these about forty-two million live in Great Britain. Most of the colonies are self-supporting. They present every form of government, military, autocratic, rep- resentative, democratic. The sea alone binds the Empire. England's throne is on the mountain wave in a literal as well as in a metaphorical sense. Dominance of the oceans is essen- 5M3 BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY The problem of Imperial Federation. The increasing importance of the question. tied that she may keep open her communications with her far flung colonies. It is no adventitious circumstance that Eng- land is the greatest sea-power of the world, and intends to remain such. She regards this as the very vital principle of her imperial existence. A noteworthy feature of the British Empire, as already sufficiently indicated, is the almost unlimited autonomy en- joyed by several of the colonies, those where the English stock predominates, Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zealand. This policy is in contrast to that pursued by the French and German governments, which rule their colonies directly from Paris and Berlin. But this system does not apply to the greatest of them all, India, nor to a multitude of smaller posssessions. A question much and earnestly discussed during the last twenty-five years is that of Imperial Federation. May not some machinery be developed, some method be found, whereby the vast empire may be more closely consolidated, and for certain purposes act as a single state? If so, its power will be greatly augmented, and the world will witness the most stupendous achievement in the art of government recorded in its history. The creation of such a Greater Britain has seized, in recent years, the imagination of many thoughtful statesmen. Various causes have occurred to give this question prom- inence in recent years. The growth of pride in an empire, the like of which has never been seen before in the history of man, is one. The English attitude toward the colonies has, moreover, radically changed in the last century from one of indifference, or passing condescension, to one of lively in- terest in their welfare and satisfaction in their success. Again, the British Isles alone have rivals in importance now which they did not formerly have. During the period cov- ered by this book, Italy and Germany have arisen, the former with a population nearly as large as that of Great Britain, the other with one larger by half. Russia has increased from forty-five millions to a hundred and fifty, and in the IMPERIAL FEDERATION 547 west the United States have expanded until they stretch from sea to sea, their population mounting from less than nine million to more than ninety. Relatively the British Isles are less commanding than they were. Another reason for federation is that the price paid for an empire so vast as the British is large, the burden heavy. Ought not the constituent parts, which profit from their membership in it, to help support it? The difficulties in the way, however, of closer union are The various and formidable. In the first place it could only difficulties include the self-governing colonies, where the English stock in e predominates. Thus India, with its three hundred millions, would be left out. Moreover, federation implies important concessions from those states that enter. Would England be willing to make such concessions herself, and if she were, would the colonies? The question cannot be answered affirmatively in either case. If the new and closer union is The to take the form of a political body in which the British P rol5lem of Isles, Canada, Australia, South Africa shall be all repre- sented, what shall that body be? Shall it be the House of Commons? If the colonies send representatives to West- minster they will be a small minority, for the population of Great Britain is forty-two million, theirs collectively thirteen million. Moreover, such representatives could vote on local English questions, could make and unmake ministries. We have here the dilemma which, as we have seen, baffled Glad- stone in his attempt to provide Home Rule for Ireland and yet keep her in the Empire. Or shall an entirely new Im- perial Parliament be created to which Great Britain and the colonies shall send delegates? What shall be the relation of the new parliament to the old historic one? Again, even in it, the colonists would be outnumbered. Moreover, shall Canada and Australia be forced to go to war at the bidding of a majority composed of Englishmen? To ask these questions is to show the extreme difficulty of answering them. But may not the union be commercial rather than political, 54S BRITISH EMPIRE IN NINETEENTH CENTURY Commercial the latter being so difficult to work out? Here we have the union. contrast between the mother country, devoted for half a century to free trade, and the colonies, ardent supporters of protection even against Great Britain. The most promising scheme suggested thus far is that of preferential tariffs, England favoring the colonies if the colonies will favor her, and some slight steps in this direction have been taken ; for instance, Canada and Australia have recently made some concessions in tariff rates to England which they do not make to other countries. But this arrangement cannot go far until England can make concessions to them which she cannot do under the system of free trade. Mr. Chamberlain, whose interest in imperial development is both broad and deep, is anxious to do this, and he has had much influence in making the question of preferential duties prominent in England to-day. But the election of 1906, resulting in the overwhelming defeat of his party, showed that England was far from ready to abandon free trade, as on the whole to her advantage, if not essential to her very existence. The whole subject abounds in problems too complex to be easily, if ever, solved. None the less it is one of indis- putable interest, a provoking challenge to the boasted and proved ability of English speaking peoples in the art of government and politics. Colonial Perhaps a beginning toward its solution has been found conferences, in the colonial conferences, held in recent years in London, the first in 1887, the second in 1S97, under the presidency of Mr. Chamberlain, another in 1902, and the latest in 1907. These have discussed at length many phases of the problem, but have as yet accomplished little. The last one, however, established the imperial conference as a permanent institu- tion rather than as an episodic occurrence. Henceforth one is to be held every four j-ears. 1 1 The best treatment of this subject in a small compass is to be found in Chapter LVIII of President Lowell's remarkable book, The Govern- ment of England, many of whose observations I have incorporated in this paragraph. CONFEDERATIONS WITHIN THE EMPIRE 549 The work of co-operation, out of which a real federal Confedera- .,, j i_. i • i tions within empire may in time emerge, will, no doubt, be immensely Empire facilitated by the existence of the four self-governing " na- tions " whose rise has been traced — the Dominion of Canada, the Commonwealth of Australia, the Dominion of New Zea- land, and the Union of South Africa. The reduction of the number of units, with which imperial statesmen will have to deal in attempting a more wide-spreading organization, diminishes the difficulties in the way of federation, difficulties at best numerous and formidable enough. The advantages of the combinations that have already been effected can, from an imperial point of view, hardly be exaggerated. Three of these colonial consolidations have been consummated during the first decade of the twentieth century. The movement may proceed with accelerating speed. CHAPTER XXIII THE PARTITION OF AFRICA Lying almost within sight of Europe and forming the southern boundary of her great inland sea is the immense continent, three times the size of Europe, whose real nature was revealed only in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In some respects the seat of very ancient history, in most its history is just beginning. In Egypt a rich and advanced civilization appeared in very early times along the lower valley of the Nile. Yet only after thousands of years and only in our own day have the sources and the upper course of that famous river been discovered. Along the northern coasts arose the civilization and state of Carthage, rich, mysterious, and redoubtable, for a while the powerful rival of Rome, succumbing to the latter only after severe and memorable struggles. The ancient world knew there- fore the northern shores of Africa. The rest was prac- The period tically unknown. In the fifteenth century came the great of dis- series of geographical discoveries, which immensely widened the known boundaries of the world. It might seem that Africa, rather than America and Asia, would have been the important conquest of that marvelous period of human curiosity and courage. But this was not the case. Europe was seeking primarily riches, and riches were to be found, as events proved, in Peru, and Mexico, and India, rather than in the great continental mass on its very threshold. The age of exploration did, it is true, reveal the hitherto unknown outline and magnitude of the continent. Portu- guese explorers pushed further and further south until they finally rounded the southern cape, and then sailed away to- 550 AFRICA IN 1815 551 ward India, so alluring with its gems and spices. Diaz, Vasco da Gama, are shining names in this romantic history. But the result was not the conquest of Africa and its introduction into European civilization. America, and even Australia, then unknown, were destined to receive the civilization of Europe long before that continent. A melancholy beginning was, however, made. No ancient civilization offered its riches to the spoliation of Europeans, as in Mexico, Peru, and India. But property in human beings was to be had in abundance for little effort. The African slave trade began, " black ivory," and stations were established by the Portuguese, and later by other nations for this business, which was both lucrative and inhuman. These posts were simply along the shores. The great inner mass of the conti- nent remained as before, unknown, mainly because of the diffi- culty of penetrating it, owing to its lack of rivers navigable from the sea. For centuries Europe, absorbed in multifarious struggles, whence emerged its modern civilization, paid slight attention to the mystery which lay near at hand. Moreover, it had not the means, mechanical and scientific, for the ex- ploration of this enigmatic and dangerous land. And such remained the case down to the nineteenth centurj', and, in- deed, well into it. Africa is the great field of discovery of that century as America was of the fifteenth and sixteenth. In 1815 the situation was as follows: the Turkish Empire Situation extended along the whole northern coast to Morocco, that in 1815. is, the Sultan was nominally sovereign of Egypt, Tripoli, Tunis, and Algeria. Morocco was then, as now, independ- ent under its own sultan. Along the western coasts were scattered settlements, or rather stations, of England, France, Denmark, Holland, Spain, and Portugal. Portugal had certain claims on the eastern coast, opposite Madagascar. England had just acquired the Dutch Cape Colony whence, as we have seen, her expansion into a great South African power has proceeded. The interior of the continent was unknown, and was of interest only to geographers. 552 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA The French conquest of Algeria. For sixty years after 1815, progress in the appropriation of Africa by Europe was slow. The most important annex- ation was that oi' Algeria by France between 1830 and 18 t7. In the south, England was spreading out, and the Boers were founding their two republics. European annexation waited upon exploration. Africa was the " dark continent," and until the darkness was lifted it was not coveted. About the middle of the century the darkness began to disappear. Explorers penetrated further and further into the interior, traversing the continent in various directions, opening a chapter of geographical dis- covery oi absorbing interest. It is impossible within our limits to do more than allude to the wonderful work partici- pated in by many intrepid explorers. Englishmen, French- men, Portuguese, Dutch, Germans, and Belgians. A few incidents only can be mentioned. It was natural that Europeans should be curious about the sources of the Nile, a river famous since the dawn of history, but whose source remained enveloped in obscurity. In 1858 one source was found by Speke, an English explorer, to consist of a great lake south of the equator, to which the name Victoria Xyanza was given. Six years later another Englishman, Sir Samuel Baker, discovered another lake, also a source, and named it Albert Xyanza. Two names particularly stand out in this record of African exploration, Livingstone and Stanley. David Livingstone, Livingstone, a Scotch missionary and traveler, began his African career in 1810. and continued it until his death in 1873 at Chitambo, not far from the shores of Lake Bangweolo. which he had previously discovered. He traced the course of the Zambesi River, of the upper Congo, and the region round about Lakes Tanganyika and Xvassa. He crossed Africa from sea to sea in higher latitudes than had hitherto been traversed. He opened up a new country to the world. His explorations caught the attention of Europe, and when, on one of his journeys, Europe thought that he was lost or dead, and an The sources of the Nile. David STANLEY'S EXPLORATIONS 553 expedition was sent out to find him, that expedition riveted tli<.' attention of Europe as no other in African history had done. It was under the direction of Henry M. Stanley, Stanley. sent out by the New York Herald. Stanley's story of how he found Livingstone was read with the greatest interest in Europe, and heightened the desire, already widespread, for more knowledge about the great continent. Livingstone, whose name is the most important in the history of African exploration, died in 1873. His body was borne with all honor to England and given the burial of a national hero in Westminster Abbey. Another African explorer was Cameron, sent out from England by the Royal Geographical Society to rescue Livingstone. Pie failed in this, as Livingstone died before his arrival, but Cameron made a remarkable journey across Africa from east to west. He was the first, indeed, to cross the continent in that direction. By this time not only was the scientific curiosity of Europe thoroughly aroused, but missionary zeal saw a new field for activity. Thus Stanley's journey across Africa, from 1874 to 1878, was followed in Europe with an attention unparalleled in the history of modern explorations. Stanley Stanley's explored the equatorial lake region, making important addi- explora- tions to knowledge. His great work was, however, his ex- ploration of the Congo River system. Little had been known of this river save its lower course as it approached the sea. Stanley proved that it was one of the largest rivers in £he world, that its length was more than three thousand miles, that it was fed by ail enormous number of tributaries, that it drained an area of over 1,300,000 square miles, that in the volume of its waters it was only exceeded by the Amazon. Thus, by 1880, the scientific enthusiasm and curiosity, the missionary and philanthropic zeal of Europeans, the hatred of slave hunters who plied their trade in the interior, had solved the great mystery of Africa. The map showed rivers and lakes where previously all had been blank. 554 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA Africa Upon discovery quickly followed appropriation. France ppr ° pria e entered upon her protectorate of Tunis in 1881, England upon her " occupation " of Egypt in 1882. This was a signal for a general scramble. A feverish period of parti- tion succeeded the long, slow one of discovery. European powers swept down upon this continent lying at their very door, hitherto neglected and despised, and carved it up among themselves. This they did without recourse to war by a series of treaties among themselves defining the bound- aries of their claims. Africa became an annex of Europe. Out of this rush for territories the great powers, England, France, and German}'', naturally emerged with the largest acquisitions, but Portugal and Italy each secured a share. The situation and relative extent of these may best be appreciated by an examination of the map. Most of the treaties by which this division was effected were made be- tween 18S1 and 1890. One feature of this appropriation of Africa by Europe was the foundation of the Congo Free State. This was the work of the second king of Belgium, Leopold II, a man who was greatly interested in the exploration of that con- tinent. After the discoveries of Livingstone, and the early ones of Stanley, he called a conference of the powers in 1876 " to discuss the question of the exploration, and the civiliza- tion of Africa, and the means of opening up the interior of the continent to the commerce, industry, and scientific enterprise of the civilized world," and to consider measures for ex- tinguishing " the terrible scourge of slavery known to pre- vail over wide and populous tracts in the interior of the continent." This conference was participated in by Great Britain, Belgium, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, and Russia. As a result of its deliberations an International African Association was established, which was to have its seat in Brussels, and whose aim was to be the exploration and civilization of central Africa. Each nation wishing to co-operate was to collect funds for the common object. The Congo Free State. Ml III < h M jP >N ^4 r .= 1 A" " S3 f & v £ A "^ ^ r / \ * 5 & ill *>| IVa .- , a 1 L 1 " ^ i ; -. s *= v-t-^r ■ if 9\ T3 1 Mv aa \ \ ' 11 « " 2 Ls •H hi $ F FOUNDING OF THE CONGO FREE STATE 555 But the international character of the movement thus Inter- started was not long maintained. Most of the contrihutions . . . ° t origin of came from Belgium. Stanley reached Europe in 1878 with the Congo the remarkable additions of knowledge which his trip across Free State. Darkest Africa had given him. He was sent back the following year nominally under the auspices of the Inter- national Association of the Congo, an organization formed in 1879, and the practical successor of the former African Association, just alluded to. Stanley, hitherto an explorer, now became, in addition, an organizer and state builder. During the next four or five years, 1879-84 he made hundreds of treaties with native chiefs and founded many stations in the Congo basin. Nominally an emissary of an inter- national association, his expenses were largely borne by King Leopold II. Portugal now put forth extensive claims to much of this Tne Berlin ^ • i i /• v m Conference. Congo region on the ground of previous discovery, lo adjust these claims and other matters a general conference was held in Berlin, in 1884-5, attended by all the states of Europe, with the exception of Switzerland, and also by the United States. The conference recognized the exist- ence as an independent power of the Congo Free State, with an extensive area, most of the Congo basin. It was evidently its understanding that this was to be a neutral and international state. Trade in it was to be open to all nations on equal terms, the rivers were to be free to all, and only such dues were to be levied as should be required to provide for the necessities of commerce. No trade monopolies were to be granted. The conference, however, provided no machinery for the enforcement of its decrees. Those decrees have remained unfulfilled. The state quickly ceased to be international, monopolies have been granted, trade in the Congo has not been free to all. The new state became practically Belgian. In 1885, Leopold II assumed the position of sovereign, declaring that the connection of the Congo Free State and Belgium should 556 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA Leopold II bo merely personal, ho being ruler of both, and that the former, like the hitter, should be entirely neutral. The Congo Free State. Belgian parliament gave its consent, ami the powers gave their approval. Leopold granted to the new state a con- stitution oi an autocratic character, and in the succeeding years acted as if it were entirely his private possession. His position was that oi sovereign and proprietor com- bined. In 1889 he announced that by his will all his sov- ereign rights in the Congo should go to Belgium after his death. This, oi course, was an infraction of the Berlin Act of ISSo as he had no right to will an international state without the consent of the powers. The powers, however, recorded no protest, probably because the new state was nearly bankrupt, and they were not disposed to contribute to its maintenance and development. In reality the Congo Free State was not a free state at all, but the personal property of King Leopold. He possessed there practically unlimited power in the making ami execution of laws. An international state became a personal appanage of the King oi Belgium, largely because the powers did nothing for the Congo while Leopold gave it liberal and constant support. Criticism oi In recent years Leopold's policy has been vehemently de- Leopold's nounced. State monopolies have been established, and administra- ,. , , , . . T monopolies have been granted to private companies. In the exploitation of the natural resources, particularly the immensely valuable rubber trees, and in the building of railroads, it has been asserted that the natives have been reduced to practical slavery. Fearful stories of inhuman treatment meted out to women as well as to men. of endless and crushing toil imposed upon them, of outrage, murders. whippings freely inflicted, and greatly reducing the popu- lation, have gained wide, and it would appear, making some allowance for exaggeration, justified credence. The existence of the gravest abuses was affirmed bv a commission of investigation appointed by the King himself. After a study of their report, published in October 1905, a professor in the THE CONGO COLONY 557 University of Brussels wrote as follows: " An examination of the Congo Free State administration reveals the clear and indisputable fact that the Congo Free State is not a colony in the proper sense of the term : it is a financial speculation. The real aims of those in authority are pecuniary — to in- crease the amount yielded by taxation, to exploit the natural wealth of the country, to effect all that can stimulate the powers of production. Everything else is subordinated to this end. The colony is administered neither in the interest of the natives nor even of the economic interests of Belgium; the moving desire is to assure the sovereign king the maximum of pecuniary benefit." x In recent years the revelations of the atrocious conditions prevailing in the Cjongo have become steadily more numerous and more shocking. Other powers, notably England and the United States, finally aroused, have demanded reforms. The result has been that the Belgian ministry and Parliament The Con &° Free State have been forced by the public opinion of the world to take made a up this question, and in 1908 the Congo Free State was con- colony of verted outright into a Belgian colony subject, not to the Belgium. personal rule of the King, but to Parliament. EGYPT Egypt, a seat of ancient civilization, was conquered by Egypt, the Mohammedans soon after the rise of their religion. Some centuries later it was conquered by the Turks, and became a part of the Turkish Empire (1517). It is nom- inally such to-day, its supreme ruler being the Sultan, who resides in Constantinople. But a series of remarkable events in the nineteenth century has resulted in giving it a most singular and complicated position. To put down certain opponents of the Sultan an Albanian warrior, Mehemet Ali, was sent out early in the nineteenth century. Appointed a semi-royal Governor of Egypt in 1806, by 1811 he had made himself house. 1 Quoted in Bliss, Encyclopedia of Social Reform, 270. 558 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA absolute master of the country. He had succeeded only too well. Originally merely the representative of the Sultan, he had become the real ruler of the land. His ambitions grew with his successes. In time he aspired to add Syria to his states, but was checked in this by a European in- tervention in 1840. He was compelled to acknowledge the suzerainty of the Porte once more, and to limit his rule to Egypt, but he gained in turn the important concession that the right to rule as viceroy should be hereditary in his family. The title was later changed to that of Khedive (1866). The present Khedive, Abbas II, is the seventh ruler of the dynasty thus founded. The fifth ruler of this family was Ismail (1863-79). It was under him that the Suez Canal was completed, a great undertaking carried through by a French engineer, Ferdinand de Lesseps, the money coming largely from European investors. This Khedive plunged into the most reckless extravagance. As a result the Egyptian debt rose with extraordinary rapidit}- from three million pounds in 1863 to eighty-nine million in 1876. This, as well as the increased taxation which characterized the same years, was a crushing burden for a poor and ignorant population. Sir Alfred Milner after studying the situation declared: " There is nothing in the financial history of any country, from the remotest ages to the present time, to equal this carnival of extravagance and oppression." The Khedive, needing money, sold, in 1875, his shares in the Suez Canal Company to Great Britain for about four million pounds, to the great irritation of the French. They are now worth seven times as much. This was a mere temporary relief to the Khedive's finances, but was an im- portant advantage to England, as the canal was destined inevitably to be the favorite route to India. The extraordinary increase of the Egyptian debt is the key to the whole later history of that country. The money had been borrowed abroad, mainly in England and France. ENGLISH INTERVENTION IN EGYPT 559 Fearing the bankruptcy of Egypt, the governments of the Interven- two countries intervened in the interest of their investors, on ° England and succeeded in imposing their control over a large part and of the financial administration. This was the famous Dual France. Control, which lasted from 1879 to 1883. The Khedive, Ismail, resented this tutelage, was consequently forced to abdicate, and was succeeded by his son Tewfik, who ruled from 1879 to 1892. The new Khedive did not struggle against the Dual Control, but certain elements of the popu- lation did. The bitter hatred inspired by this intervention of the foreigners flared up in a native movement that had as its war cry, " Egypt for the Egyptians," and as its Revolt of leader, Arabi Pasha, an officer in the army. Before this AraDi movement of his subjects the Khedive was powerless. It was evident that the foreign control, established in the interests of foreign bond-holders, could only be perpetuated by the suppression of Arabi and his fellow-malcontents, and that that suppression could be accomplished only by the foreigners themselves. Thus financial intervention led directly to military intervention. England sought the co- operation of France, but France declined. She then pro- ceeded alone. A British fleet bombarded Alexandria, and English forced its abandonment by Arabi (July 11, 1882). Arabi expedition crushes the and his troops withdrew. England then sent an army under nsiirrec _ General Wolseley, who with great swiftness and precision, tion. marched from the Suez Canal westward across the desert to Cairo. Wolseley defeated Arabi at Tel-el-Kebir, Sep- tember 13, 1882, and immediately seized Cairo. The re- bellion collapsed. Arabi himself was captured and sent to Ceylon. The English had intervened nominally in the interest of the Khedive's authority against his rebel, Arabi, though they had not been asked so to intervene either by the Khedive himself or by the Sultan of Turkey, legal sovereign of Egypt, or by the powers of Europe. Having suppressed the insurrection, what would they do? Would they with- 660 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA draw their unj? The question was a difficult One. To withdraw was, in the opinion ot* the British ministry, ot' which Gladstone was the head, and Lord Granville the foreign secretary, to leave Egypt a prey to anarchy; to remain was certainly to offend the European powers, which would look upon this as simply another piece ot* British aggression. Particularly would such action be resented by France, and Er.^'.And by the Sultan. The ministry decided neither to annex the sissumes the country to the British Empire nor to proclaim a British positio . •, i . , .1 •.• .• .. i • .« protectorate over it. but to assume the position ot adviser to the Khedive, whose power would nominally remain what it had been. Under British u advice " the Khedive would himself carry out the reforms considered necessary for the prosperity and welfare oi his country. This policy was ex- pressed by Lord Granville in a diplomatic note sent to the various powers of Europe. " Although," so runs the note, ** for the present a British force remains in Egypt for the pies iblic tranquillity, her Majesty's Govern- ment are desirous oi withdrawing it as soon as the state of the country and the organization oi proper means for the maintenance of the Khedive's authority will admit of it. In the meantime the position in which her Majesty's Govern- ment are placed towards His Highness imposes upon them the duty of giving advice with the object of securing that the order oi tilings to be established shall be oi a satisfactory character, and possess the elements oi stability and progress." A gl^ss on the meaning of the word " advice " was furnished a year later by Lord Granville in a communication to the British representative in Egypt, Sir Evelyn Baring, later Lord Cromer. " It should." wrote Lord Granville, " be made clear to the Egyptian ministers and governors of prov- inces that the responsibility, which for a time rests on England, obliges her Majesty's Government to insist on the adoption oi the policy which they recommend, and that it will be necessary that those ministers and governors who do uot follow this course should eease to hold their office." Ill v v I i 1 1 •■; i i f s > ■ \» ST , \S . i . - - \M f \ \ :. § * J2; r< S .Sfc \ 3 •' 5 I v It a \ tf ^ . . : * I -•4 J ■_ Q IP>'£ ' '"""1 i < ^ y r I 3 6 u ■; »■ i GORDON AND THE SOUDAN 661 These two utterances described the anomalous position The of England in Egypt in 1883, and they still describe it. English A British force still remains in Egypt, the " occupation " occ ^ pa " continues, advice is compulsory. England bus often been asked when she intends to keep her promise. No answer has been given. She is ruler in fact, not in law. The Dual Control ended in 1883, and England began in earnest the process of reconstruction and reform which has been pro- ceeding ever since under the real guidance of Lord Cromer, the British Consul-General in Egypt. 1 In intervening in Egypt in 1882, England became imme- diately involved in a further enterprise which ended in disaster and humiliation. Egypt possessed a dependency to the south, the Soudan, a vast region comprising chiefly the basin of the Upper Nile, a poorly organized territory with a varied, semi-civilized, nomadic population, and a capital at Khartoum. This province, long oppressed by Egypt, was in full process of revolt. It found a chief in a man called the Mahdi, or leader, who succeeded in arousing the fierce religious fanaticism of the Soudanese by claiming to be a kind of Prophet or Messiah. Winning successes over the loss of Egyptian troops, he proclaimed a religious war, the people e ou an * of the whole Soudan rallied about him, and the result was that the troops were driven into their fortresses and there besieged. Would England recognize any obligation to pre- serve the Soudan for Egypt? Gladstone, then prime min- ister, determined to abandon the Soudan. But even this was a matter of difficulty. It involved at least the rescue of the imprisoned garrisons. The ministry was unwilling to send a military expedition. It finally decided to send out General Gordon, a man who had shown a remarkable power in influencing half-civilized races. It was understood that there was to be no expedition. It was apparently supposed that somehow Gordon, without military aid, could accom- 1 Lord Cromer resigned his position as His Majesty's Agent and Consul-General in Egypt, in 1907. 5$l THE PARTITION OF AFRICA push the safe withdrawal of the garrisons. He reached Khartoum, but found the danger far more serious than had been supposed, the rebellion far more menacing. He found himself shortly shut up in Khartoum, surrounded bj frenzied and confident MahcHsts. At once there arose in England a ery for the relief of Gordon, a man whose personality, marked by heroic, eccentric, magnetic qualities, barHingly contradictory, had seized in a remarkable degree the interest, enthusiasm, and imagination of the English people. But the Government was dilatory. Weeks, and even months, went by. Finally, an expedition was sent out in September 1884. Fushing forward rapidly, against great difficulties, it reached Khartoum January 88, ISSo, only to Death of find the flag of the Mahdi floating over it. Only two days Gordon. before the place had been stormed ami Gordon and eleven thousand of his men massacred. Fublic opinion held Glad- stone responsible, and as a result his ministry was quickly overthrown. For the next decade the Soudan was left in the hands of the dervishes, completely abandoned. But it was certain that the reconquest of the provinces would some day be attempted. Various forces contributed to this end — the na- tional honor, the feeling that Gordon must be avenged, the sense of humiliation that the Egyptian empire had grown smaller under English rule, the conviction that the power that controls the lower reaches of the Nile must, for its own safety, control the upper reaches and the sources, also. And another cause was the pronounced growth during these years, in England as elsewhere, of the spirit of imperialism, eager for an onward march. In 1896 an Anglo-Egyptian army was sent into the Soudan under General Kitchener. Building a railway as he advanced, in order properly to supply his army, he progressed M very slowly, but very surely." At the battle of Omdurman. September 0. 1898, Recovery of the power of the dervishes was completely annihilated. Thus the Soudan, the Soudan was recovered, but it was recovered, not for EGYPT AND THE BRITISH EMPIRE 563 Egypt, but for England and Egypt. The British and the Egyptian flags were both raised over the conquered field. Thus the power of England in the Soudan rests technically upon a different basis than does its power in Egypt. For all practical purposes, however, both are simply parts of the British Empire, CHAPTER XXIV STAIN AND PORTUGAL STAIN SINCE 188S 9g» tm Wv have braced the history of Spain from the downfall of Napoleon bo the year 1828, and have soon the restored King Ferdinand All reign in a manner so cruel, so un- intelligent, and tyrannical that the people rose in insurrec- tion and insisted upon being accorded ■ liberal constitution. 1 And we have soon that as ■ result the powers, commonly called the Holy Alliance, intervened in 1889 to put down this reform movement, sent a French army into the peninsula, and restored to Ferdinand his former absolute power. This recovery oi his former position through foreign aid was Revenue of followed by a period of disgraceful and ruthless revenge __ ' , on the part oi Ferdinand upon those who had stood out i$o3, as Liberals, or had merely been lukewarm toward the King. Forced finally by the energetic remonstrances of the French, who had put him back upon his absolute throne, to moderate the frenzy oi his wrath, he was obliged to grant an amnesty, which proved, however, to be most deceptive, as it excepted from its operation fifteen different classes. The royal rage was slow in subsiding. Hundreds wore executed at the Jer of courts-martial for the most trivial acts in which there was the slightest tinge of liberalism, such as uttering " SuKer- so-called "subversive" cries, or possessing a portrait of s.ve ' uica Etiego, or defacing an inscription "Long live the Absolute King." Various classes wore carefully watched as " sus- pects." military men. lawyers, doctors, professors, and even veterinary surgeons. Universities and clubs, political and - cial, wore closed as dangerous, yet most of them were 5 See Chapter III. LOSS OF THE AMERICAN COLONIES 665 entirely innocuous, and little disposed to criticise or disturb the existing order. The University of Cervera, for instance, had begllfl an addreff to the monarch with the reassuring word-,, " Far from us the dangerous novelty of thinking." After closing the universities as inimical to society, Ferdi- nand endowed a school of bullfighting at Seville. Ferdinand \ll ruled for ten yean after hie second restora- loss of the tion, and in the spirit of unprogressive, unenlightened ah- Amtrican solutism. His reign is not signalized by any attempt to improve the conditions of a country that sorely needed reform. It is notable mainly for the loss of the imrne:. Spanish empire in the new world, and the rise of the in- dependent states of Central and South America. Prac- tically nothing remained under the scepter of the King save Cuba, Porto Rico, and the- Philippines. Ferdinand's chief interest in the last years of his reign The was the determination of the succession. He had no heir. 3 uest on of the But, assured, in March 1830, that one was about to be aucceg3 i on , born to him, lie wished that the child, whether son or daugh- ter, should succeed him. In the case of a daughter, however, the Salic law would stand in the way. This law was not a native product of the evolution of the Spanish monarchy. P'or centuries the laws of Castille and Leon had permitted women to rule, and one of the great figures in Spanish history was Isabella, Queen of Castille, the patroness of Columbus, who, moreover, upon \nr death was succeeded by her daughter. But with the accession of the- Bourbon line of rnonarchs the Salic law was introduced. It was a French importation, resting on the decree of Philip V, issued in 1713. As the king was absolute, his decree marie it law. In 1789 Charles IV prepared to rescind this law. A The decree was drawn up, called the Pragmatic Sanction, making „ ra ^ na 1 ' , H h Sanction. the change. But this decree was not published, and was known only to a few. Forty years later, in March 1830, Ferdinand VII drew it forth and promulgated it, whereupon Don Carlos, his brother, and the next in the line of succession, 566 SPAIN AND PORTUGAL if the Salic law were not repealed, issued a public protest and announced his intention to assert his rights to the crown if the contingency should arise. In October 1830 a daughter, Isabella, was born. The matter now became the subject of court bickering and intrigue, one faction struggling for the withdrawal of the new decree, the other for its maintenance. In 1832 the King fell ill, and, believing his end to be near, and dominated at the time by the supporters of Don Carlos, he signed a paper revoking the Pragmatic Sanction, Septem- ber 18, 1832. The King, contrary to all expectations, began to recover, whereupon his sister-in-law, aunt of the little Isabella, forced her way to his bedside, berated him for his weakness, had the decree brought her, revoking the Pragmatic Sanction, and tore it up. Isabella The King did not change his mind again, and when he proclaimed c H a, September £9, 1833, his daughter Isabella, three years of age, was proclaimed Queen, with her mother, Christina, as Regent. Christina was in power seven years, from 1833 to 1840, when she was driven into exile. During that time the Carlist war and the political evolution of the kingdom constituted the two chief series of events. The Carlist Don Carlos, true to his word, refusing to recognize the War * revocation of the Salic law, proclaimed himself king im- mediately after the death of Ferdinand, and a war of seven years was necessary to determine whether he or his niece, Isabella, should henceforth be the ruler of Spain. The supporters of Isabella, called Christinos, after the Regent Christina, had the advantage of being in actual possession of Madrid ami the machinery of government. They also con- trolled a part of the army. Don Carlos, on the other hand, was supported by the clergy and nobility, and all who be- lieved in thorough-going absolutism, many of whom consid- ered even the regime of the late Ferdinand too mild. The war between these factions was very irregular and incoherent, and is of little interest. As neither side had numerous SPAIN A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY 567 troops or large resources, the fighting was carried on in guerilla fashion by small detachments. Local issues en- tered in to make confusion worse confounded. Christina had no desire to use her position for the pur- pose of reforming Spain. " I will maintain scrupulously," she said at the outset, " the form and fundamental laws of the monarchy, admitting none of the dangerous innova- tions of which we already know too well the cost. The best form of government for a country is that to which it is accustomed." Christina was an absolutist by training and conviction. Yet under her the Spanish monarchy was changed from an absolute to a constitutional one. She saw the Carlists victorious in the north, and even gaining a part of old Castille. She was forced to appeal to the Liberals for support, and to gain them was obliged to grant the Royal Statute of 1834. This established a parliament The Royal divided into two bodies, the Chamber of Peers and the Cham- statute » 1834. ber of Deputies. The latter was to be elected by the property owners for a term of three years. The Chambers were to have the power to vote taxes and laws. But the Government was to have sole right to propose laws. Min- isters, moreover, were not to be responsible to the Chambers, to rise and fall according to their will, but were to be responsible to the monarch alone. The Crown could sum- mon and dissolve the Chamber of Deputies, but a year must not pass without a meeting of Parliament. This statute resembled the French Charter of 1814. It granted a cer- tain amount of individual liberty. It created a parliament which represented the propertied class, but whose powers were not large. It marks some progress, as by it, by action of the Crown itself, instead of by action of revolutionists, as hitherto, Spain became a constitutional state. The gain, though largely nominal, was something. It did not satisfy the Liberals, but it contributed somewhat to the political education of the country. The parliamentary history of Spain, opening in 1834, 568 SPAIN AND PORTUGAL Disturbed was much disturbed, bewildering and unprofitable to follow. Ministries changed with amaiing frequency, parties were life. . B , . more nominal thau real, not representing bodies of divergent political principles, but serving as masks for men who were eager to get into office as an easy method of gaining a livelihood. The ministries were short : in twenty-five years, from 1889 to 1858] there were H presidents of council, 61 ministers oi the interior. 7S of finance, and 96 of war. The Liberals were divided into two groups, the Moderates and the Progressists. The Moderates accepted the Statute of 1834. which so carefully guarded the rights of the mon- arch, and gave him such power over the chambers. But the Progressists demanded the far more liberal Constitution of 1818, which clearly proclaimed the sovereignty oi the people and made Parliament more powerful than the mon- arch. As the Carlist war continued unfavorable. Christina The was driven to make further concessions. The Constitution of Constitution 18;>7 was accordingly promulgated, more liberal than the of 1S37. Statute of 1884, less liberal than the Constitution of 1818, The Parliament or Cortes were henceforth to consist of a Senate and a Congress, the former to be appointed for life and, under certain restrictions, by the Crown, the latter to be elected by the voters for three years. This Constitution had been framed by a constituent Cortes, whereas the Statute of 1S;>4 was merely a royal decree. The Carlist war was finally brought to a close, with the help oi England and France, in 1840, but at the same time the Queen Regent was driven from the country. Actual direction o{ the government now fell for many years into the hands of rival military leaders. The war had left the armv the strongest force in the state. Isabella II was Isabella II ' . ° declared of declared of age in 1848, and the government was carried on age. henceforth in her name. Her reign, which lasted until 1868, was one. on the whole, of reaction. Adhering tenaciously to the forms of religion, and to the principle of monarchical authority, the Queen was influenced throughout by her favor- OVERTHROW OF THE SPANISH BOURBONS 569 ites, by a camarilla, and did not observe the spirit, and frequently not the letter, of the constitution. Her reign was marked by absolutism nearly as unqualified as that of her predecessors. Constitutional forms were used to cover arbitrary actions. It was a period of short and weak ministries, court intrigue, petty politics, a period little in- structive. Whatever disturbances occurred were vigorously repressed. In 1861 Spain joined England and France in sending The an expedition to Mexico to enforce certain claims upon the Mexican Mexican government. Spain and England quickly with- drew from this undertaking, leaving France to embark upon one of the most ill-starred enterprises of Napoleon III. In 1861 also Spain took possession again of her former colony of San Domingo, only to relinquish it a little later as the result of a revolt. Dissatisfaction with the existing regime, marked, as it was, by arbitrariness, by religious and intellectual intoler- ance, by abuses and corruption, and by the scandalous im- morality of the Queen, increased as the reign progressed. The more liberal politicians and officers in the army and navy, persecuted under this regime, became revolutionary. In 1865 an insurrection broke out, led by General Prim. It was suppressed and Prim sought refuge in exile. In 1866 and 1867 similar movements occurred, likewise abortive. But in 1868 the issue was different. More widespread than the others, and more carefully organized, this revolt re- The over- suited in the flight of the Queen to France, and in the throw of Tea V)P 1 1 P. ] establishment of a provisional government, in which Marshal Serrano and General Prim were the leading figures. The reign of the Spanish Bourbons was declared at an end, and universal suffrage, religious liberty, and freedom of the press were proclaimed as the fundamental principles of the future constitution. The Society of Jesus was suppressed. The Cortes were elected a little later by universal suf- frage, and the future government of Spain was left to their 570 STAIN AND POR rUGAL The ■ - SOIIM k.v.c drcw up ■ constitution based upon popular son. y, and promulgated it in June 1869. They pronounced in favor of i monarchy and against ■ republic, by .. \ 114 to 71. They established a regency under Marsha] Serrano, to conduct the government until i k g ould be chosen. This proved to be DO easy task. The queen. Isabella 11, alv. Q favor of her son Alfonso, but those in power were opposed to any representative ot the House or' Bourbon. It \\..- - s dered necessary that the king should be a Roman Catholic: that, moreover, he - /aid be of royal blood. Some advocated a son of 1 Philippe, others a Portuguese prince. Finally, after long negotiations, Prince Leopold oi Hohensollern was chosen. His candidacy is important in history as having been the immediate of the Franco-Prussian war oi 1S70. In the end 1 eopold declined the offer. A: length. November 1S70. the crown was offered by a of \> L91 QUI of fill, to Amadeo, second son ot' \ Emmanuel 11. The smallucss ot the majority was ominous. I - n< I t g's . gn was destined to be short and troubled. 1 ..', ; . Dg D Spain at the close of 1S70, he was coldly re- el fed. Opposition to him came from several sources — from the Republicans, who were opposed to any monarch; from : I sts, who claimed that the heir of Don Carlos, brother of ind VH, was the lawful king: from the \ so, son oi Isabella, who held that he IS the leg ruler. Amadeo was disliked also for the simple reason that he was a g HP, The del d him for his adherence to constitutional principles • eminent. No strong body of politicians supported him. Ministries rose and fell with great rapidity, eight in two years, one of them lasting only seventeen days. Each change left the government more disoi . i and more unp g that the problem ot* giving peace - I r^e voted for a republic; the otbet fOtCS W«t s.\;:'.er. _- ■* blank. ABDICATION OF AMADEO r/71 to Spain w&t insoluble, and irearying of an uneasy crown, Amadeo, in February 187-i, refigned hii powers into the AHH f tfsn hands of the Cortef. En a letter to that body he laid, * AaMdee. " I realize that my good intention! hare been in vain. For two long yean have I worn the crown of Spain, and Spain still Jives in continual strife, departing day by day more iridely from that era oi peace and prosperity for which I have so ardently yearned. I am to-day firmly convinced of the barrenness of my efforts and the impossibility of attaining my aims. These, deputies, are the reasons that move me to give hack to the nation, and in its name to you, the crown offered me by the national suffrage, re- nouncing it for myself, my children, and my successors." The abdication of Amadeo left the nation without an executive. The ministry necessarily disappeared with the monarch, whose servant it was. The Cortes alone remained a a depository of power. In the Cortes there were many Republicans. Feeling that monarchy by divine- right had failed in the person of Isabella 11, and ought not to be restored either by calling her or her son to the throne, feeling also that elective monarchy had foiled in the person of Amadeo, they field that the only alternative was the re- public, that, moreover, it was the only form of government consistent with the principle of the sovereignty of the people. The Monarchists, taken by surprise, had no definite plan. The Cortes, therefore, proclaimed the Republic, February The eatab- le, 1878, by a vote of 258 to 32, and declared that the lament of constitution should be framed by a convention to be chosen especially for that purpose. Castelar, a prominent Republi- can, speaking of the fall of the monarchy, declared that it had not been brought about by violence. " \o one destroyed it. It died of natural causes. The monarchy died of in- ternal decomposition. It died by the providence of God. The Republic is the creation of circumstances. It comes from a conjuncture of society and nature and history." But the advent of the Republic did not bring peace. In- of its fall. STAIN AND PORTUGAL de ed , its history was short and agitated. European powers, with the exception o\ Switzerland, withdrew their diplo- — tic represe nt a ti ves. The United States alone recognised the new government. The Republic lasted from February 1S7;> to the end oi December 1874, It established a wide suffrage) proclaimed religious liberty " in all its purity,* 3 proposed the complete separation of the ehnreh and state, and voted unanimously for the immediate emancipation of slaves in Porto Rico. The causes The causes o{ its fall were numerous. The fundamental one was that the Spaniards had had no long politieal train- ing, essential for efficient self-government, no true experience in partv management. The leaders did not work together harmoniously. Moreover, the Republicans, once in power, immediately fell apart into various groups, of which the principal were those who believed in a centralised republic and those who believed in a federal republic The Federal- ists differed even among themselves as to the size of the various units that should form the federation. The avowed enemies of the Republic were numerous, the Monarchists, the clergy, offended by the proclamation of religious liberty, all those who profited by the old regime, and who resented the reforms which were threatened. Also, the problems that faeed the new government increased the confusion. Three wars were in progress during the brief life of the Republic — a war in Cuba, a Carlist war. and a war with the Federalists in southern Spain. Presidents succeeded each other rapidly. Figueras was in office four months. Pi y Margall six weeks, Salmeron and Castelar for short periods. Finally, Serrano became prac- tically dictator. The fate of the Republic was determined by the generals of the army, the most powerful body in the country, who declared in December iS"I4- in favor of Alfonso, son oi Isabella II. The Republic fell without a Alfonso XII . . . , , rmnralmi struggle, Alfonso, landing m Spain early in ISTo. and as king:. being reeeived in Madrid with great enthusiasm, assumed stitution of THE CONSTITUTION OF 1876 573 the government, promising a constitutional monarchy. The Carlist war was brought to an end in the following year. Thus, six years after the dethronement of Isabella, her eon was welcomed back as king. Those six years had been characterized by instability and governmental confusion. The iiqw King had followed his mother into exile in 1868, and had spent the intervening years in study in France, Austria, Switzerland, and England. He was now seventeen years of age. I lis reign lasted ten years, until his death in November 1885. In 1876 a new Constitution was rated, The Con- the last in the long line of ephemeral documents issuing during the century from either monarch or Cortes or revolu- tionary junta. Still in force, the Constitution of 1876 declared the person of the king inviolable, created a re- sponsible ministry, a parliament of two chambers, a Con- gress of Deputies, elected by voters meeting a property qualification, and a Senate, consisting of three classes, those sitting in their own right, such as sons of the king, grandees of a certain wealth, admirals of the navy, archbishops, life members appointed by the king, and elective members, chosen for five years by certain corporations, such as provincial legislatures and universities, and by the wealthier citizens. The executive power was vested in the king, the legislative in the king and the parliament. No project should become law unless passed by both houses. Spain possesses the machinery of parliamentary government, ministries rising and falling according to the votes of parliament. Prac- tically, however, the political warfare is largely mimic. The two chief parties in 1876 were the Conservatives, led by Canovas, and the Liberals, led by Sagasta. But they were divided, not so much by principle, as by a desire for office. Parliamentary institutions have been used for purposes of personal advantage rather than for the increase of the national well-being through courageous and intelligent legis- lation. They constitute a parody on the parliamentary system. 674 SPAIN AND PORTUGAL Death of Alfonso XII died in ISSo. His wife, an Austrian prin- Alfonso XII. cess, Maria Christina, was proclaimed regent for a child born a few months later, the present King Alfonso XIII. Maria Christina, during the sixteen years of her regency, confronted mauv difficulties. Oi these the most serious was the condition oi Cuba. Spain's chief colony. An insurrec- tion hail broken out in that island in 1868, occasioned by the gross misgovermnent oi the mother country. This Cuban war dragged on for ten years, cost Spain nearly 100,000 men and $200,000,000, and was only ended in 1878 by means of lavish bribes and liberal promises of reform in the direction of self-government. As these promises were not fulfilled, and as the condition ot' the Cubans became more unendurable, another rebellion broke out in 1895. This new war. prosecuted with great and savage severity by Weyler, ultimately aroused the United States to intervene The in the interests of humanity and civilization. A war re- Spanish- su i tod between the United States and Spain in 1898, which w proved most disastrous to the latter. Her naval power was annihilated in the battles of Santiago and Cavite; her army in Santiago was forced to surrender, and she was com- pelled to sign the Treaty of Paris of 1S9S. by which she loss of renounced Cuba, Forto Rico, and the Philippine Islands. _,. , The Spanish Umpire, which at the opening of the nine- Bico. and l t "^ ° the Philip- teenth century bulked large on the map of the world, com- pines. prising immense possessions in America, and the islands of both hemispheres, has disappeared. Revolts in Central and South America, beginning when Joseph Napoleon became King in 1S0S, and ending with Cuban independence ninety years later, have left Spain with the mere shreds of her former possessions. Rio de Oro, Rio Muni in western Africa, and a few small islands off the African coast. The Canary Islands are not colonies but form one of the provinces of the kingdom. The disappearance of the Spanish colonial empire is one of the most significant features of the nine- teenth century. Once one of the great world powers, Spain PORTUGAL SINCE 1815 575 is to-day a state of inferior rank, a negligible quantity in this era of world politics. In 1902 the present King, Alfonso XIII, formally assumed Alfonso the reins of government. He married in May 1906 Princess J assume* Ena of Battenberg. Profound and numerous reforms are power. necessary to range the country in the line of progress. Though universal suffrage was established in 1890, political conditions and methods have not changed. Illiteracy is widespread. Out of a population of 18,000,000 perhaps 12,000,000 are illiterate. In recent years attempts have been made to improve this situation; also to reduce the in- fluence of the Roman Catholic Church in the state. Nothing important has yet been accomplished in this direction. Public worship is forbidden to the members of any other church. PORTUGAL, 1815-1909 Portugal, like other countries, felt the full shock of Na- poleonic aggression. French armies were sent into the peninsula in 1807 for the purpose of forcing that country into the Continental System, of closing all Europe to Eng- lish commerce. The royal family fled from Lisbon just Flight of as the French were approaching, and went to the capital of r °y al Portugal's leading colony, Brazil. The actual authority Brazil in Portugal for several years was the English army and 1807. Lord Beresford. Portugal suffered during this period the immense loss of a million in population. After the fall of Napoleon the Portuguese hoped for the return of the royal family, but this did not occur. The King, John VI, was contented in Rio de Janeiro ; moreover, he felt that his de- parture from Brazil would be the signal for a rebellion in that colony, which would result in its independence. The situation gave great dissatisfaction to the Portuguese, whose pride was hurt by the fact that they no longer had a court in Lisbon, and that the mother country seemed to be in the position of a colony, inferior in importance to Brazil. 576 SPAIN AND rORTUGAL Portuguese revolution of 1820. Loss of Brazil. Moreover, Beresford remained In Portugal after 1814, and was the real ruler of the country. The relations between the Portuguese and the English were strained from the begin- ning. The army was disaffected because it was not promptly paid, and because many of the positions in it were held by Englishmen. An occasion for the explosion of the growing discontent was furnished by the Spanish revolution of 1820. Encouraged by the movement in the sister state, the Port- uguese army revolted, and the Cortes were summoned to frame a constitution. This body adopted, in 1822, what was practically the famous Spanish Constitution of 1812, which, as has been shown, was largely the French Con- stitution o{ 1791, the ideal oi radicals in various countries, which, moreover, possessed the advantage of being ready made. The King accepted it, and Portugal, hitherto an absolute monarchy, became a constitutional one. The King meanwhile had returned from Brazil, leaving his eldest son, Dom Pedro, as regent of that country. In 1822 Brazil declared itself an independent empire, under Dom Pedro I. Three years later its independence was recognized by Portugal. Meanwhile, the Portuguese Constitution proved short- lived. As the absolutists regained control in Spain in 18&S, the absolutists in Portugal also were encouraged to at- tempt to recover their power, and succeeded. The first ex- periment in constitutional government hail been very brief, but it resulted in leaving a constitutional party confronting an absolutist party. The death of King John VI in 182b* created a new crisis, which distracted the country for many years. His eldest son, Dom Pedro, was Emperor of Brazil. His younger son was Dom Miguel. Dom Pedro was lawfully King of Portu- gal. He opened his reign as Pedro IV by granting a liberal constitutional charter introducing parliamentary government of the English type. Then, not wishing to return from Brazil, he abdicated in favor of his daughter- Donna Maria PREVALENT DISCONTENT IN PORTUGAL 577 da Gloria. Hoping to disarm hit brother Dom Miguel, Ifho Donna himself wished to be king, he betrothed hie daughter, aged Maria ** seven, to Dom Miguel, decreeing that the marriage should be consummated when Donna Maria became of age. He then appointed Dom Miguel regent for the little princess. But Miguel, landing in Portugal in 1828, was proclaimed king by the absolutists. If': accepted the crown. His reign was odious in the extreme, characterized by cruelty and arbitrariness, by a complete defiance of the law, of all per- sonal liberty, by imprisonments and deportations and execu- tions. Dom Pedro abdicated his position as Emperor of Brazil, and returned to Europe to take charge of the cause of his daughter. This civil war between Maria da Gloria and Dom Miguel resulted in the favor of the former. Dom Miguel formally renounced all claims to the throne and left Portugal never to return (1834). Maria reigned until her death in 1853, a reign rendered Death of turbulent and unstable by the violence of political struggles Maria - and by frequent insurrections. In 1852 the Charter of 1826, restored by Maria's government, was liberalized by important alterations, with the result that various parties were satisfied, and political life under her successor, Pedro V, was mild and orderly. His reign was uneventful. He was followed in 1861 by Louis I, and he in 1889 by Carlos I. Of recent years radical parties, Republican, Socialist, Recent have £rown up. Discontent during this period expressed events ln • , , V, vii Portugal. itself by deeds of violence. The Government replied by becoming more and more arbitrary. The King, Carlos I, even assumed to alter the Charter of 1826, still the basis of Portuguese political life, by mere decree. The contro- versy between Liberals, Radicals, and Conservatives de- veloped astounding bitterness. Parliamentary institutions ceased to work normally, necessary legislation could not be secured. On February 1, 1908, the King and the Crown Prince were assassinated in the streets of Lisbon. His second 578 SPAIN AND PORTUGAL son succeeded, and is at present King, Manuel II. Portugal evidently faces serious problems ; monarchy itself is in danger. She is burdened with an immense debt, disproportionate to her resources, and entailing oppressive taxation. Her edu- cational system is most inadequate. Her population is over five million. She has small colonial possessions in Asia and extensive ones in Africa, which have thus far proved of little value. The Azores and Madeira are not colonies but are integral parts of the kingdom. CHAPTER XXV HOLLAND AND BELGIUM SINCE 1830 HOLLAND We have described the dismemberment of the Kingdom of Holland, the Netherlands in 1830, and the years succeeding. That kingdom, which included what we know as Holland and Belgium, was the work of the Congress of Vienna, created as a bulwark against France. The Belgians had revolted, and, supported in the end by some of the great powers, had won their independence. Since then there have been two kingdoms. The old Dutch provinces preserved the name henceforth of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. This kingdom, more frequently called Holland in English-speaking countries, has had a history of comparatively quiet internal develop- ment, and has played no important role in international politics. It has passed through several reigns, that of William I, from 1814 to 1840; of William II, from 1840 to 1849; of William III, from 1849 to 1890, and of Queen Wilhelmina since 1890. The questions of greatest prom- inence in her separate history have been those concerning constitutional liberties, educational policy, and colonial ad- ministration. The political system rested upon the Fundamental Law The Funda- granted by William I in 1815. By this the kingdom be- mental came a constitutional monarchy, but a monarchy in which jgis. the king was more powerful than the parliament, or States- General. By that law, the States-General were composed of two chambers, one of which consisted of members ap- pointed for life by the king, the other of members chosen by the estates of the provinces, which themselves were chosen 579 580 HOLLAND AND BELGIUM SINCE 1880 by voters meeting a certain property qualification. The legislative power oi the States-General was restricted to the acceptance and rejection of bills submitted by the Govern- ment. Thej had no powers oi origination or of amendment. The budget was voted tor a period oi years; the civil service was beyond their control. The ministry was not responsible to them, but to the king alone. Such a system was an advance upon absolutism, but it left the king extensive powers, not easily or adequately con- trolled, and rendered possible the personal government oi William I, which ended in the revolt oi the Belgians in 1880. The Liberals oi Holland demanded that this system should be radically changed, and that thenceforth the emphasis should be laid upon parliament, and that parlia- ment should be brought into closer connection with the people. After an agitation ot' several years they were rewarded with The Con- a considerable measure of success. A revision of the con- stitution was made by a commission appointed by the King, and was adopted by an extraordinary States-General in 1848, the general revolutionary tendency of that time no doubt facilitating the change. By the revised Constitution oi 1848 the power oIl the king was diminished, that oi par- liament greatly increased. The Upper House was no longer to be appointed by the monarch, but elected by the provincial estates. The Lower House was to be chosen directly by the voters, that is, those who paid a certain property tax, varying according to locality. The ministers were made responsible to the States-General, which also acquired the right to initiate legislation, to amend projects submitted, and to vote the budget annually. Their sessions became pub- lic. Later reforms reorganized the provincial estates. Hol- land is divided into eleven provinces, each with its estates. The principle at the basis of these, of division into orders, or estates, was abolished. They were henceforth to be elected directly by those who were entitled to vote for the popular chamber of the States-General. Properly speak- stitution of 1S4S. THE DUTCH COLONIES 581 ing, they ceased to be estates, and became legislatures in the modern sense, though the old name was preserved. Since 1848 the constitution has been subjected to slight amend- ments, one of the more important being the enlargement Extension in 1887 of the electorate and the extension of the suffrage ot xht practically to householders and lodgers, as in England. This increased the number of voters from about 140,000 to about 300,000. Jiy a later reform, voted in 1896, in- creasing the variety of property qualifications, the number was augmented to about 700,000, or one for every seven inhabitants. Universal suffrage, demanded by Socialists and Liberals, has not been granted. The Kingdom of the Netherlands possesses extensive The Dutch colonies in the East Indies and the West Indies. Of these Colonle,< the most important is Java. Sumatra, Borneo, Celebes in Asia, Curasao and Surinam or Dutch Guiana in America, are valuable possessions. The Dutch colonial empire has a population of about 38,000,000, compared with a popula- tion of about fj, 000, 000 in the Netherlands themselves. The colonies are of great importance commercially, furnishing tropical commodities in large quantities, sugar, coffee, pepper, tea, tobacco, and indigo. BELGIUM The constitution adopted by the Belgians in 1831, at the time of their separation from Holland, is still the basis of the state. It established an hereditary monarchy, a parliament of two chambers, and a ministry responsible to it. The King, Leopold I, scrupulously observed the methods of parliamentary government from the outset, choosing his ministers from the party having the majority in the cham- bers. Leopold's reign lasted from 1831 to his death in 1865. It was one of peaceful development. Institutions essential to the welfare of the people were founded. Though The reign the neutrality of Belgium was guaranteed by the powers, it eopold was nevertheless essential that she should herself have force 6891 HOLLAND AND BELGIUM SINCE 1880 enough to maintain her neutrality. The army was, conse- quently, organized ami put upon a war basis of 100,000 men. State universities were founded, ami primary and secondary Bchools were opened in large numbers. Legislation favorable to industry and eonuneree was adopted. Railroads were built. Liberty oi religion, oi the press, of assoeiation, of education, was guaranteed Ivy the Constitution. Foreign relations were prudently conducted by Leopold I, whose influence with other rulers of Europe was great, owing to his extensive acquaintance with European statesmen, his knowledge oi polities, his sureness oi judgment. Under Leo- pold I Belgium's material and intellectual development was rapid. The He was succeeded in 1S65 by his son, Leopold II, who suffrage. ruled for forty-four years. The two most important politieal questions during most of this period have concerned the suffrage and the schools. The suffrage was limited by a comparatively high property qualification) with the result that in 1800 there were only about 185,000 voters out of a population oi six millions. As the eities had grown rapidly, ami as the working elasses were practically dis- franchised, the demand for universal suffrage became in- creasingly clamorous until it could no longer be ignored. In 1S93 the Constitution was revised, and the suffrage greatly enlarged. Every man ot' twenty-five years of age, not dis- qualified for some special reason, received the franchise. But supplementary votes were given to those who, in addition to the age qualification, could meet certain property qualifi- cations. This is the principle of plural voting, and was designed to give the propertied classes more weight than they would have from numbers alone. It was provided that no voter should have more than three votes. Tins form of suffrage is strongly opposed by the Socialists, a growing party which has attempted to secure the recognition of the principle oi M one man, one vote," but has not thus far been successful. * POLITICAL PARTIES IN BELGIUM 583 The political parties of moft importance have been the Education. Liberal and the Catholic. The Catholics hare struggled to gain sectarian religious inftroctioil iri the schools, and have in great measure succeeded. Their opponent! desire nniee- tarian schools. Belgium U the most densely populated country in Europe. Its population of more than leren millions u overwhelmingly Roman Catholic. ft possesses one colony, the former Congo Free State, transformed into a colony in 1908. Leopold II died December 17, 1909* and was succeeded by his nephew Albert I. CHAPTER XXVI SWITZERLAND Switzkri and in 1815 was a loose confederation of twenty- two states or cantons. 1 These varied greatly in their forms of government. A few were real democracies, the people meeting en masse at stated periods, generally in some mea- dow or open place, to enact laws and to elect officials to execute them. But these were the smaller and poorer can- tons. In others, the government was not democratic, but was representative. In some of these political power was practically monopolized by a group of important families, the patricians: in others by the propertied class. Most of the cantons, therefore, were not democratic, but were governed by privileged classes. The central government consisted oi a Diet, which really was a congress of am- bassadors, who voted according to the instructions given them by the cantons that sent them. In the language of political science, Switzerland was not a federal state, but was only a federation of states. Its constitution was The Con- ^ p ftct Q f |g| 5< which was the work o{ a convention which stitution of _ 1815. me t m Zurich and whose deliberations continued from April 1814 to August 1815. Switzerland did not have a capital. The Diet sat alternately in three leading cities, Bern, Zurich, and Lucerne. The In Swiss institutions, therefore, the emphasis was put upon importance ^ cantons> not upon tno confederation. This had been cantons. t1ie caso during the five hundred years of Swiss history, save daring a short period of French domination under 'Three of these were divided into " half-cantons." thus making in all twenty-five cantonal governments. A " half-canton " has the same powers in local government as has a whole canton. In federal affairs, however, it has only half the weight. Vincent. Government in Switzerland, 40. 5S4 SWITZERLAND IN 1815 585 the Directory, and under Napoleon. The cantons retained all powers that were not expressly granted to the Diet. They had their own postal systems, their own coinage. A person was a citizen of a canton, not of Switzerland. Leav- ing his canton, he was a man without a country. Cantons might make commercial treaties with foreign powers. The Pact of 1815 said nothing about the usual liberties of the press, of public meeting, of religion. These matters were, therefore, left in the hands of the cantons, which legislated as they chose, in some cases very illiberally. Several pos- sessed established churches, and did not allow any others. Valais did not permit Protestant worship, Vaud did not permit Catholic. Education was entirely a cantonal affair. Most of the cantgns were neither democratic nor liberal, and it remained for the future to accomplish the unification of these petty states. For about fifteen years after 1815 most of the cantons followed generally reactionary policies. Then began the period which the Swiss call the era of regeneration, in which The "Era the constitutions of many of the cantons were liberalized of Re " generation, by the recognition of the classes hitherto excluded from power, and now becoming clamorous. The cantonal govern- ments were wise enough to make the concessions demanded, such as universal suffrage, freedom of* the press, equality before the law, before discontent appealed to force. Between 1830 and 1847 there were nearly thirty revisions of cantonal constitutions. The same party which demanded liberal cantonal constitu- tions demanded a stronger central government. This, how- ever, was not effected so easily, but only after a short civil war, the war of the Sonderbund. As each canton possessed control of religion and education, it had come about that in the seven Catholic cantons the Jesuits had gained great influence, which they were striving to increase. The Radical party stood for liberty of re- ligion, secular education, a lay state. It wished to increase 586 SWITZERLAND the power of the central government) so that it might impose its views upon the whole confederation. For this reason the Catholic cantons were opposed to anv increase of the fed- eral power, and wished to maintain the authority ot' the cantons untouched, t'or only thus could they maintain their views. Religious and political passions finally rose so high that in 1847 the seven Catholic cantons formed a special UN Sonder- league {SoudtrbunJ), for the purpose oi protecting the in- bund. terests which they considered threatened. They regarded their action as merely defensive against possible attack. The Radicals were, however, able to get a vote through the Diet ordering the disbandment oi this league. As the members of the league refused to disband, a war resulted (1847). It was of brief duration and was over in three weeks. The victory, which did not cost many lives, was easily won by the forces of the federal government, which were much more numerous and better equipped than those ot' the league. The Stmdtf bund was dissolved, the Jesuits were expelled, and the tri- umphant Radicals proceeded to carry out their cherished The Con- plan of strengthening the federal government. This they stitntion of accomplished by the Constitution ot 1848. which superseded the Pact oi 1815. This constitution, with some changes, is still in force. It transformed Switzerland into a true federal union, resembling, in many respects, the United States. The Diet oi ambassadors gave way to a represent- ative body with extensive powers of legislation. The federal legislature was henceforth to consist of two houses : the National Council, elected directly by the people, one member for every £0,000 inhabitants; and the Council of States, composed oi two members for each canton. In the former, population counts : in the latter, the equality of the cantons is preserved. The two bodies sitting to- gether choose the Federal Tribunal, and also a committee of seven, the Federal Council to serve as the executive. From this committee of seven they elect each year one who acts as its chairman and whose title is u President of the 1S4S. The Federal Govern- ment. EVOLUTION OF SWISS DEMOCRACY 587 Swiss Confederation/* but whose power if no greater than that of any of the other members. It iraf recognized that there should DC a single capital, and li f; r n was chosen as such, on account of its position on the border of the German- and Prench-fpeaking districts. Larger powers v, o" - UY.l THE CONGRESS OF BERLIN 625 manians protested vehemently when they learned that, in reward for their services to Russia at Plevna, they were to cede to Russia a part of their territory, Bessarabia, receiv- ing an inferior compensation in the Dobrudscha, a region about the mouths of the Danube. But more important was the opposition of the powers of western Europe. They did not wish to have the Eastern Question solved without their consent. England particularly, fearing Russian expansion England southward toward the Mediterranean, and believing that . . revision. Bulgaria and the other states would be merely tools of Russia, declared that the arrangements concerning the penin- sula must be determined by the great European powers, that the Treaty of San Stefano must be submitted to a general congress on the ground that, according to the international law of Europe, the Eastern Question could not be settled by one nation but only by the concert of powers, as it affected them all. Austria joined the protest, wishing a part of the spoils of Turkey for herself. Russia naturally objected to allowing those who had not fought determine the outcome of her victory. But as the powers were insistent, particu- larly England, then under the Beaconsfield administration, and as she was in no position for further hostilities, she vielded. The Congress of Berlin was held under the presi- The . ■ -r> Congress of dency of Bismarck, Beaconsfield himself representing Eng- Berlin# land. It drew up the Treaty of Berlin, which was signed July 13, 1878. By this treaty Montenegro, Servia, and Roumania were rendered completely independent of Turkey. The Greater Bulgaria of the Treaty of San Stefano was divided into three main parts, Macedonia, left as a part of Turkey under the direct authority of the Sultan, Eastern Roumelia, as a part of Turkey, but to be autonomous and to have a Christian governor appointed by the Sultan, and Bulgaria, to be still nominally a part of Turkey, but to be autonomous, with a prince to be elected freely by the Bul- garians, the election, however, to be confirmed by the Sultan with the assent of the powers. The various powers were not 6M DISRUrTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMFIRE thinking of Turkey in all this, nor of the happiness of the people who had long been oppressed by Turkey. They found the occasion convenient for taking various Turkish possessions for themselves. Austria was invited to " occupy " and administer Bosnia and Herzegovina in the interest of the peace of Europe. Russia retained a part of Turkish Armenia, which she had conquered, and which included Ardahan, Kars, and Batoum. The Congress also forced Roumania to cede Bessarabia to Russia and to take the Dobrudscha as compensation. This made Roumania the enemy of Russia as the district ceded was peopled by Rou- manians, not by Russians. The powers recommended that the Sultan cede Thessaly and a part of Epirus to Greece, a recommendation only grudgingly complied with three years later. Before the meeting of the Congress, England had induced Turkey to permit her to occupy the island of Cyprus, and in return for this she undertook to guarantee the integrity of the Sultan's remaining dominions in Asia. Independ- As a result of this war, therefore, three Balkan states, ence of long in the process of formation, Montenegro, Servia, and Montenegro, . .... , Servia and Boumania, had become entirely independent of their former Konmania. suzerain Turkey, and a new state, Bulgaria, had been called into existence, though still slightly subject to the Porte, and a new district} Eastern Roumelia, was assured a freer life, though denied union with Bulgaria. All this had been accom- plished as a result of the intervention of Russia. The Treaty of Berlin was not a final solution of the Eastern Question. In one of its most important provisions it did not endure ten years. The device of separating the Bulgarians north of the Balkans from the Bulgarians south of the Balkans, in spite of the entire racial and spiritual unity of the two, and the wishes of the two, of attempting TTnion also to make the latter forget that they were Bulgarians of the two by the childish device of calling their province Eastern Rou- u ganas. me ji aj endured precisely seven years. In 1885 the Bui- THE TREATY OF BERLIN 627 garians took matters into their own hands, declared them- selves united, and tore up this arrangement of the Congress of Berlin, and the powers were forced to look on in acquies- cence. The other arrangement of leaving Macedonia in the hands of Turkey simply raised another question, the Macedo- nian, which has since that day been a source of constant uneasiness to Europe, a recurrent cause of alarm, frequently threatening a general conflagration. As far as humanitarian considerations are concerned this disposition of Macedonia has been a colossal blunder. The Turks have not carried out the promised reforms, and the conditions of the people would certainly have been greatly improved had Macedonia Macedonia, been a part of Bulgaria as provided by the Treaty of San Stefano. This determination of the fate of Macedonia, which was the essential difference between the two treaties, was one wholly deplorable. Owing to the rival ambitions of the western powers Macedonian Christians were destined long to suffer an odious oppression from which more fortu- nate Balkan Christians were free. On the other hand, the benefits assured by the Treaty of Berlin were great and unmistakable. Before the Russo- Turkish war the population of European Turkey was about seventeen or eighteen million. As a result of the Treaty of Berlin, European Turkey was greatly reduced, and its popu- lation was only about six million. In other words eleven million people or more had been emancipated from Turkish control. This constituted an important partition of Turkey. Yet the powers had, in 1856, guaranteed the territorial integrity and the independence in internal affairs of the Ottoman Empire, a guarantee as farcical as many others made in the course of the history of this Eastern Question. BULGARIA SINCE 1878 The Treaty of Berlin, while it brought substantial ad- vantages, did not bring peace to the Balkan peninsula. The history of the various states since 1878, both in internal GS8 DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE affairs and in their foreign relations, has been agitated, yet, despite disturbances, considerable progress has been made. Bulgaria, of which Europe knew hardly anything in 1876, was, in 1S7S, made an autonomous state, but it did not attain complete independence, as it was nominally a part of the Turkish Empire, to which it was to pay tribute. The new principality owed its existence to Russia, and for several years Russian influence predominated in it. It was started on its career by Russian officials. A constitution was drawn Alexander U P establishing an assembly called the Sobranje. This of Batten- assembly chose as Prince of Bulgaria, Alexander of Batten- " s ~ berg, a young German oi twenty-two. a relative of the Russian Imperial House, supposedly acceptable to the Tsar (April 1879). The Bulgarians were grateful to the Russians for their aid. They recognized those who remained after the war was over as having all the rights of Bulgarian citizens, among others the right to hold office. Russians held im- Friction portant positions in the Bulgarian ministry. Russians between the organized the military forces and became officers. Before u garians | on — however, friction developed, and gratitude crave way and the f r & . Russians. T0 indignation at the high-handed conduct of the Russians, who plainly regarded Bulgaria as a sort of province or out- post of Russia, to be administered according to Russian ideas and interests. The Russian ministers were arrogant, and made it evident that they regarded the Tsar, not Prince Alexander, as their superior, whose wishes they were bound to execute. The Prince, the native army officers, and the people found their position increasingly humiliating. Fi- nally, in 1SS3. the Russian ministers were virtually forced to resign, and the Prince now relied upon Bulgarian leaders. This caused an open breach with Russia which was further widened by the discovery of an unsuccessful Russian plot to kidnap Alexander. Meanwhile, the resentment of the Bulgarians of Eastern UNION OF THE TWO BULGARIAS 629 Roumelia at their separation from Bulgaria by the Treaty of Berlin steadily increased, and in 1885 a bloodless revolu- tion was carried through which destroyed this artificial Breach arrangement. The people of that province expelled the rep- oi the resentative of Turkish authority, and expressed their en- * ,. . . . ot Berlin, thusiastic desire for union with Bulgaria. Prince Alex- ander was forced to choose between the Russians, whom he knew to be opposed to this aggrandizement of Bulgaria, and his own people and those of Eastern Roumelia, who were eager for the union. He chose the latter and became the " Prince of the Two Bulgarias." It was expected that in- ternational complications would result, that Europe would insist upon the observance of the Treaty of Berlin. But the moment for collective intervention was not propitious, owing mainly to the extraordinarily tangled internal political conditions in various countries. The wrath of Russia was great, and was shown in her recall of all Russian officers from the Bulgarian army, leaving the army demoralized s ^ in its leadership. Just at this moment, Servia, claiming attacks that the union of Eastern Roumelia and Bulgaria would Bulgaria, overthrow the equilibrium of the Balkan states, jealous of the aggrandizement of her neighbor, and believing that her army was disorganized, and that the European nations would chastise her for her action in regard to Eastern Roumelia, suddenly attacked her. Bulgaria took up the gauntlet, en- thusiasm fired her army, and, crippled as she was, to the astonishment of Europe she expelled the Servians, severely defeated them, and invaded their own country only to be stopped by Austria, which insisted upon a treaty between the combatants on the basis of the situation before the war (Treaty of Bucharest, March 3, 1886). Bulgaria gained no territory by this war, but she gained prestige. She stood before Europe in a new light, and the war really founded her unity. In the face of the unanimous desire of the people, it was seen to be futile to insist on the separateness of Roumelia, now swallowed up in Bulgaria. 6S0 DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE Abdication Of Prince Alexander. Ferdinand Of Saxe- Cobursr. Dictator- ship of Stambuloff. The powers protested against this unification, and would not recognise the change, but thej refrained from doing any- thing further. Russia, however, incensed at the growing independence oi the new state, whieh she looked upon as a mere satel- lite, resolved to read her a lesson in humility by organizing a conspiracy. The conspirators seised Prince Alexander in his bedroom in the dead o\' night, forced him to sign his abdication, and then carried him oft' to Russian soil. Alexander was detained in Russia a short time, until it was supposed that the Russian partv was thoroughly estab- lished in power in Bulgaria, when ho was permitted to go to Austria. He was immediately recalled to Bulgaria, re- turned to receive an immense ovation, and then, at the height of his popularity, in a moment oi weakness, abdicated, apparently overwhelmed by the continued opposition of Russia (September 7. 1886). The situation was most crit- ical. Two parties advocating opposite policies confronted each other; one pro-Russian, believing that Bulgaria should accept in place of Alexander any prince whom the Tsar should choose for her: the other national and independent, rallying to the cry oi M Bulgaria for the Bulgarians." The latter speedily secured control, fortunate in that it had a remarkable leader in the person ot' Stambuloff, a native, a son oi an innkeeper, a man ot' extraordinary firmness, supple- ness, and courage, vigorous and intelligent. Through him Russian efforts to regain control of the principality were foiled and a new ruler was secured. Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, twenty-six years of age, who was elected unan- imously by the Sobranje. duly 7. TS87. Russia protested against this action, ami none of the great powers recognized Ferdinand. Stambuloff' was the most forceful statesman developed in the history oi the Balkan states. He succeeded in keeping Bulgaria self-dependent. During the earlier years of his rule Ferdinand relied upon him, and, indeed, owed to him his DICTATORSHIP OF STAMBULOFF 631 continuance on the throne. He won the pretentious title of " the Bulgarian Bismarck." His methods resembled those of his Teutonic prototype in more than one respect. For seven years he was practically dictator of Bulgaria. Rus- sian plots continued. He repressed them pitilessly. His one fundamental principle was Bulgaria for the Bulgarians. His rule was one of terror, of suppression of liberties, of unscrupulousness, directed to patriotic ends. His object was to rid Bulgaria of Russian, as of Turkish control. Bulgaria under him increased in wealth and population. The army received a modern equipment, universal military service was instituted, commerce was encouraged, railroads were built, popular education begun, and the capital, Sofia, a dirty, wretched 'Turkish village, made over into one of the attractive capitals of Europe. But StambulofF made a multitude of enemies, and as a result he fell from power in 1894. In the following year he was foully murdered Murder of in the streets of Sofia. But he had done his work thoroughly, Stambuloff. and it remains the basis of the life of Bulgaria to-day. The Turkish sovereignty was merely nominal, and even that was not destined to endure long. In March 1896 the election of Ferdinand as prince was finally recognized by the great powers. The preceding years had been immensely significant. They had thoroughly consolidated the unity of Bulgaria, had permitted her institutions to strike root, had accustomed her to independence of action, to self-reliance. Those years, too, had been used for the enrichment of the national life with the agencies of the modern world, schools, railways, an army. Bulgaria had a population of about four million, a capital in Sofia, an area of about 38,000 square miles. She aspired to annex Macedonia, where, however, she was to en- counter many rivals. She only awaited a favorable oppor- tunity to renounce her nominal connection with Turkey. The opportunity came in 1908. On October 5th of that year Bulgaria declared her independence, and her Prince assumed the title of King. 632 DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE ROUMANIA AND SERVIA SINCE 1878 Roumania proclaimed a kingdom, Agrarian disturb- ances. At the outbreak of the Russo-Turkish war in 1877, Rou- mania declared herself entirely independent of Turkey. This independence was recognized by the Sultan and the powers at the Congress of Berlin on condition that all citizens should enjoy legal equality, whatever their religion, a condi- tion designed to protect the Jews, who were numerous, but who had previously been without political rights. In 1881 Roumania proclaimed herself a kingdom, and her prince henceforth styled himself King Charles I. The royal crown was made of steel from a Turkish gun cap- tured at Plevna, a perpetual reminder of what was her war of independence. Roumania has created an army on Prussian models of about 175,000 men, has built railroads and highways, and has, by agrarian legislation, improved the condition of the peasantry. The population has steadily increased, and now numbers nearly seven million. The area of Roumania is about 50,000 square miles. While mainly an agricultural country, in recent years her industrial de- velopment has been notable, and her commerce is more im- portant than that of any other Balkan state. Her govern- ment is a constitutional monarchy, with legislative chambers. The most important political question in recent years has been a demand for the reform of the electoral system, which resembles the Prussian three-class system, and which gives the direct vote to only a small fraction of the population. In 1907 the peasantry rose in insurrection, demanding agrarian reforms. As more than four-fifths of the popula- tion live upon the land, and as the population has steadily increased, the holding of each peasant has correspondingly decreased. A military force of 140,000 men was needed to quell the revolt. After having restored order, the ministry introduced and carried various measures in- tended to bring relief to the peasants from their severest burdens. CONDITIONS IN SERVIA 633 Servia, also, was recognized as independent by the Berlin Servia. Treaty in 1878. She proclaimed herself a kingdom in 1882. She has had a turbulent history in recent years. In 1885 she declared war against Bulgaria, as has been stated, only to be unexpectedly and badly defeated. The financial policy was deplorable. In seven years the debt increased from seven million to three hundred and twelve million francs. The scandals of the private life of King Milan utterly dis- credited the monarchy. He was forced to abdicate in 1889, and was succeeded by his twelve-year-old son, Alexander I, who was brutally murdered in 1903 with his wife, Queen Draga, in a midnight palace revolution, and the present occupant of the throne, Peter I, has been in most unstable power since then. The present King is of the house of Karageorge, which has ended its century-long feud with the house of Obrenovitch by exterminating the latter in the murders of 1903. While some progress has been made along economic and educational lines, the condition of the country is far from satisfactory. The present regime is odious by reason of the manner of its origin. Its duration is problematical. GREECE SINCE 1833 In January 1833, Otto, second son of Louis I, the King of Bavaria, became King of Greece, a country of great poverty, with a population of about 750,000, unaccustomed to the reign of law and order usual in western Europe. The kingdom was small, with unsatisfactory boundaries, lacking Thessaly, which was peopled entirely by Greeks. The coun- try had been devastated by a long and unusually sanguinary war. Internal conditions were anarchic. Brigandage was rife; the debt was large. The problem was, how to make out of such unpromising materials a prosperous and pro- gressive state. King Otto reigned from 1833 to 1862. He was aided Reign of in his government by many Bavarians, who filled important otto I# DISRUPTION OF nir OTTOMAN EMPIRE s -. the :ivmv and the civil service rh-.s German int- \ i use q the unpopularity of tho I '"■•■ gs wen made, however, in the :» healthy national life, Athens was made the capital, . . rersitj ras established there v .- . .i national bank created. In 1844 s sent to t". . . his tstitutional one* A pai :':• two chambers, the Deput es bn ng chosen bj rersal s ins . political educatioi gan. Prom g of the Eastern Question bj the Q Qn bv the enlargement - . rs, however, thoi remain quiet. Because the Gov* j Europe tisist upon her rights, saw pre ag, i une very unpopular. For this is weU as For despotic tend- .us. Otto \\.i> IStW bv tin insu ' • " " G return. A new king was se< as - Danish 1. in 1863, ind who still rules, t brother a g of i\ 5 1909) n •• fa s popu- set, England [onian Islands, which she ls '- ; ■* td held since IS" ... <: r st enlargement of \ nen eonstitution was - IS Senate and left all s ,'.e assembly . ge, and cc sis g ol "'- - U P s, struggling fin 1881, mainly thro sertions ? ras tuced to i to i I thus of terri- torj ■ ea Lnis was -.use UNREST IN THE BALKAN STATES 035 of the CoDgrcM of Berlin that the Greek fro ould b<; " rectified" Id ]H'.f! Greece declared war against Turl og at. the annexation of Crete, irhich had rrection against Turkey* Greece wa$ ea ily defeated, and rai to cede certain parti of Theeealy to Turkey and gire up the project of the annexation of Crete. After lonj ia tione among til': powers, the latter bland irai mad* auton- omom under the suzerainty of the Sultan, and under the direct adminiftration of Prince George, a ion of the K of Greece* 1 irho remained in power until 1906. Greeci - not in kmnd financial condition. Hei debt if rerj larg*:, baring grown owing to armament*, the building of railroad-, and the digging of canal .. The country .• adranced in population and now nnmberi about, two and a half million-. Her irealth has increased, and much has been accompliahed in the direction of popular education. Jf<-r parliamentary history haa been troubled by incessant factional disputes* Since the acceaaion of the pi in 1803 there hare been about fifty ministries. It if esti- mated that the Greeki now number ah it uuHioi The larg<: majority, therefore, Jiv<; outride the r / kingdom. None of theee Balkan ftatea if latiafied arith il i pr< ■ nt Aspirations boundari';-,. Rournania wi-.h <.-:-. to include in the kingdom the of th * Roumanian-, of Ruffian Bessarabia, and of eastern H Servians dream of a Greater Serria, to include thofe of their race in Boania and Herzegovina and fouthern Hungary, a dream that recent events icon to hare forever di patecL Bulgarianf desire the annexation of part-, of 1 A eoDftSfotfoii ires promulgated for Crete in IflM 'ice been -i by Um constftattofl of WOT, irUdi pi - an m- wrrnhly of elected for t: 'J.''- H . I or eUef execotrre, h appointed by <}.<- k:.-.^ of r the ■ went of the four protecting pi Greet Brftai and Italy. QneiHoni concerning the foreign relations of r de- termined by the representative'; of thee pon 6S6 DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE The Young Turks. Revolution of July 190S. Macedonia, ox all of it. The Greeks desire Macedonia and Crete. They dream of a Greater Greece] dominating the JSgean. Servian, Bulgarian, and Greek rivalries meet in the plains Macedonia, which each country covets, and which is in- habited bj representatives of all these peoples hopelessly intermixed. The problem oi Macedonia is further com- plicated bj the rivalry oi the great powers, and by the transformation which Turkey is herself undergoing. REVOLUTION IN Tl'KKt'Y The Eastern Question entered upon a new and startling phase in the summer of 1908. In Julj a swift, sweeping, and pacific revolution occurred in Turkey. The Young Turks, a liberal, revolutionary, constitutional party, dom- inated bv the politieal principles of western Europe, seised control oi the government, to the complete surprise of the diplomatists and public of Europe. This party consisted of those who had been driven from Turkey by the despotism of the Sultan, Abdul llamid II, and were resident abroad, chiefly in Paris, and of those who, still living in Turkey, dis- sembled their opinions and were able to escape expulsion. Its members desired the overthrow of the despotic, corrupt, and inefficient government, and the creation in its place of a modern liberal system, capable, by varied and thoroughgoing reforms, of ranging Turkey among progressive nations. Weaving their conspiracy in silence and with remarkable adroitness, they succeeded in drawing into it the Turkish army, hitherto the solid bulwark oi* the Sultan's power. Then, at the ripe moment, the army refused to obey the Sultan's orders, and the conspirators demanded peremptorily bv telegraph that the Sultan restore the Constitution oi 187 o\ a constitution granted by the Sultan in that yi merely to enable him to weather a crisis, and which, having quickly served the purpose, had been immediately suspended and had remained suspended over since. The Sultan, seeing TURKEY A CONSTITUTIONAL STATE 637 l\i': ommoui defection of the army, complied at once with Restoration the dfirnwrif of the Young Turks, " restored " on July 34th of the the Constitution of 1876, and ordered elections for a parlia- ti(m merit, irhich should meet in November. Thai an ocbc tyranny was instantly swept, away. It was a rentable coup d'etat, this time effected, not by some would-be autocrat, but by the army, usually the chief support, of despotism or of the authority of the monarch, now, however, the chief instrument for the achievement of freedom for the democracy. This military revolution, completely successful and almost blood- less, was received with incredible enthusiasm throughout the entire breadth of the Sultan's dominions. Insurgents and Apparent boloiers, Mohammedans and Christians, Greeks, Herbs, Rul- unanimity garians, Albanians.' Armenians, Turks, all joined in jubilant movement celebrations of the release from intolerable conditions. r J most astonishing feature was the complete subsidence of the racial and religious hatreds which had hitherto torn and rav- aged the Empire from end. to end. The revolution proved to be the most fraternal movement in modern history. Pictur- esque and memorable were the scenes of universal reconcilia- tion. The ease and suddenness with which this astounding change was effected proved the universality of the detesta- tion of the reign and methods of Abdul Hamid II through- out all his provinces and among all his peoples. It is a significant fact that, since the defeat of Russia by the Japanese in 1904-05, and apparently as a conse- quence of that defeat, autocracy has been greatly undermined in eastern Europe, its last stronghold. Russia has its Duma, Persia in Asia its constitution, Austria its universal suf- frage, Turkey its new regime. The Young Turks, who thus seized control of the gov- ernment in July 1908, forcing the Sultan to obey their orders, illustrated excellently two of the dominant passion ! of the nineteenth century, the spirit of nationality and the mod<;ril . spirit of democracy. They wished to modernize and ener- ized gize their country by comprehensive reforms in civil ad- Turkey 63S DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE ministration, in the judicial system, in the army and navy, in education, and in economic conditions. Thus Turkey, modern and liberal, would be strong enough in the loyalty and well-being of its citizens to assert its position in the world as one of the family of nations. The Young Turks were a patriotic and liberal party, intent upon maintaining the integrity of the Empire, and upon gaining political and civil freedom for the people. Might not the old racial and religious feuds disappear under a new regime, where each locality would have a certain autonomy, large enough to insure essential freedom in religion and in language? Might not a strong national patriotism be developed out of the polyglot conditions by freedom, a thing which despotism had never been able to evoke? Might not Turkey become a stronger nation by adopting the principle of true tolera- tion toward all her various races and religions? Had not the time come for the elimination of these primitive but hardy prejudices and animosities? Might not races and creeds be subordinated to a large and essential unity? Might this not be the final, though unexpected, solution of the famous Eastern Question? Such, at least, was the evident hope of the Young Turks. They desired to realize the social solidarity represented in their cry, " One Flag, One People." But at best the problem of so vast a transforma- tion would be very difficult. The unanimity shown in the joyous destruction of the old system might not be shown in the construction of the new, as many precedents in Euro- pean history proved. If Turkey were left alone to con- centrate her entire energy upon the impending work of reform, she might perhaps succeed. But she was not to be left alone now any more than she had been for centuries. Attitude of The Eastern Question has long perplexed the powers of foreign Europe, and has at the same time lured them on to seek their own advantage in its labyrinthine mazes. It is con- spicuously an international problem. But the internal re- form of Turkey might profoundly alter her international BREACHES OF Till: TREATY OF BERLIN 659 position by increasing the power of the Empire. Thus it came about that the July Revolution of 1908 instantly riveted the attention of European powers urn! precipitated a series of startling events. Might not a reformed Turkey, animated with a new national spirit, with her army and finances reorganized and placed upon a solid basis, attempt to recover complete control of some of the possessions which, as we have seen, had been really, though not nominally and technically, torn from her — Bosnia, Herzegovina, Bulgaria* Crete, possibly Cyprus, possibly Egypt? There was very little- evidence to show that the Young Turks had any such intention or dreamed of entering upon so hazardous an adventure. Indeed, it was quite apparent that they asked nothing bette r than to be left alone, fully recognizing the intricacy of their immediate problem, the need of quiet for its solution. But the extremity of one is the opportunity of another. On October 3rd Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria- Austria- Hungary announced, through autograph letters to various un £ ar y b . ... . . annexes rulers, his decision to incorporate Bosnia and Herzegovina Bosnia and definitively within his empire. These were Turkish prov- Herzego- inces, handed over by the Congress of Berlin in 1878 to vma * Austria-Hungary for " occupation " and administration, though they still remained officially under the suzerainty of the Porte. On October 5th Prince Ferdinand of Bui- Bulgaria garia proclaimed, amid great ceremony, the complete in-. e *j ares er dependence of Bulgaria from Turkish suzerainty, and as- encCi surned the title of King. Two days later the Greek popula- tion of the island of Crete repudiated all connection with Turkey and declared for union with Greece. On the same day, October 7th, Francis Joseph issued a proclamation to the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina announcing the annex- ation of those provinces. Against tin's action Servia pro- tested vigorously to the powers, her parliament was imme- diately convoked, and the war spirit flamed up and threat- ened to get beyond control. Ferdinand was prepared to 640 DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE defend the Independence of Bulgaria by going to war with Turkey, if necessary. Those startling events immediately aroused intense excite- ment throughout Europe. They constituted violent breaches of the Treaty of Berlin. The crisis precipitated by the actions of Austria-Hungary ami Bulgaria brought all the great powers, signatories of that treaty, upon the scene. It became quickly apparent that they did not agree. Ger- many made it clear that she would support Austria, and Italy seemed likely to do the same. The Triple Alliance, there- fore, remained firm. In another group were Great Britain, France, and Russia, their precise position not clear, but plainly irritated at the defiance of the Treaty of Berlin. A tremendous interchange of diplomatic notes ensued, of which the public is not fully informed. The powers Gradually, however, the situation cleared, and the war do not cloud, the most threatening that had loomed over Europe preven ^ manv vears, disappeared. On examination and reflection these • * ... breaches certain facts sKhhI forth indubitable. It was evident that of the Austria would not recede from the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, that she was prepared for war, and Treaty. ' , would be supported by Germany. Russia, lamed by the disastrous war with Japan, with her army disorganized and her finances in bad condition, was in no position to play her usual role of protector of the Balkan Slavs. More- over, she was bound by a treaty with Austria, which had hitherto been known only to a few, to consent to the very action Austria had taken. Great Britain and France were not disposed or able to go to war with the two great military monarchies of central Europe, even had the reason seemed sufficient. On the other hand, as signatories of the Treaty of Berlin, they could not consent to the flouting of that agreement by one of its parties without a serious loss of self-respect and prestige. Meanwhile, the Turks protested against these infractions of their rights, but with admirable self-control refrained from warlike acts. PREDICAMENT OF SERVIA 641 The British Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grey, an- nounced that Great Britain could not admit " the right of any power to alter an international treaty without the con- sent of the other parties to it, and it, therefore, refuses to sanction any infraction of the Berlin Treaty and declines to recognize what has been done until the views of the other powers are known, especially those of Turkey, which is more directly concerned than any one else." Thereupon Turkey and Bulgaria announced themselves as in favor of peace. Austria-Hungary let it be known that, while she would not give up the annexation of the provinces, she was not unwilling to compensate Turkey for their loss. The Greeks manifested a disposition to wait a while before consummating their plan in regard to Crete. Russia, France, and England urged the calling of a congress to take the whole subject under consideration, a suggestion which was not accepted. Since November 1908 the tangle has been unraveling. Austria-Hungary and Bulgaria are negotiating with Turkey for the recognition of the status quo, willing to indemnify Turkey by cash payments for her losses. Of all the states the most aggrieved is Servia, and the Servia. most helpless. For years the Servians have entertained the ambition of uniting Servia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Monte- negro, peopled by members of the same Servian race, thus restoring the Servian empire of the Middle Ages, and gain- ing access to the sea. This plan is blocked, apparently forever. Servia cannot expand to the west, as Austria bars the way with Bosnia and Herzegovina. She cannot reach the sea. She alone of all the states in Europe, with the exception of Switzerland, is in this predicament. Thus she can get her products to market only with the consent of other nations. Feeling that she must thus become a vassal state, probably to her enemy, Austria-Hungary, seeing all possibility of expansion ended, all hopes of combining the Serbs of the Balkans under her banner frustrated, the feeling 64^> DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE Opening of the Turkish Parliament. The counter- revolution of April, 1909. The Young Turks regain control. was strong that war, oven against desperate odds, was preferable to strangulation. The remarkable aspeet of the whole history was that the reforming Young Turk party was able to survive blows so damaging to Turkey's prestige, to pursue a moderate policy when a warlike one would have been most natural. Meanwhile, the new Turkish Parliament had been chosen, and was formally opened by the Sultan on December 17, 1908, amid great enthusiasm. It consisted of two chambers, a Senate, appointed by the Sultan, and a Chamber of Depu- ties, elected by the people, in the ratio of one member for every fifty thousand males of the population. But shortly events of a startling nature occurred, which seemed to mean the abrupt termination of this experiment in constitutional and parliamentary government, and to seal the doom of the Young Turks. Their power rested on their control of the army. Suddenly that control appeared to vanish. On April 13, 1909, without warning, thousands of troops in Constantinople broke into mutiny, denounced the Young Turks as tyrants, surrounded the Parliament House and the War Office, and demanded the removal of the ministry and of the president of the Chamber of Deputies. Constantinople was in a panic. There was much looting of houses and some loss of life. The Minister of Justice was killed, the Minister of Marine was wounded. Promi- nent Young Turk leaders fled for their lives. The city was terrorized. At the same time sickening massacres occurred in Asia Minor, particularly at Adana, showing that the religious and racial animosities of former times had lost none of their force. It seemed that the new regime was about to founder utterly. A counter-revolution was to undo the work of the revolution of July. But the counter-revolution lasted just eleven days. The Young Turks did not lie down supinely, but at once joined issue with the insurgents. Mobilizing quickly the troops which were loyal to them in Salonika, Adrianople, and other OVERTHROW OF ABDUL HAMID II 643 places they began a march upon the capital, resolved to wrest it from the grasp of the reactionary party. They entered it on April 24th, and after many hours of fighting gained complete control. Thus, for the first time since 1453, Constantinople was taken by an attacking army. It is interesting to note that the rapid interplay of nation upon nation, so striking a characteristic of the present age, was illustrated here. The method followed in the capture of the city was suggested by a chief of staff, who had seen it applied successfully by the Japanese in Manchuria during the war with Russia. The Young Turks were again in power. Holding that the mutiny had been inspired and organized by the Sultan, who had corrupted the troops so that he might restore the old regime, they resolved to terminate his rule. On April Deposition 27th Abdul Hamid II was deposed, and was immediately of Abdul . . Hamid II. taken as a prisoner of state to Salonika, a city intensely loyal to the reformers. Thus ended a reign of thirty-three years, a shameful chapter in Turkish history. Under Abdul Hamid II Turkey had lost extensive territories — Servia, Bulgaria, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Crete, Cyprus, and, for all practical purposes, Egypt and the Soudan ; had experienced extreme demoralization in every branch of the public service; and had become virtually bankrupt. Only in the army had any constructive work been accomplished. This, re- modeled and drilled by German officers, had revealed its quality in the Turco-Greek War of 1897, and is now an efficient instrument for progress in the hands of the re- formers. Abdul Hamid II was succeeded by his brother, whom he Mohammed had kept imprisoned many years. The new Sultan, Mo- v# hammed V, was in his sixty-fourth year. He at once ex- pressed his entire sympathy with the aims of the Young Turks, his intention to be a constitutional monarch. Thus the Young Turks find their power consolidated and increased as a result of these events. Whether they will 644 DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE be able to raise an ignorant and impoverished people, debased by long misrule, to a state of enlightenment and prosperity, will be able to render them capable of self- government, the future alone can tell. Even if they reveal the mighty statesmanship required, will they be permitted to work out their own salvation? Will the European powers abandon the ambitions they have cherished for centuries of aggrandizement, at the expense of Turkey? Is not the real reformation of the Turkish Empire the last thing they desire? Will they not take advantage of future troubles likely to arise? Will they, indeed, not cause troubles themselves in order, under their cover, to advance their own interests? The Eastern Question is probably not yet solved. Meanwhile, the annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austria-Hungary, and the independence of Bulgaria, have been formally recognized by the signatories of the Treaty of Berlin. CHAPTER XXIX RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER I Russia in 1815 was the largest state in Europe, and was a still larger Asiatic empire. It extended in unbroken stretch from the German Confederation to the Pacific Ocean. Its population was about 45,000,000. Its Euro- pean territory covered about 2,000,000 square miles. It was inhabited by a variety of races, but the principal one was the Slavic. Though there were many religions, the religion of the court and of more than two-thirds of the population was the so-called Greek Orthodox form of Christianity. Though various languages were spoken, Russian was the chief one. The Russians had conquered many peoples in various directions. A considerable part of the former King- Russian dom of Poland had been acquired in the three partitions con( l ues 8> at the close of the eighteenth century, and more in 1815. Here the people spoke a different language, the Polish, and adhered to a different religion, the Roman Catholic. In the Baltic provinces, Esthonia, Livonia, and Courland, the upper class was of German origin and spoke the German language, while the mass of peasants were Finns and Lithu- anians, speaking different tongues. All the inhabitants were Lutherans. Finland had recently been conquered from Sweden. The languages spoken there were Swedish and Finnish, and the religion was Lutheran. To the east and south were peoples of Asiatic origin, many of them Moham- medans in religion. There were in certain sections con- siderable bodies of Jews. All these dissimilar elements were bound together by their allegiance to the sovereign, the Tsar, a monarch of absolute, 645 646 RUSSIA IV rilF. WAR WITH JAPAN The nobility. unlimited power. There wore two classes of society in Russia — the nobility and the peasantry. The large ma- jority oi the hitter wore sort's oi the Tsar and the nobility. The nobility numbered about 140.000 families. Some oi the nobles wore very wealthy. It is estimated that 1,500 oi them \^o>>c>>cd more than a thousand sort's each, that 8,000 others possessed over rive hundred each, while 17,000 possessed more than two hundred each. But more than four-fifths oi them, that is, about 1 '20.000 were quite poor. With only a tew sorts each. The nobles secured offices in the army and the civil service. They were exempt from many taxes, and enjoyed certain monopolies. Their power over their sort's was extensive and despotic They enforced obedience to their orders by the knout and by banishment to Siberia. The middle elass oi well-to-do and educated bourgeoisie, increasingly important in the other countries of Europe, practically did not exist in Russia. Russia was an agricultural country, whose agriculture, moreover, was very primitive and inefficient. It was a nation of serfs and oi peasants little better off than the serfs. This elass was wretched, uneducated, indolent, prone to drink excess- ively. In the ** mir," or village community, however, it possessed a rudimentary form of communism and limited self-government. Over this vast and ill-equipped nation ruled the Autocrat of All the Russias, or Tsar, an absolute monarch, whose decisions, expressed in the form of ukases or decrees, were Alexander I. the law of the land. The ruler in 1815 was Alexander I, a man thirty-eight years oi age. Ascending the throne in 1801, he played a commanding role in the later Napoleonic era. Under him Russia took a leading part in the politics and wars of Europe. Allied with Napoleon in 1S0T, he broke away from him in 1811, and from that time was his constant and powerful foe. In early life he had had as tutor Colonel Laharpe, a Swiss, who inspired principles of liberalism and humanitarianism in the mind of his quick and receptive pupil. The ^e.">s*ntry. 1777-1885. LIBERALISM OF ALEXANDER I Wl For several years aft.< ; r hii accession he followed a pro- gressive and reforming policy. The times, however, were not propitious for any sweeping changes. From 1805 to 181 S Russia was almost incessantly at war, and it is esti- mated that she lost in these wars nearly a million and a quarter of men, most of irhom died from sickness or the privation* of war, rather than in battle. The national debt and the burden of taxation had necessarily been im- mensely augmented. Moreover, blocking the way of re- form was an administrative service thoroughly honeycombed with corruption, so that even the official historian of the period after 1815 could only say, "Everything was cor- The rupt, everything unjust, everything dishonest." Such con- corruption ... . . ..... of the ditions constituted' a serious restraint upon the initiative ,„„ _ 1 govern- and work of the ruler. ment. In 1815 Alexander I stood forth as the most liberal sovereign on any of the great thrones of Europe. In the reorganization of Europe in 1811 and 1815 he was, on the whole, a liberal force. He it was who insisted upon reason- ably generous terms to France, on the part of the victorious allies; who insisted that Loui^ XVlff should grant con- stitutional liberties to the French people; who, at the Congress of Vienna, favored, though ineffectually, the aspirations of the German people for a larger political life. He showed his liberal tendencies even more unmistakably in his Polish policy. He succeeded at the Congress of Vienna in securing most of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, which he now transformed into the Kingdom of Poland. Poland. This was a state of 3,000,000 inhabitants, with an area less than one-sixth the size of the former Polish kingdom, but containing the Polish capital, Warsaw. This was hence- forth to be an independent kingdom, not a part of Russia. The only connection between the two was in the person of the ruler. The Tsar of Rus-.ia. was to be King of Poland. Alexander intended to make this revived, though incomplete, 648 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN Poland, a constitutional state. He granted a constitution in 1815, which created a Diet of two chambers, to meet every two years, and to have the power to make laws and to examine the budget. He granted liberty of the press and pf religion. The Polish language was to be the official language in the administration and in the army. Poland en- joyed freer institutions at this moment than did either Prussia or Austria. The franchise was wider than that of England or France. Apparently, also, Alexander considered his Pol- ish experiment as preliminary to an introduction of similar reforms in Russia also. Alexander's Returning to Russia from Warsaw, Alexander showed progressive m man j ways his desire to be a progressive and beneficent policy ruler. He thought much on what was long the fundamental problem of Russia, the emancipation of the serfs. There were 16,000,000 peasants on the vast domains that belonged to the Crown alone. The condition of these he sought to improve. But the general problem was so vast, his own will so unsteady, that it was solved neither by him nor by his successor. It was, however, a fact of importance that a Tsar had conspicuously indicated that this was the great national evil, which must be removed before Russia could be- come either free or progressive. The Emperor's opinion could not fail to have a formative influence. Alexander devoted his attention also to healing the wounds and repair- ing the waste of the long wars. His activity was incessant and varied. He endeavored to make the administration efficient, and to hunt out and punish corruption, which had flourished abundantly during his long absences and his pre- occupation with foreign affairs and war, but his success was slight. Prison reform was undertaken. Hospitals and asylums received generous support. That famine might be avoided, in a country whore transportation was very difficult owing to poor roads, he gave orders for the establishment in every district of magazines of corn. He encouraged foreign commerce. ALEXANDER I AND METTERNICH 649 In foreign policy, also, Alexander threw his influence on Liberal the side of liberalism, in France, in Germany, in Italy, even in forei £ n Spain; supporting through his agents in those countries those who wished constitutional forms of government. Con- sequently, for some time, he was the main obstacle in the path of Metternich, the apostle of reaction. As Metternich, however, possessed the stronger character, and as Alexander was easily discouraged, the result of their rivalry was ulti- mately the triumph of the former. Metternich had exercised little influence over Alexander at the Congress of Vienna in 1814-1815, but three years later, at the Congress of Aix-la- Alexander Chapelle, he ceaselessly played upon the Emperor's essen- becomes tially timid nature, pointing out the significance of liberal- ism, how it ended in anarchy, the loss of respect of all human authority, how in the interest of civilization it must be stamped out. Illustrations were forthcoming to point the argument; the election to the French Chamber of Deputies of Radicals ; the actions of the German students ; the murder of Kotzebue, one of the Tsar's own agents; the mutiny of one of the St. Petersburg regiments ; the spread of secret societies. The Tsar was won to a policy of repression, and his support was after 1818 the main bulwark of Met- ternich's policy of intervention, which expressed itself in the various congresses and which made the name of the Holy Alliance a by-word among liberals. Events at home further altered the Tsar's domestic policy. He became disappointed over the failure of his attempts to give Poland constitutional liberty. Those attempts were always unpopular in Russia. Why should Poland, the old and dangerous enemy, be fa- vored by generous concessions not awarded to Russia her- self? Would not such liberty be used simply to build up the former nation to the detriment of Russia? Russian abso- paction lutists and reactionaries were opposed on principle to all with the constitutions, and feared that the Tsar's experiment might Poles « be a step toward the introduction of a constitutional regime in Russia itself. The actions of the Poles served this party Death of Alex- ander I. 650 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN well, for they took their liberties seriously, and the Diet criticised freely the proposals of the Government. The Tsar, feeling that those whom he had favored were un- grateful, ami swinging to the conservative side in general, began to cool. The Diet rejected in 1820 a measure sub- mitted by the Government. Alexander then modified the constitution, and restricted the freedom he had granted by excluding the public from the sessions of the Diet and for- bidding the publication of its debates. The liberal period of a brief five years was soon over. The Poles replied by conspiring. Profoundly depressed by what he regarded as the ingratitude of the world, and skilfully terrified by Metternich's analysis of the unrest of the times, Alexander became more and more reactionary, ami when he died, on December 1, 1825, he left an admin- istration dominated by a totally different spirit from that which had prevailed in the earlier years. The period from 1820 to 1825 was one of reaction and repression through- out his dominions. THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS I Alexander left no son to succeed him. His nearest heir was his brother Constantine, who, however, had secretly re- nounced the crown. Alexander had designated his younger brother, Nicholas, as his successor. The documents, how- ever, making this disposition had never been published. The result was confusion and uncertainty for some weeks. Nich- olas refused to mount the throne, and took the oath of allegiance to Constantine. Some days elapsed before Con- stantine renounced his rights publicly. The opportunity was seized by many malcontents and by the secret societies which had grown up" under Alexander. They attempted to effect a revolution, whose precise aim was not clear. This was finally put down by bloodshed in the streets of St. Peters- burg. Punishment was meted out to the ringleaders with great severity. Several were hanged, others were banished to ACCESSION OF NICHOLAS I 651 the Ural mines or to Siberia. This revolt of December (1825) only strengthened the hold of absolutism upon Russia by deepening the hostility of the new ruler to all liberalism, associated in his mind with disloyalty and anarchy. Nicholas I was in his thirtieth year at the time of his Nicholas i, accession. His reign covered a generation, 1825-1855, and was eventful. His training had not been in politics or administration, but in the army. His mind was practical, narrow, rigid, and exceedingly conservative. He sought to eradicate abuses wherever he discovered them, but in so vast and centralized yet ill-compacted an empire it was impossible for the Emperor to control effectively the details of the government.' His policy was uncompromisingly ab- solutist^, both at home and abroad. He was the great bulwark of monarchical authority in Europe for thirty years. He carried out systematically and persistently that scheme Systematic of reaction into which Alexander had drifted during the repression, closing years of his reign. He sought to give an entirely Russian tone to every aspect of Russian life. His predeces- sors since Peter the Great had sought Russia's advancement in imitation of western Europe, in the introduction of western customs and ideals and institutions. Nicholas planted himself right athwart this traditional tendency. Russia must be self-sufficient; must find within herself the fundamental, active principles of her life. For thirty years a system of remorseless, undeviating re- pression was steadily carried out. The two principal in- struments employed were the secret police and the censor- ship. The former, under the name of the Third Section, The possessed practically unlimited power?' of life and death, P° * ce r r J r -ill. system, could arrest, imprison, exile, or execute without let or hindrance. The censorship was elaborately and minutely The censor- organized, and was most effective in stamping out freedom » hl P- of the press and of speech, though making itself ridiculous by the senseless zeal with which it pursued its work. Musical 65* RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN notes were investigated on the ground that conspirators might bo using them as ciphers tor malevolent purposes. It was decreed that books on anatomy and physiology should contain nothing that could offend the souse oi decency. Punishments were oi groat severity. The most harmless word might moan exile to Siberia, without any kind ot' preliminary trial. The rigor oi tins regime increased as the reign wore on. To rivet it still tighter, that vigilance should never sloop, a committee was appointed in 1848 to watch over the censors, and Later another committee to watch over the first. It has boon estimated that in the twenty years between 1882 ami 1858 probably 150,000 persons were exiled to Siboria, suffering fearful hardships on the way ami after arrival, condemned, as they generally were, to work in the mines. In addition, tons oi thousands Languished in the prisons oi Russia. Needless to say, under such a system no such thing as a free press or a free reading public could possibly exist. In 1848 all the Russian journals combined did not have more than 12,000 subscribers. That Russians might not bo con- taminated by the pernicious liberal ideas oi the west, their travel abroad was greatly restricted by a system oi passports. These passports were expensive, and were only granted on the consent of the sovereign, and then only for a maximum period ot" five years. Any one outstaying the time per- mitted might have his property in Russia confiscated. On the other hand, the travel in Russia oi foreigners was elaborately discouraged. Such travelers must obtain pass- ports from the Russian government, must explain why they were visiting that country, anil during their entire sojourn were under police surveillance. Foreign literature oi a liberal nature was rigorously ex- cluded. While Nicholas I encouraged Russian literature in the forms that seemed harmless, while his reign was called the " Augustan age oi Russia," rendered notable by the literature. poetry of Pushkin, the novels ot' Dostoievski, Turgenieff, and Safeguards ;i£.unst the ideas of western Europe. A brilliant native POLICY OF NICHOLAS I BBS Gogol, while he encouraged research in [inef which he con J sidered legitimate, and showed hie hiimanitarianism by abol- ishing capital punishment, except for high treason, at a tame when the English penal code w&s barbarous in its severity, and while be encouraged the building of railways, so that at the time of his death there irere 632 miles in operation, bis reign was, on the whole, one of repri -ion and national stagnation. As we have seen, Russia IfOS as Com- pletely as possible shut off from the outside world. No attempt was made- even to connect the railways with the systems of western Europe, hi later years, regarding edu- cational institutions as " hotbed-, of revolution," he prac- tically limited the number of students at any Russian uni- versity, with the exception of those pursuing courses in medicine, to three hundred. The result was that in 18-j-^, in a country whose population was about 70,000,000, there were only about. 2,900 students. Religious persecution Beligiovs accompanied political and intellectual. Any one renoune- persecution, ing the Orthodox religion was punished with loss of prop- erty and with eight to ten years of hard labor. Any one attempting to convert an Orthodox believer was imprisoned from eight to sixteen months, and, for the third offense, was exiled to Siberia. Nicholas, like his predecessor, was alive The evil of to the evils of serfdom, and during his reign six committees serfdom. \v<-r(: appointed to study the problem, but almost nothing was accomplished. " I do not understand," he once said, speaking as " the first nobleman in Russia," " how man came to be a thing, and I can explain the fact only by deception on one side and ignorance on the other. We must make an end to this. It is better we should give up, of our own account, that which might otherwise be wrested from us." Nicholas's foreign policy was marked by the same char- The acteristics, and made him hated throughout Europe as the for ei£n most brutal autocrat of Europe. Nicholas suppressed the Nicholag j Polish insurrection of 1830-31, abolished the constitution granted by Alexander I, and incorporated Poland in Russia, 654. RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN thus ending the history of that kingdom, a history of only fifteen years. He waged two wars against Turkey, previ- ously described, one in 1828-9, and one in 1853-6. He interfered decisively to suppress the Hungarian revolution- ists in 1849, and in German affairs he was a factor of im- portance. His prestige was great after 1849. Russia, alone of the great powers, had passed through the turbulent years of 1848 and 1849 without commotion. She had aided in the restoration of the established order elsewhere. Her army, on which nearly forty per cent, of her income was annually expended, was supposed by Nicholas and by many Th« outside of Russia to be the best in Europe. The Crimean Crimean war, in which Nicholas became involved in 1854;, proved the hollowness of this claim. That war was an overwhelming' and disillusioning defeat for Russia. Sebastopol finally fell after a famous siege. Russia had lost more than 250,000 lives, and had incurred an enormous expenditure. Another campaign and the Empire might dissolve into the elements from which it had been created. The prestige of Russia, so overwhelming since Napoleon's flight from Moscow, was completely shattered. The people had acquiesced in the narrow, iron regime of Nicholas, consoling themselves with the belief that their country was the greatest in Europe, that their army was invincible, that their sovereign was the most powerful monarch on the Continent. The falsity of all The this was now apparent. The Government was shown to be humiliation as incompetent and impotent as it was reactionary. The of Russia, military organization was clearly as honeycombed with abuses as the civil. Though the soldiers were brave, the generals were incapable, the officials corrupt, the commis- sary department a field of endless robbery. But in this great national humiliation lay the best hope of the future. As Prussia arose and reformed her institu- tions after Jena, so did Russia after the Crimean war. That war is a landmark in her history, as it inaugurated a period of extensive reorganization and improvement. THE SYSTEM OF LAND TENURE 655 THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II Nicholas died in 1855, and was succeeded by his son, Alexander Alexander II, who ruled from 1855 to 1881. The new Em- n » 1818-1881 peror was in his thirty-seventh year at the time of his accession. lie had received a varied training, designed to equip him for rule. Of an open mind, and desirous of ameliorating the conditions of Russian life, he for some years followed a policy of reform. He relaxed the censorship of the press, and removed most of the restrictions which had been imposed upon the universities and upon travel. Particularly did he address himself to the question of serfdom. To understand the significance of the Edict of Emancipa- tion, which was to constitute Alexander IPs most legitimate title to fame, one must first understand the previous system Prevailing of land tenure. Nearly all, practically nine-tenths, of the s y stem li-ii ill ii i- °^ i an d arable land was owned by the crown and the royal princes, t enure< and by the one hundred and forty thousand families of the nobility. The land was, therefore, generally held in large estates. It was owned by a small minority ; it was tilled by the millions of Russia, who were serfs. The method of cultivation was as follows : each estate was, as a rule, divided into two parts ; one part reserved by the owner for his own use, and cultivated directly under his supervision ; the other assigned to his serfs. These serfs generally lived in small villages, going out into the fields to till them, returning to their villages at night. The village communities, or mirs, regulated for their members The mir. the cultivation of those lands especially allotted to them. The serfs did not own the land, but enjoyed the usufruct of it, were entitled to whatever they raised. In return the mir paid the landlord a fixed sum annually. About one-half of the mirs were on crown lands, one-half on lands belonging to the nobility. Serfdom, previously abolished in all other European coun- tries, still flourished in Russia, and was the basis of the 656 RUSSIA TO THE AVAR WITH JAPAN The serfs. economic and social life. The serfs numbered about fifty millions, about 23,000,000 on the crown domains, about 23,- 000,000 on the estates of the nobility, and over 3,000,000 on the appanages of the imperial family and in private service as house domestics and attendants. The serfs cul- tivated, then, the lands allotted to the mir, and from what they raised they got their sustenance. But they also cul- tivated the portion set apart for the landlord's own use. They must labor for him three days a week. They were not slaves in the strict sense of the word. They could not be sold separately. But they were attached to the soil, could not leave it without the consent of the owner, and passed, if he sold his estate, to the new owner. The landlord had the right to inflict corporal punishment, which right, though legally restricted, was practically uncontrolled. If he considered any of his serfs unduly troublesome he could usually get the government to force them into the army, or send them to Siberia. In practice, the authority of the proprietor was unlimited. The peasant had the use, but not the ownership, of enough land to support himself and family ; but otherwise he was not his own master. Serfdom Serfdom was condemned on various grounds. It was morally harmful in that it offended the conscience of the age. Economically it had not proved successful. Two- thirds of the estates of private owners were mortgaged up to their full value, and while serfdom was not alone the cause of this, it was one of the causes. Yet the institution had influential support. The nobles looked upon their serfs as the chief source of their income. It was customary in speaking of a nobleman's wealth not to say that he pos- sessed so many acres, or had an income of so many rubles a year, but that he possessed so many hundreds of " souls." It is no occasion for surprise, therefore, that although the Emperor, Alexander II, attacked the question immediately after the close of the Crimean war, several years elapsed before it was solved. condemned. THE EMANCIPATION OF THE SERFS 657 The crown serfs were in a better position than the serfs The Crown on private estates. Practically, their only obligation was serfs - to pay certain dues each year to the State or the imperial family, which were considerably smaller than those paid by the others to their lords. They were, in a sense, tenants, owing the equivalent of rent. To free them, all that was necessary was to abolish these dues, and to recognize the serfs as owners of the holdings, which they had been culti- vating, and to grant them personal freedom. No one could question the right of the State to do what it would with its own. The liberation of these serfs was begun in 1859, though the process was not completed until 1866. Another class, those in domestic service, could easily be freed, but the class belonging to private landlords and attached to the soil presented greater difficulties, for it was not simply a question of giving them civil freedom, but it was a question of giving them land as well. The Edict of Emancipation The Edict concerned the serfs of private landowners, the nobles. Issued of Em anci- March 3, 1861, it abolished serfdom throughout the Empire, freeing about twenty-three million serfs, thus winning for Alexander the title of " the Tsar Liberator." This mani- festo did not merely declare the serfs free men. It under- took to solve the far more difficult problem of the ownership of the soil. The Tsar felt that merely to give the serfs free- dom, and to leave all the land in the possession of the nobles, would mean the creation of a great proletariat possessing no property, therefore likely to fall at once into a position of economic dependence upon the nobles, which would make the gift of freedom a mere mockery. Moreover, the peasants were firmly convinced that they were the rightful owners of the lands which they and their ances- The land tors for centuries had lived upon and cultivated, and the p fact that the landlords were legally the owners did not alter their opinion. To give them freedom without land, leaving that with the nobles, who desired to retain it, would be bitterly resented as making their condition worse than ever. 668 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN On the other hand, to give them the Land with their freedom would mean the ruin oi the nobility as ■ class, considered essential to the state. The consequence oi this conflict of interests was a compromise, satisfactory to neither party, but more favorable to the nobility than to the peasants. Division of The lands were divided into two parts. The Landlords the land. were to keep one; the other was to go to the peasants in the following manner: the house and lot of each peasant was to become his personal property; the lands surrounding the village were to become the property oi the village, or mir, to be owned bj the community collectively, but to be divided periodically among its members, according to the Russian fashion. 1 Such divisions were made by lot, ami were merely temporary, for a period, varying in different dis- tricts, from three to twelve years, and varying also with the si.e oi the family. Collective ownership oi general farming land, private ownership oi house and lot. were thus the modes oi land tenure adopted at the Emancipation. But the lands, those going to the peasants individually, and those going to the mir collectively, were not given to them out- State aid. right. The peasant and the mir must pay the landlord for their respective acquisitions. As they could not do this themselves, the State was to advance the money, which was to be paid back in instalments during a period of forty-nine years. The principle was the same as that ap- plied later in the land purchase laws for Ireland. Thus in time the peasants would become individually and collect- ively the owners of a part oi the soil, yet the former land- owner would be paid for what w as taken from him." Disappoint- This arrangement was a great disappointment to the ment of the peasantry. Their newly acquired freedom seemed a doubtful peasantry. boon ffl ^ j^ of ^ motho j of dividing the land. In- 1 This arrangement applied only to those regions where communal ownership was customary, namely the north, east, aiul south sf Russia. Where individual ownership was the rule, as in Little Russia and Poland. the land was apportioned directly to individuals. 'Domestic serfs were given freedom, but not land. CONTINUANCE OF THE LAND QUESTION 659 deed, the peasant could not sec that he was profiting from the change. Personal liberty could not mean much, irhen the condition! of earning a livelihood became harder rather than lighter. The peasant ceased to be bound to the land- lord, but. he was hound to the mir all the more closely, because the mir was hound to the State for at hast, forty-nine years by its obligation to pay the State for the communal lands. This meant, concretely, a heavy land tax on each peasant. Was anything gained in becoming a kind of serf to the State at the moment of ceasing to be the serf of a noble- man ? The peasants regarded the land as their own. But the State guaranteed i'<>n\(-r a part to the landlords, and announced that the peasants must pay for the part, assigned to themselves. To the peasants this seemed sheer robbery. Moreover, as the division worked out, they found that they had less land for their own use than in the pre-euiancipation days, and that they had to pay the landlords, through the State, more than the lands which they did receive w-.nt worth. Moreover, as they were not permitted to leave the mir and seek their fortunes elsewhere, even the personal liberty guaranteed by emancipation seemed hollow. Evidently this The land could be no final solution of the land question for a country Q ueBtIon . . not solved, almost entirely agricultural. The agrarian question, in- deed, became steadily more and more acute during the next fifty years, and constitutes to-day one of the most difficult problems in the revolution now in progress. The peasant population has in that time vastly increased, and the pressure upon the land has consequently grown greater. At present the peasant has only on an average half as much land as he had in 1861. He lives necessarily upon the verge of starvation. The emancipation of the serfs is seen, therefore, not to have been an unalloyed boon. Yet Russia gained morally in the esteem of other nations by abolishing an indefensible wrong. r I neoretically, at least, every man was free. More- over, the peasants, though faring ill, yet fared better than 660 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN Establish- ment of zenistvos. Duties of the zenistvos. Much ac- complished hy the zenistvos. had the peasants oi Prussia and Austria at the time o{ their liberation. 1 The abolition of serfdom was the greatest act of Alex- ander IPs reign, but it was only one oi several libera) measures enacted at this time of general enthusiasm. In 1S(U the Emperor issued a decree establishing ■ certain measure of self-government. This decree was based upon investigations made bj a commission appointed in lSoi>. Russia is divided into provinces and the provinces are subdivided into districts. In each district a popular assembly was now established, called the lemstvo, to be chosen by the landowners, the bourgeois, and the peasants in the villages. The district ■emstvos were to choose representatives, who were to form provincial zenistvos. The /emstvos were to meet regularly once a year, and were to aid the Government in administra- tion. They were not to be political bodies. It was not the intention of the Emperor to divide or reduce in any degree his autoCTatic power. They were to serve as a part ot the local administration, discharging certain func- tions which the smaller areas, the mirs, could not adequately perform, such as the control of the public highways, primary schools and hospitals, anil the taking of precautions against famine: in short, to contribute within strict limits to the material and moral well-being ot" the people. These zenistvos were introduced gradually during the next twelve years, from 1864 to 1 >7 0. "The lemstvo," says a leading authority. *' has (.lone a great ileal to provide medical aid and primary education for the common people, and it has im- proved wonderfully the condition of the hospitals, lunatic asylums, and other benevolent institutions committed to its charge. In its efforts to aid the peasantry it has helped to improve the native breeds of horses and cattle, and it has created a system of obligatory tire insurance, together 1 On the attitude of the nobility and peasantry toward the Emancipa- tion see Wallace, Russia (Revised Edition 1905), 449 451. On general discussion of effects see Wallace. 159-490. REFORM OF THF JUDICIAL SYSTEM 661 with meani for preventing and extinguishing fires in the villages, a most, important matter in a country where the peasant! live in wooden houses, and big fires are fearfully frequent." ' Though not intended as political or legislative bodies, but simply as aids to the State in business matters, the zemstvos have, nevertheless) been training schools in political co-operation. Though their activity has been interrupted, rest rifted, nullified, more or less by the central government, yet, they have persisted, have struck root in the life of the nation, and have contributed to the political education of the people. This reform in administration was followed by one in the Reform judicial system (November 1864), based upon a study of of the the systems of Europe and the United States. The judicial 8Vgtem organization was both corrupt and inefficient. Judges were poorly paid, and might be removed at any moment; trials were conducted behind closed doors and irf writing, a method which greatly facilitated bribery, a system favorable to the rich, oppressive to the poor. Henceforth, it was provided, that judges should serve during good behavior, that court proceedings should be public and oral, and that trial by jury should be instituted for criminal cases. Whatever its short- comings, the new system was a great improvement on the old. Other lesser reforms were also carried through at this time. The censorship of the press was somewhat relaxed, the universities \v(> RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN Widespread disillusion- ment. Rise of Nihilism. work with a constitution, and with real parliamentary in- stitutions for the whole Empire. Their optimism was doomed to speedy extinction. When the members of the Bemstvos begged the Tsar to grant a representative constitution he rebuked them summarily for mixing in affairs not theirs. Shortly, the zemstvos were told that they were not political bodies, but merely business organizations, designed to attend to the economic interests of their districts. They were for- bidden to express political views. They were to be merely administrative organs, subject to the officials of the central government. The retrogressive policy of the later years of Alexander II created a widespread and bitter sense of disappointment and deception, and resulted in the rise of an opposition to the existing form of government. This feeling has passed through several phases, but has constantly become stronger. The first phase was the most pessimistic. The Russians were thrown in upon themselves once more, there being no room in the Russian state for liberal action. Reading the works of the more radical philosophers and scientists of western Europe, and reflecting upon the foundations of their own national institutions ami conditions, the " intellectuals," as these men were called, became most destructive critics, and were called Nihilists. " The fundamental principle of Nihilism," says Stepniak, " was absolute individualism. It was the negation, in the name oi' individual liberty, of all the obligations imposed upon the individual by society, by family life, and by re- ligion." Turgenieff denned a Nihilist as a " man who sub- mits to no authority, who accepts not a single principle upon faith merely, however high such a principle may stand in the eyes of men." The Nihilists were extreme individualists who tested every human institution and custom by reason. As few Russian institutions could meet such a test, the Nihil- ists condemned them all. Theirs was an attitude, first of in- tellectual challenge, then of revolt against the whole estab- THE NIHILIST PROPAGANDA 667 lishcd order. They did not properly form a party of action, Persecution but their reckless criticism of government, religion, marriage, ° e i • • Nihilists, ethics brought down upon them the wrath of the authorities. Alarmed, they fled to other countries. The term Nihilist, as a term of opprobrium, has since been applied by the con- servatives to all shades and kinds of reformers, most in- accurately. Forced to live abroad, mainly in France and Switzer- land, the refugees came in contact with other advanced schools of thought. One of these was represented by Hakounine, a Siberian exile, who had escaped and was living Bakounine. in London. Hakounine was an anarchist who advocated the immediate destruction of all existing institutions, gov- ernments, churches, the family, private property, codes of law, in the interests of human freedom, " in order that," as he said later, " all these millions of poor human beings who are cheated, enslaved, overworked, and exploited . may henceforth and forever breathe in absolute freedom." Shortly, Socialism was grafted upon this hatred of all es- tablished institutions, this anarchy of Bakounine. In the place of the existing society, which must be swept away, a new society was to be erected, based on socialistic principles. Thus the movement entered upon a new phase. It ceased to be merely critical and destructive. It became constructive as well, in short, a political party with a positive programme, a party very small but resolute and reckless, willing to resort to any means to achieve its aims. This party now determined to institute an educational Nihilist campaign in Russia, realizing that nothing could be done P r °P a ^ an unless the millions of peasants were shaken out of their stolid acquiescence in the prevalent order which weighed so heavily upon them. This extraordinary movement, called " going in among the people," became very active after 1870. Young men and women, all belonging to the educated class, and frequently to noble families, became day laborers and peasants in order to mingle with the people, to arouse 668 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN them to action, " to found," as one of their documents said, ** on the ruins of the present social organization the empire of the working classes." They showed the self-sacrifice, the heroism of the missionary laboring under the most discourag- ing conditions. A typical case was that of Sophie Bardine, arrested for discussing a socialist pamphlet before a group of workmen. She had for several months been employed in a spinning factory, working fifteen hours a day, and sharing all the hardships of the other women — all this that she might get the chance to preach to them the new ideas. Our aim, she explained later in court, " was to arouse in the conscience of the people the ideal of a better organization, one more con- formable to justice; to point out the vices of the present organization in order to prevent the return of the same errors." It is estimated that, between 1872 and 1878, be- tween two and three thousand such missionaries were active in this propaganda. Their efforts, however, were not re- warded with success. The peasantry remained stolid, if not contented. Moreover, this campaign of education and per- suasion was broken up wherever possible by the ubiquitous and lawless police. Many were imprisoned or exiled to Siberia. A policy of A pacific propaganda being impossible, one of violence terrorism, seemed to the more energetic spirits the only alternative. As the Government held the people in a subjection unworthy of human beings, as it employed all its engines of power against every one who demanded reform of any kind, as, in short, it ruled by terror, these reformers resolved to fight it with terror as the only method possible. The " Terrorists " were not bloodthirsty or cruel by nature. They simply believed that no progress whatever could be made in raising Russia from her misery except by getting rid of the more unscrupulous officials. They perfected their organization and entered upon a period of violence. Numerous attempts, often successful, were made to assassinate the high officials, chiefs of police and others who had rendered themselves ATTACKS UPON THE TSAR 669 particularly odious. In turn many of the revolutionists were executed. All this redoubled the activity of the authorities, par- Activity of ticularly of the dreaded Third Section of the police. In the P olice - the course of a single winter, 1878-9, it is said that nearly 2,000 arrests were made in St. Petersburg alone. Suspected persons were not allowed witnesses, and were often summarily executed. Thousands were arrested and sent to Siberia without trial, by simple administrative decrees. Finally the Attempts terrorists determined to kill the Tsar as the only way of upon the overthrowing the whole hated arbitrary and oppressive sys- ... tem. Several attempts were made. In April 1879 a school- master, Solovief, fired five shots at the Emperor, none of which took effect. - In December of the same year a train on which he was supposed to be returning from the Crimea was wrecked, just as it reached Moscow, by a mine placed between the rails. Alexander escaped only because he had reached the capital secretly on an earlier train. The next attempt (February 1880) was to kill him while at dinner in the Winter Palace in St. Petersburg. Dynamite was ex- ploded, ten soldiers were killed and fifty-three wounded in the guardroom directly overhead, and the floor of the dining room was torn up. The Tsar narrowly escaped because he did not go to dinner at the usual hour. St. Petersburg was by this time thoroughly terrorized. Alexander Alexander now appointed Loris Melikoff practically die- IJ and tator. Melikoff sought to inaugurate a milder regime. He «>»* released hundreds of prisoners, and in many cases commuted the death sentence. He urged the Tsar to grant the people some share in the government, believing that this would kill the Nihilist movement, which was a violent expression of the discontent of the nation with the abuses of an arbitrary and lawless system of government. He urged that this could be done without weakening the principle of autocracy, and that thus Alexander would win back the popularity he had enjoyed during his early reforming years. After much hes- 670 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN Assassina- tion of Alex- ander II. itation and mental perturbation the Tsar ordered, March 13, 1881, Melikoff's scheme to be published in the official journal. But on that same afternoon, as he was returning from a drive, escorted by Cossacks, a bomb was thrown at his carriage. The carriage was wrecked, and many of his escorts were injured. Alexander escaped as by a miracle, but a second bomb exploded near him as he was going to aid the injured. He was horribly mangled, and died within an hour. Thus perished the Tsar Liberator. At the same time the hopes of the liberals perished also. This act of supreme violence did not intimidate the successor to the throne, Alexander III, whose entire reign was one of stern repression. Alexander III, 1845-1894. Higorous policy of reaction. Influence Pobyedo- nostseff. of THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER III The man who now ascended the throne of Russia was in the full flush of magnificent manhood. Alexander III, son of Alexander II, was thirty-six years of age, and of power- ful physique. His education had been chiefly military. He was a man of firm and resolute rather than large or active mind. He was profoundly religious, and had a deep sense of his responsibility. It shortly became clear that he possessed a strong, inflex- ible character, that he was a thorough believer in absolutism, and was determined to maintain it undiminished. His most influential adviser was his former tutor, Pobyedonostseff , later for many years Procurator of the Holy Synod, a man who abhorred the liberal ideas of western Europe, and who insisted that Russia must preserve her own native institutions untainted, must follow without deviation her own historic tendency, winch he conceived in a strictly nationalistic sense. The orthodoxy of the Greek Church, the absolutism of the monarch, were the fundamental tenets of his belief, — no coquetting with western ideas of representative government and religious and intellectual freedom. The opinions of this man are historically important because he was the power ABSOLUTISM OF ALEXANDER III 671 behind the throne during all of Alexander Ill's reign, and during the first ten years of his successor's, the present Em- peror's. Of those opinions two, significant and characteris- tic, may be quoted, the one concerning parliamentary insti- tutions, the other concerning the press, supposed, in western Europe, to be two of the most powerful agencies of progress. " Parliament is an institution serving for the satisfaction of personal ambition, vanity, and self-interest of the members. Opposition The institution of Parliament is, indeed, one of the greatest to the ideas illustrations of human delusion. . . . On the pediment E of this edifice is inscribed, ' All for the public good.' This is no more than a lying formula; Parliamentarism is the triumph of egoism — its highest expression." " From the day that man first fell, falsehood has ruled the world, ruled it in human speech, in the practical business of life, in all its relations and institutions. But never did the Father of Lies spin such webs of falsehood of every kind as in this restless age. . . . The press is one of the falsest institutions of our time." 1 Under the influence of such an adviser, and under the sway of his own instincts and his indignation at the insolent demand of the Nihilists that the murderers of his father be not punished as they were merely " executors of a hard civic duty " ; influenced, too, no doubt, by the general horror which that event inspired, and the warm evidences of loyalty which it called forth, Alexander assumed an attitude of defiant hostility to innovators and liberals. His reign, which lasted from 1881 to 1894, was one of reversion to the older ideals of government and of unqualified absolutism. The terrorists were hunted down, and their attempts prac- The tically ceased. The press was thoroughly gagged, university t erronsts professors and students were watched, suspended, exiled, ^ own as the case might be. The reforms of Alexander II were in part undone, the zemstvos particularly being more and more restricted, and the secret police, the terrible Third Sec- 1 Pobyedonostseff, Reflections of a Russian Statesman, 35, 62. 678 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN tion, being- greatly augmented. Liberals gave up all hope of any improvement during this reign, and waited for better days. Many of the subjects of the Emperor felt the hand of Persecution the oppressor with excessive severity. Under him began of the the persecutions of the Jews, which have been so dark a feature of recent Russian history. The chief home of the Jews in the modern world is Russia. Out of about eight and a half million Jews in Europe, over five million live in that country. The Russian Jews had long been restricted to Poland and to the contiguous provinces of Lithuania, called the Jewish Territory, formerly a part of Poland. The Tsar, bigoted, and believing in a policy of Russification of all the varied elements and races of the Empire, looked with disfavor upon a people which held fast its own re- ligion and spoke its own language and maintained its own customs. Under Alexander II the restrictions upon Jewish residence had not been rigorously enforced, and many were living outside the Jewish Territory. These were now ordered back, although suffering and hardship were the inevitable result. Anti-Jewish riots broke out in many places, costing many lives. The Government gave but slight protection ; indeed, in many cases the officials appeared to encourage the outbreaks, so popular was Jew-baiting. To keep them out of the liberal professions decrees were issued limiting the number of Jews who might attend the secondary schools and universities — to from three to ten per cent, of the total enrollment according to the region, even though in some of these districts they formed a third or a half of the population. Utterlv miserable and insecure, tens of Great r r " .... Jewish thousands left the country. The great Jewish emigration emigration, to the United States dates from this time. Elsewhere, too, in the Baltic provinces, where the dominant element was of German origin, and in Finland, and particu- larly in Poland, the policy of Russification was vigorously applied. Alexander was offended by the sight within his PROGRESS UNDER ALEXANDER III 673 Empire of religions, races, and languages not his own, and he steadily endeavored to suppress the variations. Thus by the close of his reign the attempt to force alien peoples to become thoroughly Russian was in process of execution. It was both political and religious. Apparently meeting with a large measure of success, its permanence or profundity was not clear. Widespread, intense, though silent, dis- affection was aroused, which would surely express itself if the Government should ever find itself in difficulties. This policy sowed abundant seeds of trouble for the future. While the policy of Alexander III was thus opposed to Progressive the intellectual and moral forces of liberalism, and while * eatures ot the reign, it was harshly oppressive to the religious dissenters and of ^i ex . subject nationalities of alien race, in other directions it was ander m. progressive. The Tsar was sincerely interested in the material advancement of his people, and won the title of the Peasants' Emperor. He abolished the poll tax, which has been called " the last relic of serfdom " (January 1884). He partially canceled the dues still owed by the peasants in compensation for lands acquired at the time of the emanci- pation. He sought to encourage the peasants to emigrate from congested districts to more sparsely populated regions, for the question of subsistence was then, as it still is, a serious problem in Russia. The lands allotted the peasants at the time of their liberation were inadequate then, and have become more inadequate since, owing to the rapid growth of the population. In 1815 the population was about forty -five million, in 1867 over eighty-two, in 1885 over one hundred and eight millions. This growth has been re- markable. In a land with endless agricultural stretches, widespread and terrible famines have frequently occurred. The most important feature of Alexander's reign was the The industrial revolution which began then, and has been carried industnal revolution, much further under his successor. Russia had been for cen- turies an agricultural country whose agriculture, moreover, 674 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN Sergius de Witte. Minister of Finance. Witte's industrial policy. was of the primitive type. Whatever industries existed were mainly of the household kind. Russia was one of the poorest countries in the world, her immense resources being undevel- oped. Under the system of protection adopted by Alexander II, and continued and increased by Alexander III, industries of a modern kind began to grow up. A tremendous impetus was given to this development by the appointment in 1892 as Minister of Finance and Commerce of Sergius de Witte, one of the most salient personalities in recent Russian his- tory. Witte believed that Russia, the largest and most populous country in Europe, a world in itself, ought to be self-sufficient, that as long as it remained chiefly agricultural it would be tributary to the industrial nations for manufac- tured articles, that it had abundant resources, in raw material and in labor, to enable it to supply its own needs if they were but developed, that a diversified industrial life would have the further advantage that it would draw laborers from the soil already overtaxed, and would thus render the agra- rian problem less acute. To effect this economic transforma- tion, believing thoroughly in a protective tariff, he advised that duties be raised and applied on a wider scale. But that the process of building up the nation's industries might be rapid, it was essential that a large amount of capital should be invested at once in the various industries, and this capital Russia did not possess. One of the cardinal features of Witte's policy was to induce foreign capitalists to invest in Russian factories and mines. lie was eminently success- ful in bringing this about by showing them that they would have the Russian market by reason of the protective system, and by promising, in many cases, large orders from the Government for their products. Immense amounts of for- eign capital poured in, and Russia advanced industrially in the closing decade of the nineteenth century with great swift- ness. But that these industries might flourish, the markets must be rendered more accessible so that customers could be reached. Russia's greatest lack was good means of ECONOMIC EVOLUTION OF RUSSIA 675 communication. She now undertook to supply this want Extensive by extensive railway building. For some years before M. de railway construe™ Witte assumed office, Russia was building less than 400 miles of railway a year ; from that time on for the rest of the decade, she built nearly 1,400 miles a year. The most stu- pendous of these undertakings was that of a trunk line connecting Europe with the Pacific Ocean, the great Trans- Siberian railroad. For tin's Russia borrowed vast sums of money in western Europe, principally in France. Begun in 1891, the road was formally opened in 1902. It has re- duced the time and cost of transportation to the East about one-half. In 1909 Russia possessed over 41,000 miles of railway, over 28,000 of which were owned and operated by the Government. This tremendous change in the economic life of the Empire Rise of was destined to have momentous consequences, some of which laDor were quickly apparent. With the introduction of modern industry on a large scale came the rise of a large laboring class and of labor problems of the kind with which western Europe had long been familiar. An industrial proletariat has sprung up in Russia as elsewhere, a new source of dis- content. Cities have grown rapidly, owing to the large number of workmen pouring into them. Two of these, Mos- cow and St. Petersburg, have over a million each. In the large factory towns the revolutionists have a new field of activity which can be more easily worked than the country districts. Here socialistic theories have spread rapidly as among the working people of the other countries of Europe. All this, too, has created a considerable body of rich Rise of a " industrials " of the middle class, of capitalists, in short, a nch *bour£T6oisi6 bourgeoisie which would not permanently be content with entire exclusion from political power or with obsolete, nar- row, illiberal forms of government. Thus the political con- dition of to-day has been rendered more complex by the addition of two new elements to the army of discontent. Looked at in this light, the reign of Alexander III is seen 676 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN to be, not stagnant) but highly formative. Alexander was undermining his most cherished political principle by the new forces which he was liberating) and which in time were bound to spring' the old iron framework of Russian life asunder. This fact partly explains the great unpopularity of Witte The system among the traditional ruling classes of Russia. A system of privilege ros tj n o- on privilege and tradition cannot safely innovate menaced. . ° f. ' . .. ' .. even in the direction of extracting oil and iron from the sou, and spinning cotton and weaving wool. That the old system was being undermined was not, however, apparent, and might not have been for many years had not Russia, ten years after Alexander's death, become involved in a disastrous and humil- iating war with Japan. THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II Accession of Alexander III died in ISiH, and was succeeded by his Nicholas II. son, Nicholas II, then twenty-six years of age. The hope was general that a milder regime might now be introduced. This, however, was not to be. No change of importance was made in the Emperor's councilors. Pobyedonostseff, the very incarnation of narrow-minded, stiff-necked despotism, remained the power behind the throne. For ten years the young Tsar pursued the policy of his father with scarcely a variation save in the direction of greater severity. Nich- olas early announced his intention to *' protect the principle of autocracy as firmly ami unswervingly as did my late and never-to-be-forgotten father." A suggestion of one of the zemstvos that representative institutions might be granted was declared u a senseless dream," and the zemstvo was severely reprimanded. The government of Russia grew more Continuance . , of auto- oppressive, rather than less, as the century wore to its cratic gov- close. It was not a government of law but one of arbitrary ernment. power. Its main instruments were a numerous and corrupt bureaucracy or body of state officials who were not, in the slightest degree, responsible to the people, and a ruthless, CONDITION OF THE PEASANTRY 677 active police. This being the system, an eminent Russian scholar, Professor VinogradofF, could say in England in 1902, " Nobody is secure against search, arrest, imprison- ment and relegation to the remote parts of the Empire. From political supervision the solicitude of the authorities has spread to interferences with all kinds of private affairs. Such is the legal protection we are now enjoying in Russia." And again, " Such a government is not a fitting patron of law and justice. What it enforces is obedience to order, not to law, and its contempt of law is exemplified in every way." ' Under such a system, men could be terrorized into silence, they could not be made contented. Disaffection, driven into subterranean channels, only increased, biding its time for explosion. The immense Increasing additions to the public debt and expenditure, occasioned disaffection, by the extensive railroad building and the support of army and navy, involved heavier taxation which fell mainly on the poor, the peasantry, reducing them to destitution and despair. Of this the same Russian authority said, speak- ing of the appalling conditions, " In most cases the number of cattle and horses owned by the peasantry is decreasing. In some districts of the province of Samara, which counts among the granaries of Russia, there have been years when one-third, and even one-half of the population have been turned into mendicants. When the tax gatherer turns away in despair from such wretched people he fastens the more Wretched on those who still have something left. It may be said condition without exaggeration that for the majority of the Russian °o ,.,.*' peasantry. peasantry the primary object in life is to earn enough to pay the taxes, everything else is accident. The wonder is not at the lack of enterprise and thrift, but at the endurance which enables men to toil along in the face of such con- ditions." 2 The same witness quotes a Russian magistrate as saying that " there is no indignity which, in the beginning 1 Lectures on the History of the Nineteenth Century, edited by F. A. Kirkpatrick, 266-267. 1 Ibid., 259. 678 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN of the twentieth century, may not be inflicted on :i Russian peasant." Feneeattoa Tho professional and educated man was in ■ condition * w m " almost as intolerable. It' a professor in a university, ho was tellectu.ils." ,-, watched by tho police, ana w ; is likely to be removed at any moment as was Professor Milyoukov, an historian oi dis- tinguished attainments, for no other reason than u generally noxious tendencies." If an editor, his position was even more precarious, unless he was utterly servile to tho author- ities. It was a suffocating atmosphere tor any man oi the slightest intellectual independence, living- in the ideas of tho present age. The censorship grew more and more rigorous, and included such hooks as Green's History of England, and Bryce's American Commonwealth. Arbitrary arrests of all kinds increased from year to year as the difficulty of thor- ghly bottling up Russia increased. Students were tho objects o( special police care, as it was the young and ardent and educated who were most indignant at this senseless despotism. Many of them disappeared, in one year as many as a fifth of those in the University of Moscow, probably sent to Siberia or to prisons in Europe. A government oi this kind was not likely to err from k upon excess of sympathy with the subject nationalities, such as Che Finns. f, 10 p { os . uu { the Finns. In Finland, indeed, its arbitrary course attained its climax. Finland had boon acquired by Russia in 1809, but on liberal terms. It was not incor- porated in Russia, but continued a Grand Duchy, with the Emperor ot' Russia as simply Grand Duke. It had its own Parliament, its Fundamental Laws or constitution, to which the Grand Duke swore fidelity. These Fundamental Laws could not be altered or explained or repealed except with the consent of the Diet and the Grand Duke. Finland was a constitutional state, governing itself, connected with Russia in the person of s - \. reign. It had its own army, its own currency and postal system. Under this liberal regime it prospered greatly, its population increasing from less than RUSSIAN POLICY TOWARD FINLAND 679 a million to nearly three million by the close of the century, and was, according to an historian of Russia, at least Uiirty years in advance of that country in all the appliances of material civilization. 1 The- sight of this country enjoying a constitution of its own and a separate organization was an offense to the men controlling Russia. They wished to Sweep away all distinctions between the various parts of the Emperor's dominions, to unify, to Russify. The attack upon the liberties of the Finns began under Alexander III. It was carried much further by Nicholas II, who, on February 15, 1899, issued an imperial manifesto which really abro- Abrogation gated the constitution of the country. The Finnish Diet of the was henceforth to legislate only concerning matters relating ... JJ . . constitution. solely to Finland. All legislation of a general nature affect- ing the Empire as a whole was to be enacted in the ordinary way, that is, by the Tsar, who also said, " We have found it necessary to reserve to Ourselves the ultimate- decision as to which laws come within the scope of the general legisla- tion of the Empire." This practically meant that Finland was henceforth to be ruled like Russia. The Finns so under- stood it. The following Sunday was observed as a day of mourning. An immense petition was drawn up, signed within five days by over half a million people. The Tsar refused to receive it. The process of enforced Russiflcation was continued. The Finnish army was virtually incorporated in the Russian. Finnish soldiers, who had hitherto been required to serve only in the Grand Duchy, might now be sent to serve anywhere. Russian officials were appointed to positions in Finland previously filled only by Finns. Newspapers were suppressed or suspended. Finnish nationality was being in- tentionally crushed out. Intense was the indignation of the Finns, but three million people were powerless against D . the autocrat of one hundred and forty million. For the f the moment there were no signs of any possible relief. Grim Finns. 'Skrine, Expansion of Russia, 1815-1900, p. 322. 680 RUSSIA TO THE WAB WITH JAPAN despair seized the people. Temporary relief was to come as a result of the disastrous defeat of Russia in the war with Japan in 1904-5, a landmark in contemporary history. Rise of the To understand recent events in Russia it is necessary to ax trace the course of that war whose consequences have been Question. profound and far-reaching, and to show the significance of that conflict we must interrupt this narrative of Russian history in order to give an account of the recent evolution of Asia, the rise of the so-called Far Eastern Question, and the interaction of Occident and Orient upon each other. CHAPTER XXX THE FAR EAST ENGLAND, FRANCE, AND RUSSIA IN ASIA Europe has not only taken possession of Africa, but she England, has taken possession of large parts of Asia, and presses raHce > a with increasing force upon the remainder. England and Asia. France dominate southern Asia by their control, the former of India and Burma, the latter of a large part of Indo- China. Russia, on the other hand, dominates the north, from the Ural Mountains to the Pacific Ocean. As far as geographical extent is concerned, she is far more an Asiatic power than a European, which, indeed, is also true of England and of France, and she has been an Asiatic power much longer than they, for as early as 1581 Cossacks from the Don had crossed the Urals and seized a town called Sibir. Pushing onward farther and farther east, and meeting no serious obstacles, the population being small, they conquered most of northern Asia before the Pilgrims came to America, and in 1633 they reached the Pacific. To this country, now Russian, they gave the name Siberia, applying the name of the first region conquered to the whole. In 1648 the town of Okhotsk was founded. Thus for nearly three centuries Russia has been a great Asiatic state, while England has been a power in India for only half that time. It was not until the nineteenth century, however, that Russian Russia began to devote serious attention to Asia as a field for colonial and commercial expansion. Siberia was regarded merely as a convenient prison to which to send her disaffected or criminal citizens. Events in Europe have caused her to .concentrate her attention more and more upon her Asiatic development. She has sought there what she had long been seeking in Europe, but without avail, because of the oppo- 681 i>-: THE FAR fast sition > iratered, namely, i with the ocean, free outlets to the world. Russia's coast line, either in Europe Kv.ss-..-. V- la, had DO harbors free from iee the year round. She • " .d attempted to gain this contact at the expense of Turkey. hoping to reach the Mediterranean, but she had not suc- ceeded. She made no progress in this direction in the nine- teenth century. Blocked decisively by the Crimean war. and si . g no chance in Europe, she turned to seek advantage in the East, Her eoast line in eastern Siberia was very tar north, with the result that its harbors were icebound more than half of the year. She sought to extend that line south- ed. In 1859 S quired from China, then involved in i h Great . ; and France, the whole northern bank A or, and two years later she acquired from China more territorj farther south, which became the Maritime Pn . ind at the southern point oi this she founded as a naval base Vla< . which means the Dominator ot the East. Here her development in eastern Asia stopped. .. s: || La another direction, Russian advance has been notable. She has conquered Turkestan, a vast region east of the >. -pian Sea. and this conquest has brought her elose to India, and has given gn ince to Afghanistan as a buffer fa them, Turkestan had a population oi about 10,000,000, partly nomadic, partly settled in famous cities - . '.: as Samarkand, Bokhara, Tashkend. The nomads fre- quently made incursions into Siberia, and cut oft* the com- mui - Russ . with her eastern possessions. To secure the safety ot S t was n ...e them. r ess was a g 1845-1885), and at time exceed- . \ difficult, but was in the end entirely successful, and Russia annexed Turkestan, proceeding shortly to connect it with Eui the Drans Caspian railroad. chin i china. Between Russian Ajs . the north, and British and French Asia on the >outh. lies the oi ■ ipire of the THE CIVILIZATION OF CHINA 683 world, China, and one more extensive than Europe and probably more populous, with more than 400,000,000 inhab- itants. 1 It is a land of great navigable rivers, of vast agricultural areas, and of mines rich in coal and metals, as yet largely undeveloped* The Chinese were a highly The civiliza- civilized people long before the Europeans were. They pre- tlon of ceded the latter by centuries in the use of the compass, powder, porcelain, paper. As early as the sixth century of our era they knew the art of printing from movable wooden blocks. They have long been famous for their work in bronze, in wood, in lacquer, for the marvels of their silk manufacture. As a people laborious and intelligent, they have always been devoted to the peaceful pursuits of in- dustry, and have despised the arts of war. Their greatest national hero is not a soldier but a philosopher and moralist, Confucius. Their really vital religion is ancestor worship, and they worship, not simply the souls of their ancestors, but their ideas and customs as well. Hence the most salient feature of their civilization, its immobility. For that civili- zation, so ancient, and in some respects so brilliant, lacked the very element that gives to European civilization its extraor- dinary interest, namely, its restlessness, its eagerness, its buoy- ancy, its daring, its constant struggle for improvement, its adaptability to the new, its forwardness of view, in short, its belief in progress. The one emphasized the past, the other the present and the future. The history of the former was one of endless repetition from generation to generation, and from century to century ; the history of the latter was one of evolution. The reverence for ancestral ideas, for immemo- rial customs as the perfection of wisdom, rendered the Chinese hostile to all innovations in the realm of thought or in the realm of action. Foreigners they regarded as barbarians. 1 Mr. W. W. Rockhill, late minister of the United States at Peking, carne to the conclusion in 1904-, after careful inquiries, that the official Chinese estimates have heen for a hundred and fifty years greatly ex- aggerated and that the number of inhabitants does not much exceed 270,000,000. 681 THE FAB EAST mrnt of Italstira ■i China. ri eir Kingdom they called the Middle Kingdom, i.e., the center of the world. They colled themselves Celestials. The govern- Their Emperor was the "Son of Heaven." lie was, in theory, on absolute monarch. Ho *ofl represented in the eighteen provinces into which China was divided bv Viceroys. The office-holding class, called bv foreigners the ■■ WOS chosen from On educoted bj an elaborate and severe SC] esof examinations in the literature and learning of China. The programme of studies in vogue until very recently was the same that had been in vogue for a thousand years. The reigning dynasty, the Manchu, had been on the throne since 1644, when it succeeded in overthrowing the former or Ming dynas' J China, then, had always lived a life of isolation, despising .'.ts:de world. Something was known of it in Europe, yet remarkably little. Marco Polo in the thirteenth cen- tury brought home marvelous accounts which were one of the gn ■' inspirations of the age of geographies] discovery. vers and, later, missionaries and merchants sought out the fabulous land. At times they even received some favors from the more enlightened Kmperors. But, speaking broadly, between Europe and China whs oi the slight- est down to the nineteenth century. Foreigners were per- mitted in the eighteenth century to trade in one Chinese port. Canton, but even there only under vexatious and humi- liating conditions. China had no diplomatic representatives in any foreign country, nor were any foreign ambassadors .: in Peking. China did not recognise any eQUsHty on the part oi England. France. Spain, or any other country. *" There is only one sun in the heavens, and there is only one Emperor on earth." w inese saying. Inhabiting ■try larger than Europe, with every variety of sod and climate, and with an old and elaborate civilisation, it is not surprising that the Chinese were self-sufficient and indifferent to the outside world. They even forbade for- Chinese Isngu THE OPIUM WAR 685 Obviously ;>. policy of SUCH isolation COllld not. he perma- nently maintained in the modern age, and af the nine- teenth century progressed it. was gradually shattered This isolation began to be broken down by the outside irorld ai a f .nit. of the so called Opium War between China and The opium Great Britain. Opium, a v<-ry harmful and dangerous drug, War - is niarjf: from a certain kind of poppy that is grown in India. The Chinese government, anxious to preserve its people from the effects of the usage of this drug, forbade its importation in 1790'. 5Tet the trade, though declared illegal, was carried on by smugglers with irhom corrupt Chinese officials connived for the sake of gain. This illicit traffic flourished greatly. Four thousand chests irere im- porter] into China in 1796, thirty thousand in 1837. Each chest was supposed to be worth from sis to twelve hundred dollars. The profits v,<-r<: enormous. The trade v.- as a source of great income to British India, which did not wish to do without it. In 1837 the Chinese government proposed to stop this smuggling, and sent a Viceroy of great energy, Lin, to see that it was done. In this it was entirely within its rights. Lin seized about 20,000 chests of opium and destroyed them. Unfortunately, by hi- later arbitrary and arrogant proceed- ings, he put himself in the wrong. Out of this situation arc e the Opium War, which began in 184-0, and lasted about two years, ending in the victory of Great Britain. This was the first war between China and a European power. The con auences, in forcing the doors of China srider open to Kuro- pean influence, were important. By the Treaty of Nanking, 1842, she was forced to pay a large war indemnity, in part as Compensation for the destroyer! opium ; to open to British The treaty trade four ports in addition to Canton, namely, Amoy, po 8 ' Foochow, Ningpo, and Shanghai, on the same conditions as those established for Canton ; and to cede the island of Hong Kong, near Canton, to England outright. Hong Kong has since become one of the most important naval and 686 THE FAR EAST commercial stations of the British Empire. A step was taken also toward the recognition of the equality of Great Britain with China. It was provided that henceforth British officials should be treated as the equals of Chinese officials of similar rank. The question of the opium trade was left undecided. The Chinese refused to legalize it, declining, as they said, " to put a value upon riches and to slight men's lives." They were, however, afraid after their defeat to enforce their prohibition of it, and the smuggling began again and flourished more than ever. Owing to the fact that, practically, the Chinese were not permitted by a Christian nation to abolish an infamous traffic because it was a very lucrative one, and owing to the humiliation of their defeat, the relations with Great Britain continued unstable, and even led to another war. Entrance of Other powers now proceeded to take advantage of the . . British success. The United States sent Caleb Cushing to powers into ° commercial make a commercial treaty with China in 184<4, and before relations. long France, Belgium, Holland, Prussia, and Portugal es- tablished trade centers at the five treaty ports. Some years later trouble arose in Canton between the English and the Chinese which led to a second war with China. England was joined by France this time, the reason for French intervention being the murder of a French missionary, an act for which no reparation could be secured. The allies resolved to Treaties of carry the war to the very neighborhood of Peking, the cap- Tientsin, ital. The Chinese Emperor, therefore, in 1858, agreed to the double Treaties of Tientsin. By the one with England, China agreed henceforth to receive a British ambassador, also to open more ports to commerce and to receive British consuls at the treaty ports. The treaty with France was of much the same nature, though differing in details. These treaties represented a great step forward in the recognition of the equality of European powers with China, and in furthering commercial intercourse. But, the Chinese not carrying them out, hostilities were renewed. The allies again marched upon EMERGENCE OF JAPAN 687 Peking, burned the Emperor's beautiful summer palace just outside, and prepared to bombard the city. The result was that China confirmed the Treaties of Tientsin and agreed to pay additional war indemnities (1860). Thus she was brought into more direct connection with the outside world. Russia, which had taken no part in these proceedings, knew B- ussia 3,11116X68 tllG how to profit by them. It was at this time that she induced Mar } t i me China to cede to her the Maritime Province, which extended Province, her Pacific coast line seven hundred miles further south, enabling her to found at its southern port Vladivostok, as has already been mentioned (1860). The period of greatest importance in China's relations with Europe came in the last decade of the nineteenth cen- tury as a result of a war with Japan in 1894-5. To appre- ciate this war it is first necessary to give some account of the previous evolution of Japan. JAPAN The rise of Japan as the most forceful state in the Orient Japan, is a chapter of very recent history, of absorbing interest, and of great significance to the present age. Accomplished in the last third of the nineteenth century, it has already pro- foundly altered the conditions of international politics, and seems likely to be a factor of increasing moment in the future evolution of the world. Japan is an archipelago consisting of several large islands Description and about four thousand smaller ones. It covers an area of 147,000 square miles, 1 which is smaller than that of California. The main islands form a crescent, the northern point being opposite Siberia, the southern turning in toward Korea. Between it and Asia is the Sea of Japan. The country is very mountainous, its most famous peak, Fuji- yama rising to a height of 12,000 feet. Of volcanic origin, numerous craters are still active. Earthquakes are not un- 1 Exclusive of territories acquired since 1894. ess THE FAR EAST Japanese civilization. The Mikado. The Shogun. common, and have determined the character of domestic architecture. The coast line is much indented, and there are many good harbors. The Japanese call their country Nippon, or the Land of the Rising Sun. Only about one- si^ tli of the land is under cultivation, owing to its mountain- ous character, and owing to the prevalent mode of farming. Yet into this small area is crowded a population of about fifty million, which is larger than that of Great Britain or France. It is no occasion for surprise that the Japanese have desired territorial expansion. The people of Japan derived the beginnings of their civili- ization from China, but in many respects they differed greatly from the Chinese. The virtues of the soldier were held in high esteem. Patriotism was a passion, and with it went the spirit of unquestioning self-sacrifice. " Thou shalt honor the gods and love thy country," was a command of the Shinto religion, and was universally obeyed. An art- loving and pleasure-loving people, they possessed active minds and a surprising power of assimilation which they were to show on a national and momentous scale. In the middle of the nineteenth century their state and society were thoroughly feudal, and presented many inter- esting points of similarity with forms long outlived in Europe. The Mikado or Emperor, reputed to be the de- scendant of the gods, was the head of the nation. But while he had formerly been a powerful personage he had for two centuries and more sunk into a purely passive state. He lived in complete seclusion in his palace in Kioto, took no part in the actual government, had become, in fact, a figurehead, invested with a kind of religious authority or halo, so that many foreigners thought that he was not the Emperor but a sacred ecclesiastical personage. The real authority was the Shogun. The comparison is often made between the Shogun and the Frankish mayor of the palace in Merovingian times. Reigning as a mere servant of the Mikado, he had known how to acquire from the latter more JAPAN A FEUDAL STATE 689 and more power in the actual direction of affairs until he was practically the ruler. He had his own palace at Yedo, which was the real seat of government, and his power became hereditary, passing from the Shogun to his heir without disturbance. The Mikado was the nominal, the Shogun the real ruler. There were thus practically two dynasties. Beneath the Shogun was the military aristoc- xhe racy, the Daimios, owners of great estates, governors of Daimios, provinces, and beneath them their retainers, the Samurai, e amura or class of warriors, completely armed in coats of mail, helmets, and cuirasses, not greatly dissimilar from those with which Europe had been familiar centuries before. These were the directing classes of the state. Beneath them were the masses of the people, of no importance politically, mer- chants, peasants, artisans. Such was the system that re- mained intact until the remarkable revolution which began in 1868. That revolution was a direct result of the insistence of foreign nations that Japan should enter with them into the ordinary relations that exist among nations. For about two hundred years Japan had been almost hermetically sealed against the outside world. In the period of geographical discoveries of the fifteenth century, Zipangu had been one of the mysteries and allurements of the venture- some navigators. Europe had a vague knowledge of the existence of this island, which was placed on pre-Columbian maps somewhat east of the present United States. To clear up this obscurity, and to find a convenient route to the riches which were associated in men's minds with the East gener- ally, was one of the objects of the Spanish and Portuguese discoverers. One of the latter, Pinto, was the first to reach Advent of the famous land, in 1542. He was well received, as were for a time other visitors. In a £ew years missionaries came, among whom was Francis Xavier, the Jesuit. Later other missionaries appear to have had very considerable success. It is said that in 1581 there were two hundred churches and 50,000 converts, and for some years before 1590 it is esti- 690 THE FAR EAST Japan adopts a policy of isolation. Commodore Perry. mated that there were 10,000 converts a year. But bitter persecutions of the Christians finally broke out, apparently occasioned by the pretensions and tactlessness of the bishops, and possibly by their political intriguing. A reaction naturally resulted. More than 20,000 converts were put to death in 1591, amid fearful tortures. The spirit of persecu- tion flamed up from time to time in the years following, cost- ing thousands of victims. The anti-foreign feeling grew so strong that in 1638 Japan adopted a policy of isolation, more rigorous than that of China. Foreigners were for- bidden to enter the country under pain of death, and the Japanese were forbidden to leave it. They were also for- bidden to buy foreign goods, and they might sell only those articles which the Government permitted, and then only to the Dutch, who were allowed a trading station on the small peninsula of Deshima. This was Japan's sole point of con- tact with the outside world for over two centuries. This unnatural seclusion was rudely disturbed by the arrival in Japanese waters of an American fleet under Com- modore Perry in 1853, sent out by the government of the United States. American sailors, engaged in the whale fish- eries in the Pacific, were now and then wrecked on the coasts of Japan, where they generally received cruel treatment. Perry was instructed to demand of the ruler of Japan pro- tection for American sailors and property thus wrecked, and permission for American ships to put into one or more Jap- anese ports, in order to obtain necessary supplies and to dispose of their cargoes. He presented these demands to the Shogun, supposing him to be the sovereign. He announced further that if his requests were refused, he would open hos- tilities. The Shogun granted certain immediate demands, but insisted that the general question of opening relations with a foreign state required careful consideration. Perry consented to allow this discussion and sailed away, stating that he would return the following year for the final answer. The discussion of the general question on the part of the OPENING OF JAPAN 691 Shogun and the Daimios, or ruling military class, was very earnest. Some of the latter believed in maintaining the old policy of complete exclusion of foreigners. Others, however, including the Shogun, believed this impossible, owing to the manifest military superiority of the foreigners. They Policy of thought it well to enter into relations with them in order to isolatlon learn the secret of that superiority, and then to appropriate down it for Japan. They believed this the only way to insure, in the long run, the independence and power of their country. This opinion finally prevailed, and when Perry reappeared the Shogun made a treaty with him (1854) by which two ports were opened to American ships. This was a mere be- ginning, but the important fact was that Japan had, after two centuries of seclusion, entered into relations with a for- eign state. Later other and more liberal treaties were con- cluded with the United States and with other countries. The reaction of these events upon the internal evolution of Japan was remarkable. They produced a very critical situation, and precipitated a civil war. The epoch-making Overthrow treaty had been made by the Shogun, and one of its results was the speedy overthrow of the Shogunate and of the entire feudal system. The Mikado and his supporters resented the high-handed action of the Shogun, nominally a mere subordinate, who, in a matter of supreme importance, had not consulted the sovereign. All those members of the feudal nobility who opposed the admission of the foreigners sided with the Mikado in opposition to the Shogun. The Shogun and his supporters stood for the policy of entering into relations with the outside powers for the simple reason that the latter had the military force to enable them to impose their demands. The supporters of the Mikado were themselves now convinced of that superiority in a decisive manner. The popular hatred of foreigners resulted in out- rages, several of them by the Mikado's partisans. One of these was upon an Englishman, Richardson, murdered in 1862. The English forthwith bombarded Kagoshima, the 69S THE FAR EAST The Mikado recovers power. Rapid trans formation of Japan. strong-hold of the anti-foreign Daimios (1S63). Tins had the result of convincing these Daimios of the superiority of other nations to Japan, of the uselessness of combating them or trying to keep them out of Japan, of the desirability of adopting their civilization in order to make Japan equally powerful. Thus they completely reversed their position, and became friends of the new foreign policy, instead of its bitter opponents. Other Daimios hostile to the foreigners were taught a similar lesson at Shimonoseki (1864). The situation remained, however, confused and troubled. In 1866 the Shoguzi died, and 1S67 the .Mikado. The successor to the latter was Mutsuhito, the present Emperor, then fifteen years of age. A civil war shortly broke out between the representatives of the Mikado and the sup- porters of the Shogun. The latter were repeatedly de- feated. The Shogunate was abolished. Henceforth the Mikado was the real as well as the nominal head oi the state. He abandoned the retirement in which his predeces- sors had lived so long, left Kioto in order to emphasize this fact, and established himself in Yedo, previously the Sho- gun's capital, to which was now given the name Tokio, the Capital oi the East (^1808). The collapse of the Shogunate, and the restoration of the Mikado to absolute power constituted the initial step of a remarkable and sweeping transformation of Japan, the beginning of a new era, which the Mikado himself called the era of " enlightened rule." Japan revolutionized her political and social institutions in a few years, adopted with ardor the material and scientific civilization of the West, made herself in these respects a European state, and entered as a result upon an international career, which has already profoundly modified the world, and is likely to be a constant ami an increasing factor in the future development of the East. So complete, so rapid, so hearty an appropriation of an alien civilization, a civilization against which every precaution of exclusion had for centuries been taken, is a ADOPTION OF EUROPEAN INSTITUTIONS 69i3 change unique in the history of the world, and notable for the audacity and the intelligence displayed. The en- trance upon this course was a direct result of Perry's ex- pedition. The Japanese revolution will always remain an astounding story. Once begun with the abolition of the Sho- gunate, it proceeded with great rapidity. In 1871 the Abolition Daimios or nobles, most of whom had sided with the Mikado, of the voluntarily relinquished their feudal rights, and the feudal system, which had Lasted for over eight hundred years, was entirely abolished. The old warrior class of Samurai, numbering about four hundred thousand, gave up their class privileges, ami became ordinary citizens. All this cleared the way for a general adoption of European institutions. In place of the former military class arose an army based Adoption of on European models. Military service was declared uni- ur °P ean iiii- • „,, „ . institutions. versal and obligatory m 187?v. The German system, which has revolutionized Europe, began to revolutionize Asia. Soldiers enter upon military service at the age of twenty, serve three years in the active army, pass for four into the reserve, and are liable to be called out in any time of crisis until the age of forty. The army was thus made national. European otHcers were imported to train it. A navy was started, and dockyards and arsenals were constructed. The first railroad was begun in 1870 between Tokio and Yokohama. Thirty years later there were over 3,600 miles in operation. To-day there are 5,000. Steam navigation Mas begun, a telegraph system commenced in 18G8, a postal system instituted, and in 1878 a Stock Exchange and a Chamber of Commerce were opened at Tokio. The educa- tional methods of the West were also introduced. A uni- Reform in versity was established at Tokio, and later another at Kioto. edu cation. Professors from abroad were induced to accept important positions in them. Students showed great enthusiasm in pur- suing the new learning. Public schools were created rapidly, and by 188;$ about 3,5300,000 pupils were receiving educa- 694 THE FAR EAST Japan becomes a constitu- tional state. tion. In 1884 the study of English was introduced into them. Compulsory military service and the system of educa- tion tended to fuse the people into a homogeneous whole, permeated with the same spirit of progress, optimism, and patriotism. Newspapers, first permitted in 1869, multiplied rapidly, until in 1882 there were over a hundred. Transla- tions of foreign books were published unceasingly. Vaccina- tion was introduced, and in 1873 the European calendar was adopted. The codes of law, civil and criminal, and the code of judicial procedure were thoroughly remodeled after an exhaustive study of European systems. The equality of all citizens before the law was proclaimed, and to crown this work of peaceful revolution a constitution was granted by the Mikado. The Mikado had promised this in 1881, and had declared that in 1890 Japan should have a parliament. He was true to his word. In 1881 a commission, at whose head Mas Count Ito, went to Europe to study the political systems in operation there. After its return the information gathered was carefully studied by a special body appointed for the purpose. This body drafted a constitution in which the influence of England, the United States, Germany, and other countries can easily be traced. Eight years were spent upon the elaboration of this document, which was pro- claimed in 18S9. It established a parliament of two chambers, a House of Peers, and a House of Representatives. The vote for the latter body was given to men of twenty-five years of age who paid direct taxes to the state of about seven dollars and a half. This was reduced in 1900 to those paying about five dollars. The members of the popular house receive salaries. The constitution reserves very large powers for the monarch. Parliament met for the first time in 1890. Thus Japan, as soon as she recognized the superiority of foreign nations, reversed her long-established policy of seclusion, and, instead of lying helpless before them, studied them carefully, adopted all of the machinery of their civiliza- CHINO-JAPANESE WAR 695 tion, political, military, industrial, intellectual, that seemed to promise advantage, and in a few years emerged completely revolutionized and immensely strengthened. Not that such far-reaching reforms occasioned no dissatisfaction, for they did — and even a rebellion — which was easily put down. The test of rejuvenated Japan came in the last decade of the nine- teenth century and the first of the twentieth, and proved the solidity of this amazing achievement. During those years Wars with she fought and defeated two powers apparently much China and RussisL stronger than herself, China and Russia, and took her place as an equal in the family of nations. CHINO-JAPANESE WAR AND ITS CONSEQUENCES A war in which the efficiency of the transformed Japan Cause of the was clearly established broke out with China in 1894. The war with immediate cause was the relations of the two powers to Korea, a peninsula lying between China and Japan, about six hundred miles long, with an area one-fifth less than that of Great Britain, and a population of ten or twelve million. This territory was a kingdom, but both China and Japan claimed suzerainty over it. Japan had an in- terest in extending her claims, as she desired larger markets for her products. Friction was frequent between the two countries concerning their rights in Korea, as a consequence of which Japan began a war in which, with her modern army, she was easily victorious over her giant neighbor, whose armies fought in the old Asiatic style with a traditional Asiatic equipment. The Japanese drove the Chinese out of Korea, defeated their navy in the battle of the Yalu, invaded Manchuria, where they seized the fortress of Port Arthur, the strongest position in eastern Asia, occu- pied the Liao-tung peninsula on which that fortress is located, and prepared to advance toward Peking. The Chinese, alarmed for their capital, agreed to make peace, ghimono- and signed the treaty of Shimonoseki (April 17, 1895), seki 696 , THE FAR EAST by which they ceded Port Arthur, the Liao-tung peninsula, the island of Formosa, and the Pescadores Islands to Japan, also agreeing to pay a large war indemnity of two hundred million taels (about $175,000,000). China recognized the complete independence of Korea. But in the hour of her triumph Japan was thwarted by a European intervention, and deprived of the fruits of her victory. Russia now entered in decisive fashion upon a scene where she was to play a prominent part for the next ten years. The advance of Russia in eastern Asia had early aroused the apprehension of the Japanese. The building of the Trans-Siberian railroad, begun in 1891, seemed to them to indicate that Russia was cherishing ul- terior ambitions. The Japanese felt that a further increase of Russian power in Asia would be a menace to themselves. Their anxiety proved well founded. Russia showed that she entertained plans directly opposed to those of the Japanese. Interven- She induced France and Germany to join her in forcing them 1011 ° to give up the most important rewards of their victory, to -TvllSSlH, i • i France, and wmcn the conquered Chinese had consented in the treaty. Germany. These powers were determined that Japan should not have Port Arthur, should not have any foothold on the continent of Asia. They therefore demanded, " in the cause of peace and amity," that the treaty be revised. The reason given by the Russian Government to the Japanese Government was that " the possession of the peninsula of Liao-tung, claimed by Japan, would be a constant menace to the capital of China, would, at the same time, render illusory the independence of Korea, and would henceforth be a perpetual obstacle to the permanent peace of the Far East," and the Tsar advised the Mikado " to renounce the definite possession of the peninsula of Liao-tung." This was a bitter blow to the Japanese. Recognizing, however, that it would be folly to oppose the Japan three great military powers of Europe, they yielded to the Port " advice," restored Port Arthur and the peninsula to China, Arthur. and withdrew from the mainland, indignant at the aetion RUSSIA AND MANCHURIA 697 of the powers, and resolved to increase their army and navy and develop their resources, believing that their enemy in Asia was Russia, with whom a day of reckoning must come sooner or later, and confirmed in this belief by events that crowded thick and fast in the next few years. The insincerity of the powers in talking about the in- tegrity of China and the peace of the East was not long in manifesting itself. The intervening powers immediately set about reaping their reward. Russia secured the right Russian to run the eastern end of the Trans-Siberian railroad across Entrance Manchuria, a province of China, to Vladivostok, and to . construct a branch line south from Harbin into the Liao- tung peninsula, with a terminus at Talienwan. At the end of a certain time, and under certain conditions this railroad was to pass into the possession of China, but meanwhile Russia was given the right to send her own soldiers into Manchuria to guard it. This was the beginning of Russian control of Manchuria. She poured tens of thousands of troops into that Chinese province, and gradually acted as if it were Russian. She also acquired extensive mineral and timber rights in the province. In 1897 two German missionaries were murdered in the province of Shantung. The German Emperor immediately German sent a fleet to demand redress. As a result Germany secured aggression. (March 5, 1898) from China a ninety-nine year lease of the fine harbor of Kiauchau, with a considerable area round about, and extensive commercial and financial privileges in the whole province of Shantung. Indeed, that province be- came a German " sphere of influence." This action encouraged Russia to make further demands. Russia She acquired from China (March 27, 1898) a lease for * ec ™ es twenty-five years of Port Arthur, the strongest position in Arthur, eastern Asia, which, as she had stated to Japan in 1895, enabled the possessor to threaten Peking and to disturb the peace of the Orient. France and England also each acquired a port on similar terms of lease. The powers also forced 698 THE FAR EAST The " Boxer " movement. Rescue of the Legations. China to open a dozen new ports to the trade of the world, and extensive rights to establish factories and build railways and develop mines. It seemed, in the summer of 1898, that China was about to undergo the fate of Africa, that it was to be carved up among the various powers. This movement was checked by the rise of a bitterly anti-foreign party, occasioned by these act of aggression, and culminating in the Boxer insurrections of 1900. The " Boxers " were one of the numerous secret societies which abound in China. They were vehemently opposed to foreigners and to the foreign ideas which their own Emperor, after the defeat at the hands of the Japanese, wished to adopt. They enjoyed the support of the Empress- Dowager, aunt of the Emperor, a woman of remarkable force, who had been for many years the real ruler of China during the minority of the latter. She now emerged from her retirement, and by a coup d'etat pushed the Emperor aside, stopping abruptly the liberal reforms which he was inaugurating. The Government, for she was henceforth the leading power in the state, was in sympathy and probably in direct connivance with the Boxers. This movement grew rap- idly, and spread over northern China. Its aim was to drive the " foreign devils into the sea." Scores of missionaries and their families were killed, and hundreds of Chinese converts murdered in cold blood. Finally, the Legations of the various powers in Peking were besieged, and for weeks Europe and America feared that all the foreigners there would be mas- sacred. In the presence of this common danger the powers were obliged to drop their jealousies and rivalries, and send a relief expedition, consisting of troops from Japan, Rus- sia, Germany, France, Great Britain, and the United States. The Legations were rescued, just as their resources were exhausted by the siege of two months (June 13- August 14, 1900). The international army suppressed the Boxer move- ment after a short campaign, forced the Chinese to pay a large indemnity, and to punish the ringleaders. In forming APPREHENSIONS OF JAPAN 699 this international army, the powers had agreed not to acquire territory, and at the close of the war they guaranteed the integrit}' of China. Whether this would mean anything remained to be seen. The integrity of China had been invoked in 1895 and Japan ignored in the years following. Russia, France, and Ger- in lgna many had appealed to it as a reason for demanding the hensive. evacuation of Port Arthur by the Japanese in 1895. Soon afterward Germany had virtually annexed a port and a province of China, and France had also acquired a port in the south. Then came the most decisive act, the securing of Port Arthur by Russia. This caused a wave of indignation to sweep over Japan, and the people of that country were with difficulty kept in check by the prudence of their states- men. The acquisition of Port Arthur by Russia meant that now she had a harbor ice-free the year round. That Russia Russian did not look upon her possession as merely a short lease, actlvlt y in • iiii Manchuria, but as a permanent one, was unmistakably shown by her conduct. She constructed a railroad south from Harbin, connecting with the Trans-Siberian. She threw thousands of troops into Manchuria ; she set about immensely strengthening Port Arthur as a fortress, and a considerable fleet was sta- tioned there. To the Japanese all this seemed to prove that she purposed ultimately to annex the immense province of Manchuria, and later probably Korea, which would give her a large number of ice-free harbors and place her in a dominant position on the Pacific, menacing, the Japanese felt, the very existence of Japan. Moreover, this would absolutely cut off all chance of possible Japanese expansion in these direc- tions, and of the acquisition of their markets for Japanese industries. The ambitions of the two powers to dominate the East clashed, and, in addition, to Japan the matter seemed to involve her permanent safety, even in her island empire. Meanwhile, the other powers, observing the increasing Rus- sian control of Manchuria, repeatedly asked that power 700 THE FAR EAST Diplomatic her intentions. Russian annexation of Manchuria would negotiations p ro bably mean the closing of that province to the commerce Manchnria °* * nc rcs ^ °^ * ne wor ^- The powers were, therefore, in- sistent, particularly the United States and England, in urg- ing the policy of the " open door." Russia gave the powers the formal promise to withdraw from Manchuria " as soon as lasting order shall have been established " there, but she steadily refused to specify the date, and this became, there- fore, one of the subjects of diplomatic negotiation. The Anglo- Japan's prestige at this time was greatly increased by a Japanese treaty concluded with England in 1902, establishing a de- 1902 fensive alliance according to which the two powers " actu- ated solely by a desire to maintain the status quo and general peace in the extreme East, being, moreover, especially inter- ested in maintaining the territorial integrity of the Empire of China and the Empire of Korea, and in securing equal oppor- tunities in those countries for the commerce and industry of all nations,'' agreed, among other things, to remain strictly neutral in case either power became involved in a war con- cerning these matters, but also agreed that if a third power should join the enemy against the ally, then the second power would drop its neutrality and come to the assistance of its ally, making war and peace in common with it. This meant that if France or Germany should aid Russia in a war with Japan, then England would aid Japan. In a war between Russia and Japan alone England would be neutral. This treaty was, therefore, of great practical importance to Japan, and it also increased her prestige. For the first time in history, an Asiatic power had entered into an alliance with a European power on a plane of entire equality. Japan had entered the family of nations, and it was remarkable evidence of her importance that Great Britain saw advantage in an alliance with her. Russia, with the other powers, had recognized the integrity of China. Her position differed from theirs in that she had a large army in Manchuria, a Chinese province, and THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR 701 a leasehold of the strong fortress and naval base of Port Arthur. She had definitely promised to withdraw from Man- churia when order should be restored, but she declined to make the statement more explicit. Her military prepara- Japan tions increasing all the while, the Japanese demanded of her makes war the date at which she intended to withdraw her troops from B_ uss i a Manchuria, order having apparently been restored. Nego- tiations between the two powers dragged on from August 1903 to Fobruary 1904. Japan, believing thai Russia was merely trying to gain time to tighten her grip on Manchuria by elaborate and intentional delay and evasion, and to pro- long the discussion until she had sufficient troops in the province to be able to throw aside the mask, suddenly broke off' diplomatic Delations and commenced hostilities. On the night of the 8th-9th of February, 1904, the Japanese tor- pedoed a part of the Russian fleet before Port Arthur and threw their armies into Korea. The Russo-Japanese war, thus begun, lasted from Feb- ftusso- ruary 1904 to September 1905. It was fought on both ._.. J r # & war, 1904- land and sea. Russia had two fleets in Asiatic waters, one 1905. at Port Arthur and one at Vladivostok. Her land connec- tion with eastern Asia was by the long single track of the Trans-Siberian railway. Japan succeeded in bottling the Port Arthur fleet at the very outset of the war. Controlling the Asiatic waters she was able to transport armies and munitions to the seem; of the land warfare with only slight losses at the hands of the Vladivostok fleet. One army drove the Russians out of Korea, back from the Yalu. Another under General Oku landed on the Liao-tung peninsula and cut off the connections of Port Arthur with Russia. It ^ ie 5 e ° Port attempted to take Port Arthur by assault, but was unable Arthur. to carry it, and finally began a siege. This siege was con- ducted by General Nogi, General Oku being engaged in driving the Russians back upon Mukden. The Russian General Kuropatkin marched south from Mukden to relieve Port Arthur. South of Mukden great battles occurred, 702 THE FAR EAST Mukden captured by the Japanese. Destruction of the Russian fleet, May 27, 1905. The Treaty of Ports mouth. that of Liao-yang, engaging probably half a million men and lasting several days, resulted in a victory of the Japanese, who entered Liao-yang September 4, 1904. Their objective now was Mukden. Meanwhile, in August, the Japanese had defeated disastrously both the Port Arthur and Vladivostok fleets, eliminating them from the war. The terrific bombard- ment of Port Arthur continued until that fortress surren- dered after a siege of ten months, costing the Japanese 60,000 in killed and wounded (January 1, 1905). The army which had conducted this siege was now able to march north- ward to co-operate with General Oku around Mukden. There several battles were fought, the greatest since the Franco- German war of 18T0, lasting in each case several days. The last, at Mukden (March 6-10, 1905), cost both armies 120,000 men killed and wounded in four days' fighting. The Russians were defeated and evacuated Mukden, leaving 40,- 000 prisoners in the hands of the Japanese. Another incident of the war was the sending out from Russia of a new fleet under Admiral Rodjestvensky, which, after a long voyage, was attacked at its close by Admiral Togo as it entered the Sea of Japan and annihilated in the great naval battle of the Straits of Tsushima, May 27, 1905. The two powers finally consented, at the suggestion of President Roosevelt, to send delegates to Portsmouth, New Hampshire, to see if the war could be brought to a close. The result was the signing of the Treaty of Portsmouth, September 5, 1905. The war between Japan and Russia had been fought in lands belonging to neither power, in Korea, and principally in Manchuria, a province of China, yet Korea and China took no part in the war, were passive spectators, powerless to preserve the neutrality of their soil or their independent sovereignty. By the Treaty of Portsmouth Russia recognized Japan's paramount interests in Korea, which country, however, was to remain independent. Both the Russians and the Japanese t quale %'* A ""< -i frigate" ass JjL.**... i Ieiaow Ska k *' f ^ 80° Umijiiu.fi Bart RESULTS OF RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR 703 were to evacuate Manchuria. Russia transferred to Japan her lease of Port Arthur and the Liao-tung peninsula, and ceded the southern half of the island of Sakhalin. Japan thus stood forth the dominant power of the Orient. She had expanded in ten years by the annexation of For- mosa and Saghalin. She has not regarded Korea as in- dependent, but since the close of the war has virtually, though not nominally, annexed her. 1 She possesses Port Arthur, and her position in Manchuria is one giving rise at the pres- ent moment to diplomatic discussion. She has an army of 600,000 men, equipped with all the most modern appliances of destruction, a navy about the size of that of France, flourishing industries, and flourishing commerce. The drain upon her resources during the past ten years has been tre- mendous, and, appreciating the need of many years of quiet recuperation and upbuilding, she was willing to make the Peace of Portsmouth. Her financial difficulties are great, imposing an abnormally heavy taxation. No people has accomplished so vast a transformation in so short a time. The Russo-Japanese war cannot be said to have settled the Far Eastern Question, as the future of China is called. Wars may yet grow out of it. But if they do, it seems likely that a new factor will have to be considered, a re- juvenated and modern China. For the lesson of these events Reaction has not been lost upon the Chinese. The victories of Japan, of tnese an Oriental state, over a great Occidental power, as well China as over China, has convinced many influential Chinese of the advantage to be derived from an adoption of Euro- pean methods, an appropriation of European knowledge. Moreover, they see that the only way to repel the aggres- 1 By an agreement signed by Korea and Japan, November 17, 1905, the control of the foreign relations of Korea was placed in the hands of the Japanese Government. It was also provided that a Japanese Resident- General should be stationed in Seoul. By a subsequent agreement, signed by the same parties, July 31, 1907, all administrative measures and all high official appointments are subject to the approval of the Resident- General. Japanese subjects are eligible to official positions in Korea. 704 THE FAR EAST sions of outside powers is to be equipped with the weapons used by the aggressor. This change of attitude was represented after the Boxer rebellion by the Empress-Dowager herself, upon whom the invasion of her capital by the international army in 1900 and the punishment inflicted upon the country were not lost. Returning to Peking she showed herself more accessible to foreigners and foreign ideas, and after 1900 she began to approve of reforms more far-reaching than those for which in 1898 she had put men to death. China in j n the ] as f. f ew y ears t ne leaven of reform has been work- transforma- m & fruitfully in the Middle Kingdom. A military spirit tion. has arisen in this state, which formerly despised the martial virtues. Under the direction of Japanese instructors a Chinese army is being constructed after European models, equipped in the European fashion. The acquisition of western knowledge is encouraged. Students are going in large numbers to foreign countries, European, American, 20,000 of them to Japan. The State encourages the proc- ess by throwing open the civil service, that is, official careers to those who obtain honors in examinations in western sub- jects. Schools are being opened throughout the country. Even public schools for girls have been established, a re- markable fact for any Oriental country. Railroads are being built, and the Chinese have begun the economic de- velopment of their country, and are buying back where possible the concessions for mines and railways formerly granted to foreigners. In 1906 an edict was issued aiming at the prohibition of the use of opium within ten years. Moreover, the absolute monarchy is about to be changed into a constitutional one, the people of China are to receive political power and education. An imperial commission was sent to Europe in 1905 to study the representative systems of various countries, and on its return a committee, consisting of many high dignitaries, was appointed to study its report. CHINA PROMISED A CONSTITUTION 705 In August 1908 an official edict was issued promising, in China the name of the Emperor, a constitution in 1917, and setting forth in detail the stages that will be reached each year in the conversion of the form of government until the new system is completely established. A piquant and highly modern illustration of the swift interplay of the nations in these days of world politics, of instantaneous transmission of news, is furnished by the action of Chinese reformers, who have urged that China should not lag behind Turkey and Persia, themselves very recent converts, indeed, to the faith in constitutions and parliaments, a faith which has spread so astoundingly since 1815 and which is fast winning the last re- treats of absolutism. CHAPTER XXXI RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN ■Unpopu- larity in Russia of the war with Japan Open ex- pression of the popular discontent. We are now in a position to follow with some under- standing the very recent history of Russia, a history at once crowded, intricate, turbulent, the outcome of which is certainly obscure, but which seems to be the dawn of a new era — a dawn, however, still heavily overcast and lower- ing. That history is the record of the reaction of the Japanese war upon Russia herself, a war which may prove to be as far-reaching in its effects upon the Russian state and people as it has already proved itself to be upon Japan and China. That war was from the beginning unpopular with the Russians. Consisting of a series of defeats, its unpopu- larity only increased, and the indignation and wrath of the people were shown during its course in many ways. The Government was justly held responsible, and was dis- credited by its failure. As it added greatly to the already existing discontent, the plight in which the Government found itself rendered it powerless to repress the popular expression of that discontent in the usual summary fashion. There was for many months extraordinary freedom of discussion, of the press, of speech, cut short now and then by the officials, only to break out later. The war with Japan had for the Government most unexpected and unwelcome consequences. The very winds were let loose. The war began early in February 1904. At a meeting of the Institute of Mining Engineers at St. Petersburg on February 83d, a resolution was passed stating M that the war with Japan has its origin in a policy conceived solely in the interests of a small privileged minority, to the detri- 706 ASSASSINATION OF PLEHVE 707 merit of the vast majority of the Russian people, and that it is the result of the spirit of reckless adventure which characterizes the enterprises of the Government in the Far East." The Institute accordingly expressed its " profound dissatisfaction with the Government, which is the responsible author of this fresh national misfortune," and denounced the war as " at once inhuman and contrary to the interests of the people." The Minister of the Interior, in whose hands lay the Von Plehve's maintenance of public order, was at this time Von Plehve, one iron re & lme - of the most bitterly hated men in recent Russian history. Von Plehve had been in power since 190SJ, and had revealed a character of unusual harshness. He had incessantly and pitilessly prosecuted liberals everywhere, had filled the pris- ons with his victims, had been the center of the movement against the Finns, previously described, and seems to have secretly favored the horrible massacres of Jews which occurred at this time. He was detested as few men have been. He attempted to suppress in the usual manner the rising volume of criticism occasioned by the war by applying the same ruthless methods of breaking up meetings, exiling to Siberia students, professional men, workmen. He was Assassina- killed July 1904 by a bomb thrown under his carriage by a tion of former student. Russia breathed more easily. There im- mediately appeared a document which throws a remarkable light on the meaning of assassination in the minds of the more radical revolutionists in Russia. This was " an appeal to the citizens of the world," issued by the central committee of the Revolutionary Socialist party. Assuming responsi- bility for the " righteous act," and announcing its decision to put an end to Tsardom, it stated that Plehve had been " executed " because of the relentless policy of repression and reprisals, which he had applied against all those who strove for freedom in Russia. " The necessary violence of our A Russian defense of methods of combat," the appeal concluded, " should not hide assasS f na . from any one the truth. We disapprove absolutely . . . tion. 708 RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN a terrorist policy in countries that are free. But in Russia, where, owing to the reign of despotism, no open political discussion is possible, where there is no redress against the irresponsibility oi absolute power throughout the whole bu- reaucratic organisation, we shall be obliged to tight the violence oi tyranny with the force of revolutionary right." Nicholas II The Emperor Nicholas 11 now showed a disposition to enters upon depart somewhat from the rigorous policy of Von Plehve. liberal path ^° appointed as Minister oi Home Affairs in September, Prince Sviatopolk Mirski, a man oi liberal tendencies. The new minister announced " that though the Russian people are as yet unfit for constitutional government, the local rep- resentative institutions oi the Empire (the /emstvos) might be given greater freedom oi action and larger opportunities without risk to the established system." and he spoke oi " sincere confidence in the people " as essential to good gov- ernment. This aroused the hopes of" the liberals. The press was allowed great freedom, which it used to express the people's demands, and in November 1904 representatives from the ■emstvos were permitted to meet in St. Petersburg to state and discuss what they considered the needs oi the country. Many other bodies did the same. Lawyers, acad- emic and professional faculties, learned societies, city councils, all criticised existing abuses and demanded remedies. Never had the Russian people uttered their desires so freely. A few months before under Plehve such meetings would have been broken up and their participants treated with customary severity. Demands of It appeared from all these expressions of opinion that though the liberals differed from each other on many matters, they were agreed on certain points. They demanded that the reign of law be established in Russia, that the era of bureaucratic and police control, recognizing no limits of in- quisition and of cruelty, should cease. They demanded the individual rights usual in western Europe, freedom oi con- WIDESPREAD DISORDER 709 science, of speech, of publication, of public meeting! and .'■iations, of justice administered by independent judges, of legal trials for alleged lawbreakers. They also demanded greater participation of the people in local government, some sort of a national parliament which should share in making the laws of the Empire, and which should control the officials, and a national constituent assembly, to be sum- moned immediately, with power to frame a constitution em- bodying these privileges in fundamental law. The last two demands were considered by far the most important — a convention to give a constitution to Russia, and a parlia- ment henceforth to make the laws. But, however passionate Not granted and universal the demands, the Tsar showed no inclination to ^ tiie Tsar- grant them, and the discontent continued, fanned by the disclosures of the war, which grew ever more unpopular and disastrous as it progressed Thousands of soldiers of the reserve, called out, escaped to Germany and Austria. Others were forced, only at the point of the bayonet, into widespread the trains that were to carry them to Manchuria. Hundreds disorder. of thousands of workmen were thrown out of employment by the failure of business enterprises, caused by the war; the harvest iras bad, and it was found that the officials were enriching themselves at the expense of the nation's honor, selling for private gain supplies intended for the army, even seizing the funds of the Red Cross Society. The war continued to be a series of humiliating and sanguinary de- feats, and on January 1, 1905, came the surrender of Port Arthur after a fearful siege. The revolutionary agitation continued. The people de- sired concessions from the Tsar, but none came from him. University students in Moscow and St. Petersburg marched through the streets shouting, "Down with autocracy!" " Stop the war ! " Finally, the Tsar spoke. Toward the The Tsar end of December 1904 he issued a decree in reply to the announces public demands. In it he stated the reforms which he con- . . . . tions. sidered were most needed, and ordered the ministers to 710 RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN prepare the laws necessary to effect them. Some of these were identical with the wishes expressed by the zemstvos and the other assemblies, but the reformers noticed one critical omission. There was no mention of a national assembly. It was clear that, while the Emperor might grant some reforms, he had no intention of reducing his own auto- cratic powers, of restricting the bureaucracy, or of allowing the people any share in the government. Popular The agitation, therefore, continued unabated, more and dissatisfac- m ore embittered as the war progressed. January was sig- continuance nanze( ^ D J an event that aroused the horror of the civilized of disorder, world — the slaughter of " Bloody Sunday " (January 22, 1905). Workmen in immense numbers, under the leader- ship of a radical priest, Father Gapon, tried to approach the Imperial Palace in St. Petersburg, hoping to be able to lay their grievances directly before the Emperor, as they had no faith in any of the officials. Instead of that, they were attacked by the Cossacks and the regular troops and the result was a fearful loss of life, how large cannot be accurately stated. All through the year 1905 tumults and disturbances oc- curred. Prince Sviatopolk Mirski, ill, foiled at every step, and undermined by reactionaries, was replaced by Buliguin (February 1905). The Government resumed its customary methods. Deeds of violence and repression on its part were met in turn by assassinations and bomb-throwing on the part of the revolutionists. Immense strikes were organized. Peas- ants burned the houses of the nobles. Mutinies in the army and navy were frequent. The uncle of the Tsar, the Grand Duke Sergius, one of the most pronounced reactionaries in the Empire, who had said " the people wants the stick," was assassinated. Russia was in a state bordering on anarchy. Finally the Tsar sought to reduce the ever-mount- e ing spirit of opposition by issuing a manifesto, concerning of August * ne representative assembly which was so vehemently de- 19, 1905. manded (August 19, 1905). MANIFESTO OF AUGUST 19, 1905 711 In this he announced that " while preserving the funda- mental law regarding the autocratic power," he had resolved to call, not later than January 1906, a state council, or Duma, consisting of elected representatives from the whole of Russia. But this manifesto was only another disappoint- ment to the reformers, as the Duma was to be merely a consultative body, not a real legislature, as the elections to it were to be conducted by the very class most hated and dis- trusted, the bureaucracy, as the working and professional classes were not given the suffrage, and as the sessions of the Duma were not to be public. How small the electorate was to be was shown from the fact that St. Petersburg, with a population of over a million and a half, would have only nine thousand five hundred voters. Feeling, therefore, that the Emperor's concessions were inadequate and illusory, that Russia must be assured far greater liberties, the revolutionary parties continued their agitation. An agency of great effect when completely ap- plied was now resorted to, the general strike. Under present conditions, when governments dispose of large, well-equipped armies against which the people are powerless to fight, this is a weapon of immense value. It is, however, difficult to set The resort in operation, involving, as it does, the co-operation of vast numbers in a strike, which can be maintained only if the strike, strikers have reserve funds large enough to prevent starva- tion. In Russia in October 1905 the attempt was made. It began with a railway strike, which included the whole Empire, and which cut off all communication both within Russia and with the outside world. Any one wishing to travel was forced to use the ordinary highways or the water, if that were possible. Commerce was tied up. Merchants could neither ship nor receive goods. Similar strikes oc- curred in most of the great factories. Practically all shops, except provision stores, were closed. In the large towns the gas and electric light companies ceased to operate. Druggists refused to sell medicines until reforms should be 71 £ RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JATAN granted. The students of the universities struck, lawyers also; the law courts were closed. No newspapers appeared. Stocks fell rapidly. This sharp, sweeping suspension of the ordinary and necessary activities of life created an insupportable situation, and exerted a terrific pressure on the Government. It was Tne an extraordinarily dramatic protest against misrule. Forced ani es o o ^ yield, at least somewhat, the Tsar issued a manifesto October, 1905. October 80, 1905, granting M the immutable foundations of civic liberty." freedom of speech, of conscience, of association, extending the suffrage to those then lacking it, leaving the matter of the permanent franchise to be determined by the Duma, and. most important of all. establishing M as an im- mutable rule that no law can come into force without the approval of the Duma, and that it shall be possible for the representatives of the people to participate effectively in the supervision of the legality of the acts of the public offi- cials." Count Witte was at the same time appointed prime minister, ami Pobyedonostseff, hated by all liberals as the very soul of the cruel government of the last twenty years, was removed from his position. But it was evident that the police and bureaucrats in- tended to continue their usual practice of breaking up meet- ings, shooting, and arresting at will. Moreover, the revolu- tionists were not satisfied with the Tsar's concessions, but demanded the convocation of an assembly elected by univer- Tne sal suffrage which should draw up a constitution for Russia, popu ar M a p re U mmar y s t e p absolutely essential to reassure the demand for x • r ^ a constitu- people. This the Tsar would not grant. The strike went ent assem- on through November, new classes joining it, such as the bly refused. j ^ cr CJirr ; crs iUU \ telegraph operators. Dangerous mutinies in the army and navy were frequent, and brutal and bloody attacks upon the Jews, inspired in many cases by Government officials, shocked the western world. There was much street fighting in Moscow and other places. The Government re- fused the constituent assembly, but it ordered the elections TIIK ELECTION OF THE DUMA 713 for the Duma to be held. Moreover, it made concessions The Govern- to Finland which brought peace to that distracted country, m ma e • i ■ 1111/. concessions by restoring the rights enjoyed by trie duchy before the to Finland. late usurpations. Russia continued in a highly troubled state, in fact, an irregular kind of civil war between re- actionaries seeking to recover lost ground and revolution- ists bent upon preventing a return to the old conditions. That the old odious methods were still extremely vigorous was shown by the fact that, in January 1906 alone, 78 newspapers were suspended, 58 editors arrested, and thou- sands of people thrown into prison or exiled to Siberia, and most of Russia placed under martial law ; all this after the Tsar in October had recognized the civil rights of* the in- dividual. The Tsar had promised the Duma, which was to be a law-making body and was to have a supervision over the actions of officials. But before it met he proceeded to clip its wings. He issued a decree constituting the Council The of the Empire, that is, a body consisting largely of official c »7««r- , "''•.•.,- *«^4Vi •>*,- / ■ ieiuRi, Sea I »<"» ^N 1 ^ ■ r 'A 10 ■ ■>> ? i SSggj , . Ji ?. V .,; -I* ,,\ T!S&^ v \fi» AP / T a* / *\ tf ; : /» 1 lbs.,.,., THE TRANSFORMATION OF INDUSTRY 721 material condition! of life, by its application to industry and to war. The transformation of industry and. commerce accom- plished in the century is unique in the history of the world, a transformation so sweeping that in this respect the present age differs more from that of Louis XVIII than did his from that of Rameses II. This transformation has been the result of a series of discoveries arid inventions too numerous even to mention. Among these, one stands pre-eminent, the placing at the disposition of man of a new motive force of incomparable consequence, steam, rendered available by the perfection of an engine for the transmission of its power. James Watt rendered this service to the race at the close of the eighteenth Century, but it was not until the nineteenth was well advanced that its possibilities, the vast range of its utility, were clearly established. Consider the significance of the new agency. Up to the advent of the age of steam, industry and commerce were , essentially what they had been for many centuries. Pre- f steam. riously the only motive force had come from animal strength, and from wind and falling water. Mankind had very few machines, but manufacture was literally production by hand, and was carried on in small shops generally connected with the home of the manufacturer. There, in the midst of a few workmen, the proprietor himself worked. The imple- ments were few, the relations of master and journeyman and apprentice intimate and constant, the differences of their conditions comparatively slight. Industry was truly do- mestic. In general each town produced the commodities which it required. Production was on a small scale, and was designed largely for the local market. Necessarily so, for the difficulty of communication restricted commerce. Down to the nineteenth century men traveled and goods were carried in the way with which the world had been familiar since time began. Only by horse or by boat could merchandise be conveyed. Roads were few in number, poor in quality, 78S CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS bridges wore woefully infrequent, bo that traveler and cart were stopped bv rivers, over which they wore carried slowly, and often with danger, by boats or ferries. Practically no great improvement had been made in locomotion since the earliest times, save in the betterment of roadbeds and the establishment of regular stage routes. Napoleon, fleeing from Russia in 181$, and anxious to reach Paris as quickly as possible, left the army, and with a traveling and sleeping carriage and constant relays of fresh horses, succeeded, by extraordinary efforts day and night, in covering a thousand miles in five days, which was an average rate of eight or nine miles an hour, a remarkable ride for an age of horse conveyance. Where the Emperor of the French, command- ing all the resources of his time, could do no better, of course the average traveler moved much more slowly and merchan- dise more slowly still. The transmission of information could not be more rapid than the means of locomotion. The postal service was primi- tive, postage was high and very variable, and was paid by the receiver. In France, since 1793, there was a kind of aerial telegraph which, by means of signals, operated from the tops of poles, like those along the lines of modern rail- roads, could transmit intelligence from Paris to other cities rapidly. But this invention was monopolized by the State, and moreover ceased to operate when darkness or rain came on. Rise of the Into this world of small industries and limited commerce factory came the revolutionary steam engine, destined to effect an economic transformation unparalleled in the history of the race. It was applied to industry, then to commerce. First employed in mining, it was shortly adopted by the manu- facturers of cotton and woolen goods, to give the force for the inventions of Crompton and Arkwright and Hargreaves ami Cartwright. Out of it the modern factory system of production arose, and it became the throbbing heart of every industry. The machine superseded the hand of man as the IMPROVED METHODS OF COMMUNICATION 723' chief element in production, increasing the output ultimately in certain lines a hundred, even a thousand fold Domestic industry iraned and disappeared Manufacturing became concentrated in large establishment! employing hundreds of men, and ultimately thousands. And this concentration of industry caused the rapid growth of cities, one of the char- acteristic features of the century. But there iras a limit imposed upon the utility of the ■team engine in industry. Production on the large icale involved necessarily two other factors— larger lources of fupply from which to draw the raw materials, larger markets for the finished produd i. Right here the inadequate means of communication called halt. The necessity for improvement wot ifnjj.-rat.ivf-. a single illustration is sufficient evidence. The port, of* Liverpool and the great manufacturing city of Manchester were separated by only about thirty miles. Three canals connected them, yet traffic on them wsa m congested tliat it sometimes took a month for cotton to reach the factories from the sea. 1 The new machine industry was in danger of strangulation. Moreover the size of cities was conditioned upon the ability to procure food supplies, an ability strictly limited by the existing methods of communica- tion. The steam engine, applied to locomotion, came to the- Steam lie of the steam engine applied to looms and ,pindles. navi ^ ation ' AfirJ first to locomotion on water. Fulton'-, steamboat, the Clermont, leaving New York August 7, 1807, arrived at Albany, a hundred and fifty miles distant, in t.hirt.y-two hour,. The practicability of steam navigation was thus, after much experimenting, definitively established. But ..team navigation only slowly eclipsed navigation by sail. In 1814 there w<-r<: only two steamers, with a tonnage of 426 tons, in the whole British Empire. In 181 fj, Liverpool, which now has the largest steam fleet in existence, did not have a single steamer. It is impossible here to trace the growth of this 'Day, A Hi. lory of Commerce, 290. 724 CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS The Great Western. The invention of the railroad. method of locomotion. Its expansion was reasonably rapid. It was at first thought impossible to construct ships large enough to carry sufficient coal for long voyages. It was not until 1838 that a ship relying solely upon steam propulsion crossed the Atlantic Ocean. The Great Western, a British vessel, sailed from Bristol to New York in fifteen days, to the discomfiture of those who were at that very time showing the impossibility of such a feat. " It was proved by fluxionary calculus," wrote Carlyle, " that steamers could never get across from the farthest point of Ireland to the nearest of Newfoundland ; impelling force, resisting force, maximum here, minimum there ; by law of nature, and geometric dem- onstration ; — what could be done ? The Great Western could weigh anchor from Bristol Port; that could be done. The Great Western, bounding safe through the gullets of the Hudson, threw her cable out on the capstan of New York, and left our still moist paper demonstration to dry itself at leisure." The experimental stage was over. In 1840, Samuel Cunard, a native of Nova Scotia, living in England, founded the first regular transatlantic steamship line, thus raising his name out of obscurity forever. In 1847 the Hamburg-American, in 1857 the North German Lloyd, in 1862 the French lines began their notable careers, the two former now constituting veritable fleets and serving all parts of the globe. But more important still was the application of steam to locomotion on land, the invention of the railroad. This, like most inventions, was a slow growth. In the mines and quarries of England carts had for some time been drawn on rails made at first of wood, later of iron. It was found that horses could thus draw much heavier loads, the friction of the wheel being reduced. The next step was to substitute the steam engine for the horse. Several men were studying this problem in the early nineteenth century. William Hedley, chief engineer of a colliery near Newcastle, constructed in 1813 a locomotive, Puffing Billy, which worked fairly well. THE INVENTION OF THE RAILROAD 725 The significance of George Stephenson lies in the fact that by his inventions and improvements, extending through many years he made it " actually cheaper," to use his own words, " for the poor man to go by steam than to walk." His first locomotive, constructed in 1814, proved capable of hauling coal at the rate of three miles an hour but at such a rate was not commercially valuable. He perfected his machine by increasing the power of the boiler so that the Rocket was able to make thirty miles an hour at the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester railway in 1830. The experi- mental stage was over. The railway was a proved success. Construction began forthwith and has continued ever since. The development of the new means of locomotion has pro- ceeded with the development of chemistry, metallurgy, me- chanics, engineering, electricity. Rails have been constantly improved, locomotives augmented in drawing power, bridges flung over rivers and ravines, tunnels cut through moun- tains. Navigation, too, has had its record of triumph. Steamships, plying regularly and in all directions, have become larger and larger, swifter and swifter, more and more numerous. Traveling and transportation have thus been revolutionized by methods entirely dissimilar from those in existence during all the previous history of man- kind. They represent not a difference of degree, but of kind. It is railways that have rendered possible the remarkable Importance of r3.ilr03.ds economic transformation of the world, which must otherwise have been checked in mid-process. They have also aided in the work of nation-building, of empire-building, and have facilitated political concentration. They have become power- ful auxiliaries in war. " The lack," says President Hadley, " of a few miles of railroad connection in 1859 probably caused Austria to lose the battles of Solferino and Magenta, and changed the whole destiny of Italy. The energetic con- trol and use of every railroad line in 1870 enabled Germany to put her troops where they were most needed, and strike those 726 CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS telling blows which virtually decided the contest in a few days." x Another agency has co-operated with steam in the trans- formation of the conditions of modern industry and com- Electricity. merce, electricity. It has become, within very recent years, the source of light and heat and motive power. But the marvelous service it has thus far rendered has been the instantaneous transmission of intelligence by the telegraph, which became practicable after 1835, and by the telephone, invented much later by Alexander Graham Bell (1876), only several years later still to become commercially valuable. Within the last twenty years the application of this new agency to life has made gigantic strides. The result of all this development, of the railroads, render- ing possible the extraordinary expansion of industry, of in- dustrial inventions, rendering possible the extraordinary ex- pansion of the railroads — for the latter are both cause and effect — and of this instantaneous transmission of intelligence by wire and cable, and its publication by the marvelously im- proved printing presses of our day, is the modern world of business which affects constantly and intimately the life of ever}' man, the activity of every government. Humanity occupies a stronger position than ever before. Its increased knowledge and control of the forces of nature have en- abled it to produce in immensely greater quantities the necessities and comforts and luxuries of life. The applica- tion of machinery to production, in agriculture, in manu- facture, in transportation, has increased vastly the quan- tity and reduced the price of most commodities. Many products which only the well-to-do could formerly enjoy are now within the reach of the millions. The plane of living has been distinctly raised. The higher standard begets a desire for a standard higher still. But while general wealth has advanced, and is advancing with enormous strides, and while all have shared in the pro- 1 Hadley, Railroad Transportation, 15. Standard of living. PRESENT SOCIAL PROBLEMS 727 digious material progress, there is indubitably a growing feeling that the distribution of the benefits has been and is far from equitable and healthy, that the world's manual laborers have not gained from these improved methods of production as much as, in the interests of society as a whole, they should have gained. There is an increasing conviction in men's minds, to which the history of the last thirty or forty years bears cumulative witness on every page, that, given man's unexampled power over creative forces which formerly went to waste, poverty has no place in the modern world save as the doom of indolence or vice. Yet poverty abounds which cannot be justly ascribed to either. Out of this conviction and out of the disillusions and sufferings of the millions who have flocked to the cities, allured by higher wages, have sprung various movements, of which socialism is but one, although the most conspicuous and the most potent. And discontent now possesses powers which Popular it has never previously possessed. For the masses of to-day discontent, have been educated in the public schools, whereas, in 1815, they could, as a rule, neither read nor write ; have received a discipline in armies and in factories, a training in co- operation and management and judgment in their unions; have newspapers which conduct their propaganda, and ex- press their views; have acquired a taste for politics, which at the beginning of the century was the characteristic of a small minority ; and exercise an increasing power in most states as they possess the suffrage. The supreme result of the economic and the democratic evolution of the century in the domain of politics is the sharpening concentration of the thought of our day upon the social and economic problems to which it itself has given rise. For, more and more penetrating into the foreground of the consciousness of every nation, is the condition of the most numerous class and the duty of society to improve it. Social amelioration is one of the insistent questions of the 728 CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS twentieth century, a question which will be answered, if at all, by democracy, the product of the nineteenth. There is another problem created by the advance of science which engrosses more and more the attention of thoughtful men. The rise and development of the militaristic spirit have been shown in the preceding pages. The Prussian military system, marked by scientific thoroughness and efficiency, has been adopted by all the countries of Europe. Europe is to-day what she has never been before, literally an armed continent. The burden is heavy and its weight increases with every ad- vance of science. For every discovery of a new explosive, every improvement in weapons is immediately adopted, regardless of expense. Thus old equipment becomes obsolete before it has ever been used in actual war. The rivalry of the nations to have the most perfect instruments of destruction, the strongest army and the strongest navy, is one of the most conspicuous features of the world to-day. Ships of war were made so strong that they could resist attack. New projectiles of terrific force were consequently required and the torpedo was invented. A new agency would be useful to discharge this missile and thus the torpedo boat was de- veloped. To neutralize it was therefore the immediate neces- sity and the torpedo-boat destroyer was the result. Boats that could navigate beneath the waters would have an ob- vious advantage over those that could be seen, and the sub- marine was provided for this need. And now we are about to take possession of the air with dirigible balloons and aero- planes, as aerial auxiliaries of war. And thus man's imme- morial occupation, war, gains from the advance of science and contributes to that advance. The wars of the past were fought on the surface of the globe. Those of the future will be fought in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, and in the waters under the earth. Cost of B u j. a ]| {.j^g * s tremendously expensive. It costs more than instruments a hundred thousand dollars to construct the largest coast of war. defense gun, which carries twenty-one miles, and its single THE BURDEN OF MILITARISM 729 discharge costs a thousand dollars. Ten millions are nec- essary to build a Dreadnought. The debts of European countries have been nearly doubled during the last thirty years, largely because of military expenditures. The mil- itary budgets of European states in this day of " armed peace " amount to not far from a billion and a half dollars a year, half as much again as the indemnity exacted by Ger- many from France in 1871. Peace hath her price no less than war. The burden is so heavy, the rivalry so keen that it has given rise to a movement which aims to end it. The very aggravation of the evil prompts a desire for its cure. In the summer of 1898 the civil and military authorities of Russia were considering how they might escape the neces- sity of replacing an antiquated kind of artillery with a more modern but very expensive one. Out of this discussion emerged the idea that it would be desirable, if possible, to check the increase of armaments. This could not be achieved by one nation alone but must be done by all, if done at all. The outcome of these discussions was the issuance by the Nicholas II Tsar, Nicholas II, on August 24, 1898, of a communication limitation to those nations which were represented by diplomatic agents f at the Court of St. Petersburg, suggesting that an interna- armaments, tional conference be held to consider the general problem. This paper is very significant. Some of its statements de- serve to be quoted : " In the course of the last twenty years the longings for a general appeasement have become espe- cially pronounced in the consciences of civilized nations. The preservation of peace has been put forward as the object of international policy ; in its name great states have con- cluded between themselves powerful alliances; it is the better to guarantee peace that they have developed, in proportions hitherto unprecedented, their military powers, and still con- tinue to increase them without shrinking from any sacrifice. . All these efforts, nevertheless, have not yet been able to bring about the beneficent results of the desired pacification. The financial charges, following an upward 730 CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS The First Peace Conference at the Hague. Address of M. de Staal. march, strike the public prosperity at its very source. The intellectual and physical strength of the nations, labor and capital, arc for the major part diverted from their natural application, and unproductively consumed. Hundreds of mil- lions are devoted to acquiring terrible engines of destruction which, though to-day regarded as the last word of science, are destined to-morrow to lose all value, in consequence of some fresh discovery in the same field. National culture, eco- nomic progress, and the production of wealth are either para- lyzed or checked in their development. ... It appears evident then that, if this state of things were prolonged, it would inevitably lead to the very cataclysm which it is de- signed to avert, and the horrors of which make every think- ing man shudder in advance." The conference, thus suggested by the Tsar, was held at the Hague in 1899. Twenty-six of the fifty-nine sovereign governments of the world were represented by one hundred members. Twenty of these states were European, four were Asiatic — China, Japan, Persia, and Siam, — and two were American — the United States and Mexico. The Conference was opened on the 18th of May and closed on July 29th. That the problem concerned all the world, that Asia and America were as truly involved as Europe, that the day of isolation is over, when a nation may live unto itself, was shown in the address of the President of the Conference, M. de Staal, a Russian delegate. " We perceive between nations," said he, " an amount of material and moral interests which is constantly increasing. The ties which unite all parts of the human family are ever becoming closer. A nation could not remain isolated if it wished. ... If, therefore, the nations are united by ties so multifarious, is there no room for seeking the consequences arising from this fact? When a dispute arises between two or more nations, others, without being concerned directly, are profoundly affected. The conse- quences of an international conflict occurring in any portion of the globe are felt on all sides. It is for this reason that THE INTERNATIONAL PEACE CONFERENCE 731 outsiders cannot remain indifferent to the conflict — they are bound to endeavor to appease it by conciliatory action." Among the means suggested are mediation and arbitration. On another occasion the same member said : " The forces of human activity are absorbed in an increasing proportion by the expenses of the military and naval budgets. . . . Armed peace to-day causes more considerable expense than the most burdensome war of modern times," and another Russian delegate exclaimed : " The idea of the Emperor of Russia is grand and generous. ... If not this first Conference, it will be a future Conference which will accept the idea, for it responds to the wants of all nations." A member of the German delegation, General von Schwarz- Address of hoff, however, stfuck the opposite note. " I can hardly be- General von lieve that among my honored colleagues there is a single warz ° ' one ready to state that his Sovereign, his Government, is engaged in working for the inevitable ruin, the slow but sure annihilation of his country. ... So far as Ger- many is concerned, I am able completely to reassure her friends and to relieve all well-meant anxiety. The German people is not crushed under the weight of charges and taxes, — it is not hanging on the brink of an abyss ; it is not approaching exhaustion and ruin. Quite the contrary : public and private wealth is increasing, the general welfare and standard of life is being raised from one year to another. So far as compulsory military service is concerned, which is so closely connected with these questions, the German does not regard this as a heavy burden, but as a sacred and patriotic duty to which he owes his country's existence, its prosperity, and its future." A French representative, M. Bourgeois, replied that Gen- Address eral von Schwarzhoff " will surely recognize with me that, of M. if in his country, as well as in mine, the great resources, which Bour e eois « are now devoted to military organization, could, at least in part, be put to the service of peaceful and productive activity, the grand total of the prosperity of each country would not 7iW CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS cease to increase at an even more rapid rate.* 1 . . . Ami he added: ''The object of civilisation seems to us to be to abolish, more and more, the struggle for life between men, and to put in its stead an accord between them for the struggle against the unrelenting forces of matter." The great military powers had spoken. The feeling of the lesser states was voiced by a representative of Bulgaria who declared M that armed peace was ruinous, especially for small countries whose wants were enormous, and who had even-thing to gain by using their resources for the develop- ment of industry, agriculture, and general progress." l Y\ ith such differences of opinion the conference was un- able to reach any agreement upon the fundamental question which hat! given rise to its convocation. It could only adopt a resolution expressing the belief that " a limitation of the military expenses which now burden the world is greatly to be desired in the interests of the material and moral well- being of mankind M and the desire that the governments " shall take up the study of the possibility of an agreement concerning the limitation of armed forces on land and sea, ami of military budgets." W ith regard to arbitration the Conference was more suc- cessful. It established a Permanent Court of Arbitration for the purpose of facilitating arbitration in the case of Arbitration, international disputes which it has been found impossible to settle by the ordinary means of diplomacy. The Court does not consist of a group of judges holding sessions at stated times to try such cases may be brought before it. But it is provided that each power " shall select not more than four persons of recognized competence in questions of international law, enjoying the highest moral reputation and disposed to accept the duties of arbitrators," and that their appointment shall run for six years and may be renewed. Out of this long list the powers at variance choose, in a manner indicated} 1 Quotations arc from 1 lolls. The Peace Conference at the Hague, Chapters II ami 111 passim. Establish- ment of a Permanent Conrt of >V c • *« A \ turn ■ -tut,/ ^ ■ t I ■ *\*1" S s *fejfe IW EITROPI AT THE J& ■■ - E M J ■ I •*' - Itf < > < y. a n ■ ■ ' ;SW»iW/ P.Omvrt/ '''<*"/ Ml teaf (Jwklaxtift Vi/ian French .Spo/ti.st> Danifh Belgian OSSESSIONS the POWERS SENT TIME. '—Id CU** Eltfl lsJ'Kltl'UlS lrr,n, I,, ,- .firuutlair f:«tMA*tJ. ty tottlm* A PERMANENT COURT OF ARBITRATION 733 the judges who shall decide any given case. When in the discharge of their duties, such judges are to have the privi- leges and immunities enjoyed by diplomatic agents. Recourse to this Court is optional, but the Court is always ready to be invoked. Arbitration is entirely voluntary with the parties to a quarrel, but if they wish to arbitrate, the machinery is at hand, a fact which is, perhaps, an encourage- ment to its use. The work of the First Peace Conference was very limited and modest, yet encouraging. But that the new century was to bring not peace but a sword, that force still ruled the world, was shortly apparent. Those who were optimistic about the rapid spread of arbitration as a principle destined to regulate the international relations of the future were sadly disappointed by the meager results of the Conference, and were still more depressed by subsequent events. The nineteenth century had been ushered in by a series The of wars of unexampled magnitude and of shattering effect. t wentieth The twentieth century also opened with conflicts on an even 0T)ens witll vaster scale, involving larger armies, and likely to prove of wars, still deeper import. The very location of the theaters of war in the two cases exemplifies admirably the changes that have come over the world during a hundred years. The wars of Napoleon were fought in the very heart of Europe. Those of the opening decade of the twentieth century were fought in eastern Asia and southern Africa, regions that for Napoleon, whose imagination, however, was quite lively, were the very confines of the world. Russia fought in Man- churia, England fought in the Transvaal, five thousand miles and more from the base of supplies. Distance has been anni- hilated. Again, both wars arose largely out of the ambi- tions of modern commerce, were expressions of the expansive, aggressive character of modern business, the relentless pres- sure of economic interests in the world of to-day, of what we call, in short, imperialism. During this decade, also, the expenditures of European 784 CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS The Second Peace Conference at the Hague. Work of the Conference. states upon armies and navies continued to increase, and at an even faster rate than ever. During the eight years, from 1898 to 1906, they augmented nearly £70,000,000, the sum total mounting from £250,000,000 to £320,000,000. Sucli was the disappointing sequel of the Hague Confer- ence. But despite discouragements the friends of peace were active, and finally brought about the Second Conference at the Hague in 1907. This also was called by Nicholas II, though President Roosevelt had first taken the initiative. The Second Conference was in session from June 15th to October 18th. It was attended by representatives from forty-four of the world's fifty-seven states, claiming sov- ereignty in 1907. The number of countries represented in this Conference, therefore, was nearly double that represented in the first, and the number of members was more than double, mounting from one hundred to two hundred and fifty-six. The chief additions came from the republics of Central and South America. The number of American gov- ernments represented rose, indeed, from two to nineteen. Twenty-one European, nineteen American, and four Asiatic states sent delegates to this Second Conference. Its member- ship illustrated excellently certain features of our day, among others the indubitable fact that we live in an age of world politics, that isolation no longer exists, either of nations or of hemispheres. The Conference was not European but in- ternational, — the majority of the states were non-European. The Second Conference accomplished much useful work in the adoption of conventions regulating the actual conduct of war in more humane fashion, and in defining certain aspects of international law with greater precision than heretofore. But, concerning compulsory arbitration, and concerning disarmament or the limitation of armaments, nothing was achieved. It passed this resolution : " The Con- ference confirms the resolution adopted by the Conference of 1899 in regard to the restriction of military expenditures; and, since military expenditures have increased considerably SIGNIFICANCE OF HAGUE CONFERENCES 735 in nearly every country since the said year, the Conference declares that it is highly desirable to see the governments take up the serious study of the question." This platonic resolution was adopted unanimously. A grim commentary on its importance in the eyes of the governments is contained in their naval programmes for 1908 and 1909, which included larger appropriations than ever. Cost of the Even nations which have hitherto done without ships of the policy of Dreadnought type have begun to enter the costly competi-j tion, such as Brazil, Austria-Hungary, and Italy, while Great Britain, Germany, and the United States are straining every nerve to surpass their rivals. It is estimated that the armies of Europe number about four million men on a peace footing, about ten million- on a war footing, and that the cost of maintaining the armies and navies of Great Britain, Ger- many, and France alone amounts annually to nearly nine hundred million dollars (1909). Whether the Hague Conferences will be reckoned in history as simply inconsequential outbursts of sentiment, as merely the baseless fabric of a vision, or whether they will be looked upon as the small beginnings of great institutions, remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the comment of Elihu Root, at that time American Secretary of State, may be quoted : " Each Conference will inevitably make further progress and, by successive steps, results may be accomplished which have formerly appeared impossible. . . . The most valuable result of the Conference of 1899 was that it made the work Significance of the Conference of 1907 possible. The achievements of the of the two Conferences justify the belief that the world has en tered ferenceg upon an orderly process through which, step by step, in suc- cessive conferences, each taking the work of its predecessor as its point of departure, there may be continual progress toward making the practice of civilized nations conform to their peaceful professions." * The Hague Conference of 1907 was more representative 1 Hull, The Two Hague Conferences, 503. 786 CERTAIN FEATURES OF MODERN PROGRESS than the Congress of Vienna of 1815, with which this history opened, for it represented practically the whole human race. If the movement inaugurated in 1898 should, in the long Arbitration, result of time, facilitate the resort to arbitration as the usual procedure of nations in their relations with each other. Nicholas II would have been instrumental in founding an alliance far more holy than the one to which his predecessor on the Russian throne gave such celebrity in the early nine- teenth century. The origins o\' the British Parliament and of the British Constitution were modest, indeed. But the nineteenth century saw every nation struggling to gain the political institutions which England had been fashioning thoughout the centuries. Will arbitration enter into the mentality of the race, will it find the same solid lodgment amid the facts ot' life, as have parliamentarism and constitu- tionalism? And if so, will it require as many centuries? The historian, having reached the point of interrogation, may, in all comity, leave the answer to his question to the prophet or to the future. But he may observe, in closing, that contemporary Europe is dominated by two great leagues, the Triple Alliance, consisting o\' Germany, Austria, :.nd Italy, and the Triple Entente, consisting of England, France, and Russia. The precise nature of these combina- tions, the character and range of the obligations they im- pose, have never been made public. They constitute the very arcana of a profoundly secret and undemocratic diplo- macy. The nations stand committed to they know not what. These two leagues confront each other, watchful, suspi- cious, portentously armed. Professing peace to be their passion they press forward in sinister and dangerous rivalry for military superiority, that is, for the power to destroy. It is a strange and melancholy fact that that society which is the heir of all the ages is more constantly obsessed by the thought of war and more unceasingly occu- pied by preparations for it than the most primitive society of which history bears record. BIBLIOGRAPHY GENERAL HISTORIES Cambridge Modern History, vol. X, The Restoration, vol. XI, Thh Growth of Nationalities, and vol. XII, 'I In- Latest Aye (announced). The most considerable modern work in English. A co-operative history written by various English and Continent.;!] scholars, and including chap- ters on economic and literary as well as political history. Lacks unity but is critical and informing. Is a kind of historical encyclopedia packed full of facts. A useful feature is the bibliographies connected with each chapter which are extensive lists without criticism or descrip- tion. Sijionobos, C, A Political History of Europe Since 1814. Translation edited by S. M. Macvane. Brings the history of each country down to about 1897. Objective, impartial A strictly political history. Each chapter has an excellent, brief, critical bibliography. I vi if:, C. A., History of Modern Europe. Published in three volumes, also complete in one. Covers period 1702-1878. A careful, clear, scholarly, admirably written political history of the chief Continental nations. Andrews, C. M., The Historical Development of Modern Europe, 2 vols. (1896-1898). Brings the history of the chief Continental nations down to 1897. The smaller nations are not treated. The narrative is clear, informing, studiously fair. The most important chapters are perhaps those on the revolutions of 1848 and on the diplomacy of the Crimean War. Andrews, C. M., Contemporary Europe, Asia and Africa, (1902). Covers excellently the period from 1871 to 1901. Forms a part of the Series of The History of All Nations. Pmi.i.rps, W. Alison, Modern Europe, 181o~-l%!Jf). A purely political study, limited, moreover, almost entirely to external or diplomatic history. Accurate and trustworthy within its circumscribed limits. Very weak on the period after 187*. Robinson, J. II., and Beard, C. A., The Development of Modem Europe, vol. II. Emphasizes the significance of economic factors in the history of the century. Has interesting chapters on the industrial revolution, on Russia, on European expansion, and on some of the great problems of to-day. Mii.i.ER, Political History of Recent Times. Pronouncedly liberal point of view. Journalistic, fairly full. Comes down to about 1880. Kirkpatrick, F. A., editor, Lectures on the History of the Nineteenth Century. Cambridge, 1902. Consists of seventeen lectures given by various scholars to university extension students. Particularly interest- ing are the lectures on Germany by Marcks, on France by Mantoux, and on Russia by Vinogradoff. Lavisse et Rambaud, Histoire ginirale du IV* siecle a nos jours. Vols. X, XI, XII cover the period from 1815 to 1900. A co-operative history by French scholars. Articles are of varying, though on the whole, of high excellence. The narrative is generally clear and not overloaded with facts. The bibliographies are very useful. 737 788 BIBLIOGRAPHY DEBinorn, Histoirc diplomatique de 1'Europc. 181^1878, 9 vols. (1891). A useful aid to the study of the period, well proportioned, well arranged and well written; on the whole Impartial. Authorities are not quoted for any statements and the bibliographies at the opening of each chap- ter are inadequate, miscellaneous, and not critical. Bourgeois, Emile, Manuel kistorique de politique itrangere, 3 vols. (1905); vols. 11 and 111 concern our period; come down to 1878. There are many German histories of this period. The fullest are the volumes in Onckkn's Allpemeine (h schichte in Einzcltlnrstcllunpt n ; namely Fi.athk, Dot Zt -Halter der Rcstauration und devolution ( 1815" 1851); BuXLX, (lescliichtc ties ziceiten Kaist rrt ichcs und tits Konit/reiches Italien; BamREBQ, deschichte der orit ntalischcn A noelt ;i< nhtit im Zeitraumc den Pariser und den Berliner Frictlcns; Oncken, Das Zeitalter den Kaisers Wilhelm. These volumes collectively cover the period from 1815 to 1S8S in about four thousand pages. Another excellent German work is Bii.i.i:. (itschichte der neuesten Zeit. \ vols. (1886-1887), covering the period 1815-1885. The most scientific and authoritative history on the years succeeding 1815 is STERN, A., Oeschichte Europas Beit den Vertrdgen von IS to bis zum Frankfurter Friedcn von 1S71. Four volumes have appeared, carrying the narrative down to about 1835. This work is Indispensable to evcry studcnt. It is rigidly scientific, scholarly, free from partisanship, and includes much new archival material. It is the most thorough and most informing work on the period in any language and considerably extends our knowledge. It ought to be translated. Hkhtsi.it, Map of Europe by Treaty since 1814, 4 vols. (1875-1891). Contains treaties in English covering the period from 1814 to 1891, showing how the "Map of Europe" has been changed by treaties or by other international arrangements since the overthrow of Napoleon I. Very useful are the biographical dictionaries of various countries: for Austria-Hungary; Wttrzbach, Biographischet Letdkon de.i Kaiserthume Oeeterreich, 60 Theile, Vienna (1856-1891); for Germany; I.ii.iencron und Wxgxle, Allot meine deutsehe Biographie, Leipsic (1875 seq. — ), now 54 volumes; for France, Xouvelle biographie generate, edited by Hoefer, 1855-18(i(), 46 vols., not limited to France; for England, Stephen and Lee, editors, Dictionary of National Biography, 67 vols. (1885- 1903). CHAPTER I The Reconstruction of Europe For Sources: See Klttber, Akten dee Wiener Kongrestes; Hertslet, Map of Europe by Treat;/, vol. 1; British and Foreign State Papers, vol. II, 1811-1815.' The First and Second Treaties of Paris may he found in Akdbbsok, Constitutions and Documents. Nos. 91 and 99; The Treaty of the Holy Alliance in University of Pennsylvania, Translations and Reprints, vol. I, 3; or in Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, vol. I, No. 183. General Treatment of the Congress: Cambridge Modem History, vol. IX, chaps. XIX and XXI; Lavish et Pamhaii), Histoire genirale, vol. X, chap I; DEBinorn. Histoirc diplo- matique, vol. 1, chap. I. Stern, Oeschichte Europas, vol. I, chap. I; Sorel, L' Europe et la Revolution francaise, vol. VIII, pp. 355-505; Houssaye, H., 1814. Oncken, Das Zeitalter der Revolution, des Kaiserreiches und der Befreiungskriege, vol. II, pp. 832-911; Treitschke, Deutsche Oeschichte im Nt unzelinten Jahrhundert. vol. I, pp. 597-711; Svbel, The Founding of the German Empire, vol. I, chap. Ill; Sprinqeb* BIBLIOGRAPHY 739 Geschichte Oesterreichs, vol. 1, pp. ' 254-274; Tiiaver, Davm of Italian Independence, vol. I, pp. 116-138. See also Deuidour, Etudes critiques sur la Revolution, I'Empire et la Piriode con~ temporaine, which Include studies on Talleyrand au dongres de Vienne and La liquidation de 1815 J see also SoBEL, Essais d'hisloire et de critique, containing a study on Talleyrand au Congres de Vienne. On Second Treaty of Paris: Sokei., L' Europe et la Revolution, vol. VI 1 1, pp. 407-493; Sobel, Le Traile" de Paris du 20 novembre, 1815. On Metternich: Mallesox, Life of Prince Metternich (1888); Mazade, Un chancelier d'ancien regime; Le regne diplomatique de Metternich, (1889); Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, vol. XXIII, article by Baieleu with critical bibliography; Wubzbach, Biographiechee Lexikon des h'aiserthums Oesterreich, Acht/.chnter Tlieil, with extensive bibliography; Som;i., Essais d'hisloire et ti. CHAPTER HI Reaction and Revoiition in Spain and Italy POT a general account: see. Hi n ru Ct.ABKTC, Modern Spain. 1815-1898, chaps. 11 and III; HUMS, Modtrn Spain, chap. V; Hvuuard, Histoirt eontt niporaine (/«' I'F.spayne. Vols. 1 and 11 cover the reign of Ferdi- nand VII, 1814-1833, On Italy, between ISlo and 1891; see, Thayer, \\ . R., l'he Dawn of Italian Independence, vol. I. pp. 139-311, the best account in English; also. Stiiim.vn, W. .'.. The I'nity of Italy, pp. 1-40. On social conditions o( Italy after 1815; see. Hoi ton Kino. A History of Italian Unity, vol. 1. chaps. 111. IV, V. On the rise and activity of the secret societies, Johnston. H. M., The Nopoltonit l-'mpirc in Southern Italy, vol. II. pp. 1-139. The most important treatment of the whole subject of the conditions in Spain ami Italy, the revolutions and the congresses, is in Stern. Ottchiektt Europat, vol. 11, chaps. I, lll-Vl, Vln-X, Cambridge Modtrn History, vol. \, chaps. 1, IV, VII, may he consulted. Also TasmcHsx, Deutsche Qttchicktt, vol. Ill, pp. 131- 191, 854-983 j Dsamoua, l.'histoire diplomatique, chaps. 111-V. On England's foreign policy from 1815 to 1897; Wau-oie, History of t'nyland timet IS to. vol. 111. chap. \; BaODBICK anil Fotherinoham, History of England, 1801-1887, chap, \; Pazsok, P. 1... The In- dependence of tkt South .Imerican Republics, an excellent account of the wars of liberation and a study of the policies of England and the United States. On the Monroe Doctrine: Hkudaway. W. F., The Monroe Doctrine (ISi'S 1 ). or TuBXER, P. .'.. Rist of the \eir West (1906)j chap. XIIj TeKFEBXEY, H. W, V., Life of Canniny (1905). CHAPTER IV France Hi kino the Restoration POT sources: see. A.XDEBSOX, (Constitutions and Documents. Xo. 93, Constitutional Charter of 1814; No. 101, various press laws. On the crisis and revolution of 1830, Ibid, Nos, 103 and 104, also: Robixsok and BbaeD, l\ca. Bzbbt, France since Waterloo (1909), more satis factory than the preceding, is readable and useful. A very sug- gestive little book is ('•■ LoWZI Dickinson, devolution and Reaction in Modern France (IH!)J), not a history of France, but. a description of the various phases and schools of political HlOUghl from 1789 to 1871. On the period of this chapter, 1816 to ih:jo, there are chapters in the Cambridge Modern History, vol. X, chaps. II and ill, and Lavishk et Rambaud, Hietoire generate, vol. X, chaps. Ill, VII, XI, XII, XIII. 'J'he most thorough and scholarly treatment, is in SxEBV, (Jeschichte EuropaS, vol. I, chaps. I, VI; vol. II, chaps. VIII, X, XI; vol. Ill, chap. X; vol. IV, chap. I. See also J. It. Hai.i., The Bourbon Beetoration (1909). The trench works Vii:i. Cahtki., I/ixloire de la lieslau '.ration, in 20 vols. (1800-1878), and I)i;vi:noiKit DB 1 1 aiiia n nk, Uixloire 'l pp.), is a scholarly investigation of tin; first years of the Rest a ii rat ion, 1814-1818, and an important addition to our knowledge of the supervision which the Allies exercised over the French government during the years of military occupation, 181.1-1818. IIiiNiiv Hochhavk, 1815, La Beaonde Abdication, La Terreur blanche, is a graphic and on the whole sound description of an unfortunate and turbulent year of transition, far superior to E. Daijdkt'h La Terreur blanche. I,. Miciion, Le ( toucenieinenl parlementaire sous la Restaura- lion (1905, 471 pp.), is a solid study, partly historical, partly juristic, of the introduction and establishment of the theory and practice of cabinet and parliamentary government in France under Louis XVIII and Charles X. J. Rai(thi':i.i:.my", //Introduction du r/tf/ime parle- mentaire en France sous Louis XVIII et Charles X (1904, 323 pp.), is another valuable study of the same subject, a work crowned by the faculty of Law of Paris. Tiimii.Au-DANGiN, Le parti liberal sous la Rextauration (1870), a study of the "Opposition" from 1815 to 1830, use- ful for an understanding of the July Revolution. On the history of the republican party during this period: see, (.',. Wkji.i., Uixloire du parti rcpublicain en France de 181 'i a 1810 (1900), pp. 1-32. On questions of church and state and the activity of the clerical partj see, I)i:mi)orii, UEglite el I' fit at en France de 118U-1810, pp. 325-412 t a valuable contribution to modern church history, readable, analytical, Supplied with footnotes and appendices. A special topic, fully treated, is Lex royalixles conlre I'arrn/te, 1815-1820, by Edouard Bonnat,, Paris, (1906), 2 vols. Useful hooks on this and succeeding periods of French history are: Dim it (Li':on) ct Monnikh (Hkniiy), Les constitutions et les principalea his poliliques de la France depuis 1789, based upon 742 BIBLIOGRAPHY official texts and containing an analytical index (1898); Hi':i.ie, F. A., /,<* constitutions de la Franc* (1880), contains the texts of the various constitutions and historical notes. EL Pierre, Histoire dee assemblies politique* en France (1ST?), covering the years 1789 to 1831, and G. D. Win, L,.< tlcctions hoislaticcs d> puis J1S!> (1895), are useful. Much information, in clear and compact form, on constitutions, electoral laws, liberties, finances, army, navy, education, letters, sciences, and arts, may be found in Hamhaid, Histoire d( la civilisation contemporaine en France (Paris, 1888, -2 vols.); vol. II, 320-794, covers the period from 1814 to 1888. CHAPTER V Revolutions Beyond France Much the most scholarly and authoritative treatment of the revolu- tionary movements in the Netherlands, Poland, Italy, and Germany, is Stern, Oeschichte Europas, vol. IV, chaps. II-VL The Cambridge Modern History, vol. X. ami I.avissk et Rambaud, Histoire gencrale, vol. X, have sections on the subjects treated in this chapter; also DEBinorn, L'histoire diplomatique . vol. I, chaps. YII-IX. On Poland, 1815-1830: consult, Sciukmann, Oeschichte Eusslands unter NikoUtUS I, vol. I, chaps. V, VI; vol. II, chap. XII; also Skiune, Expansion of 'Russia, pp. 110-199, The movements in Germany are described in Teeitschxs, Deutsche Oeschichte, vol. IV, chap. II; in Kaufmann, Politische Oeschichte Deutschlands, pp. 170-193; in Sybel, The Found- ing of the German Empire, vol. I, pp. SJ-107. For events in Italy: consult, Thayer, Dawn of Italian Independence, vol. I, pp. 34:2-378. CHAPTER VI Reign of Louis Philippe For sources: see, Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, No. 105, the constitution of 1830, and No. 106, the electoral law of 1831; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modem European History, vol. II, No. £13, Louis Blanc's labor programme. Illustrative extracts from parliamentary speeches are in Pei.i.isson, Les oratt urs politique* de la France de 1880 a nos jours (ISPS), pp. 1-908. The most extensive French history on the reign of Louis Philippe is that by Thureau- Panc.in, Histoire de la monarchic de juilltt. 7 vols. (1884-1899). Very different in interpretation and emphasis is Fornix ikre's Le regne de Louis Philippe (Jaurks, Histoire Socialiste, vol. VIII). Hillebrand, Oeschichte Frankreichs t880-1848, 9 vols. (1877-1879), is a work of value. Louis Blanc's Histoire de di.e ans (1830-1840), 5 vols., is important for the radical movements of the time. See also, Stein, L., OeschichU der socialen Bewegungin Frankreich, 3 vols. (1850). Covers years 17S9 to 1849. An admirable treatment of the first five years of the reign is found in Stern. Oeschichte Europas. vol. IV, chaps. I and XII. A favorable view of the policy of Louis Philippe is given by Professor Bouroeois in Cambridge Modern History, vol. X, chap. XV, and vol. XI, chap II. On the history of the Republicans: Weill, Histoire du parti rSpubli- cain. pp. 33-975, a careful study based upon a large number of pam- phlets, memoirs, and newspapers, and containing an excellent bibli- ography and index. I. Tchernoff, Le parti rcpubticain sous hi BIBLIOGRAPHY 743 monarchie de juillel (1901), shows that the doctrines of the republicans were changing unck-r the stress of .new and imperative needs and were not a mere repetition of revolutionary phrases. Carefully documented. Octave Festy's Le mouvernent ouvrier au de"but de la monarchie de juillel, 2 vols. (1908), covers the years 1830-18.54, and is an important monograph tracing the growth of labor organizations and the develop- ment of the i(l<.is and programmes of the working class. Debidour, L'Eglise el I'Elat en France, pp. 413-480, describes the relation of the church and state during the reign. Dejhdour, Eludes critiques sur la Revolution, etc., has essays on Louis Philippe Emigre and Melternich et le gouvernement de juillel. A. Bardoux, Guizot (1894), is a criticism of Guizot as statesman, historian, political orator, critic, and publicist. Other biographies are J. de Crozals, Guizot; I. Tchernoff, Louis Blanc (1904); E. Zevort, Thiers (1892); de Mazade, Thiers, Cinquante annees d'histoire contemporaine (1884); and Jules Simon, Thiers, Guizot, Rtmusat (1885). CHAPTER VII Central Europe Between Two Revolutions For Prussia during this period there is no good history in English. Sybel covers these years briefly in The Founding of the German Empire, vol. I, pp. 82-141. The fullest treatment in German is that of Treitschke, Deutsche Geschichte; among the important subjects treated are the Zollverein, vol. IV, pp. 350-406; railroads and telegraphs, vol. IV, pp. 581-598; accession and early reign of Frederick William IV, vol. V, pp. 3-60; on dissatisfaction with the reign and general con- fusion, vol. V, pp. 138-275; on economic conditions, vol. V, pp. 433-523; on the United Landtag of 1847, vol. V, pp. 591-648. Kaufmann, Politische Geschichte, covers this period, pp. 193-218; 273-304. On the Zollverein: see also, B. Rand, Economic History /ch-ay. VIII; also W. H. Dawson, Protection in Germany (1904), chaps. I and II, the best book in English on German commercial policy, and coming down to the tariff of 1902. On Austria: see, Springer, Geschichte Oesterreichs seit dem Wiener Frieden, Zweiter Theil, pp. 1-134; Leger, L., A History of Austro- Hungary from the earliest Time to the Year 1889. Translated by Mrs. B. Hill (1889), chaps. XXVII-XXIX; Whitman, S., Austria (Story of the Nations Series), chaps. XXII-XXIII. On Hungary: Eisenmann, L., Le Compromis Austro-Hongrois de 1867 Etude sur le dualisme (1904), pp. 1-71, contains an excellent survey of the old regime in Hungary, a description of the Hungarian constitution and the relations of Hungary to the Austrian monarchy, and an account of the awakening of the new ideas and the preparation for revolution; a very valuable monograph, containing a bibliography of the source and secondary material. Florence Arnold Forster, Dedk, A Memoir, first published anonymously in 1880 with a preface by M. E. Grant Duff, is a very useful biography. On Bohemia: E. Denis, La Bohime depuis la Montagne-Blanche, 2 vols. (1903). Vol. II, 675 pp., constitutes probably the best history of Bohemia from 1815 to 1901, detailed and full. Pages 87-231 cover the years 1815 to 1848. Some of the subjects treated are the Czech renaissance, literature, science, the Metternich vegime, the growth of the spirit of nationality, the years 1848-1849. For Italy: Thayer, W. R., The Dawn of Italian Independence, vol. I, pp. 379-453; vol. II, pp. 1-76; also the various histories cited above by King, Stillman, Cesaresco, Pbobyn. L. C. Farini, The Roman State from 1815-1850, translated by W. E. Gladstone, 4 vols. (1852). 744 BIBLIOGRAPHY Farini was a Liberal politician opposed to Clericals and Republicans, and generally well informed. R. M. Johnston, The Roman Theoc- racy and the Republic, 1846-1849, pp. 1-112, on the election and early- years of the pontificate of Pius IX. Bulle, O., Die italienische Ehv- heitsidee in Hirer literarisehen Entwicklung von Parini bis Manzoni (Berlin, 1893). A valuable monograph on the early presentation of the ideal of national unity as contained in the writings of Parini and Alfieri, on the intellectual movement during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic period, mirrored in the works of Monti and Foscolo, and on the patriotic significance of Manzoni's productions. Important as show- ing the pre-Mazzinian development of the idea of unity. The best biography of Mazzini is that by Bolton King, Joseph Mazzini (1902). Pages 1-991 arc devoted to a chronological account of Mazzini's life, 999- 341 mainly to a presentation of his principal teachings. Includes a bibliography. Myers, F. W. II., Essays Modern; contains an excellent study of Mazzini's life. Some of the works of Mazzini have been trans- lated into English and published in six volumes under the title, Life and Writings of Joseph Mazzini (1890-1891). A small collection of Essays by Joseph' Mazzini has been made by Thomas Okey (1894). There is now being published in Italy a complete collection of Mazzini's writings, Scritti editi ed inediti di Giuseppe Mazzini. This will probably number sixty volumes when completed, will include the vast correspondence of Mazzini, and will inevitably constitute the most important source for the history of Italy during the awakening. There is an interesting essay on Mazzini in W. K. Thayer's Italica (1908), and brief popular sketches may be found in J. A. R. Marriott's Makers of Modem Italy, and in R. S. Holland's Builders of United Italy (1908). CHAPTER VIII Central Europe in Revolt Excellent general accounts of the revolutions of 1848-1849 are to be found in Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, single volume edition, pp. 707-804, three volume edition, vol. Ill, pp. 1-148; and in Andrews, Historical Development of Modern Europe, vol. I, chaps. IX and X. Maurice, C. E., The Revolutionary Movement of 1848-1849, m Italy, Austria-IIunyary, and Germany, with some Examination of the Precious Thirty-three ' Years (1887), contains a great amount of information, poorly presented; also contains a bibliography. For Austria, the chief authorities are Friedjung, H., Oesterreich von t848 bis I860. Vol. I covers the period from 1848 to 1851 (1908); Springer, Oeschkhte Oesterreichs, Zweiter Theil, pp. 135-774; Helfkrt, J. A., Oeschichte Oesterreichs seit IS',S. For Hungary, the most im- portant treatment is Eisenmann, Li Compromis Austro-Hongrois, pp. 75- 148. Consult, also Arnold Forster, Dedk, A Memoir, pp. 79-119. Kossuth's Speeches in America, explaining and defending the Hungarian movement, were edited by F. W. Newman and published in New York in 1854. For Bohemia: Denis, La Boheme depuis la Montayne-Blanche (1903), vol. II, pp. 235-381. For Germany: see, Sybel, The Founding of the German Empire, vol. I, pp. 145-499; vol. II, pp. 3-82; Kaufmann, Politische Geschichte Deutschlands. chap. V; Matter, P., La Prusse et la Revolution de 1848 (1903). The best account of the German revolution is in Hans Blum's Die deutsche Revolution, 1848-49 (1897). A sketch of the attempts to achieve unity before 1848, followed by an account of the revolutionary movements in the several states and of the work of the BIBLIOGRAPHY 745 Frankfort Parliament. Bismarck's opinions on the revolutionary events are in his Reflections and Reminiscences, vol. I, chaps. II and III. Vol. I of the Reminiscences of Carl Schurz (1907), a revolutionist and refugee, are exceedingly interesting on these years. For Italy, by far the best account in English is Thayer, Dawn of Italian Independence, vol. II, pp. 77-415. On the French expedition against the Roman Republic: see, Bourgeois et Clermont, Rome et Na- poleon III; also the recent scholarly and very graphic book of G. M. Trevelyan on Garibaldi's Defence of the Roman Republic (1907). Chap- ters I, II, and III give an admirable account of Garibaldi's previous career, and chaps. XII-XVII a description of his famous retreat. An excellent bibliography is appended. Garibaldi's own account is contained in his Autobiography, translated by A. Werner, vol. II, pp. 1-51. On Mazzini's connection with the Republic: see, Bolton King's Life of Maz- zlni, chap. VII. R. M. Johnston, Roman Theocracy, pp. 113-315, may also be consulted on the years 1848-1849. CHAPTER IX The Second Republic and the Founding of the Second Empire The Constitution of 1848 may be found in Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, No. 110. There are clear accounts of the Second Re- public, by Bourgeois, in Cambridge Modern History, vol. XI, chap. V, and by Seignobos in Lavisse et Rambaud, Hlstolre generate, vol. XI, chap. I. General histories are: Pierre, V., Hlstolre de la ripubllque de 18^8, 2 vols. (1873-1878), anti-Bonapartist; Gorce, Hlstolre de la deuxleme republlque, 2 vols. (1887), written from the standpoint of sym- pathy with a liberal monarchy, critical of the republic, and merciless toward socialists and socialistic theories. An admirable counterweight to this is Georges Renard's La ripubllque de 1848 (1848-1852), vol. IX of Hlstolre Soclallste. Part I, pp. 1-227, is devoted to the political history, Part II, pp. 227-384, to the economic and social evolution. Important for the period are: Debidour, L'Eglise et VEtat en France, pp. 481-523 on the expedition to Rome and the Falloux law concerning education; Bourgeois et Clermont, Rome et Napoleon III, a study in diplomacy, based upon unpublished official documents as well as upon published material, and showing that the Roman expedition of 1849 prepared the Empire by forming a close alliance between Louis Napoleon, the clergy, and the army; Quentin-Bauchart, P., Lamartine, homme politique, 2 vols. (1903-1908). Excellent recent studies are: Ferdinand Dreyfus, L'asslstance sous la deuxleme republlque (1907), 220 pp., a treatment of the question of poverty and an account of the various measures of social reform passed at this time; Weill, G., Hlstolre du parti ripubllcaln en France, chaps. IX and X; I. Tchernoff, Associations et socUUs secretes sous la deuxleme republlque, 1848-1851 (1905), 396 pp., a treatise based upon much unpublished material in the archives of the ministries of justice and the interior; aims to show that the coup d'itat was prepared by the previous systematic destruction of republican organizations; a collection of valuable documents; I. Tchernoff, Le parti republlcaln au Coup d'Etat et sous le Second Empire (1906), 676 pp., richly docu- mented, shows that the coup d'Uat was far from being received by the laboring classes with amiable , indifference; I. Tchernoff, Louis Blanc, 1904;Tenot, E., The Coup d'Etat; Thihuia, NapoUon III avant VEmplre, 2 vols., is an apology for the Prince President, diffuse, useful as show- ing the state of public opinion, as the author has industriously ran- sacked English and French newspaper files; Cheetham, F. H., Louis 746 BIBLIOGRAPHY Napoleon and the Genesis of the Second Republic: brine/ a Life of the Emperor Napoleon 111 to the Time of His Election to the Presidency of the French Republic (1909), is a popular, readable narrative, but adds nothing to our knowledge; Jerrold, the Lift of Napoleon III, De- rived from State Records, from I'npublisln d Familii Correspondence, and from. Personal Testimony, 4 vols. (1871-1874), is sympathetic and full; Forbes, A., Life of Napoleon III. is popular, superficial, untrust- worthy; H. A. I.. Fisher, Bonapartism, Six Lectures Delivered in the University of London (1908), is popular anil brilliantly written, at- tempts to show the essential unity of the two Napoleonic regimes, more interesting and suggestive than convincing; Pellissox, Les orateurs politique*-, pp. 209-277, contains interesting extracts from parliamentary speeches. For the Seeond Empire, the leading secondary authority is Gorce, Histoire du Second Empire, 7 vols. (1894-1905), the fullest and ablest history we have of the period from 1850 to 1871, very important, not only for the history of Prance, but of Italy and Germany also. Presents a wealth of information with great ludicity, admirable impartiality, and largeness of view. An indispensable work. Vols. I, pp. 1-131, and II, pp. 1-129, cover the Held of this chapter. Taxile Deloro, Histoire da Second Umpire. (> vols. (18(>!)-1S7.">), an older work, based on careful research, strongly opposed to the Empire. Albert Thomas, Le Second Empire (Histoire Socialists, vol, X). very instructive; see chaps. I and II. There is no satisfactory account of the Second Empire in English. Chapters I and IV in vol. II of Andrews, Historical Development of Modern Europe, are clear and well-balanced, but necessarily restricted. See, also, Cambridge Modern History, vol. XI, chap. X. For the history of the relations of church and state: see, DEBIDOUR, L'Eglise et I'Etat en France, pp. 524-550; for history of the republican party: Weill, Histoire du parti republicain. chaps. XI-XIII; I. Tchernoff, Le parti r< 'publicaiii an Coup d'Etat et sous le Second I'm pin ; for description of the political system of the autocratic Empire: see, Benton. 1/crolution constitutionelle du Second Umpire. Part I treats of the despotic em- pire and the constitution of 1S.')J. A very important monograph. For labor and social questions and movements: Weill, G., Histoire du mOuvement social en France. 1852-1902 (1905), chaps. I-1II. CHAPTER X CAVOUR AND THE CREATION OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY The general histories of Italy on this period are: Kino, A History of Italian Unity, 2 vols., the most extensive and informing history in English, thoroughly documented. Vol. I, pp. 353-416, and all of vol. II concern the period of this chapter; Cesaresco, The Liberation of Italy, pp. 165-415, written with much charm, sympathy, and understanding, but without scientific apparatus; Stillman, The Union of Italy, pp. 2\-2- 325; Pbobtk, Italy 1815-1B90, pp. 159-242. There is an excellent chap- ter in W.u.poik's History of Twenty-fine Years, vol. I, pp. 506-308. Much the best account of Napoleon Ill's Italian policy and of the war of 1859 is in GoBCE, Histoire du Second Empire, vol. II, pp. 511-449, and vol. Ill, pp. 1-123; and on the annexations. Ibid vol. Ill, pp. 125- 212, a treatment marked by admirable lucidity, keenness of analysis, solidity of judgment, and sustained interest of narration. For Cavour: see, Cesaresco, Cavour (1898), a brief biography of unusual merits, well-informed, just to the other figures of the time as well as to Cavour, epigrammatic, full of color and life. Countess Cesaresco traces BIBLIOGRAPHY 747 the shifting diplomacy of the period with precision and comprehension. Her chapters on the internal reforms in Piedmont and her revelation of Cavour's activity hetween the interview of Plombieres and April 1859 are admirable. William de la Rive, Le Comle de Cavour, R4cits et Souvenirs (Paris, 1862), an intimate portrait by a close personal friend. This has been translated into English by Edward Romilly (London, 1862), but the French edition is preferable. D. Berti, II Conte di Cavour avanti il IH'iH (1886), important. Vii.lari in his Studies, Critical and Historical (London, 1907), has a chapter on the youth of Cavour (pp. 119-141). D. Zanichelli, Cavour (1905), a solid study by a professor in the University of Pisa. N. Bianchi, La politique du Comte Camille de Cavour de 1852 a 1861, Lettres inMites, 419 pp. (1885), is an important collection of over two hundred letters of Cavour to Marquis Emmanuel d'Azeglio, the ambassador of Piedmont to Eng- land during the period. Treitschke, Cavour, in vol. Ill of his His- torische und Politische Aufsdtze, a study first published in 1869, and Kraus, F. X., Cavour, Die Erhebung Italiens im Neunzehnten Jahr- hundert, with bibliography and illustrations (1902), may also be con- sulted; see, also, Mazade, Le Comte de Cavour (1877). The parlia- mentary speeches of Cavour have been published in 12 vols., Discorsi parlementari (1863-1874), and Chiala, L., has edited his correspondence, Lettere edite ed. inedite di Camillo Cavour, 2nd edit. (1883-1887), 10 vols. Chiala's extensive introductions and notes in these volumes are of great value. See, also, Bert, A., Nouvelles lettres inedites de Cavour (1889). Brief essays on Cavour are found in Makkiott's Makers of Modern Italy, and in Hollands Builders of United Italy. Lord Acton has a suggestive essay on Cavour, first published in 1861, and reprinted in 1907, in his Historical Essays and Studies, chap. VI. W. R. Thayer compares Cavour and Bismarck in the Atlantic Monthly, March 1909; same article Fortnightly Review, March and April 1909. Nigra, Cavour and Madame de Circourt (1894), contains some un- published letters from the years 1836-1860. Cadogan's Life of Cavour is worthless. On Garibaldi the most recent work is G. M. Trevelyan, Garibaldi and the Thousand (1909), an account of the Sicilian expedition. Another volume is announced by the same author to cover the conquest of the mainland. These, with the work already cited by the same author on Garibaldi's Defence of the Roman Republic, will constitute the most scholarly account, in English, of Garibaldi's career. Their literary merit is high. Each volume contains a critical bibliography. W. R. Thayer's Throne Makers (1899), has a spirited essay on Garibaldi. H. R. Whitehoisi:, Collapse of the Kingdom of Naples (1899), gives a brief survey of affairs in Naples down to 1848, describes the reaction of the years 1850-1859, and then the catastrophe of I860; an excellent book. On the Papacy: see, R. de Cesabe, The Last Days of Papal Rome (1850- 1810), translated by Helen Zimmerx, with an introduction bv G. M. Trevelyan (Boston, 1909). The Birth of Modern Italy (1909) con- sists of the posthumous papers of Jessie White Mario, edited by the Duke Litta-Visconti-Arese ; interesting for the careers of Mazzini and Garibaldi whose friend Madame Mario was; unjust toward Cavour; full of the emotion of the Risorgimento — at least of the republican agitation. Della Rocca, The Autobiography of a Veteran (1898), is an inter- esting narrative by an important participant in events from 1848 to 1870. The most elaborate Italian histories of the Risorgimento are: Tivaroni, C, Storia critica del risorgimento d'ltalia (Turin, 1888-1897), 9 vols.; and. Bebsf./io, V.. // regno di Vittorio Emanuele II; Trent' anni di vita italiana (Turin, 1878-1895), 8 vols. 748 BIBLIOGRAPHY CHAPTER XI Bismarck and German Unity There is no satisfactory work in English on the founding of tht> German Empire. Headlam's long-promised work in the Cambridge Historical Scries has not yet appeared. Malxeson's The It* founding of the German Empire 1 848-1871 (1893) is brief and concerned chiefly with military events. The articles in the Cambridge Modern History are unsatisfactory. Walpole, History of Twenty-Five Years, vol. II, chaps. X and XIII, is straightforward, informing, concerned mainly with diplomacy. Syhki.'s The Founding of the Herman Empire (>;/ Wi'lliitm I, 7 vols. (1890-1898), is a monumental work, based chiefly upon Prussian state documents, to which he alone was allowed access by Bismarck. While a work of remarkable industry and erudition, it is a thorough- going defense and panegyric of the conduct of the Prussian Govern- ment. Moreover, in many important matters it is not subject to effective control. Zwiedeveck-Sudekhorst's Deutsche Geschichte von dor Aufldsung des alien bis aw Errichtung des nenen Kaiserreichs, 1806- 1871, 3 vols. (1903), is characterized by much the same partisanship, as is also Ottokab I.orkn/.'s Kaiser Wilhelm und die BegrUndung des lieichs, 1866-1871 (Jena, 190^?). On the other hand/ the German Scholarship, which commands greater respect abroad as more critical and objective, is that of Marcks, Lenz, Delbriick, Meinecke, who are adhering to the Ranke traditions of historical writing. II. Fiuedjung's Der Kampf tint die Vorh, rrsehaft in D> utschland, is by an Austrian scholar and covers the years 1859-1866, g vols. (1898). It is the most important treatment we have of the relations of Prussia and Austria on the critical years before 18(i(i. Contains also an excellent account of the Austro-Prussian war. The work is already in its seventh edition. One of the most brilliant and suggestive books on this period is by E. Denis, La fondation de I'empire allemand (1906), a study covering the years 1850 to 1870, limited to a single series of facts, those which prepared and which explain the foundation of the German Empire. Large spate is given to the evolution of ideas and to the economic transformation. The book is marked by profound and wide investiga- tion, by penetration and subtlety of characterisation, by an admirable impartiality. It contains no references, footnotes, or bibliography. The literature on Bismarck is very extensive and is constantly expand- ing. His speeches have been published by Kohl, Die politisehen Reden des Fiirsten Bismarck, 14 vols. (1899-1905). There is an excellent selection in two small volumes, sold cheaply, entitled. Otto von Bis- marck. Setzen wir Deutschland in den Sattel. licden aus der grossen Zeit, edited by Eugex Kaxkschmidt (1907). A smaller collection is that of Otto Lyon, Bismarcks Heden und Briefe (Leipsic, 1895). Professor Hermann Schoenfeld has published a collection entitled Bismarck's Speeches and Letters (in German, 1905). The Correspondence of William I and Bismarck, with Other Letters front and to Prince Bis- marck, translated by J. A. Foim, - 1 vols. (1903), consists of about five hundred letters, selected by Bismarck himself, to show his relationship to the Emperor and also to authenticate and supplement his Ei mi- niscences in certain respects. Prince Bismarck's Letters to His Wife, His Sister and Others, from IS',', to 1870, translated by F. Maxse (New York, 1878), are vivacious and entertaining. Bismarck's Reflections and Reminiscences, 9 vols. (1899), are im- portant but must be used with caution. For criticism of them, see, Erich Marcks, Fiirst Bismarcks Oedanken und Krinnernngen. I'ersuch einer kritischen Wiirdigung (1899); also Max Lexz, Zitr Kritik der BIBLIOGRAPHY 749 Oedanken und Erinnerungen des Fursten Bismarck (1899); Friedrich Meinecke, Historische Zeitschrift, Band 82, pp. 282-295; Sorel, Etudes de Htt drat ure et, d'histoire (1901). On the new Bismarck historiography (writings of Busch, Blume, Bamberger, etc.), see, Hans Delbruck, Preussische Jahrbiicher, Band 96, pp. 461-480 (June, 1899). There are many biographies of Bismarck. The best in English is that by Headlam, J. W., well informed and judicial. Munkoe Smith, Bismarck and Ger- man Unity (1898), is a clear epitome, with a slight bibliography. In French, P. Matter, Bismarck et son temps, 3 vols. (1905-1908), full, critical, remarkably impartial, and very readable. In German, Max Lenz, Geschichte Bismarcks (1902), compact and critical; Ehich Marcks, Bismarck, Fine Biographic. One volume has just appeared (1909), entitled Bismarcks Jugend, 1815-1848. One may hazard the con- jecture that this, when completed, will be the most satisfactory biography in German. Ed. Heyck, Bismarck in Monographien zur Welt geschichte, is interestingly illustrated. Erich Marcks' Kaiser Wilhelm I (5th edition, 1905) is admirable in knowledge, criticism, and temper, an indispensable book both by reason of its presentation and interpretation of the Emperor's career and his relations to others, especially to Bismarck, and also because of its critical bibliography. A clear account of the Danish and Austro-Prussian wars may be found in Murdoc-k, The Reconstruction of Europe (1894), chaps. XV- XXI. Hozier, H. M., Seven Weeks' War, is readable, founded on letters written from Bohemia to the London Times, well supplied with maps and plans. Stbel'b account of the war of 1866 is in vol. V, The Found- ing of the German Empire. See, also, Friedjung, Der Kampf um die Vorherrschaft, vols. I-II, and Gorce. Histoire du Second Empire, vol. IV, pp. 522-631; vol. V, pp. 1-80. CHAPTER XII The Transformation of the Second Empire The most valuable account of the transformation of the Second Empire between 1860 and 1870 is in Gorce, Histoire du Second Empire, vol. Ill, livre XXII, and vols. IV and V. Berton, H., L' Evolution con- stitutionelle du Second Empire (1900), parts two and three, is also full and trustworthy; an important monograph by a French lawyer. For the growth of the republican party: Weill, Histoire du parti repu- blicain, chaps. XII-XV; Tchernoff, Le parti rdipublicain au Coup d'E tat et sous le Second Empire. For labor movements: Weill, Histoire du mouvement social, chaps. III-VI; for relations with the church: Debidour, L'Eglise et I'Etat en France, pp. 551-627. CHAPTER XIII The Franco-German War Palat, Bibliographie g/me'rale de la guerre de 1870-1871 (1896), is indispensable for any detailed study of this period. There is a good account of the causes of the war in Rose, Development of European Nations, vol. I, chap. I; also in Walpole, History of Twenty-five Years, vol. II, chap. VIII; Headlam, Bismarck, chap. XIII. Vols. VI and VII of Sybel's Founding of the German Empire contain an elaborate account of the events and diplomacy of the period; pronounced special pleading. These volumes have not the value of the earlier ones, 750 BIBLIOGRAPHY as Bismarck did not allow the author access to the Prussian archives for the period after 1867. The seventh volume was composed under the inspiration of Bismarck himself, anil is based on information largely furnished by him. Delbrilck says it is " not history luit diplomacy — and calculated to inspire laughter at that." (Delrrucx, Das G( heimniss der Xapolconischt n Politik, p. 34). Bismarck's description is in his Reflec- tions and Reminiscences, chaps. XX-XXIII. Far the most judicial, as well as most interesting account of the causes of the war and of the war itself (down to Sedan) is in GoaCE's Histoire du Second Empire, vols. VI and VII, volumes of absorbing interest, clear, vivid, admirably ar- ranged, and written with scrupulous fairness. Two hundred pages of vol. VI are given to the Hohenzollcrn candidacy. An earlier but very able study is Sorei., A., Histoire diplomatique de la guerre franco- allemande. 9 vols. (1875). OlliVTER's L' Empire liberal, 11 vols., in course of publication (1895 — ), is an elaborate account of the Empire by one who was badly compromised by the war. On the hearing upon the fall of the Empire of Napoleon's relations to the Pope: Boirgeois et Clermont, Rome et NapoUon III, is important. The authors thesis is that Napoleon's refusal to withdraw his troops from Rome occasioned the failure of the projected triple alliance with Italy and Austria, and that that was the cause of the subsequent disasters. See, also, Debidour, L'Bglise et VEtat en France, pp. 551- 627. Debidour's account of the diplomacy of the period is found in his Histoire diplomatique, vol. 11, chaps. YII-X. The numer- ous biographies of Bismarck, cited above, should hi' consulted; also MarcKS, Kaiser WiUielm I. Lord Acton has a study of the causes of the Franco-Prussian war in his Historical Essays and Studies (1907), chap. VII. Of the war itself there is a good account in Rose, Development of the European Nations, vol. I, chaps. II, III, and IV; also in Murdock, Reconstruction of Europe, chaps. X\1U-X\X. Geh. J. F. Maurice, The Franco-German War, is a translation of a German work, edited by Pflvc.k-H ARTixii, entitled Krieg and Sieg (1S9(>); Col. L. Hale's The People's War in France (1901) is founded on IIoxic, Der Volkskrieg an der Loire, and describes the latter part of the war, after Sedan. Moltke, The Franco-German War is important but technical. Chuquet, La guerre de 1870-1871 (1895), is an excellent account in a single volume. The extensive histories by the German General Staff and by Lehautcourt are too detailed and technical for general use. Probably the best account for the general reader is GoRCE, Histoire du Second Empire, vol. VI, pp. 331-434, and VII throughout (comes down to September 4, 1870). E. B. Washburne, Recollections of a Minister to France, S vols. (1887), a very interesting and important hook by the United States Minister to France, the only foreign minister who re- mained at his post in Paris throughout the Franco-German war, and whose firm conduct won the praise of William I, Bismarck, Gambetta, and Thiers. There was published by the Government Printing Office, 1878, Senate Executive Document No. £4, a book of 2-2-2 pages entitled Franco-German War and the Insurrection of the Commune. Corre- spondence of E. B. Washburne. This includes the correspondence of Washburne with the State Department in Washington in relation to the war, together with correspondence with Bismarck, Bancroft, United States Minister to Berlin, and Motley, United States Minister to London. The letters cover the period from July 11). 1870, to June 29, 1871. Interesting volumes are BusCH, Bismarck in the Franco-German War; A. Forbes, My Experiences in the War Between France and Germany (187?); W. H. Russell, My Diary During the Last Great War (1874); Bis- marck's Letters to His Yi'i/c from the Seat of War (1870-1871), trans- BIBLIOGRAPHY 751 lated by A. Harder (1903); Diaries of Emperor Frederick, During the Campaigns of 1866 and 1870-1871, translated by F. A. Welby (1902); Henry Labouchere, Diary of the Besieged Resident in Paris (1871); Sir Edwin Arnold, Inside Paris During the Siege (1871); Jules Claretie, Paris assiege; F. Sarcey, he siege de Paris. This attained its thirtieth edition within its first year. See, Thiers, Notes et Souvenirs, on the years 1870-1873 (1903), for an account of Thiers' attempts to secure the intervention of foreign powers. CHAPTER XIV The German Empire There is in English no general history of Germany since 1871. The treatment in Andrews, Contemporary Europe, Asia and Africa, is excellent. That in Rose, Development of European Nations, vol. I, chap. VI; and vol. II, chap. I, is slight; that in Headlam, Bismarck, pp. 377- 463, good. Lowell, A. L., Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, vol. II, chap. VII, gives a clear outline of party history from 1871 to 1894. The most extensive account is H. Blum, Das deutsche Reich zur Zeit Bismarcks, covering the years 1871-1890 (1893), a book largely inspired by Bismarck himself. Oncken's Das Zeitalter des Kaisers Wilhelm I, vol. II, pp. 3(59-768, 952-1005, comes down to 1888. Bulle, Geschichte der Jahre 181 1-1817 , is useful. Kaufmann, Politische Geschichte Deutschlands, covers the period from 1870-1888 very poorly. Probably the most useful and readable account is in Matter, Bismarck et son temps, vol. Ill, a book based on wide and careful investigation, impartial in tone, an interesting narrative. The writings of Marcks and Lenz, cited above, should be used. Bismarck's Reflections and Reminiscences, vol. II, chaps. XXIV-XXXIII, concern the period 1871- 1888. The Memoirs of Prince Chlodwig of H ohenlohe-Schillingsfuerst, 2 vols. (1906), are of importance. Hohenlohe was head of the Bavarian ministry 1866-1870, German ambassador to Paris 1874-1885, and Chancel- lor of the Empire 1894-1900. The Memoirs throw light upon the relations between the South German States and the North German Confederation, upon the conflict with the Roman Catholic Church, and upon French politics from 1874 to 1885. Of slight importance for the period after 1890. On the Kulturkampf: Hahn, Geschichte des Kulturkampfes; on Social Democracy: E. Milhaud, La Democratic socialiste allemande (1903); Kirkup, History of Socialism (1906), chaps. V, VII, IX (contains Erfurt programme in full, pp. 223-229); Werner Sombart, Socialism (1898); A. Schaeffle, The Quintessence of Socialism; W. H. Dawson, Bismarck and State Socialism (1891); on protection: W. H. Dawson, Protection in Germany, A History of German Fiscal Policy During the Nineteenth Century (1904), the best book in English on the subject, coming down to the tariff of 1902; on state insurance: F. W. Lewis, State Insurance, chap. IV (Boston, 1909); also, J. G. Brooks, Compulsory Insurance in Germany; Ludwig Lass, German Workmen's Insurance ; on government: B. E. Howard, The German Empire (1906), an exhaustive account of the structure of the imperial government, not a description of the manner in which it works, a jurid- ical rather than an historical study; Lowell, Governments and Parties, chaps. V, VI, VII, an account of both structure and operation of im- perial and state governments; Combes de Lestrade, Les monarchies de V empire allemand, organisation constitutionelle et administrative (1904); probably the best, most complete account of German governments, im- perial and state; describes the powers and functions of sovereigns, 752 BIBLIOGRAPHY chambers, ministers] communes, financial and judicial systems, etc.; «.'u Vitus Bobobaud, The Adoption and Ann mdrnv nt of Constitution* in Burope and America, translated by C D. Habbn v iS!>;>). pp, i?-7S. kiorrrti. 1\. Ihiissi,/ Jahre diutsclur •', rfassuuastxschichtc. 1867' IS! 1 " : vol. 1 (^ i ;>vH> > covers period to is;; ; Laband, P., Dos Staatsreekt dee doutsehon Reiches, I vols, (tth edit., 1901), a very important work on German public law. Has been translated into French. The most In- forming book on present day Germany is \Y. II. Dawson's 1'he Evolution of Modern Germany (1908), a hook that aims to trace the economic and social transformation of Germany, her industrial and colonial expansion, the growth of socialism, etc. See, also, E. D. Howard, rhe Recent indus- trial Progress of Germany (l!>07) ; " Vi lbjtas," /7k Herman Empire of l'o-dai/ (1909); Kir.isu in is. O. (or J. 1- i i is BaBKBB), Modiin Germany, Jlir Political and Economic Problems (1905). CHAT l'KK XV 'I'm: Tmisn Kin m ic There is no satisfactory history of the Third Republic in English. I.oweii. Government* and Parties, chap. II, has a clear outline of party history down to 18!>(>. CoUBBB tin. Evolution of the Third Republic, is not always clear, presupposes some knowledge of the subject, contains chapters on education, the army, literature, socialism; is poorly translated. K. I.vwion. ITie Third French Republic (1909), covers in a Superficial way the years 1871-1906, and has entertaining chapters on literature, science, art. education, the parliamentary system. W. G. Bbbby, France since Waterloo (1909), devotes pages 949-868 to the years 1871-1908. A work of great importance, detailed, authoritative. ami brilliantly written is llw.w w\. Contemporary France, I vols. (1!H>:>- 1909), covering the years 1ST l-ISS J*, a full narrative, abounding in vivid and instructive accounts of men anil events, '/.vvouv, K... Histoire de la Troisieme F,publique. 1 vols. (1896-1901), covers the years 1870-1894, a useful narrative, full of detail, fair, careful, pleasantly written. 1 uirsiii ■ii'iir, La Troisii nu l\t publiauc. 1871-1900, is vol. XII of Jaubsb, Histoire Socialists, V. T. Mabbials, Life of I. ion Qambetta in the Statesmen Series (London. ISiHl), is a brief account. Ch ari.ks uk Mabadb, Monsieur Thiers, Cinquante annus d'histoire contemporaine (1884), is an Interesting book. More important is the life of Jules Fcrrtj by A-. rasn Rambaud (Paris, 1903), a biography of a forceful and far- sighted statesman, a founder of the Republic, written by a trained his- torian. See. also, Hi'nkv Lsybbt, Waldi ck-Rousseau ft la Troisieme R4pubKque, 1869-1899. On protection: see, H. O. Mrurmru. Protection in F rutin ; on labor and social movements: G. WEIIX, Histoire du mouvcuifnt social tn France, 185&-190& (1905), pp. 133-479, with bibliography; on diplomatic history: Hipfbau, Histoire diplomatique do la Troisieme RepubKgue (isss); A. Tabdieu, France and tin- Alliances (1908); Billot, m. v.. La Franco ei I'ltalie. Hisioire des iiniues troubles (1905); the author was French ambassador in Koine, and treats of the period between 1SS1 and 1899 — useful for French history, also for Italian; on colonial ex- pansion: LsVASSEUB, I. a France el 809 colonics. 3 vols. (1889); 1.. Yionon. L'expansion dc la France (1891), and by the same author, l.es colonies francaises. leur commerce, leur situation iconomiguo, leur utilite pour la metropole. leur avenir (1886), containing a description of the dif- ferent French colonies; Dubois et Tbbbibb, Lee colonies francmsos: an sitdt d'expansion coloniale. 1800-1900 (1909); on the Dreyfus case; BIBLIOGRAPHY 753 Kkinacii, J., I/affaire Dreyfus, ■'> vols. 1901-1902; also by Dreyel-s him- self, Five Years of My Life (1901); Steevens, The Tragedy of Dreyfus (1899). On l.iii- and church: Abthub Galton, Church and Htate in France, tSOO-1907, ]>]>. 201-268. Of the first importance is Debioour, A., UEglise Catholique et /,'/; tat sous la Troiswm* R4publique, 1810-1906, 2 vols. (Paris, 1906-1909). Vol. I covers the period 1870-1889; vol. II, 1889-1900; the fullest account concerning the separation of Church and State t<» lie found is in vol. ii, pp. 331-498; excellent bibliographies; many important documents, Including the law of April 1:5, 1908, modifying certain articles of the. Jaw of December 9, 1905. See, also, Briand, A., L« Separation des Eglises el de VEtat. Rapport fail au nam de la Commission de la Chamhre den D/ipults, suivies des pieces annexes (1905), On the government of Prance, the best description in English is Lowell's Governments and Parties, chaps. I and II. This is far superior to Bodlet, J. S. £, France, 2 vols. (1898), a pretentious hook which, with much information, is dominated by the melancholy thesis that parliamentary government is unsuccessful in France, because it is not the same as parliamentary government in England. The book contains many other preconceptions, more entertaining than important. Lebon and Pei.lt, France as 11 Is (1888), is a useful book. George, W. L., France in the Twentieth C'enlury (1909), contains chapters on the politi- cal institutions, relations of church and state, socialism, trades-unionism, colonies, education, etc., of France of the present day. A penetrating analysis of the French mind and character and description of French conditions is W. C. Brownkli.'s French Traits, an Essay in Comparative Criticism (1889). Useful collections of the constitutions of France are: Duguit et Monnieb, Les constitutions el les principales lois poliliques de la France depuis 1189 (2nd edit., 1908); Hklie, F. A., Les constitutions de la France (1880). Professor F. M. Anderson has rendered an im- portant service to students by translating many of the important documents in the history of nineteenth century France in his Con- stitutions and Documents (2nd edit., revised and enlarged, 1909). Pellihson, Les orateurs poliliques de la France de 1880 d nos jours, pp. 381-434; contains extracts illustrating the history of the Third Republic from 1871 to 1889. CHAPTER XVI The Kingdom of Italy The literature on this period of Italian history is not extensive Stillman'* history may be used; pages 358 to 393 cover the years 1871 to 188(i. Lowell's account of party history down to 1896 is clear and his description of the political institutions adequate, Governments and 1'nrtics, vol. I, chaps. Ill and IV. Stiilman's Francesco Crispi (1899) and Justin McCarthy's Pope Leo XIII (1896) are useful biographies. A. Billot, La France et V I talis, 1881-1899, 2 vols. (1905), a book by a former French ambassador to Italy. For present conditions in Italy: see, Kino and Okey, Italy To-day (2nd edit., 1909); W. It. Thayer, Italica (1908), containing an essay on "Thirty Years of Italian Progress," and one on "Italy in 19*07"; En Driault, Les problemes poliliques et sociaux a la fin du XIX^ siecle (1900), chap. II, La ques- tion romaine: le pape, le roi, le peuple. The Encyclopedia Americana contains more than thirty articles, mostly by Italian specialists, on various Italian institutions and conditions. 754 BIBLIOGRAPHY CHAPTER XVII Austria-Hungary Since 1849 On Austria and Hungary, there is very little that is important in English. Leger, L., History of Austro-Hungary (1889), chaps. XXXIII- XXXVIII, is probably the most satisfactory treatment. Whitman, S., Austria (Story ot' the Nations Series), gives a brief account of the period from 1815 to 1898, pp. 308-381. Cambridge Modern History, vol. XI, chap. XV, contains an account of the reaction and reorganization in Austria, Prussia, and the German Confederation, by Professor Fried- jung, of the University of Vienna. Consult, also. Ibid. chap. XVI. Seignobos has useful chapters. Ya.mukhy, A., The Story of Hunqaru (The Story of the Nations Series, 1886), pp. 400-440. Florence Ahxold Fouster, Francis Dedk, A Memoir, first published anonymously (1SS0), is important for the period 1840 to 1876. Sir Horace Rum- bolu's Francis Joseph and His Times (1909) is an interesting and vivid account of this reign. The author was long British ambassador at Vienna. His book is useful, though frequently superficial and biased. Rumbold has, however, made much use of the solid works of Friedjung. The most important work on Austria after 1848 is H. Friedjung, Oesterreieh von 1S!/S bin 1S60. of which vol. I, Die Jahre der Revolution und der Reform, 1848-1851, has appeared (3rd edit., Stuttgart, 1908). L. Eisenmann, he Compromis Austro-Hongrois. is very valuable: on the period of reaction, 1849-1859, see pp. 149-203; on the various at- tempts at constitution-making, the struggle over the unitary and federal principles} see Ibid., pp 207-399. See, also, Dedk, A Memoir, passim; A. de Bertha, ha Hongrie moderns, de 1849 a li>01 (Paris, 1901), a book by a native of Hungary, laudatory of men and things Hungarian, yet well-informed and useful. Chap. I describes Hungary under Austrian absolutism, 1849-1859; chap. II, Hungary under the provisional schemes, 1859-1865. H. Friedjung, Der Kampf urn die Vorherrschaft in Deutsch- land, is invaluable for the period 1859-1866. On the making of the Ausgbieh, 1865-1867: see, Kisen ;mann, he Compromis Austro-Hongrois, pp. 403-657; Forster, Dedk, A Memoir, pp. 113-3-22; Bertha, ha Hongrie moderns, chap. Ill, pp. 83-160; see, also, Bertha, ha constitution hongroise (Paris, 1S9S), a good outline and description containing chap- ters on the laws of 1848, on the attempts at centralization, on dualism, on Croatia, the nationalities, development from 1867-1897; see, also, M. G. Horn, he compromis de t868 entre la Hongrie et la Croatie (Paris, 1907). Bertha also has a book on Francois Joseph I et son regne, lS-iS-1888 (Paris, 1888). See, also, Beust, Aus drei Viertel-Jahrhunderten. vols. I and II (Stuttgart, 1887). On the working of the Ausgleich; Eisen- mann, he Compromis Austro-Hongrois, pp. 659-680; on history of Hungary, 1867-1901: Bertha, ha Hongrie moderns, pp. 161-358. A clear and instructive account of party history in Austria-Hungary from 1867 to 1896, and a description of the political institutions of each country, and of the Dual Monarchy, is given by Lowell in Governments and Parties, vol. II, chaps. VIII-X. The fullest account of Bohemia in the nineteenth century is to be found in E. Denis, ha Boheme depute la Moniagne-Blanche, 2 vols. (Paris, 1903); vol. II, pp. 381-670, covers the period from 1850 to 1901. For descriptions of contemporary Austria and Hungary: Geoffrey Drage, Austria-Hungary (1909); Scotus-Viator (R. W. Seton-Watson), The Future of the Hungarian Nation (190S), and (by the same author) Racial Problems in Hungary (1908); A. R. Colouhoun, The Whirlpool of Europe (1907). A careful, scientific study of the races and nationalities in the dual monarchy is Auerbach, hes races et les mationalit4s en BIBLIOGRAPHY 755 Autriche-Hongrie (1898). The leading authority on Austrian public law is Ulbrich, J., Oesterreiches Staatsrecht (3rd edit., Tubingen, 1904). See, also, for general conditions: Andre Cheradame, L'Europe et la question d'Aulriche au seuil du XXe siecle (Paris, 1901, 452 pp.) ; Dbiault, Le monde actuel (1909), chap. III. CHAPTER XVIII England to the Reform Bill of 1832 The best bibliographies on English history during the nineteenth century are in vols. XI and XII of Hunt and Poole's Political History of England. These are arranged under topics and are not mere lists of titles but are critical and descriptive, and constitute a very valuable guide. There are lists, without criticism, in connection with the various chapters of the Cambridge Modern History. Traill, Social England, vol. VI, contains useful bibliographies on many subjects not included in the preceding lists, such as literature, arts, sciences, industries, social life, etc. One can find source material in a form available for class use in Cheyney, Readings in English History Drawn from the Original Sources (1908), pp. 663-767; Adams and Stephens, Select Documents of English Constitutional History (1901), pp. 507-555; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History (1909), vol. II, pp. 239- 337; Kendall, Source-Book of English History (1900), pp. 381-465; Lee, Source-Book of English History (19C0), pp. 497-585. The fullest and most informing general history of this period is Walpole, History of England Since 1815 (1890), reaching to 1856, a work of solid scholarship and abundantly supplied with references to authorities; indispensable. Molesworth, History of England, 3 vols., is particularly full on the reform movements; account of the reform of 1832 exceptionally good. Brodrick and Fotheringham, vol. XI, in Hunt and Poole, The Political History of England, covering years 1801-1837, a book marked by good judgment and accuracy, but over- loaded with detail, a clear, substantial, and dry resume. See, also, Bright, History of England, vol. Ill; Traill, Social England, vol. VI, illustrated edit., more an encyclopedia of history than a history itself, with articles by specialists on many different departments of the national life, religion, laws, learning, arts, industry, commerce, manners. The political sections are the least satisfactory. The illustrations are numerous and admirable. Oman, England in the Nineteenth Century (1899), a sketch of no great importance, readable but not always im- partial. On Catholic Emancipation: see, Bryce, Two Centuries of Irish History, pp. 272-314; W. E. H. Lecky, Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland, 2 vols, (new edit., 1903). Vol. II is a life of O'Connell; Shaw- Lefevre, G. J., Peel and O'Connell. A Review of the Irish Policy of Parliament from the Union to the Death of Sir Robert Peel (1887), pp. 1-13; -Parker, C. S., Sir Robert Peel, 3 vols. (1899); vol. I, chaps. IX-XII; vol. II, chaps. III-V. On the movement for parliamentary reform: see, Molesworth, History of England, vol. I^McCahthy, Epoch of Reform, a convenient and clear, brief account; Rose, J. H., The Rise and Growth of Democracy in Great Britain (1898), chaps. I and II. An indispensable work for the understanding of the political system of England before the Reform Bill is Porritt, E. and A. G., The Un- re formed House of Commons, 2 vols. (1903), a clear, full, authoritative description of the representative system in England, not at all a de- scription of the Reform itself. On the Reform: consult, also, Walpole, Life of Lord John Russell, and Stuabt Reid, Life and Letters of Lord 7«6 BIBLIOGRAPHY Durham, 9 vols. (1906), Books important for understanding the move- ment of Ideas are Kvn r, C. B, K.. i'hc English Radical*- ^ isi>i>) ; Sm l.rsiiv. Sisfheh, I'hc EngUah Utilitarians (1900), both valuable for the history of the radical party; DlCST, A. V., Lecture* on the Relation Be- tween I. ate and Public Opinion in Pnaland Purina the .Y ineteenth CtiHurp (1905), a masterly exposition, commentary, ami eritieism; in- dispensable for the history of the whole century; eontains an admirable statement of the Influence of Bentham upon the legislation; valuable footnotes. On the foreign policy of Canning the recent Lire of Canning by 11. \V. \'. Temveriey (1905) is useful. Though written from the point of view of an advocate and defender, chaps. VIII-XI1 contain some new material on England and the Holy Allianee, the Congresses. America, and Gr eece . St.umeton's older Political Life of oYon/e Can- nula. 3 vols. (1831), is very valuable for foreign relations. W. CuK- ninc.uam, I'hc Growth of English Industry and Commerce in Modern Linus. 3 vols., is best on the period before the nineteenth century. Vol. 111. covering period from 1776-1850, does little more than touch on general aspects. Important matters are treated very slightly — as, for instance, the work of Huskisson. CHAPTER XIX Englaxd Between Two Reforms On this period. YVaipoi.f. History of England Since 1SL~>. remains the most important aeeount. Vols. 111. IV. V, and VI eover the period from 1832-1856; and the same author brings his narrative down to 1880 in his History of Twentu-ric, Years, \ vols. (1904-1908), of which vols. I and II concern the period treated in this chapter. Moucswobxh's History of England and Traill's Social England, vol. VI. continue useful. The volume by low and Sanoeks in the Political History of England covers the whole reign of Victoria (1837-1901), and is the best single volume on the subject. It is a clear, solid, and substantial history of political warfare and parliamentary proceedings, but is colorless and overloaded with details. Its critical bibliography is a very useful feature of the book. Jvstin McCarthy, History of C>ur Own Times, covers the Queen's reign in 5 vols., is written by a journalist and active politician, is very readable, interesting for its portraits of important persons and its de- scription of events, but is diffuse and sometimes trivial. McCarthy, J., Short History of Our Own Linus (1908), 1 vol.. treats the entire reign. Herbert Paul, J History of Modern England, 5 vols. (1904-1906), covers the years from 18 U> to 1S!V>, is a direct and vivid narrative, limited largely to parliamentary proceedings, with, however, chapters on literature and theology and ecclesiastical disputes; no treatment of social and economic problems and changes; written with clash and em- phasis, always confident, frequently partisan; standpoint that of a tilaiistonian Liberal. The biographical literature on this period is very extensive. The best life of Queen Victoria is by SlDHXT I.ee (1903); contains an excellent bibliography. Of very great value are Die Letttrs of Queen Victoria, edited by Benson and Pisher. in 3 vols. (1907). There are two editions of this work, one costing three pounds, the other costing six shillings, the latter not Sold, at present, in the United States. This is a selection from the Queen's correspondence between the years 18:?7 and 1861, very important as proving the Queen's ability ami worth, her seriousness and intelligence as a ruler; also, as throwing much light on the characters and conduct of important statesmen, Melbourne, Peel, Palmerston, Rus- sell, and others. A work of great historical significance. BIBLIOGRAPHY 757 Brief biographies of the leading statesmen of the realm are con- tained ifi the scries called The Prime Ministers of Queen Victoria, edited by Stiaht .J. Reid, a volume devoted to each. Mohi.ey's Life of W. E. ('/In (J. ft one, '.i vols. (190S), and Life of Richard Gobden (1881) ; Oai.i.ing'h and Ahhi.kv's Life of I' aimers Ion (1879); Robertson's Life of Joint, Bright (1889); Wali-oi.e's Life of Lord John Russell, 2 vols. (1879); S. .1. Run's Lord John Russell (1895); Roskuehy's Sir Robert Peel (1899); Sin T. Mak-jin's Life of the Prince Contort, 5 vols. (1874- 1880); HoDDEft's Life of the Seventh /Carl of Shaftesbury , 3 vols. (1880); Frank Pod.mohe's Life of Robert Ov)en, 2 vols. (1900); and Graham Wai.i.as's Life of Francis Place (1891), are among the most useful biographies on the period. On ChartUm: sec, R. (,. Gammage, History of Chartism (1894); Cablyle, '1'., Chartism; Rone, The Rise of Democracy, chaps. VI, VII, and VIII; Thomas Coopeb's Life, Written \>y Himself (187»). On Free Trade movement: Abmitaoe-Smith, The Free Trade Movement (1898); Mohi.ey, Life of Cobdenj Disraeli, Life of Sir Georye Bentinck; I'aukku, C. S., .Sir Robert Reel, 3 vols. (1899), vol. ill, an important col- lection of Peel's correspondence; also, Memoirs of Sir Robert Peel, 2 vols. (1850-18.07). See, also, J. S. Nicholson, History of the English Corn Laws (1901). On factory legislation: B. I.. Hi.tchins and L. Harrison, History of Factory Legislation (1908). On the American Civil War: see, Walpole, History of Tu-enly-five Years, vol. II, chap. VIII. On constitutional questions: see, Sin Thomas Erskine May, Con- stitutional History of England; Taswell-Langmead, Enylish Constitu- tional History. CHAPTER XX England Unijer Gladstone and Disraeli For this period, the general histories are: Walpole, History of Twenty-five Years, vols. II, III, and IV (coming down to 1880); Paul, History of Modern England, vols. Ill and IV; Bright, History of Enyland, vol. IV, pp. 450-577; vol. V, pp. 1-87; McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, vols. II and III; Low and Sanijeks, pp. 223-376; Traill's Social Enyland. Mohi.ey's Life of Gladstone is indispensable, written by a close personal friend, an experienced politician, and a master of historical prose. Fit/maurice, Life of Earl Granville, 2 vols. (1905), vol. II; and Winston Churchill, Lord Randolph Churchill, 2 vols. (1900), are important for the period. There is unfortunately no satisfactory life of Lord Beaconsfield. Froude's biography in the Queen's Prime Ministers series, is brief, superficial, and is very poor on the administration 1874-1880. Bhyce has an essay on Lord Beaconsfield in his Studies in Contemporary Biography (1903), and Sir Spencer Walpole one in his Studies in Biography (1907). T. S. Keiihi:i., Selected Speeches of the Earl of Beaconsfield, 2 vols. (1882), is useful. On Ireland: see, Johnston and Spenceb, Ireland's Story; Bryce, J., editor, Two Centuries of Irish History (1888); J. McCarthy, Ireland and Her Story; William O'Connor Morris, Ireland, 1198-1898 (1898); W. P. O'Brien, The Great Famine (1896); R. B. O'Biuev, Parliamentary History of the Irish Land Ques- tion (1880), Fifty Years of Concessions to Ireland, 2 vols. (1883-1885), Irish Wrongs and English Remedies (1887). G. Shaw-Lefevbe, English and Irish Land Questions (1881), contains a study of the Bright Clauses of the Land Act of 1870, pp. 115-105. A. G. RiCHET, The Irish Land Laws (1880), discusses at length the Land Act of 1870. 758 BIBLIOGRAPHY CHAPTEB \\i Kxiii vn n Sura 1886 The most satisfactory account of recent Fnglish history is J. F. BBMRT, Effete \ind. vol. Y. 1880 1901, a book of solid iiu-rits ; clearness of arrangement, directness of narrative, anil remarkable free- dom from partisanship. For the period of this chapter; see, also. 1 o\v ami SvNinus. pp. 366 189 ; l'u u Modem England, vol, V\ Met/ wuu\. Our Own l'ir:,s. \ol. ill. chaps. X XXV. Of tlu- first un portanco for the Homo Rule hills is Mouitv. l.i'c ©/ Gladsto::, . \ol. 111. a hook that by reason of Morlcy's intimacy with Gladstone at this time has practically the vahio of a source; sec. also, Cui'iicim i's Lord Randolph Churchill, vol. 11. ami Fu. m u hut's Lift of Bar! Qr u m v U k , vol. ll. chaps. Xlll XIV, authoritative biographies, based on tetters ami documents. Churchill's great Influence on the Conservative party is clearly shown bj the former. Consult, also, Ft. B. O'Baisx, Li<< of - ■ S: taeari J \-.-r. ,::. :; vols, (1898). Interesting personal descrip- t ions and appreciations of Gladstone no JAMBS BuYCK, WUUnM Firart Qkukto -::<-. in his Studies iii Contemporary BioerapAy (also published separately as a booklet), and Sis !•'• YY, Hamilton, Mr. Gladstone, a Monograph V 1S!'SV l out Rosebe&y, Lord Randolph Churchill ^ is;'t^, is also Suggestive, Tk.uu. I < Marqitia Of Salisbury, contains practical]} nothing after 1886, H. Whatss, /7.v I'hird Salisbury Ad- ministration (1895-1900), is a useful book, containing maps and diplo- matic papers bearing on the South African war. On Ireland, a very important monograph is 1. Fvri IVhois, Con- \:nd ^liVSV I'lus is a\\ RngMfln translation of l.'lrlando MnporatM ^Taris. 1907), Paul Dubois was the son-in law of Taine, His hook is largely historical and is useful for the whole nineteenth century, it contains ■ full discussion of the land question, and educa- tional, economic, and religious problems. On the revived interest in the question of Prote c tion and Free Tradei see. Q, njutreaaa-SxixH, Th*. Free I'rade Movement and Its Results (\<9>) ; W. Smu;i. Um (1903); W. J. Asmrv, . (1903); W, Cinninchvm. I'he His, and /Ve/i'n<< ' :<• /"■<( I'rade Movement (2nd ed.. 1905), These represent various points of view. While the theoretical economists like Marshall at Cam- bridge, and Bdgeworth at Oxford, adhere to the belief in free trade, the economic historians. Cunningham aiul Ashley, have adopted the Chamber- lain programme on the ground that the rise of industrial rivals anil tlie decline of her own resources have created a critical situation for Fng- land, and that one way of recovering or maintaining her leadership is a closer union of the empire, which, it is held, a system of protection would facilitate. An interesting general view by an outside observer is to be found in C.vhi JoHAKHES FuCHS, /Vie I'radr Poifee Of Great Britain and Her Colonics Sine* ($60, a German book trans- lated by C H- M. rVaCHWAU) ^ 1 ;H\'> > . On education: see. Su Ih'Nuv Ck.uk. I'he State in its Relation to Education (v?nd edit.. lSi'(>); CiiivuvM BALFOUB, I'he Educational Systems of Creat Britain and Ire- land (/.an! edit., 1903), a comprehensive account of general education in the United Kingdom during the nineteenth century, based on depart- mental reports and the blue books of the numerous commissions which have investigated the subject: full of precise information. A very useful comparison of the systems of England, the United States. France, and Germany, is to be found in K. F. llie.ius. I'he Makiny of ("itizens: A Study in Comparative Education (1909). On government: see, A. I„ low iii. I he Government of Hnyland. .' vols. (1;>0S>. by far the most BIBLIOGRAPHY ir/j authoritative , coinprehenfive, and Illuminating treatise on the subjeetj a study, moreover, broadly conceived; indispensable not only for it, profound and deaf analysis and description of British government, in perlal, national, and local, bul for the light it throws upon party machinery and preienl party progranunei or tendencies. Other uaefnl books 'in English government are the rarious rolumes of the English ( itizen Series, edited by ifi ■ , ( baik; alio, A. v. Dicer, The Lou of the Conttltution of the United Kingdom (Y^'i)-, Sidxey Loir, The Governance of England (1004). An excellent briel description is 'J. )-. Mohan, '///'• Theory and Practice of the English Government (1905) Baoehot, Engli h Constitution, and Bovtmy, '/Ac English Constitution, are also i< ■ fni. Of the ftrsl Lmportanci o r, A"" "«'./ Custom of the Constitution, 2 rols. (ISPS). See, also, Alphevs Todd, Parliamentary Government •» England, - volt (2nd edit., 1887 1889). A useful abridgment and revision of this work was made by Sir Spencer Walpole and published In 1899. Sib Covbtvey. Ilbeet, Legislative Methods and Forms (Oxford, 1901), is an authority'. The fullest historical account of parliamentary procedure Is Redmch, ./., The Procedure of the House of Commons, a study <>f Us History <>n<). Present Form, .', vol-,. (1908). CHAPTER XX n The BtmSH Kmi-uh: in THE Nini.ii.i. •••! n CfJXTDM On the K''"*' ra ' robject of European colonial expansion, the moat ex- tensive work is Ai.Mii.u Zi.m .mi. ii m a .•. • ■. ■'■-, />iV; europdischen Kolonien (\'-'>* 1903). live rolumes have appeared. The first rolumc treats of the colonial policy of Spain and Portugal to the present, the second that of Great Britain to the American Revolution, the third that of Great Britain since the American Revolution, Hie fourth that of Prance to the present, the fifth thai of the Netherlands. The rolumes are well supplied with bibliographies and maps. Chables de Lajrsrot and J 1 1. ii man.v van on l-i Md. • have underl a ken a work called Histoire il<; V expansion colonidU dee peuplcs europiens, intended to show how each nation has acquired its colonies, how it has developed them, what th<: characteristics of each are. One volume wa , published in 1907 (Brus- sels), with bibliography and maps, ft gives an account of Portuguese and Spanish colonies to the beginning of the nineteenth century. A use- ful hook i, Paul Lebot Beauliedb //". colonisation chez lee peuplcs iii'i'l'-rm-.i, .1 vol.. (0th edit., 1008). On English colonial expansion in general: Zikki cited above; If. E. Boebtoy, A Short History of British Colonial Policy C J hot; ; covers the period from Cabot, I J'>7, down, treating British colonization as a continuous movement; the latter part, concerns the nineteenth century; s careful, thoughtful hook. By the same author, The Origin and Growth of the English Colonies and of their System <>j Government (Oxford, 1904), bring an introduction to Lucas's Historical Geography of Hie British Colonies. Contains very interesting chapters on the labor problem in new colonies, on the introduction of responsible government, on the problem of the future relation, between the colonies and the mother country; also, a chronological outline of the parlous acquisitions made by (, r e;it Britain during the seventeenth, eighteenth, and nine- teenth centuries. Sis Chables Dilke, Problems of Greater Britain (1890), has bad a great influence in educating English opinion to the importance of the Empire and \ , full of information; by the same author, 1 he British Empire (1809), a sort of birds-eye view. C. P. 760 BIBLIOGRAPHY Lucas's Historical Geography of the British Empire, 6 vols., new edit, 190(5 , in course of publication, is of the first importance, com- prehensive, accurate, containing much historical matter. W. H. Wood- ward's Short History of the Expansion of the British Empire, 1500- 1870 (Cambridge, 1899), is a useful epitome. E. J. Payne, Colonies and Colonial Federations (1904), studios the Empire from geographical, historical, economic, and political points of view. See, also, Greswell, W. P., The Growth and Administration of British Colonies, 1887-1891 (1898). J. R. Seblbt, Expansion of England, is useful for an under- standing of the general subject. The British Empire Series. 5 vols. (1899-1909), contains a large amount of information, historical, political, economic, conditions for colonization, outlook for the future, etc.; vol. I concerns India; vol. II, British Africa; vol. Ill, British America; vol. IV, Australia. Bryce's studies in History and Jurisprudence contain very im- portant studies on The Roman Empire and the British Empire in India, on Two South African Constitutions, anil on the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia. Consult, also, on the Empire: Lowell, The Government of England, vol. 11, chaps. LIV-LVHIj Cambridge Modem History, vol. XI, chaps. XXVI and XXVII, with bibliographies; also, for colonial development from 1815-1859, mainly in South Africa and Australia: Walpoles History of England Since 1S1J, vol. VI, pp. 395-379; also A. T. Story, The British Empire (Story of the Nations Series). Alpheis Todd, Parliamentary Government in the British Colonies (2nd edit., 1894), is an authoritative treatment of the opera- tion of responsible government in the colonies. On India: see, Cambridge Modem History, vol. XI, chap. XXVI (from 1S15 to 1869); H. W. Eraser, British' Rule in India (Story of the Nations Series); Boru.ru, India in the Nineteenth Century (1901); Dioby, Prosperous British India (1901), a severe arraignment of British government in India; M. Innes, The Sepoy Revolt (1897); Sir John Kaye, The Sepou War, 3 vols. (1864-1876), completed by G. B. Malleson (1878-1880); G. W. Forrest, A History of the Indian Mutiny, Reviewed and Illustrated from Original Documents, £ vols. (1904); G. B. Malleson, The Indian Mutiny of 1S57 (1891); Lilly, India and Its Problems. A. L. Lowell has a valuable chapter on the Civil Service of India in his Colonial Civil Service (1900). Sir Court- ney Ilbert, The Government of India (1898), is pronounced by Lowell to be " by far the best work on the public law of India." On Canada: Bibliography may be found in the A. L. A. Annotated Guide to the Literature of American History, edited by J. N. Larned (1909); bibliographies also in Cambridge Modern History, vol. XI, and in Low and Sanders, History of England, 1887-1901. Good brief histories are: Sir John Bourixot, Canada Under British Pule. 1760- 1900; C. G. D. Roberts, History of Canada (1904). Kingsford's elaborate history in ten volumes only reaches 1841. On Lord Durham's mission: sic, F. BfiADBHAW, Self-Government in Canada and How it ■was Achieved, the Story of Lord Durham's Report (London, 1903); eight chapters are devoted to a careful account of the history of Canada to the outbreak of the Rebellion, and show the growth of the demand for responsible government; see, also, S. J. Reid, Life and Letters of Lord Durham. 9 vols. (1906), a very laudatory book but full of information concerning Lord Durham's work in Canada. Lord Durham's Report was republished in London in 1901. Perhaps the best manual dealing with the constitutional history of Canada is Sib John Bolrinot's A Manual of the Constitutional History of Canada (1901). Canadian Constitutional Development, by H. E. Egerton and W. L. Grant (1907), contains speeches and despatches pertinent to the subject, with introduction and notes; see, also, William Houston, BIBLIOGRAPHY 761 Documents Illustrative of the Canadian Constitution (1891). Canada and the Empire, by E. Montague and 15. Herbert (1904), is written from an imperialist standpoint. Holland, B., Imperium et Libertas. A Study in History dad Politics (1901); pp. 95-190 treat Canadian history from 1763 to 1867. On Australasia: see, the excellent History of the Australasian Colonies by E. Jenkh (1895), which comes down to 1893; also, G. Treoarthen, Australian Commonwealth (Story of the Nations Scries); comes down to 1891; also an admirable volume by J. D. Rogers in Lucas's Historical Geography of the British Colonies, vol. VI (1907). The most valuable work for the recent, constitutional development is The Annotated Consti- tution of the Australian Commonwealth by Sir J. Quick, and R. R. Garran (Sydney, 1901). This contains a full history of the movement toward federation and of each clause of the constitution. W. H. Moore, The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia (1902), is an im- portant commentary. BfiYCE has a useful account of the making and character of the constitution in his Studies in History and Jurisprudence. On social and economic conditions and measures and experiments: see, REEVES, The Long White Cloud (1899), and Stale Experiments in Aus- tralia and New Zealand, 2 vols. (1902); H. D. Lloyd, Newest England (New Zealand and Australia) (1900); V. Ci.ark, The Labor Movement in Australia. The most recent book is by B. R. Wise, entitled The Com- monwealth of Australia (BostoiK 1909), a description of the country, of political institutions, of industrial legislation, etc. On New Zealand: see, also, Sir. Arthur P. Douglas, The Dominion of New Zealand (1909). For South Africa: see, G. M. Theal, South Africa (Story of the Nations Scries, 1891); pp. 138-387 cover the years 1815-1890; Frank R. Cana, South Africa from the Great Trek to the Union (1909). An excellent account of the history of Europeans in South Africa down to 1895 is contained in Bryce's Impressions of South Africa (1897), pp. 99-182. A clear account of the causes and early course of the Boer war is given in Bright's History of England, vol. V, pp. 234-266. Many of the important state papers, mostly English, bearing on this war, are in Larned, History for Heady Reference, vol. VI, pp. 456-517. For the Boer side of the case: sec, the Memoirs of Paut, Khuger. Sir A. Conan Doyle, The Great Boer War (1902), is a useful narrative, from the British standpoint. The Times History of the War in South Africa, edited by L. C. Amery, vols. I-IV (1900-1906), is very detailed. On the literature of the South African War: see, American Historical Review, vol. XII, pp. 299-321. On the recent federation movement: see, R. H. Brand, The Union of South Africa (1909), which contains the South Africa Act of 20th September, 1909, an account of its elaboration and adoption and a study of its provisions. On the reaction of imperialism upon the mother country: see, Richard Jebu, Studies in Colonial Nationalism (1905); contains chapters on Canada, From Colonies to Commonwealth (Australia), New Zealand, South African War, the Colonial Conference of 1902, Nationalism in Tariffs, and Imperial Partnership. See, also, J. W. Root, Colonial Tariffs (Liverpool, 1906); Carl Johannes Fuchs, The Trade Policy of Great Britain and her Colonies Since 1860 (1905). See, also, Bernard Holland, Imperium et Libertas (1901), pp. 265-319. An important work concerning the colonies, recently published, is The Legislation of the Empire: Being a Survey of the Legislative Enactments of the British Dominions from 1898 to 1009. Edited by C. E. A. Bedwell, with a preface by Lord Rosebery, 4 vols. (1909). Contains about 25,000 acts and ordinances. ;,;•: BIBLIOGRAPHY CH \rriK win \l KtO V For explorations in Vfrica: see, Dovtd Livingstons, by I'uomvs Huohu v iss;>^; (by l iMMiswM' himself)* Missionary FVaveH »i /•»/ Ba « — rc a — in S : (1857), and Lttt .'I'lii'ihi/,* in Central .{mum, from IS(\> to death, edited bj W uiik (1875); 11 M. Stanley, How I Found Livingston, : /'r.nv.'.«. .l./fVMfu»v.»\ ;:^; through the />, ,nt or th, Sources of the Nil*, i vols. ^ IS?S> ; . founding >"' Its F> S ) \ols. (1885)] In / ,9 vols. (1890); Tk* AutobiOi/raytiU of Henry V. Stmntsy, edited bj his wife, Dobothi Stanui (1908), chaps Kill, XV- XVIII} V l Caxskok, n ;....• ^ i s r ii > ; i\ia Paraas, Now LtjrAl fee v is;>iv v verj useful collection of contemporary accounts i-. tfriea and /.'.-• -i. cm I'old by its F.v- plorsrs, -.' vols. (London, Sunpsoi) low. Marston & Co.. no date). See, also. Koiukv BaowN, s i vols. (1894-1895). On the partition of Africa, the most important book Is J. Soon Kvi ric, r/jc : Partition I (1895); See, also. Kmu.k Bvnwno. /.» | ia*« cTaj) - isartions intt rnatic $88 (1888); \. S. WhitX, ihe F>< reiopment of S tufa in .(. * (9nd <\lit.. 1899); tor ■ short amount. Rosa, J. tl. I Earopsan Nations, vol. 11. chap. VII, Sik Hakky Johnston, Histon of :'?< Colonisation of Africa by Alton Feces (1899), is a verj useful manual, compressing a targe amount of Information into ■ Small COmpasS; written by a man who is an authority on At'noan affairs, having traveled extensive]) in that ('imi- tinent, and having boon consul and administrator there; dosorilvs the efforts of the Portuguese, Dutch, English, and the other nations; has brief chapters on the history of the slave trade, of exploration, of mis- sions, oto. On England in Egypt; Rosk, Dsr Swropaaa Nations, vol. 11. chaps. IV-VIj Caoacsa, Modsrn Egypt, i vols. (1908), practically ■ histon of Egypt from ISTo to 1908, of the Dual Control which was succeeded by the Single Control of England, by the man who was the British representative in Egypt for twenty-seven years. An invaluable book, marked by ■ wealth of precise information, by positiveness, by judicial temper, and by an extraordinary detachment of view. Is, to a considerable degree, an historical source as well as a history. For an important review of this book by Mr. BaYCS, soo. American Historical Review, vol. \IY, pp. 357-869, c>n the British intervention and the don chanter one should consult in addition to Cromer: Momrv's Gknt- rtom. vol. 111. and Fuvmmkut's OtanoiUo, vol. 11. Other important - on Egypt aro: Sir \in;tn Milker's England in filth odd.. 1904); Sis A. Ooivin's l'h, Making of Modorn Egypt (9na odd., 1906)] \ Ml . \ - • •nation de rEgypts (1903); J. C Roux, l.'lstlune ..:/ is the fullest, bat i overloaded with details, nol effectively presented, Paget 81 WO covet the period oi tbii chapter, a bibliographj is appended. Hums, Modem Spain, H88-1898 (1800), is a ihorter and more interesting account) pages 248 SOS treal the period 1838 1898, There are brief chapter! In Cambridge Modem History, vol. X, chap. V 1 1, and vol. XI, chap. XX, bringing the history down to ihti. Hi itiiAin/, Histoire <» auf uneere Tage, 8 (1885-1871). Vol. II treats of the restoration of Ferdinand, the revolu- tion of ih,.'o, :mri the lubsecjuenl intervention (1814 1825)$ voL III, the re- mainder of Ferdinand's reign and the Carlisl wars, A more recent Ger- man irork i. Gvstav Diebcks, Oeschichte Spanieru von der frunesten Zeiten bis out die Oegenwart, s- vols. (1805-1800)$ \>\>. 544-074 concern our period, i.. II. Si nojiKi., The Spanish Revolution t 6 I 76 (Boston, }H'.)H), is a clear and comprehensive account of the parliamentary history of main during the -ix yean (rota the overthrow of Isabella II to Hie restoration of Alfonso XII. The book also throws much light on the manipulation of parliamentary institutions in Spain. II. Bemsem Wnm.- house, 2%s Sacrifice of a 'throne (1807), i-, the besl description we have of the election, reign, and abdication of Amadeo of Savoy. Hajtstat, Ij., him WmUio Castelar (1800), a life of thr- republican leader. On the colonies) tee, •'. W. Boor, Spain and Kn Colonies (1808) j ZimtEBKAra, A., Die ewopdischen Kolonien, voL I, Die Kolonialpolitik Portugals and Spaniens (1800) j n. w. Wiuoir, '//"< Downfall of Spain (1000), is b naval history of the Spanish-American ivar of 1808. On constitutional history] see, Gusx.iv, Studien vur spanischen Ver- fassungsgesehichte dee neuntehnten Jahrhunderts (Stuttgart, 1005)) also, •!. I.. M. CvuoT, Constitutional Government In Spain (1809). (lorry was United States Minister to Spain from 1885 to I860. The constitu- tion Itself i-. in Dooit, Modern Constitutions, voL If. On Portugal in the nineteenth century, there | ■. a slight sketch of the years 1815 to JWJ In H. Moass Stefheks, Portugal (Story of the Nation, Series, 1891), pp. 408 180) see, also, chapters in Cambridge Modern History cited above. On the coloniesi see, Zucsaanavsr, op. cit.j ( >- M, Theoi* Tas Portuguese in South Africa (IH'.K,). CHAPTER xxv HOIXAJTD and BziOICfM See). [880 For Holland and Belgium: consult, Cambridge Modem History, vol. X, chap. XVI, arul vol. xf, chap. XXIII; i.av;--i. not yet been translated] Blok, Qeschiedenis van hot Nederlandsche Voik; vol. 764 BIBLIOGRAPHY VII (190T) covers the French period and the history of the I'nited Netherlands to the secession of Belgium; vol. Ylll (1908) continues the narrative down to the opening of the twentieth eontuiv; an impartial. critical, scientific work, containing much more than simply political history. Cuts Pay. The Poiictj and Administration of the Dutch m Java (1904), is i book of the first importance. On Belgium) see. Smyths, Ci /'/.'(■ Story of Pelaium (Story of the Nations Series. 1900); T. Justs, L4opold I . Roi des Bolgos, d'apri's les documents inedits. 9 vols. (iSfisl ; Bsktsand, 1... L4opotd II it son rsgns t865-1890 (Brussels, 1890); Wilmotr, M.. I. a Pclaiquc morals et politique. 1880-1890 (Brussels. 1909); M.uPonnvm, J. de l\. Kina Leopold II. Hit Ruh' in Belaium and the Conao (London. 1905) ; Bkktuani>. 1... Histoire de /pc. vol. II, ehaps. XI-XIII, contains an admirable description of the political institutions of Switzerland and of the party history after IStS. Other books descriptive of Swiss institu- tions are: Apams. F. O., and CuKKIKOHAM, C. P.. The Stciss Confedera- tion (1SS9); WlXCHESTES, B., Thl Stciss Republic (IS91); LLOYD, H. P.. and HOBSOK, J. A.. ./ Sovtrsign I\ople: a Studt/ of Stciss Democract/ (1907). An interesting study of democratic government in one of t ho Landesijenieinde cantons is I. B. RiCHMAH's ./ ppenzell. Pure Democract/ and Pastoral Life in Inner Rhoden (lS9.'i). Contains chapters on politics, laws, administration, cantonal and domestic economy, edueation, BIBLIOGRAPHY 765 charities, etc. Useful for the study of the referendum, fa Dzrxoioc, The Referendum in Switzerland, translated by C. P. TbCVELYAV (London, 1898); by 8 Belgian lawyer. VV. II. Dawson, Social Switzerland, Studies of Present Day Social Movements and Legislation in the Swiss Republic (London, 1897); contain! chapters on the organization and protection of labor, on Industrial peace, the problem of the unemployed, poor law agencies, technical education, control of the liquor traffic. CHAPTER XXVII The Scandinavian- States There is very little in English on the subject of tbis chapter. Useful brief accounts are to be found En Uai.v, \\ . N., Scandinavia, A Political History of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, from }■'//.', to 1900 (Cam- bridge, 1905); chap. XVI concerns Denmark since 1814; chap. XVII, Sweden and Norway since 1814; Cambridge Modern History, vol. XI, chap. XXIV, Scandinavia 1815-1870; Si.ionoisos, Political History of Europe, chap. XVIII; LaVISSE et R.AKBAUD, Histoire aim role, vol. X, chap. XVIII; vol. XI, chap. XII; vol. XII, chap. VII, give an excellent, though brief narrative, covering the period 1815-1900. II. H. Borzszir, The History of Norway CStory of the Nations Series, \HH<>), pp. 516-538. On the Norwegian-Swedish crisis: see, Fhidt.jok Nanskn's Norway and the Union with Sweden (London, 1905); an historical sketch from the Treaty of Kiel, 1814, through the dissolution of the Union; presents the Norwegian side. K. Nohdi.i nd, The Swedish-Norwegian Union Crisis, A History with Documents (Stockholm, 1905), presents the Swedish side and criticises Nansen. Consult, also, Mon.v, A., La, Suede el la revolu- tion norvigienne (Paris, 1905); Fahlbeck, I'., La constitution eue'doise et le parlementarisme moderne (Paris, 1905), a brief sketch of Swedish constitutional history and government. The constitutions of Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, are in DoOD, Modern Constitutions. Much useful, miscellaneous information is contained in Scndiiaho, Sweden, Its People and Industries (1900); WEITEMEYEB, II., Denmark (London, 1891); and Cahi.he.v, Oi.iuk, and STABCKE, Le I)n nemark , Etat actuel de sa civilisa- tion et de son organisation eociale (Copenhagen, 1900) ; a work published on the occasion of the Universal Exposition at Paris in 1900. CHAPTER XXVIII The Disruption of the Ottoman- Empire akd the Rise of the Hai.kax States There is no adequate treatment in English of the Eastern Question in its entirety. An admirable French book is EdoUABD Driaii.t, La ques- tion d'Orient depuis ses origines jusqu'a nos jours (2nd edit., Paris, 1900), a book that may be cordially recommended to any one desiring a guide to a very complicated and widely ramified branch of history. The author's conception of the Eastern Question is large, including not only the fate of the Ottoman Empire in Europe, but the decline of Islam in Europe, Asia, and Africa. After a brief sketch of the Byzantine and Latin Empires, the conquests of the Turks, Driault traces the history of the Eastern Question in the eighteenth century, Napoleon's Oriental projects, the Greek war of independence, the internal reforms in Turkey, the Crimean war and its consequences, the war in the Balkans, the rise of the various states. Recent phases of the 766 BIBLIOGRAPHY general problem ere then treated) the Armenian Massacres* the Cretan problem, tin Greco Turkish war. tin Macedonian question, and the relations of Occidental powers v\ith [slam in Asia ami Africa The chief merit of tin- work ties, not In researehi but in tin orderly anil effective arrangement anil presentation of I DMSS 0)1 wwlolv scattered information the book contains useful bibliographical references to important seconder] material. [here >s a useful though limited bibliography on tlu- Eastern Ques- tion by Gkosocs Bsnqssco, Bmoi rf*«m* wortce btbJJo^rapAtyue ear /*'' f897 (Brussels, is:>rv This concerns only the question of Europe In Turkey ami is limited to works published m Prance anil Belgium. Bengesco was former]) Roumanian minister to Belgium. r. B. Hollahd ' nr e n e a a Concert in tkt Question, contains many treaties, etc., bearing on tlu* general question (1884) On tin Greek war of Independence* there Is a long ami Interesting chapter, sketching tin Greek renaissance ami describing vividly the military and diplomatic tspects of the stirring story in Fyffe, History vol, 11. chap IN' (or Chap. W. in the one volume edition). W. Ilusos Phillips, /'.< H Frees faaspsndi ^iS!'."^. treats the years 1881 to [833 Having no adequate Introduction, tin- book lacks background, but the narrative of events is full, tan-, and Interesting, It is not based upon original investigation but upon works of Mendelssohn-Bartholdy, rinlay, Gordon, and Prokesch-Osten. 1'imu, O. M - '". Is an important aeeouut, drawn larc.cly upon the author's first hand knowledge of events. To.-er's edition, is;r. is the best as representing Pinlay's matured view-, [he / , • Samuel i edited by his daughter, 1 iva V. Hun vii.-s. are verj valuable: vol. 1, entitled l':< i K,i- [Boston, 1906), throws a tlood of light upon the course of the war. The volume Is based almost entirely upon the journal of Howe, who, graduating from Brown University in 1891, ami from Harvard Medical School in is.'t. went immediately to Greece, joined the Greek army, created a surgical corps ami also distinguished himself as a Commander. His journal, though marked by serious gaps, is a \i\wl historical source for the v ears [895 to [899. How v's volume called, ttion, published m 1898, also abounds In graphic descriptions at first hand of men and events. Interesting side- lights on the Greek VI UP arc also to be found in the works of LiOSB r>\ues. /<.•••.* and Jownats, vol. VI, edited by Rowland B. rrothet\» (\ ondon, I! Perhaps the most important recent account of this whole chapter of Greek wston i> in Shun. Q B mr o pma , vol. ll, chaps, vn and \1V; vol. HI. chap-. IV Vl ; vol IV. chap. X. On the Crimean War: see. Wuroiv, History of Fnohind Sinc<- />'/>. \ol. VI, chap. WIN"; McCa*THY, fits < /':•:<... vol. I. chap- \\\ \\\ ill; Paul, Hit •; of Modern Bmthmd, vol 1, chaps. \\ 11 \l\. and vol. 11. chap. I. Paul's characterization of Napoleon HI l- so overdone as to approach the ridiculous. Kinc.ivki's monumental fn e ati ow . i (8 • 'is.. 1863-1887) is a brilliant performance in a way, picturesque and full of detail, but is frequently amusingly portentous and Homeric in tone; i- marked by a pronounced dislike oi Napoleon III; and is. moreover, incomplete, stopping at tlu- death of 1 ord Raglan, Probahl) the fclOSt informing and most interesting at count, judicial as well, is that of do^or in his Histoir,- ,/n fifscsnd Bat- l. pp. 134-481, a masterly piece of exposition. An important phase of this war is well treated by H. I'kh iuimi in /Vr KrimkriiUi ami u'i< .:;v (190T), a ,'.>.ir, Scientific analysis of khfl BIBLIOGRAPHY 707 peculiarly Involved and difflcull foreign relations of Austria during the y«-;ir-. 1853 1850) a purely diplomatic study. An excellenl briel treat menl of the diplomacy of the period la contained in \»tm ■■■■■., Historical Development of Modern Europe, vol. II, chap. n. On tin- re-opening oi n.< Eastern Question, the war in the Balkan! and the Congress of ii«- rJin : Walpole, History of Twenty-fl/ve Years, vol. IV, chapa. ;:\'ii and will; Paul, History of Modern England, vol. iv, chaps. I and li; McCarthy*, History of Ow Own Times, vol. II, chaps. I.xiv and LXV; Rose, TA« Development of the European Nations, vol. I, chapa. vii ix (include . a clear accounl of the Russo Turkish campaign)) Ha on < Contemporary France, vol, iv, chaps, 11 and V; Debidoub, Histoire diplomatique, vol. fl, chop. Xiil; BouBOKOia, E., Manuel historians de politique ii/rangbre, vol, ill, j»p HiO; Moni.K.y, />/'//.- o/" Gladstone, vol, II, pp. W8 188; Bismabck, RefUo* i,',ii'. miii Remini eences, vol. II, chap. XXVIJJ; Skbijte, Expansion of Russia, pp. 243 205; Si.noi.A ■■), I,.. Greece ki the Nineteenth Century, \>\t. 270-307; Whitman, s., Reminiscence of the King of Roumania, chaps, viii XI. On Bulgaria since 1878: ee, Rose, Development of the European Nations, vol. 1, chap. X; Muxes, w., The Balkans (Story of the Nations Series), pp. 215-548 (comes down to 1800); A. II. Beamay, Stambulof (1895) j E. Dicet, TVw Peasant State (1894); (Sir C. Bitot), v in key in Europe*. On Roumanian history: see, Whitmajt, Reminiscences <>f the King of Roumania, chap. XI; Fb£ixebi< Dame., Histoire de la Rouma/nie con temporaine depute Vavenement des princes Indig&net jusqu'a nos jours, i •• 1000 (Paris, 1900)) Bellesobt, a., La Roumanie contemporcAne (Paris, 1905), a book of travel; O. Beitobb, Roumania in 1900, trans- lated l>y A. II. Reeve (London, 1900), with bibliography; contains chapters on history, political organizations, commerce, religion, art., etc.; A. de Bebtha, Magyars et Ron/mains devant Vhistoire (Paris, 1899) j Eliade, I'., Histoire de V esprit public en Roumanie au XIX'- siccle (Paris, 1905); Fishes, i., Die Herkunft der Rum&nen (Bamberg, 1904); GsoBoi i Bi eoesco, Bibllographle Franco Roumaine depuis le commence' menl du Xix> el&cle jusqua not jourt (Paris, 1907), a list oi workn edited <>r published in France concerning Roumania, French work-, pub- Ushed l>y Roumanian authors, doctoral theses sustained (]>. 218 258; Fix-lay, O., /Union/ of the Greel Revolu- tion, book V, chap. IV (down to 1848). On n-'n/n <>i (ifi>ry<: I: see, Seboeavt, Greece In the Nineteenth Century, \>\>. 258-395. Bickfobd- S.mi'ih, it. A. II., Greece Under King George (1893), is not a history bui a description of economic conditions, education, army and navy, constitution, etc. On Greece: see, also, Sib Richabd C. Jess's Modern Greece. Two lectures with papers on The Progress of Greece and Byron in Greece (\hh<>), 2nd edition published in 1901. On Turkey in tin- nineteenth century: oso , Political History of Europe Since 1814, chap. XX; 8. Lajte Poole, Turkey (Story of the Natioir, Series, Ihhh;, pp. 840-305; Om i (Sir I ". Eliot), Turkey tn Europe (1900); Vm.j.aim, editor, '///<- Balkan Question (1905); Bbails- joho, H. N'., Macedonia, Its Races and Their Future (1900)] v/. M. JtAMii.y, Impressions of Turkey. On recent events; see, Babtox, bay- 768 BIBLIOGRAPHY break in Turkey (Boston. 1909); C. R, Rlxton, Turkey in Revolution /London. 1909); G, F, Annorr, Turkey in Transition (1909). CHAPTER XXIX Russia TO Tilt \V All WITH .I.VPAX The best history of Russia in English covering our period is Skrine, F. H., Expansion of Russia. t815-1900 (1903); clear ami free from partisanship; contains maps and bibliography. Rambaud, History of Russia from the Earliest Timts to />??, translated by 1.. B. LaxQ, -vols., vol. 11. pp. 900-985, is useful. Rambaud's work was pronounced by Turgenieff "superior to any other history accessible to Western Europe. liAMitun, Tfu Expansion of Russia. Problems of the East ami Problems of the Ear East (Burlington, Vt.. 1900), a very useful resume of the Russian advance into Asia. MoKKin, \Y. R, A.. History of Eussia from the Birth of Etter the (treat to the Death of Alexander 11 (1909), eon- tains a good deal of information, poorly presented. Rages 349-471 eover the years from 1 SI A to 1898. By the same author, Russia (Story of the Nations Series. 1890), ehaps. \i-\lY. On the reign of Alexander I. the most important work is T. Schie- mann, Russland unter Xikolaus I, vol. I. This volume treats the reign of Alexander 1. though not fully. Chap. IX. pp. 351-487, is a remark- ably fine chapter on the conditions of Russia at that time. There are also chapters on Polish questions and a sketch of the eareer of Xieholas before bis accession. Stork, Oesehiehte Europas, vol. 111. chap. I, has a valuable survey of the last ten years of Alexander's reign; consult* also. 0. JoYXBVILLE, Lift ami Times of Alexandi r 1. 3 vols. (1875). On Nicholas 1: Schumann, work cited, vol. II, covers the live years 1895 to 1830, and contains many important documents; Stern, (reschichte Europas. vol. Ill, chap. II; on the beginning of the reign. 1895-1897; Rkrnuakiu, T., Enter Xikolaus und Er'udrieh Wilhelm IV (1893); Tuoivenei, 1... Xieholas et Xapohon III, /SJ.?- /S.3 / (1891); Haxtii.u 1 - sen. Studs sur les institutions nationalts de la Russie. translated from the German, 3 vols. (1847-1853); important for its description of the mir. On the reforms of Alexander 11: see, Sn DoXALD Mackenzie WALLACE, Russia (revised edition. 1905), ehaps. XXYII-XXXIII; \\mviv LKBOT-BBAUUEU, The Empire or' the Tsars and the Russians, translated by /.. A. Raooeth, :? vols. (1893-1896); vol. I devoted to the country ami tlie people; vol. II to institutions; vol. Ill to religion and church affairs. These two are the best general descriptions of Russia and contain a great deal of history. See, also, for the reforms: Maxime Kov.uevsky. Russian Politieal Institutions (Chicago, 1909), ehaps. VI- IX. On soeial unrest and nihilism: WALLACE, ehap. XXXIV; Leroy- BSAULIETT, vol. II, Book VI; A. Thin, Oesehiehte der revolutionaren Bewegungeu in. Russland (1883)— covers the period from 1863 to 1880 and lias a good bibliography. The writings of a Russian refugee, Stepniak (pseudonym), I'nderyround Russia (1880). The Russian Etasant (1888), are important, as describing Conditions and state of mind of the masses; also, GoQOL, Pi ad Souls. On the reign of Alexander III: see, II. vox Samson-Himmelstierxa, Russia Undtr Alexander III (1897); ChabLES I.owk. Alexander III (1895}; K. Ploubbks, Alexander III (1894); George Ken nan, Siberia and the Exile System. 1 vols. (4th edit., 1897); Pobyeuonostseff, K. P., Reflections of a Russian Statesman (London, 1898). On the reign of Nicholas II: consult, Wallace, Russia, chaps. XXXVI-XXXIX; Pierre Leroy-Beaulieu, The Awakening of BIBLIOGRAPHY 769 The East, Siberia, Japan, China (1900); for a description of the development of Siberia: Vi.aiji-.hu, Russia on the Pacific, and the Siberian Railway C 1 Hfif> j ; M. M. Siiok.makkk, The Ureal Siberian Rail- way (1908); ('. P. WiiK.HT, Asiatic Russia, 2 vols. (1902); A. Kraussk, Russia in Asia (1899), strongly partisan, Russophobe; Combkb DE Lestuade, La, Russie iconomique el socials <> Vavenement de S. M. Nicholas II (1890); M. Kovai.kvskv, Le rSgime iconomique de la Iiuimie (1898), and W. de Kovai.j.wsk y, U Agriculture en Russie (1897) and La Russie a la fin da XIX- eiecle (1900) ; Geoffbet Dkaoe, Russian Affairs (1004;. Stepwiak, King Log and King stork, a Study of Modern Russia, 2 vols. (1895), and Pbikce Kroi-otkiv, Memoirs of a Revolutionist, 2 vols. (1899), throw much tight on conditions of Russian Life. On Poland j see, Mobfua, Poland (1893), (Story of the Nations Series), chaps. XJI-XIV, and Brajtdes, G. M. ( '., Poland, A Study of the Land, People, and Literature (1903), a recent hook by a Danish literary critic; KovAr.KvsKv, M., Russian Political Institutions, chap. X. On Finland! J. R. Pishes, Finland and the Tsars, 1809-1899 (London, 1899) j P. Moio.ai;, La question ftnlandaise (1900); II. de Wxnsvt, Pin- land an It In (London, 1901); Kovaxevskt, M., Russian Political Insti- tutions, chap. XI. If. N'on.MA.v, All the Russias (1902), presents the Russian side of the Finnish question, pp. 84-9.5. CHAPTER XXX The Far East The best English hook on the relations between Europe and the East is Srrt Rohf.rt K. Doror.As, Europe and the Par East (1904); contains a bibliography; treats of the opening of China and Japan to Western fnflnences, the rise and re-organization of Japan, the Asiatic wars with European powers, the Chino-Japanese war, the Boxer insurrection, etc; comes down to the outbreak of the Russo-Japanese war. An admirable French hook is Euoi;ahi> Djuai;i.t, La Question d'Eztrime Orient (1908;; studies Chinese and Japanese civilizations, the history of the relations of Asia with Europe from the sixteenth to the twentieth century, gives an account of the Chino-Japanese and the Russo-Japanese wars and describes the present situation. PlEBBE Lebot-Beauxieu, The Awakening of the East (1900), comes down to 1899 and contains a good chapter on Japan (pp. 81-182), and on China (pp. 183-089). Tor a briefer treat- ment: see, Cambridge Modem History, vol. XI, chap. XXVIIJ. The Library of Congress published (Washington, 1904) a Select List of Books Relating to the Par East. On the opening of China: see, Rf.ivsch, P. S., World Politics (1900), pp. 86-057, very clear and illuminating; Colqathoujt, A. R., China in 'Iran:; formation (1898); Smith, A. H., China in, Convulsion, 2 vols. (190J), by an American, long a missionary in China; Beow.v, A. J., Nev) Forces in Old China (1904); Martin, W. A. P., The Awakening of China (1907). Cohdikr, II., Histoire des relations de la Chine avec les puissances occidentales, 2 vols. (1901-1902), covers the period since 18'iO. A. II. Smith's Chinese Characteristics (1890) is a very informing book by one who is recognized as an authority on China. Morse, H. M., The Trade and Administration of the Chinese Empire (1908), by a Harvard graduate, for thirty-three years resident in China. On Japan: see, Murray, D., The Story of Japan (1894), chaps. XIII- XV; Griffis, W. E., Life of Matthew Calbraith Perry (1887), The Mikado's Empire (10th edit., 1903); The Japanese Nation in Evolution 770 BIBLIOGRAPHY (190)); describes recent events; Iyenaga, I'he Constitutional Develop- ment of Japan (Johns Hopkins I'niversitv Studies, Baltimore, 1891); Goixier, TiuoiMui b, Esaai sur las institutions politique* dm Japon (Brussels, IPOS'), a good account of the Japanese government; Knox, G. W.i Imperial Japan (1905). On the causes of the Russo-Japanese war: see, Csakawa, /'/(«' Russo-Japanese Conflict (1904). For a list of books on the Russo-Japanese war: see, Statesman's Year Book for 1908, p, 1993. An important book is Hershey, A. S., Tkt International l.oir and Diplomacy of the Russo-Japaiu s< War (1906); contains, among others, excellent chapters on the causes of the war and on the Treaty of Portsmouth. A very interesting account by a participant in one of the great events of the war is Capt. Yiaiumik SsstENOFF, The Battle of Tsushima be- tiraii the Japanese and Russian Fleets, Fought on .'"th of Mai/. t90S. Translated by A. B. Line-say (London, L906, 165 pp.). Mui. \nn, T. A.. /'/;< New Far Fast (1907); an examination of the present situation of Japan ami her relation to the Far Eastern Question, with special reference to the interests ot' the United States and the future of China; contains chapters on Japan in Korea, in Manchuria, the New China, Japan, China and the West; contains, also, the Anglo- Japanese Alliance of i!>o;>, the Treaty of Portsmouth, the Japanese- Korean Agreement of 1905. Dyeb, Henry, Japan in World Polities (1909), by a professor emeritus in the University of Tokio; has chapters o\\ the Meeting of the Far Fast and the West, on the Rise oi' Japan as a World Power, on the Factors of National Lite, on the Civilizations of the Fast and the West, ete. There are many important articles on Japan in the Encyclopedia A mt rieana, written by Japanese specialists. CHAPTER XXXI Russia Since the War with Japan The most useful description of the events of this period will be found in the Annual Register. Dodd, Modern Constitutions, gives the Funda- mental Laws of the Russian Empire of May Gth, 1906, with useful notes. Harped. S. N.. The Xcir Electoral Lair for the Hussion Duma (Chicago, 1908), is an excellent description of the present electoral law. Mu.YoiKov, r.ui. Russia and Its Crisis (Chicago, 1905), presents the Liberal theory of the crisis: a very instructive book, but confessedly One-sided. Victor BerarD, The Russian Empire and Czarism. trans- lated by G. Fox-Davxbb ami G. O. Pope (1905), has certain chapters describing the process of Russification attempted with the Poles, Jews, Finns, and Armenians. Other books that may be consulted are: Pares. IV, Russia and Reform (1907); Nevinsox, H. W, The Dawn in Russia (1906); Perris, G. H., Russia in Revolution (1905); Martin, 1L, The Future of Russia (1906). CHAPTER XXXII Certain Features op Modern Progress Interesting volumes treating briefly certain general features of the last century, literature, science, art, industry, transportation, etc., are: The Progress of the Century, by A. R. W.uiace and others (1901); The Nineteenth Century: A Review of Progress (1901); Wallace, A. R., BIBLIOGRAPHY 771 The Wonderful Century: Its Successes and Its Failures (1898). Day's History of Commerce (1907) treats liberally the nineteenth century, and has an admirable bibliography fully opening up the subject; Cochrane, Modern Industrial Progress (1904), is useful. Probably the most satisfactory general survey of the world to-day, from the political and economic point of view, is E. Dhiault, Le monde actuel (1909), an account of very recent history of the different coun- tries, and a description of present conditions and tendencies; clear, suggestive, interesting. Another book by the same author is Les problemes politiques et sociaux a la fin du XIX<* siecle (1900). Vol. VII of Earned's History for Ready Reference is announced. It will cover the first decade of the twentieth century and ought to prove useful for recent history. On the peace movement: see, Holls, F. W., The Peace Conference at the Hague, and Its Bearings on International Law and Policy (1900); an account of the First Conference of 1899 by a member of the delega- tion of the United States; Hull, W. I., The Two Hague Conferences and Their Contributions to International Law (1908), a comparative study of the discussions and achievements of the Conferences of 1899 and 1907, well arranged and clearly presented; Scott, J. B., The Hague Peace Conferences of 1800 and 1001, two elaborate and authoritative volumes (1909). Vol. I consists of lectures delivered at Johns Hopkins University by Seoti, one of the delegates of the United States at the conference of 1907, lectures now much revised and enlarged; vol. II con- tains the official documents, the instructions to American delegates, their official reports, and the various texts drawn up at the Conferences and ratified by the participating powers; Higgins, A. P., The Hague Peace Conferences and the Other International Conferences Concerning the Laws and Usages of War (Cambridge University Press, 1909); Foster, J. W., Arbitration and the Hague Court (1904). For current history, the most useful aids are the various annuals published in different countries: in England, the Annual Register, pub- lished since 1758; in France, Viallate, A., La vie politique dans les deux mondes, since 1907; in Germany, Schiemann, T., Deutschland und die grosse Politik, since 1902; Glaser, F. W., Wirtschaftspolitische Annalen, since 1906"; Sciiulthess, Europdischer Geschichtskalender, since 1860; Aegidi and Klauhold, Das Staatsarchiv. Sammlung der offiziellen Aktenstucke zur Oeschichte der Gegenwart, since 1861. Now edited by G. Rolofk. An annual that seems likely to prove most useful is the Jahrbuch der Zeit- und Kulturgeschichte, containing chapters on the political life of Germany and other countries, on the religious life, on economic, educa- tional, literary, and scientific matters, and on art and music. Edited by Dr. Franz Sehnurer. The first volume, that concerning the year 1907, was published in Freiburg in 1908. Several special encyclopaedias are of importance to the student of history: Palcrave, Dictionary of Political Economy, 3 vols. (1900); Conrad, Handwdrterbuch der Stanlsirissenschaften, 7 vols. (2nd edit., 1898-1901); Marquardsen, Handbuch des bffentlichen Rechts der Gegen- wart in Monographien, 5 vols. (1883-1906). What amounts to a new edition is announced under the title Das bffenlliche Recht der Gegenwart. There are certain monographs of value to the historian in Staats-und sozialwissenschaftliche Forschungen, edited by Gustav Schmoller und Max Sering. The Statesman's Year Book is an indispensable source of varied statistical information, concerning all countries. On various aspects of government and politics: see, Goodnow, F. J., Comparative Administra- tive Law, 2 vols. (1893), a study of the administrative systems of 772 BIBLIOGRAPHY Germany, France, England, and the United States; Burgess, J. W., Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law, 2 vols. (1890), a study of the governments of Germany, France, England, and the United States; Shaw, Albert, Municipal Government in Great Britain (1895), and Municipal Government in Continental Europe (1895); Mukro, W. B.. The Government of European Cities (1909); Meter, G., Das parlamentarische Walilrecht (1901), chiefly an account of the suffrage in Europe in the nineteenth century; I.kkkvke-Pontalis, Les Elections en Europe (i la fin dm XIX* sicclc (1909), treats of the electoral qualifica- tions and modes of election in the various countries of Europe; Pykeeroen, O., L'electorat politique et administratif en Europe (190*3), another account of the various electoral systems. Publications which will be found useful in the study of contemporary history, besides the more popular English and American reviews, such as the Eortniahtly : Contemporary ; Nineteenth Century: Westminster; North A marietta .' Eorum; Review of Reviews: are: the Edinburgh Re- vieir; (Quarterly lie view; National Review: American Political Science Review: Political Science Quarterly; Yale Review: Annuls of the American A cadi »t y : Economic Journal; Economic Review: Quarterly Journal of Economics; Socialist Review; Survey; Law Quarterly Re- view: American Journal of International Law; Revue des deux niondes; Revue de Paris: Revue blcuc; Le Correspondant ; Revue d'histoire diplomatique : Revue politique et parlementaire; Revue de droit inter- national et de legislation compart e: Archives diplomatiques; Revue de droit public et science politique; Annates des sciences politiques; Questions diplomatique* et coloniales ; Revue oenerale de droit inter- national public; Journal des economistes; Revue d'e"conomie politique; Revue < conomique internationale ; L'economiste francais; Deutsche Rundschau ; Preussische Jahrbiicher ; Jahrbuch des otf'entlichen Rechts; Archiv fur bffentliches Recht; Zeitschrift fur Vblkerrecht und Bundes- staatsrecht. INDEX Abbas II, Khedive of Egypt, 558 Abd-el-Kader, native leader in Algeria, 373 Abdul Aziz, Sultan, recognizes the Union of Moldavia and Walla- chia, 1862, 618; deposed March, 1876, 621 Abdul Hamid II, 1876-1909, ac- cession of, 621; war with Russia and Treaty of San Stefano, 623- 624; cedes Thessaly to Greece (1881), 634; and Crete, 635; re- stores constitution of 1876, 636, 637; deposition of, 643 Abdul Medjid, Sultan, and the Crimean War, 612-616 Abyssinia, Italian war with, 382- 384 Accident Insurance Laws (Ger- many), 188/, and 1885, 316 Achmet Agha, and the attack on Batak, 621-622 Act of Federation (German), work of the Congress of Vienna, 29-31 ; von Sybel's estimate of, 32; unsatisfactory to Germans, 32; Article XIII of, 35, 38 Act of Union (1800), Great Brit- ain and Ireland, 497 Adana, in Asia Minor, massacres in (1909), 642 Adrianople, Treaty of (1829), 611; entered by Russians (1878), 624; 642 Afghanistan, war in, 490; protec- torate of England over, 523; as a buffer between India and Tur- kestan, 682 Africa, German trading stations in, 318; German colonies in, 319; Senegal, French possession (1815) in, 371; French conquest of Algeria, 372; other French conquests in, 373-375; Western, 374; Italian possessions in, 382; slavery in the English colonies of, 439, abolished, 440; war in South (1899-1902), 490, 512, 529; British South Africa, 536- Africa, continued 545; partition of, 550-563; period of discovery in, 550-551 ; situa- tion in (1815), 551 ; French con- quest of Algeria, 552; English explorations in, 552-553; Euro- pean appropriations of (1881,- 1890), 554; conference of the Powers concerning (1876), 554; International African Associa- tion, 554; Congo Free State, 554- 557; Egypt, 557-563; Spanish pos- sessions in, 574; Portuguese pos- sessions in, 578; possessions of the Ottoman Empire (1815) in, 601. Bee British South Africa, German East and German South- west Africa, Western Africa African Association, International, 554; becomes International As- sociation of the Congo, 555 Aix - la - Chapelle, Congress of (1818), 59; 75 Alabama award, 486, 528, 591 Albania, 602 Albert Nyanza, 552 Albert of Saxe-Coburg, Prince Consort, marriage of, to Queen Victoria (18!,0), 445 Albert I, King of Belgium, 1909—, 583 Alberta, admitted to the Dominion of Canada, 1905, 529 Alessandria, 61 Alexander of Battenberg (1879), Prince of Bulgaria, 628; abdi- cates, 630 Alexander I, King of Servia, 1889- 1903, murder of, 633 Alexander I, Tsar of Russia, 1801- 1825, and Bernadotte, 2; de- mands of, at the Congress of Vienna, 6; Treaty of Holy Al- liance, 14, 16; character of, 19; becomes conservative, 38, 40; and Charles X, 92; and the Bel- gian revolution, 104; and Poland (1815), 107, 647-648; reign of, 645-650; training of, 646; posi- 773 774 INDEX Alexander I, continued tion of, in 1815, 647; progressive domestic policy of, 648; liberal foreign policy of, 649; becomes reactionary (1820-1825), 108, 649; death of (1825), 609, 650 Alexander II, Tsar of Russia, 1855-1881, attitude of, toward the Prussian annexations, 268 and note; and the Congress of Berlin, 320; alliance of the Three Emperors, 321, 616; and the Crimean War, 616; attitude to- ward Turkey, 1816, 623; de- clares war against Turkey (1877), 623; accession and lib- eralism, 655; prevailing system of land tenure under, the mir, the serfs, 655-657; issues Edict of Emancipation (1861), 657; and the land problem, 657-660; estab- lishes zemstvos (1864), 660; re- forms the judicial system, 661; other reforms of, 661 ; and the Polish insurrection of 1863, 662- 663; and the Russification of Poland, 664-665; effect of the Polish insurrection upon, 665; be- comes reactionary, 665; rise of Nihilism under, 666-668; at- tempts upon the life of, 669; assassination of (1881), 670 Alexander III, Tsar of Russia, 1881-1894, character and policy of, 670; influence of Pobyedo- nostseff upon, 670-671 ; persecu- tion of the Jews under, 672; progressive features of the reign of, 673; industrial revolution under, 673-674; appoints Sergius de Witte, Minister of Commerce and Finance (1892), his policy, 674-675; rise of labor problems, 675; rise of a rich bourgeoisie, 675; death (1894), 676 Alexander John I of Roumania, rule of, 618; abdicates, 619. See Couza Alexandria, 488, 559 Alfonso XII, King of Spain, 187 '.}- 1885, becomes King, 572; and the Constitution of" 1876, 573; death of, 574 Alfonso XIII, King of Spain, born May 17, 1886, assumes power (1902), 575; marriage with Princess Ena of Batten- berg, 575 Algeria, 98, 275; Picquart sent to, 359; in 1815, 551; French con- quest of, 372, 552 Algiers, conquered by France, 132, 372; in 1815, 602 Ali of Janina, 602 Alma, battle of the, 614 Alsace, Germans invade, 296; ceded to Germany by the Treaties of Versailles and Frankfort, 300, 303, 319, 337 Amadeo of. Savoy chosen King of Spain, 1870, 570; abdicates, 571 American Commonwealth, Bryce's, Censorship of, in Russia, 678 Amoy, opened to British trade by treaty of Nanking (1842), 685 Amsterdam, 102 Amur, Russia acquires northern bank of the, from China, 1858, 682 Ancona, seized by France, 111 Andalusia, 49 Anesthetics, discovery of, 720 Anglican Church. See Church of England Anglo-Japanese Treaty of 1902, 700 Angouleme, Duke of, leads French army in the invasion of Spain, 1823, 63; 79; renounces claim to the crown, 97 Annam, French protectorate over (1883), 373, 374 Anti-Corn-Law League (1839), 452 Antiseptics, 720 Apulia, Riots in (1889), 383 Arabi Pasha, revolt of, crushed by England, 559 Arabia, Ottoman Empire (1815) and, 601 Arbitration, Permanent Court of, established (1899), 732, 736 Ardahan, 626 Argentina, Italian emigration to, 386 Argyll, Duke of, on the Land Act of 1881, 491 Arkwright, 407, 722 Armaments, Cost of, 728; Nicholas II and the limitation of, 729 Armenia, Russia retains a part of Turkish, 626 Army Reforms, in France (1818), 76; (1872), 339; in Prussia, 248- 249, 255; in England, 481-482; INDEX 775 Army Reforms, continued in Roumania, 632; in Turkey, 643; in Japan, 693; in China, 704 Arndt, 43; restored to professor- ship, 150 Artois, Count of (afterwards Charles X), leader of the Ultras in France in 1815, 72, 74, 79; heads the party of reaction in France, 80. See Charles X Ashley, Lord, and the child labor agitation, 442 Asia, French possessions in, 374; Portuguese possessions in, 578; Dutch possessions in, 581; Otto- man Empire in (1815), 601 ; England, France, and Russia in, 681 Asia Minor, Mehemet Ali in, 131; part of the Ottoman Empire (1815), 601 ; massacres in (1909), 642 Asquith, Herbert, leader of the Liberal Party since 1908, 515; and the Old Age Pensions Law, 1908, 515; and the Irish Univer- sity or Birrell Act, 1908, 516 Associations, Law of, 1901, (France), 366 Associations of Worship (France), 1905, 369; Pius X and, 369 Athens, captured by the Turks, 607; made capital of Greece, 634 Auckland, 534 Augustenburg, Duke of, 259-260 Ausgleich or Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867, 393-396; renewed by arbitrary act of Francis Joseph I, 404 Australasia, 534, 545 Australia, Ballot system of, adopt- ed in England, 484; English pos- sessions in, prior to 1815, 519; early explorations in, 530; voy- ages of Captain Cook to, 531 ; as a convict colony, 531 ; dis- covery of gold in (1851 and 1852), 244, 532; the Six Colonies of, 532; creation of the Common- wealth of (1890-1900), 533; the Federal Parliament in (1901), 534; and the South African War, 544; autonomy in, 546; and the problem of Federation, 547- 549; preferential tariffs, 548. See South Australia, Western Australia Austria, acquires Lombardy and Venetia by Treaty of Paris, 3; Emperor of, at Congress of Vienna, 4; acquisitions by Con- gress of Vienna, 8-9; Holy Alli- ance, 14; signs Quadruple Alli- ance, 17; lack of unity in, 23- 25; policy of Francis I and Metternich, 25-28; importance in the Diet, 30; jealousy of Prus- sia, 34; importance of the Carls- bad Conference to, 43; domi- nance of, in Italy, 53; at Con- gress of Troppau, 59; invades Italy, 60, 61; at Congress of Verona, 62; recognizes the Kingdom of Belgium, 105; and the revolution in Poland, 106-110; intervention in the Papal States, 111; and the revolution in Germany (1830), 112; and Turkish affairs, 132; and the London Conference (1840), 132; and the Zollverein, 149; 1815-1848, 152-159; acces- sion of Ferdinand I, 152; the in- dustrial revolution in, 153; de- velopment of nationalities within the Empire — Bohemia, 153; Hungary, 154-159; and Young Italy, 163-166; Pius IX protests against occupation of Ferrara by, 166; Kossuth's speech against, 169; accepts Hungarian plan of autonomy, 171; grants auton- omy to Bohemia, 172; Constitu- tion for the Empire granted, 172; revolution in Lombardy- Venetia, 172; Italy renounces the control of, 173; March (1848) revolutions triumphant in, 174; begins the work of res- toration, 175; riots in Prague, 175; conquers Bohemia, 175; partially conquers Italy, 175; ex- ploits the situation in Hungary, 177; Ferdinand declares Hun- garian Diet dissolved, 178; out- break in Vienna, 178; flight of Ferdinand to Olmiitz, 178; Windischgratz conquers Vienna, 178; abdication of Ferdinand and accession of his nephew Francis Joseph I, who retracts the March Laws, 179; war with Hungary, 179; conquers Hun- gary, 180; completes conquest of Italy, 181; crushes Lom- '76 INDEX Austria, continued hardy, 181; overthrows Sar- dinian army at Xovara, 181; surrender of Venice to, 189; re- jects the work of the Frankfort Parliament, 185; the " humiliation of Ohniitz," 185; restores Die! of Frankfort (1851), 185; reaction in Italy after /S/N. 915; indicted at Congress of Paris by Cavour, 290; conspiracy against, at Plom- hieres, 993; Austro-Sardinian war, 995; defeated at battles of Magenta and Solfcrino, 995; peaee concluded with France and Sardinia at Villafranea, 995; to be a member of the projected Italian Confederation, 998; re- action in. t850-1859, 940; Bis- marck's attitude toward, 953 and 954; with Prussia declares war against Denmark, 958; secures Schleswig-Holstein and Lauen- burg in conjunction with Prussia by the Treaty of Vienna < /So'}), 959, 593; convention of Gastein, ■259; war with Prussia, 963; vic- tories of Custoua and I.issa, 965; defeated by Prussia at Konig- gratz, 965; causes of defeat of, 965; terms of peace with Prus- sia, 967; cedes Venetia to Italy, 967; neutrality of, in Franco- German war. 994; Austro-Ger- man treaty of 1879, 391; Triple Alliance (1882), 391, 389; Aus- tria to the Compromise ot' 1867, 388-396; punishment of Hungary (1849), :>8S ; constitution of 1849 revoked, 388 ; failure of the war in Italy | 1859), 389; forced to cede I.omhardy to Piedmont. 38!); becomes a constitutional state, 390; Hungary refuses to cooperate with, and demands ttie restoration of her constitution of lS'fS, 390-392; deadlock with Hungary. 1861-1865,393; Francis Joseph I yields, 393; Compromise of 1867, 393-396; constitution of. 395; Germans the dominant race in, 395; divisive effect of the principle of nationality in, '396; Empire of, since 1867, 396-10.?; liberal legislation in, since (867, 396-397; demands of the Czechs. 397; opposition of Austrian Ger- mans and Magyars, 398; elec- Austria, continued toral reform in, 399; composi- tion of the Reichsrath, 399; the Taaffe ministry. t879-189S, -100; Slavs favored, 400; social legis- lation, 4-00; Workingmcn's In- surance. 100; division among the C/echs, 101; fall of the Taaffe ministry, 101; electoral reform (1896), -101; universal suffrage established ( l!>01 '), 409; signs 'Treaty of Paris (1856), 616; joins England in demanding a revision of the Treaty of San Stefano, 625; by Congress of Berlin, 1878, invited to "oc- cupy and administer " Bosnia and Herzegovina. 390, 626; stops war between Bulgaria and Servia. 699; secret treaty with Russia, 640; attitude of, toward the breaches of the Berlin Treaty (1878), 629, 640. See Austria*- Hungary Austria-Hungary, since t849, 388-105; Ausgleich, 393; the Delegations, 394; divisive effect of the principle of nationality in, 396; and Bosnia and Herzego- vina, 404—405; at the Conference of the Powers (1876), 554; at the Congress of Berlin (1884- 1885), 555; annexes Bosnia ami Herzegovina, 1908, 639-640. 644 Austro-German Treaty (1879), 391 Austro-Hungarian War (1849), 179-180 Austro-Prussian War (1S66), 263- 961 Austro-Sardinian War (1859), 225-221 Azeglio. See D'Azeglio Azores, part of the Kingdom of Portugal, 578 Baden, granted constitution (1818), 37; supports Austria in the war of t866, -63; joins Prus- sia in the Franco-German War fl870), 994 Baker, Sir Samuel, English ex- plorer, discovers one source of the Nile, 552 Bakounine, and Socialism, 667 Balaklava, battle of, 614 Balbo, Cesare, 1789-1858, author oi -Hopes of Italy" (1844), 165 INDEX 777 Balfour, Arthur James, Chief Secretary for Ireland during the Second Salisbury Ministry (1886-1892), policy of coercion in Ireland, 505; becomes Prime Minister (1902), 511; on the death of Queen Victoria, .013 Balkan Peninsula, events in, 1876- 1818, 320; 1815, part of the Ot- toman Empire, 601 Balkan States, Rise of, 601-044 Ballot, Introduction of, in Eng- land by Ballot Law of 1872, 483; Lord Pahnerston on, 483; (Glad- stone on, 483; Morley on, 483 Baltic Provinces of Russia, 645, Russification of, 672 Baluchistan, England and, 523 Bangweolo, Lake, discovered by Livingstone, 552 Baratieri, Italian General, defeat- ed by Menelek, 383 Barbary States, 37-2-373 Barcelona, 49 Bardine, Sophie, 668 Baring, Sir Evelyn, later Lord Cromer, communication to, from Lord Granville concerning Eng- land's position in Egypt, 560 Bashi-Bazouks, in the Bulgarian Atrocities, 621 Batak, atrocities in, 621-622 Batoum, 626 Battenberg, Princess Ena of, mar- ries Alfonso XIII of Spain (1906), 575; Alexander of, chosen Prince of Bulgaria (187!)), 628 Baudin, repuhlican deputy, 281 Bavaria, King of, at Congress of Vienna, 4; importance of, in the Diet, 30; granted constitution (IRIS), 37; economic errowth of, 18/(9-1858, 244; supports Austria in the War of 1866, 263; army of, defeated at Kissingen, 265; joins Prussia in the Franco- Prussian War, 294; becomes part of the German Empire, 301 ; Louis I and the Greek War of Independence, 608; 611 Bazaine, 295; commander at Metz, 296 Beaconsfield, Lord. See Disraeli Beauharnais, Eugene, 51 Beauharnais, Hortense (daughter of the Empress Josephine), 127 Bebel, Socialist leader, 313 Belfast, 484; university at, for Protestants, 516 Bel fort, 295 Belgium, annexed to Holland, 3, 5; rise of the Kingdom of, 101- l06; difficulties concerning the constitution, 102-103; influence of the July Revolution in (1880), 103-101; the Belgians declare their independence, 104; Leo- pold of Coburg elected King of, 101; recognition of the King- dom of, 105; and Congo Free State, 554-557, 583; reign of Leopold I of (1881-1865), 581- 582; reijni of Leopold II (1865-1909), 582; extension of the suffrage (IS'JS), 582; estab- lishes trade centers at the five treaty ports of China, 686 Belgrade, capital of Servia, 604 Bell, Alexander Graham, invents the telephone (1876), 726 Benedek, Austrian commander (1866), 264' Bcncdetti, French ambassador to Prussia, interview with the King of Prussia at Ems, 291-292 Bengal, 519, 520 Bentham, Jeremy, 417 Beresford, Lord, in Portugal, 575 Berlin, news of the Revolution of 1848 in Paris reaches, 152; revolu- tionary movement of March, 18/f8, in, 173; police regulation of 1851 in, 241 ; becomes the capital of united Germany, 302; representation in the Reichstag, 325, 327; representation in the Prussian Parliament, 326; Con- gress of l88/,-1885, 555; Berlin Act, 1885, 555-556; Memoran- dum, 1876, 620; Congress of, 1878, 320, 405, 625-626 Berlin Act of 1885, 555; Leopold II and, 556 Berlin Conference, 1881/-1885, con- cerning Congo Free State, 555 Berlin Congress of 7878, 320, 405, 625-626; the Powers do not prevent the breaches in the Berlin Treaty, 629, 640, 644 Berlin Memorandum, 1876, 620 Bern, 584; chosen capital of Switzerland, 181,8, 587 Bernadotte, Crown Prince of Sweden, 2; sent into Norway, 595. See Charles XIV 778 INDEX Bernhardi. 943 Berry, Duchess of, 94, 199-193 Berry, Duke of. Murder of, 79; birth of posthumous son. 89, 97 Bessarabia, retained by Russia at Congress of Vienna, 8; part of, ceded to Moldavia by Treaty of Paris (1856), (>15; Russia recov- ers a part of, 616; eeded to Russia by Treaty of San Stef- ano, (878, 695; cession of, reaf- firmed by Congress of Berlin, (878, 696 Betbmann-Hollweg, German Chan- cellor, July, 1909 , 393 Biarritz, Interview at (1865), 960 Birred Act, (908, 51(> Bismarck, Otto von, 994, 849, 943; and German I'nity. 940-971; ap- pointed President of the Minis- try, 2869, 950; previous career, 251; politieal opinions of. 851; attitude toward parliamentary institutions. 959; hatred of de- mocracy, 953; in the Diet, -V>t; attitude toward Austria, 953 and 25-t ; carries through the army reform, 955; policy of "blood and iron," 955; diplomacy con- cerning Schleswig-Holstein, 957; and the Convention of Gastein, 959-960; conference with Na- poleon III at Biarritz (1865), 960; .'Sti; treaty of alliance with Italy, 961; proposes a reform of the confederation, 969; orders Prussian troops to enter Holstein, 963; at Kbniggratz, 965; and the Prussian Parliament. 968; author of the constitution of the North German Confederation, 968-970; forms alliance with South Ger- man States, 970; the consolida- tion of the new system, 970; attitude toward Napoleon Ill's projects for the acquisition of territory. t866-1867, 988; and the candidacy of Prince Leopold, 990-999; the" Ems despatch. 999; diplomacy of. completely isolates France, -291; arranges terms of peace with Thiers at Versailles. 300; German unifica- tion completed, 301; becomes Chancellor, 305; and the Kultur- kampf, 306-310; and the Palk Laws, 308; and the policy of pro- tection, 310-312; and Socialism. Bismarck. Otto von, continued 319-318; policy of State Social- ism ami measures carried, 316; his contribution to the solution of the social question, 317; So- cialists fail to cooperate with, 317; and the acquisition of colonies, 318-319; ami the Triple Alliance. 319-390; and the Austro-German treatv of 2879, 391; resigns (1890), 393; death of | t898), 393; 594; President of the Congress of Berlin, (878, <;.\3 Black Sea. neutralized by Treaty of Paris ( lS.lt!>, 615; Russia dis- regards neutrality of, t»16 Blanc, Louis, Theories of, 138, 189; 113; in the Provisional Govern- ment. 1SS; conception of the Re- public, 1SS; appointed head of the Labor Commission, 191-199 " /»/oc.- The, S(it Bloemfontein, 538; convention of, ;>SS; conferences at, t899, 543 Bliicher, on the Congress of Vienna, 11 Board Schools ( England), estab- lished, 179; boards abolished, 514. Boer War. t899-1902, 512. See British South Africa Boers, migration of, into Natal, .">37 ; and the founding of the Transvaal, 538; at Majuba Hill, 53!); and the Pretoria Conven- tion, 1881, 510; and the Lon- don Convention, 1884, 540; de- sire unqualified independence, 540; and the I'itlanders, 541; Sir Alfred Milner on, 542; and the South African War, 543 Bohemia, a part of the Austrian Empire, 93; condition of the peasants in, 96; development of nationality in, Czech movement, 153; revolution in, 171, 3S8; in- vasion of. by Prussia (1866), 965; position in the Empire (1861), 390; demands of the Czechs (1868), 397; concessions to Czechs in, 400; division among Czechs in. 401 Bokhara. 689 Bologna, insurrection in. t8Sl, 110 Bombay, English possession, 519 Bonapartists (France), 197, 344 Bordeaux, Napoleon Ill's speech at, 213; seat of government dur- INDEX 779 Bordeaux, continued ing a part of the siege of Paris, 298; French National Assembly meets at (1871 I, 300,329; Treaty of Frankfort ratified by Assem- bly at, 301 Bordeaux, Duke of, 97, 98, 117, 122. See also Count of Cham- bo rd Borneo, 581 Borny, Germans defeat French at, 296 Bosnia, occupied by Austria, 320; Slavs of, aid Herzegovina (1875), 620; annexed bv Aus- tria-Hungary (1908), 404, 639- 640 Botany Bay, 531 Botha, Louis, in the South Afri- can War, 543 Boulanger, General, Minister of War (1886), ambition of, 356; trial and flight of, 357 Boulogne, Louis Napoleon at, 129, 199 Bourbon, now called Reunion, Island of, owned by France, 1815, 371 Bourbons, Restoration of, 2, 66-99, 119; Bourbon line in Spain, 565, 569 Bourgeois, Emile, address at the First Peace Conference at the Hague (1899), 731 Bourmont, Minister of War, 90 "Boxer " movement, 1900, 698 Brandenburg, 251 Brazil, flight of the royal family of Portugal to, 1807,' 575; Dom Pedro regent of, 576; declared an independent empire under Dom Pedro 1, t822, 576; rec- ognized by Portugal, 1825, 576 Bremen, member of North Ger- man Confederation, 268; mem- ber of German Empire, 304; merchants from, establish trad- ing stations, 318 Briand, Minister of Public Wor- ship, and the enforcement of the Law of 1905, 370 Bright, John, and the Anti-Corn- Law League, 452; on the Irish Famine (181,5), 453; and the Re- form Bill of 1867, 463; in the Gladstone Ministry, 1868, 465; the Bright clauses in the Irish Bright, John, continued Land Act of 1870, 475; on the Forster Education Act of 1870, 481; attitude toward Irish University Bill of 1878, 485; opposition to the Irish Home Rule and Land Bills, SOS; becomes a Liberal Unionist, 504 Brisson Ministry, and the Dreyfus case, 360-363 British Columbia, responsible gov- ernment granted to, 1871, 527; admitted into the Dominion of Canada, 1871, 529 British Empire. See England British Empire in the Nineteenth Century, The, 518-549 British North America, 523-530; Act (1867), 528 British South Africa, 536-545; England acquires Cape Colony, 536; friction with the Boers, 537; the Great Trek, 1886 — , 537; founding of the Transvaal, 538; Transvaal annexed to Great Britain, 1877, 538; Majuba Hill, 539; Pretoria Convention, 1881, 540; London Convention, 188!,, 540; discovery of gold in the Transvaal, 188/,, 541 ; Jameson Raid, 1895, 541; Sir Alfred Mil- ner's Reports on, 18.9.9, 542; South African War, 18.9.9-1.902, 513-544; annexation of the Trans- vaal and the Orange Free State to the British Empire, 1.902, 544; Union of South Africa, 1.909, 544-545; autonomy in, 546; and the problem of imperial federa- tion, 547 Broglie, Achille Charles, Duke of, 87, 120, 130 Broglie, Jacques Victor, ministry of, 349 Brougham, Lord Chancellor, 436 Brunswick, revolutionary move- ments in (1830), 112; 147; in the North German Confedera- tion, 269 Brussels, 102; riot in (1830), 104; seat of the International African Association, 554 Bryce, James, on the advan- tages of federation to the Aus- tralians, 533; American Com- monwealth, censorship of, in Russia, 678 780 INDEX Bucharest, capital of Rouniania, 61S; Treaty of, 1886, 699 Budapest, 171. 177, 394, 395 Bukharest. See Bucharest Bulgaria. Slavs of, aid Herzego- vina, 1875, 690; atrocities in, 1876, 691; siege of Plevna, 693; by Treaty of San Stefano. t878, made a self-governing state trib- utary to the Sultan, 694; ter- ritory of, 6J4; disposition of, by Congress of Berlin, /NTS, 695; since 1878, 6-26-63 1 ; Alexander of Battenberg chosen Prince of, 1879, 698; friction between the Bulgarians and the Russians, 698; Union of the two Bul- garias, 1885, 696, 699; Servia de- clares war upon, 699; expels the Servians, 6-29; Treaty of Bucha- rest, 1886, 699; abdication of Prince Alexander, 630; election of Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg (1887), 630; dictatorship of Stambuloff, 630; election of Ferdinand recognised by the Powers, 631 ; declares her inde- pendence, October 5, 1908, 631, 639, 644; attitude toward Tur- key, t908, 641; and armed peace, 739 "Bulgarian Horror.* and the Ques- tion of the East," by Gladstone, 699 Bulgars, The, 603 (note) Buliguin, 710 Biilow, von, German Chancellor, 1900-1909, 393 Bundesrath, 969, 303-304 Bunsen, -2±2 Burke, Thomas, assassinated (1882), -100 Burma, annexed by England, 5-23; English control of, 681 Burschenschaft, The, 39-1 -2 Bute, 419 Butt, first leader of the Irish Home Rulers, 498 Buxton, and the anti-slavery agita- tion, 440 Byron, Lord, and the Greek War of Independence, 60S " Cadets," Constitutional Demo- cratic Party in Russia. 713 Cadiz, 48; meeting of Cortes at, 63; siesre of, 63 Cairo, 559 Cambodia, Kingdom of, France es- tablishes protectorate over, 373 Cambridge] local government in (1888), 443; University of, 415, 485 Cameron, African explorer, 553 Campbell-Bannerman, Sir Henry, leader of the Liberal Party, 1905-1908, 515 Canada, an English possession (1815), 519; constitutional diffi- culty in Upper and Lower, 523- 5.\5; rebellion of 1887 in, 446, 5-25; the Durham Mission and Report on, 525-5:7; fusion of L T pper and Lower (1840), 597; introduction of ministerial re- sponsibility in (1847), 5-27; founding of Dominion of (1867), 598; Parliament of the Dominion of, 529; growth of the Dominion of, 529; Dominion of, purchases Hudson Bav Terri- tory (1869), 529; Alberta and Saskatchewan admitted into the Dominion (1905), 599; relation of, to England, 599; Canadian Pacific Railway, 530; and the South African "war (1899), 544; autonomy in, 546; and the prob- lem of federation, 547; preferen- tial tariffs, 548 Canary Islands, relation of, to Spain, 574 Canning, 64-65; Foreign Secretary | 18.2.2 >, 499; detaches England from Holy Alliance, 493; recog- nizes independence of the Span- ish colonies in America, 493; and Catholic Emancipation, 496; and the Greek War of Independence, 608. 610 Ca novas, leader of the Conserva- tives in Spain, 1876, 573 Canton, 684, 685, 686 Cape Colony, retained by Eng- land. t815, 9, 536, 551; responsi- ble government granted to, 1872, 598; the Croat 'Trek, 537; 54:3; and the South African War, t899, 544 Cape of Good Hope, 488; acquired by England, 519; position in the South African Union, 1909, 544- 545 Cape Town, 545 Caprivi, German Chancellor, 1890- 1S94, 323 INDEX 781 Capua, 236; Francis II defeated at, 237 Carbonari, in France, 91, 95; in Italy, 56, 110, 159, 161, 222 Carlists, Wars of the, 566-568, 572 Carlos, Don, claim to the throne of Spain, 565; Carlist war, 566 Carlos I of Portugal, 1889-1908, 577; assassinated, 1908, 577 Carlotta, wife of Maximilian, Archduke of Austria, 279 Carlsbad Decrees, 41-44, 112 Carlstad, Treaty of, 1905, 599-600 Carlyle, on Queen Victoria's acces- sion, 445; on Chartism, 450; on the Reform Bill of 1867, 464; on the Great Western, 724 " Carmen Sylva," Queen Elizabeth of Roumania, 619 Carnot, becomes President of the French Republic (1887), 355; assassinated (189k), 358 Caroline Islands, purchased by Germany from Spain (1899), 319 Carrara, 223 Cartwright, 407, 722 Casimir-Perier, on the Press in France, 88; and the conserva- tives, 120-122, 130; grandson of, elected President of French Re- public (1894), 358$ resigns, 358 Cassel, 264 Castelar, on the establishment of a republic in Spain, 571; 572 Castelfidardo, battle of, 236 Castille, 565; Carlists in, 567 Castlereagh, 15 Catherine II of Russia, 601 Catholic Church (Roman) and the government of Rome after 1815, 55; the religion of the state in France (181k), 69; French ex- pedition to Rome (1849), 182; abolition of the temporal power of the Pope of, 301; struggle with the German Empire, 305; and the Kulturkampf, 306-310; dogma of Papal Infallibility in, 307; the Old Catholics, 307; and the Falk Laws, 308-309; and the Third Republic, 349; question of, and State in France, 365; Law of Associations (1901) in France, 366; religious orders for- bidden to engage in teaching in France, 366; and the Concordat of 1801, 367; anticlerical legis- lation in France, 1881-1903, 367; Catholic Church (Roman), con- tinued attitude of the clergy of, in the Dreyfus affair, 368; Pius X protests against the visit of President Loubet of France to Victor Emmanuel III, 368; and the abrogation of the Concordat, 368; and the Associations of Worship in France (1905), 369; Pius X and the Associations, 369; French Law of January 2, 1907, 370; separation of, and State in France, 370; relation of, and State in Italy, 378; Law of Papal Guarantees, 378; the Curia Romana, 379; powers of, restricted in Austria, 396- 397; in Spain, 575; in Belgium, 583 Catholic Emancipation (England), 1829, 428 Cavaignac, Jacques Marie Eugene, son of Louis Eugene Cavaignac, Minister of War, 360; speech of, concerning the Dreyfus case, 361 Cavaignac, General Louis Eugene, 99; Dictatorship of, during the June Days, 194; candidate for the presidency of the republic, 199 Cavendish, Lord Frederick, assas- sinated, 499 Cavite, battle of, 574 Cavour, Count Camillo di, and the Creation of the Kingdom of Italy, 215-239; and Napoleon III, 215-227; early life, 216; his interest in political and economic questions, 217; becomes an edi- tor, 217; prime minister (1852), 217; policy of economic develop- ment, 218; Crimean policy, 219; at the Congress of Paris, 220; and army reform, 221 ; interview at Plombieres with Napoleon III, 222; Austro-Sardinian War, 225; displeasure at the terms of Villafranca and resignation, 227; returns to office, 230; bargain with Napoleon III concerning Savoy and Nice, 230-232; policy concerning Garibaldi's expedi- tion, 234-237; and the question of Rome and the Kingdom of Italy, 238; death of, 239; characteriza- tion of, 239; on problems con- fronting the new kingdom, 376, 782 INDEX Cavour, Count Camillo di, con- tinued 377; attitude toward the Roman Catholic Church, 378; 387 Cawnpore, 521 Central Europe, between two Revo- lutions, 145-168; in Revolt, 169- 186 Certain Features of Modern Progress, 719-736 Ceylon, English possession (1815), 9, 519; 559 Chalons, MacMahon retreats to, 296 Chamberlain, Joseph, becomes a Liberal-Unionist, 504; and the Second Home Rule Bill, 509; in the Colonial Office, 511; and im- perialism, 511; and preferential duties, 548; and the Colonial conferences, 548 Chambord, Count of (Duke of Bordeaux), grandson of Charles X, 97; and the Legitimists, 341, 342 Charles Albert, Prince of Cari- gnan, 61 ; King of Piedmont, 164, 166; reforms of, 167; defeated at Custozza, 176; abdication of, 181; death of, 182; grants Constitu- tional Statute (1848), 185, 215 Charles Felix, 61-62 Charles I of Roumania, 1866 — ; reign of, 619-620, 632 Charles IV of Spain, 565 Charles X, King of France (1824- 1830), reign of, 83-97; policy of, 83-89; defeat of Villele's minis- try, 89; Martignac ministry, 89; Polignac ministry, 90-91 ; con- flict with the Chamber of Depu- ties, 91; dissolves the Chamber, 91; Ordinances of July (1830), 92; his interpretation of the Charter, 93; and the July Revo- lution, 95; abdicates, 97; retires to England, 97; death of (1836), 98. See also Artois, Count of Charles XIII, King of Norway and Sweden, adopts Bernadotte, as Crown Prince, 596; 598 Charles XIV, 1818-1844, King of Norway and Sweden, reign of, 596-597. See Bernadotte Charles XV, King of Norway and Sweden, 1859-1872, Constitution of 1866, 597 Chartist Movement, 446-450 Chateaubriand, 88; and the Greek War of Independence, 608 Child Labor (England), 440-442; Factory Act (1833) regulating, 442; Labor in Mines Act, 455- 456; Factory Act (1844), 456; Factory and Workshop Con- solidation Act of 1878, 456-457; Factory and Workshop Act of 1901, 457; 506 China, 518; Russia acquires the northern bank of the Amur (1858) and the Maritime Prov- ince (I860) from, 682; civiliza- tion of, 683; government of, 684; isolation of, 684; Opium War, 1840-1842, 685; signs Treaty of Nanking (1842) opening four ports to British trade, 685; entrance of various powers into commercial relations with, 686; France joins England in war against, 686; Treaties of Tientsin (1858), 686; confirmed (1860), 687; Japan's war with (1894), 695; signs Treaty of Shimonoseki (1895), 696; intervention of Russia, France, and Germany in, 696; Russia secures rights in Manchuria from, 697; Germany establishes a " sphere of influ- ence" in (1898), 697; the "Boxer" movement in (1900), 698; influence of the Russo- Japanese War upon, 703; reform in, 704; promise of constitution to, 705 Chino-Japanese War, 1894, 695-696 Chios, Turkish massacre in, 607 Christian Frederick, elected King of Norway, May 17, 1814, abdi- cates October 7, 1814, 596 Christian VIII, King of Denmark, 1839-1848, 593 Christian IX, King of Denmark, 1863-1906, succeeds Frederick VII, 257; and Schleswig-Hol- stein, 593; war with Prussia and Austria and Treaty of Vienna (1864), 259, 593; revision of Constitution of 1849 (1866), 594 Christiania, capital of Norway, 596 Christina, wife of Ferdinand VII of Spain, Regent of Spain, 1833-1840, 566; grants the Royal Statute, 1834, 567; pro- mulgates the Constitution of 1837, 568; driven into exile, 568 INDEX 783 Church of England, position of, in England (1815), 415; abuses within, 416; religious disabilities of Dissenters from, 494; posi- tion of, in Ireland, 4C8; schools of, 477; tests of, in universities (England) abolished, 483; vol- untary schools connected with, 513-514. See Irish Church Churchill, Lord Randolph, and the Second Home Rule Bill, 509 Cisleithania, 395. See Austria Civil Service reform in England, 482; of India, 522 Civil War (United States), Eng- land and, 461, 486 Clare, County of, O'Connell elect- ed to Parliament from, 427 Clarendon, Lord, on the Italian question, 220; in the Gladstone ministry of 1868, 465 Clausewitz, on German unity, 34 Clemenceau, leader" of the Radi- cals, 354 Clericalism, 349 Clotilde, Princess, betrothed to Prince Jerome Napoleon, 223 Coalition, The Great, 1, 592; treaties of, 2 Cobbett, William, and "The Week- ly Political Register," 419; driven into exile, 421 Cobden, Richard, and the Anti- Corn-Law League, 452 Coburg, Leopold of, elected King of Belgium, 104 Cochin-China, acquired by France (1858-1861), 373 Collectivism, Growth of, 458. See Socialism Colonial Conferences (British), 1887, 1897, 1902, 1907, 548 Colonies, of Belgium, Congo Free State (1908), 557; of Denmark, in Africa (1815), 551; (1909), 594-595; of France (1815), 371, 551; acquisitions in the nine- teenth century, 353-354, 371-375, 554; in Asia, 681; of Germany, in Africa, 319, 554; of Great Britain (1815), 3, 9, 519, 551; slavery abolished in (1834), 440; v the Disraeli Ministry and, 487; India, 519-523; British North America, 523-530; Australia, 530- 534; New Zealand, 534-536; British South Africa, 536-545; other African possessions, 552- Colonies, continued 554, 562; Egypt, 554, 561; in Asia, 681; of Holland (1815), 551; (1909) 581; of Italy, 382- 383, 554; of Portugal (1815), 551; acquisitions in Africa (1884-1890), 554; possessions of, 578; of Spain (1815), 551; loses American (1898), 565, 574; possessions of (1898), 574 Combes, Prime Minister (France), attitude toward clericalism, 366 Commonwealth of Australia. See Australia Commonwealth of Australia Con- stitution Act, The (1900), 533 Commune of Paris, The (1871) conditions in Paris prior to, 330- 333; government of, 333; and the National Assembly, 334-335; cost of insurrection to France, 337 Concert of Powers, at Congress of Vienna, 16; signs Quadruple Al- liance, 17; Turkey admitted to, 616 Concordat of 1801, 367; abrogated (1905), 368 Confederation of the Rhine, a Na- poleonic creation, 29 Congo Free State, founded by Leo- pold II of Belgium, 554; rela- tion of, to Leopold II, 555-557; conditions in, 1905, 557; declared a colony by Belgium, 1908, 557; Congo, International Association of the, 555 Congo River, 552; Stanley's ex- plorations of, 553 Congress of Berlin (1878), 625- 627; and the Greek frontier, 635 ; breaches of the Treaty of Ber- lin, 629, 640, 644 Congress of Paris (1856), 212, 220, 615-616 Congress of Vienna (September, 1814-June, 1815) Membership of, 3-5; demands of Russia and Prussia at, 6-7; Secret Treaty of Defensive Triple Alliance con- cluded at, 7; division of the spoils by, 7-10; criticism of, 10; and the German Confederation, 29, 32, 35, 38; Final Act of, 4, 12; and Italy, 52, 230; and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, 101; and Belgium, 105; and Po- land, 106; and the Pact of 1815 784 INDEX Congress of Vienna, continual (Switzerland), 584; and Greece, 605; Alexander I at, 647, (549; compared with the Hague Peace Conference, 736 Congresses, The (s«6 al.<<> Congress of Vienna), Congress of Aix- la-Chapelle (1818), 59. 649; Congress of Troppau (1820), 59; Congress of Laibach (1821 K 60; Congress of Verona (1822), 63-63 Constantine, brother of Alexander I of Russia, driven from War- saw, 108; renounces crown, 650 Constantinople, 131, 557; in War of Greek Independence, 606; events in (1876), 690; Russians march toward, 611,634; counter- revolution of April, 1909, in, 64;? Constitution, of 1191 (French), 46, 576; of 1812 (Spanish), 45- 46, abolished, 47; of t815 (Switzerland), 584; of 1887 (Spanish), 568; of 1848 (Hol- land), 580; of 18+8 (Switzer- land), 586; of 1S50 (Prussia), 185-186; of 1S66 (Norway and Sweden), 597; of 1875 (France), 345, revision of (1884), 333; of 1876 (Spanish), 573 Constitutional Charter, 181 ' f (France), 67-70; change in, 83; Charles X's interpretation of, 93; revised, 116 Constitutional Statute (1848), Piedmont, Charles Albert grants, 185 Convention of Bloemfontein, 538 Corfe Castle, 413 Cork, College at, 484, 516 Corn Laws (England), 449; of 1S15 and 1888, 451 ; repeal of, 1846, 454, 469 Cornwall, County of, representa- tion in House of Commons, 1815, 411 Corporation Act, Repeal of, 1828, 43£ Cortes (Portuguese), 576 Cortes (Spanish), Position of, un- der the Constitution of 1812, 46), 615; re- sults of the war, 616; Russia in, 654 Crispi, Francesco, Prime Minister, 1887-1891, 1898-1896, colonial policy, 383; policy of repression, 383 Croatia, Kingdom of, 24; a certain measure of autonomy in, 155; Jellaehich appointed governor of, 177; severed from Hungary, 388; position in the Empire (1861), 390; a province of Hungary, 396 Croker, on Second Reform Bill, 435 Cromarty, 412 Cromer, Lord, and Egypt, 560-561 Crompton, 407, 733 Cuba, Spanish possession, 565; in- surrections in, 18(18-1878, 1S95, 573, 574; Spanish- American War in (1898), 574; Spain loses, 574 Cumberland, Duke of, accession of, to throne of Hanover, 446 Cunard, Samuel, founder of first transatlantic steamship line- 724 Curacao, 581 Curia Romana, 379 Curtius, 246 Cushing, Caleb, sent by the United States to make a commercial treaty with China, 1844, 686 INDEX 785 Custozza, battle of (18),8) between Austrians and Sardinians, 176, 181, 215; second battle of, (1806) between Austrians and Italians, 265 Cyprus, 639, 643 Czechs, in Bohemia, 153, 172, 175; demands of (1868), 397; con- cessions to, under the Taaffe ministry, 400; division among, 401 Dahomey, French possession, 374 Daimios, The, of Japan, 689; and the policy of isolation, 690-691, 692; relinquish their feudal rights, 693 Danube, navigation of, declared free by Treaty of Paris (1856), 615 Danubian Principalities, Moldavia and Wallachia, become practi- cally independent, 611; Russian influence in, 611; Russian troops enter, 1853, 612; Russian evacuation of, 185)/, 614; de- clared under the suzerainty of the Porte by the Treaty ot Paris (1856), 615; the Rou- manians in, and the Crimean War, 617; elect Colonel Alexan- der Couza as their prince, 618; union of the Principalities, 618. See Roumania Dawson, estimate of Bismarck's policy of State Socialism, 317 Days of March, Hungary (18) f 8), 170, 174 Days of June, France (1848), 194, 198 D'Azeglio, 1708-1866, Author of " Recent Events in Romagna," 165; and the question of Rome and the Kingdom of Italy, 238; on Italian unity, 376 Deftk, Francis, 158; leader of the moderate liberals in Hungary (1861), 391 Decazes, Minister of Louis XVIII, 75; and the Electoral Law, 77; forced to resign, 80 Delarey, in the South African War, 543 Delbi, 521. Demerara, retained by England (1815), 9. Denmark, King of, at Congress of Vienna, 4; loses Norway, 11, 592; King of, a member of the Denmark, continued German Confederation, 31; in- fluence of events in Italy (1859) upon, 246; war with Prussia and Austria and Treaty of Vienna, (186/,) 256-259, 593; possessions of, in Africa (1815), 551; gov- ernment of, 592-593; Frederick VII grants constitutions to, 593; revision of the Constitution of 18) t 9 (1866), 594; growth of radicalism in, 594; colonies of, 594-595; Prince Charles of, be- comes Haakon VII of Norway (1905), 600 Depretis, colonial policy of, 382 Derby, Lord, attitude of the Derby-Disraeli ministry toward the Jews, 458; becomes Prime Minister, 462; on the Reform Bill of 1867, 464 Deshima, Peninsula of, 690 Devil's Island, Dreyfus deported to, 359; Dreyfus brought from, 362 Devonshire, Duke of. See Harting- ton, Lord Dicey, A. V., on the Factory and Workshop Act of 1901, 457 Diet of Frankfort, 29; forced vote on Carlsbad Decrees, 41; new measures of repression (1832), 112; and the national movement in Germany, 174; revived (1851), 185, 240; Bismarck, Prussian delegate to (1851), 253; King of Denmark as Duke of Holstein represented in, 257; protests against the incorporation of Schleswig with Denmark, 257; Austria brings Schleswig-Hol- stein question before the, 263; Austria moves in the, that the federal forces be sent against Prussia, 263; ceases to exist, 268 Disraeli, 461 ; becomes leader of the House of Commons, 1866, 462; Reform Bill of 1867 car- ried by, 463; on the Irish Land Act of 1870, 476; attitude to- ward Irish University Bill of 1873, 485; ministry of, .7874- 1880, 486-490; and imperialism, 487; and the purchase of the Suez Canal shares, 488; proposes title of Empress of India for the Queen, 489; for- eign policy of, 489; becomes 786 INDEX Disraeli, continued Lord Beneonsfield (1S76), 489; fall of ministry of, 480, 539; death of (1881), 497 j and the annexation of the Transvaal to Great Britain, 538; and the Bul- garian atrocities, 699; represents England at the Congress of Berlin | t878), 695 Divorce, in France, abolished in 1SI ' h restored in 1884, 359 Dobrudscha, ceded to Roumania in place of Bessarabia, 695-696 Dbllinger, on the Dogma of Papal Infallibility. 307 Dominion of Canada. See Canada Dominion of New Zealand. See New Zealand Dostoievski, 659 Double Vote, in France, by Elec- toral Law of 2820, SI; rescinded (1881), 117 Draga, Queen, wife of Alexander I of Servia, murder of, 633 Dresden, retained by King of Saxony, 8; Prussian troops oc- cupy, 964 Dreyfus Case, 358-364; Dreyfus (Alfred) condemned for trea- son (1S95), 359; attempts in Dreyfus' favor, 360; Zola tries to reopen the, 3(H) ; Court of Cassation orders a retrial of, 2899, 369; Dreyfus pardoned by President Loubet, 369; vindicat- ed, 363; the clergy in, 369 Droysen, 946 Dual Alliance (1891), Russia and France, 357 Dual Control (1879-1888), Eng- land and France in Egypt, 559, 561 Dual Monarchy (Austria-Hun- gary), 393-396' Dublin, Irish Parliament at, abol- ished (1800), 468; Universities at, 484; formation of Home Rule League at, 497; Thomas Byrke assassinated at, 199; Uni- versity at (190S), for Catholics, 516 Duchies, War of the. See Schleswig-Holstein Duma, Character of the, 711, 71 9; elections to, 713; Nicholas II opens the, May 10, 1906, 713; de- mands and impotence of, 714; dissolved by the Tsar, July 99, Duma, continual 1906, 715; Viborg Manifesto by members of the, 715; The Sec- ond, opened by the Tsar, March 5, 1907, 715, dissolved, dune 16, t907, 716; The Third, November 11. 1907, 716 Dunwich, 413 Durham, Lord, in the Grey Min- istry, 430; on condition of the colonies in Canada, 525; mis- sion of, 525; report of, 595- 597, $98 Dutch Guiana, 581 Bast India Company, 519, 5-:: East Indies, 519; Dutch colonies in, 5S1 Last Prussia, 396 Eastern Question, Thiers and, 131 ; Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi (1888), 139; London Confer- ence (lS'/O) and, 139; Austria- Hungary and, 405; importance Of, 60:\ Nicholas I and, 611- 619; Moldavia-Wallaehia and, 611, 617; reopening of, t87S, 4S9, 690; England and, 695; Con- gress of Berlin | t878) and, 625- 697; Young Turks and, 636-644, See aho Turkey and Chapter XXV 11 1. 601-644, passim Edict of Emancipation (Russia), is,; I, 657 Edinburgh, 98 Edinburgh Review (1819), Fran- cis Jeffrey on the steam engine, 408 Education, Creation of a national system of, in France, 359; com- pulsory, in Italy by Education Laws,' t877 and ' 190), 381 j secular, established in Austria, 397; in England by Forster Education Act of 1870, 478- 481; attendance made compul- sory in England (1880), 481; made free in England (1891), 481; Education Act of 2902, 513-514; in Portugal, 578; in Belgium, 582-583; in Denmark, 594; in Greece, 635; in Russia, 660, 661; in Japan, 693; in China, 704 Edward VII, 1901 — , accession of, 513 Egypt, war with Turkey, 131; Khedive of, sells shares of indj;x 787 Egypt, continued Sue-/ Canal to England, 488; early history of, 550; In 1815, 5.51; English occupation of, 1882, 554; 557-563 ; relation to Turkey, .057; Mehemet Ali in, 5.07; Intervention of Fngland and Prance In, 559; revolt of A rahi Pasha. 5.09; English ex- pedition crushes the revolt, 559; England assumes the position of adviser in, 560; English occupa- tion of, 561 j loss 01 the Soudan, 561; recovery of the Soudan, 562; part of the Ottoman Em- pire (1815), 601; condition in 1815, 602, 643 Eidsvold, Constitution of, 181/ f , 505, 598 Elba, 122 Electricity, and the industrial de- velopment of Italy, 385-386; the telegraph, the telephone, 72G Elgin, Lord, Governor of Canada, introduces principle of minis- terial responsibility, 527 Ely, attitude, of government to- ward rioters in, 4/20 Emancipation of the serfs, In Rus- sia (1861), 657 Empress-Dowager of China, 098; change of policy of the, 704 Ems, 291; despatch, 202 Ena, Princess, of Battenberg, marries King Alfonso XIII of Spain (1906), 575 England, retains Malta (1815), 3; acquisitions of (1815), 9; signs Quadruple Alliance (1815), 17; King of, a member of the German Confederation for Hanover, 31 ; at Congress of Troppau (1820), 59; opposes policy of armed intervention in Spain, 63; Canning restricts Holy Alliance to the Continent of Europe, 64-65; influence of July Revolution (1880) In, 100; favors election of Leopold of Coburg as King of Belgium, 104; recognizes Kingdom of Belgium at conference of the Powers in London (1880-1881), 105; aids Turkey against Rus- sia, 132; London Conference (1840), 132; with France and Piedmont wages war against Russia in the Crimea, 212, 219; England, continued at Congress of Paris (1856), 220; participates in affairs in Italy, 329; attitude toward the cession of Savoy and Nice to France, 231, 274; Napoleon HI'S treaty of commerce with (1860), 274; intervenes with France and Spain in Mexico, 277; neutrality of, in Franco- German war, 291; Free Trade in, 310-312, 450-455; fleet of, bombards Algiers, 372; to the Reform Bill of 1882, 406-438; in /.S/5, 406; industrial revolu- tion in, 406-408; renown of Par- liament, 409; a land of the old regime, 409; commanding posi- tion of the nobility in, 410; House of Commons (1815), 410- 414; the Church of, 415-416; works of Adam Smith and Jeremy Bentham on conditions in, 417; effect of the French Revolution upon, 417; economic distress in, after t815, 418; Corn Law of 1815, 418; demand for reform, 419; William Cohhett and parliamentary reform, 419- 420; popular disturbances (1816), 420; Spa Fields, 420; suspension of Habeas Corpus (1817), 421; massacre of Peter- loo (1819), 421; Parliament passes the Gag Laws, 422; death of George III (1820), and ac- cesion of George IV (1820- 1830), 422; era of reform after 1820, 422; defiance of the Holy Alliance, 422; economic reforms in, 423; Penal Code, reformed by Sir Robert Peel, 424; reli- gious inequality, 424; repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts (1828), 425; O'Connell founds the Catholic Association in Ire- land, 427; O'Connell elected to Parliament, 427; Catholic Emancipation Act (1829), 428; Tory opposition to the reform of Parliament, 428; death of George IV and accession of Wil- liam IV, 428; influence of the trench Revolution of 1830, 429; fall of the Tory ministry, 430; First Reform Bill, 430; speeches for and against, 431- 435; ministry defeated, Parlia- f88 INDEX England, continued ment dissolved, 435; Second Re- form Bill defeated bv the House of Lords, 435; "Third Reform Bill, 436; Grey Min- istry resigns, 436; William IV attempts to get a ministry, fails and recalls Grey, 136; the Bill passed, June I, 1882, 437; redistribution of seats, 437; the franchise, 437; between two Great Reforms { 1882-1861 ), 439- 464; era of Whig government, 439; abolition of slavery in the colonies, IS,!',, 440; child labor agitation, 140-441; Factory Act, (888, 449; evils in local govern- ment, 449; Municipal Corpora- tions Act, t885, 444; death of William IV and accession of Queen Victoria, 445; the Queen's political education and mar- riage, 445; loss of Hanover, 446; Chartist Movement, 446-450; The People's Charter (1888), 417; I.ovett and O'Connor, 447- 448; Petition of 2848, 449; sig- nificance of the movement, 449; Free Trade and Anti-Corn-Law Agitation, 450-455; Anti-Corn- Law League (1889) Cobden, Bright and Villiers, 459; argu- ments for Free Trade, 459; Irish Famine. 453; repeal of the Corn Laws, IS ',6, 454; remaining pro- tective duties gradually removed, 454; Navigation Laws abol- ished (1849), 454; labor legis- lation, 1840-1850, 455-458; regu- lation of labor in mines, 455; Factory Laws of 1844, '8 n, 1850, Act of 1878, 456; Morley on the labor code, 456; Factory and Workshop Act of 1901, 457; growth of trades-unions, 457; growth of collectivism, 45S; Jews admitted to House of Com- mons, 1S58, 458; abolition of Eroperty qualification for mem- ers of Parliament, 458; Glad- stone, Chancellor of the Ex- chequer and his policy, 459; Postal Savings Banks, 459; in- dustrial and scientific progress, 460; demand for a wider suf- frage, 461; effect of the Civil War in the United States on, 461; Gladstone introduces a re- England, continued form bill, 1866, 461; Derby and Disraeli form a ministry, 46;?; Reform Bill of 1867 carried by Disraeli, 463; provisions of the Reform Bill of 1867, 463; re- distribution of seats, 464; the Liberals under Gladstone come into power, 464; under Glad- stone and Disraeli, 465-496; the Great Ministry, 465; conditions in Ireland (1815), 467-469; Disestablishment of the Irish Church, 2869, 47-2; Irish Land Act of 2870, 475-477; Church schools, 477; Forster Education Act of 2870, 478-481; condition of education prior to 2870, 478; inadequacy of the system, 478; the Act and its provisions, 478-480; attendance made com- pulsorv (1880), 481; attendance made 'free (18iU), 481; Educa- tion Act of 1902, 481, 513-514; Army reform (1871), 481-482; introduction of short service, 481 ; abolition of the purchase system, 489; Civil Service re- form (1870), 480; Ballot Law of 287% 483-484; Gladstone's Irish University Bill of 1873 de- feated, 485; Gladstone resigns but returns to office, 485; the Alabama award, 486, 591 ; Con- servatives under Disraeli come into office by elections of 1874, 486; the Disraeli Ministry, 1874- 1880, 486-490; importance of the colonies emphasized, 487; pur- chase of the Suez Canal shares (1875), 488, 558; Queen pro- claimed Empress of India, 489, 599; reopening of the Eastern Question (1876), 489; Second Gladstone Ministry, 1880-1885, 490-496; failure "of the Irish Land Act of 1870, 490; Irish Land Act of 2882, the Three F's, 491; Reform Bill of 188',, 492; Redistribution Act of 2885, 493; Single Member districts, 494; qualifications for voting, 495; since 2886, 497-517; Irish Home Rule Movement. 498; Third Gladstone Ministry, 2886, 499; introduction of the Home Rule Bill, 500; Irish Land Purchase Bill, 501; opposition to the bills, INDEX 789 England, continued 501-501.; disruption of the Lib- eral Party, 504; Home Rule Bill defeated, 504; fall of Gladstone, 504; Second Salis- bury Ministry, 1886-1892, SOS- SOT; policy of coercion for Ire- land, SOS; Land Purchase Act of 189 1, 505-500; County Councils Act of t888, 506; social legis- lation, 507; increase of the Navy, 507; Fourth Gladstone Ministry (1892-1894), 507-SIO; Second Home Rule Bill (1893), 507-509; Parisli Councils Bill of 18.9//, 509; Gladstone resigns, 510; Rosebery Ministry, 510-511; Third Salisbury Ministry, 511- 515; War in South Africa, 1899- 1902, 512; Irish Land Purchase Act of 1896, 512; Irish Local Government Act (1898), 512; Education Act ' of 1902, 513; abolition of the school boards, 514; decline of illiteracy, 514; the Liberal Party in power, 1905—, 515; Old Age Pensions Law (1908), 515; Irish Univer- sity or Birrell Act (1908), 516; colonial possessions prior to 1815, 519; India, 519-523; an- nexation of Burma and Balu- chistan and protectorate of Afghanistan, 523; British North America, 523-530; the Durham Mission, 525; Lord Durham's Report, 525-527; the Oregon dis- pute, 529; relation of Canada to, 529; and Australia, 530-534; and New Zealand, 534-536; and British South Africa, 536-545; acquires Cape Colony, 536; fric- tion with the Boers, 537; the Great Trek (1836), 537; sends troops into Natal (18/,2), 538; proclaims Natal a colony (181,3), 538; Orange Free State declared a part of the British Empire (18J,8), 538; Transvaal annexed to the British Empire (1877), 538; Majuba Hill, 539; Pretoria Convention, 1881, 540; London Convention, 188!/, 540; Jameson Raid, 1895, 511; Sir Alfred Milner's Reports, 1899, 542; South African War, 1899-1902, 543-544; annexation of the Transvaal and the Orange Free England, continued State to the British Empire, 1902, 544; and Imperial Federa- tion, 545-549; possessions in Africa, 1815, 551; explorations in Africa, 552-553; occupies Egypt, 1882, 554; acquisitions in Africa, 1884-1890, 554; at the Conference of the Powers, 1876, 554; at the Congress of Berlin, 1884-1885, 555; demands re- forms in the Congo, 557; inter- venes in Egypt, 559; crushes the revolt of Arabi Pasha, 1882, 559; assumes the position of "adviser," 560; "occupation" of Egypt, 561; recovers Soudan, 1898, 562; Lord Beresford in Portugal, 1807, 575; inter- venes in the Greek War of Inde- pendence, 608; and the Treaty of London, 1827, 609; battle of Navarino, 1827, 610; guarantees independence of Greece, 611; Nicholas I of Russia and, 611; in the Coalition against Russia, 613; invasion of the Crimea and siege of Sebastopol, 614; Treaty of Paris, 1856, 615; and the Ber- lin Memorandum, 1876", 620; de- mands revision of the Treaty of San Stefano, 625; at Congress of Berlin, 1878, 625-626; occu- pies Cyprus, 626; cedes the Ionian Islands to Greece, 186'^, 634; in- duces the Sultan to cede Thes- saly to Greece, 1881, 634; atti- tude toward the breaches of the Berlin Treaty of 1878, 629, 640; in Asia, 681 ; and the Opium War, 181,0-181,2, 685; gains by Treaty of Nanking (181,2), 685; joined by France in second war against China, 686; Treaty of Tientsin (1858), 686, confirmed, 687; bombards Kagoshima, 691; acquires a port in China by lease, 697; helps to rescue the legations in Peking, 698; diplo- matic relations of, with Russia concerning Manchuria, 700; Anglo-Japanese Treaty of 1902, 700 Epirus, 626 Eritrea, Italian colony, 382 Esterhazy, Major, and the Drey- fus Case, 359-363 Esthonia, 645 '90 INDEX Eton College, Gladstone at, 465; 477 Eugenie, Empress, marries Na- poleon III, 210; urges war against Prussia, 293; flees from Paris after the surrender of Na- poleon III at Sedan, 297; 306 Europe, Reconstruction of, 1-22; Central, between two Revolu- tions, 145-168; Central, in Re- volt, 169-186 "Expansion of England," by Seelev, on the government of In- dia, 522 Factory Acts (England), Act of 1883', 442; Acts of 1844, 1847, 1850, 456; Act of 1878, 456; Act of 1889, 506-507; Factory and Workshop Act of 1901, 457 Factory system, Rise of, 722. See Industrial Revolution Faidherbe, and the annexation of the Senegal Valley, 373 Faillv, General de, 295 Falk' Laws (Prussia, 1878, 187!,, 1875), 308 Far East, The, 681-705 Far Eastern Question, 680, 703. See Chapter XXX, 681-705 Faroe Islands, 594 Faure, Felix, President of the French Republic (1895-1899), 358; death of, 361 Favre, Jules, and the proclamation of the French Republic, 297- 298 February ' Revolution (181/8) in France, Influence of, in Europe, 145 Federal Act of the Congress of Vicuna, 32, 35, 38 Federation (British Imperial). See Imperial Fenian Movement, 470, 528 Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, Prince of Bulgaria, elected Prince of Bulgaria (1887), 630; election of, recognized by the Great Powers (1896), 631; proclaims complete independence of Bul- garia, October 5, 1908, and as- sumes the title of King, 631, <>39 Ferdinand I, Emperor of Austria, 1885-1848, 97, 152; dissolves Hungarian parliament, 178; flees to Olmiitz, 178; abdication of, 179 Ferdinand I, King of Naples, treaty of, with Austria, 53; character of, 56; at Florence, 60 Ferdinand II, King of Naples, proclaims a constitution, 167; 181; 220 Ferdinand VII, King of Spain, restoration of (1814)t 46-50; character of, 46; abolishes Con- stitution of 1812, 47; persecutes Liberals, 47; disintegration of the Spanish Empire under, 48- 49, 565; Revolution of 1S20, 49- 50; proclaims Constitution of 181.2, 50; absolutism of, restored by France, 63; revenge of, after t828, 564; promulgates the Prag- matic Sanction of t789 (1880), 565; death of I 18.1]), 566 Ferrara, Pius IX protests against Austrian occupation of, 166 Ferry, Jules, and the proclamation of' the French Republic, 297; 351 ; minister of public instruc- tion, 353; prime minister, 1881, 1888-1885, his colonial policy, 353; overthrow of, 355; sends troops into Tunis (1881), 374 Fichte, 44 Field, Cyrus, and the Atlantic Cable, 460 Fielden, and the child labor agita- tion, 442 Fieschi, attempt on the life of Louis Philippe, 125 Fife, 412 Figueras, 572 Final Act of Congress of Vienna, 4, 13 Finland, retained by Russia in 1815, 8; seized by Russia, 595, 645; Russification of, 672; Nicholas II and, 678-680; abro- gation of the constitution of, 679; Russia makes concessions to, 713; the Viborg Manifesto, 715; Nicholas II restores the lib- erties of (1905), 717; Parlia- ment of, altered, 718; conditions in (1909), 718 Flocon, 188 Florence, overthrow of Republic of, 182; capital of Italy, 1865- 1871, 378 Florida, 64 Foochow, opened to British trade by Treaty of Nanking (18>t2), 685 INDEX 791 Forbaeh, Germans defeat the French at, 296 Forey, General, 278 Formosa, China cedes, to Japan (1895), 696 Forster, William Edward, in the Gladstone Ministry, 1868, 465; Education Act of 1870, 478-481, 513 Fouche, 27 Fox, 433; on the government of colonies, 526 France, and the restoration ot Louis XVIII, 2; boundaries of, by Treaty of Paris (181/,), 3; Isle of, 9; burdens imposed upon, by Second Treaty of Paris (1815), 13; attitude of Allies toward, 16-17; at Con- gress of Troppau (1820), 59; at Congress of Verona (1822), 62; reign of Louis XVIII, 66- 83; during the Restoration, 66- 99; France in 1815, 66; the Con- stitutional Charter, 67-70; politi- cal parties in (1815), 72-73; the White Terror in, 73; execution of Marshal Ney, 74; the King and the Chamber of Deputies, 74; period of moderate liberal- ism in (1816-1820), 75; the al- lied troops evacuate, 75; reor- ganization of the army in (1818), 76; the electoral svstem in, 77; the Press Law of 1819, 78; activ- ity of the Ultras in, 78; and the election of Gregoire, 79; and the murder of the Duke of Berry, 79; the Electoral Law of 1820 in, 80; censorship restored in, 81; invades Spain (1823), 63, 82; death of Louis XVIII, 82; reign of Charles X, 83-97; policy of Charles X, 83-89; fall of Vil- lele Ministry, 89; ministries of Martignac and Polignac, 89- 91 ; prorogation of Chambers and General Election, 91-92; Ordi- nances of July (1830), 92; July Revolution, 95; abdication of Charles X, 97; Louis Philippe made King, 98; end of the Restoration, 98-99; favors elec- tion of Leopold of Coburg as King of Belgium, 104; recog- nizes Kingdom of Belgium, 105; attitude toward insurrec- tion in the Papal States, 110; France, continued seizes Ancona, 111; reign of Louis Philippe, 114-144; his legal title to the throne, 115; the constitution of, revised, 116; the franchise in, lowered (1831), 117; character of the July Mon- archy in, 117; insecurity of the new regime, 118; the progressive and conservative parties, 119; popular unrest, 120; Casimir- Perier Ministry in, 120-122; the Legitimists, 122; Republican in- surrection (1832), 123; vigorous measures of the government in, 124; attempts upon the life of Louis Philippe, 125; the Sep- tember Laws (1835), 125; Louis Philippe and the Napoleonic legend, 127-129; rivalry of Thiers and Guizot, 130; personal gov- ernment of Louis Philippe, 131; Thiers and the Eastern Ques- tion, 131 ; becomes patron of Mehemet Ali, 132; ignored by London Conference (1840), 132; ministry of Thiers, 131-132; ministry of Guizot, 132-142; de- mand for electoral and parlia- mentary reform in, 135; rise of radicalism in, 136; growth of socialism in, 138; opposition to the policy of the government, 139-142; the "reform banquets," 140; revolution of February (1848), 142, 187; abdication and flight of Louis Philippe, 142; Second Republic proclaimed, 143; effect of Revolution of 1848 on Europe, 145, 176; intervenes in Rome, 182; siege and capture of Rome, 182; Second Republic, 187-206; Provisional Government, in, 188; achievements of the Provisional Government, 189; the national workshops, 192; Na- tional Constituent Assembly, 193; riot of May 15, 1848, 193; abolition of the national work- shops, 194; the June Days (1848), 194; military dictator- ship of Cavaignac, 194; grow- ing opposition to the Republic, 195; the constitution, 196-198; rise of Louis Napoleon, 198- 199; Louis Napoleon elected President, 200; the legislative as- sembly, 201; the President and 792 INDEX France, confirmed Assembly combine to crush the Republicans, 202; Law of 1850 limiting the franchise, 202; Louis Napoleon desires pro- longation of his Presidency, 203; Assembly refuses to revise the constitution for this purpose, 203; Louis Napoleon's prepara- tions for the coup d'etat, 203; Assembly refuses Louis Na- poleon's demands for the re- establishment of universal suf- frage, 203; coup d'etat of De- cember 2, 1S51, 204; the "mas- sacre of the boulevards," 205; the plebiscite intrusts Louis Na- poleon with forming a constitu- tion, 205; Louis Napoleon pro- claimed Emperor Napoleon III, (December 2, 1852), 205;. the Second Empire, 1852-1870, 206- 214; programme of Napoleon III, 207; the political institutions of the Empire, 207-209 ; the press shackled in, 209; character of the government of, 210; economic de- velopment of, 211; general pros- perity of, 212; Congress of Paris (1856), 212, 220; with England and Piedmont wages war against Russia in the Crimea, 212, 219; and the Italian war of 1859, 213, 225; defeats Austrians at Ma- genta and Solferino, 225; con- cludes peace with Austria at Villafranca, 225; annexes Savoy and Nice, 231; transformation of the Second Empire in, 272- 284; effect of the Italian war upon, 272; makes secret treaty of commerce with England (1860), 274; powers of Parlia- ment in, increased, 275; rise of a Republican party in, 276; and the Mexican Expedition, 277- 280; concessions to liberalism in, 280; right of interpellation granted in, 281; rise of the Third Party in, 282; transforma- tion of the Empire com- pleted, 283; plebiscite of May (1870), 284; and the Franco- German War, 285-302; indigna- tion of, over the candidacy of Prince Leopold for the Spanish throne, 290; and the Ems des- patch, 292; declares war upon France, continued Prussia (1870), 293; isolation of, 294; condition of the army, 295; numerical inferiority of the French, 295; the Germans in- vade, 296; defeated at Worth, Forbach, Spicheren, Borny, Mars-la-Tours and Gravelotte, 296; battle of Sedan and the sur- render of Napoleon, 297; fall of the Empire, 297; proclama- tion of the Republic, 297; and the Government of National De- fense, 298; siege of Paris, 298- 299; fall of Metz, 298; fall of Strassburg, 299; capitulation of Paris and armistice, 299; elec- tion of a National Assembly in, 299; National Assembly (1871- 1876) meets at Bordeaux, 300; Thiers as " Chief of the Execu- tive Power " arranges terms of peace with Bismarck, 300; Trea- ties of Versailles and Frankfort with Germany, 300; isolation of, by Bismarck, 320; seizes Tunis (1881), 321; under the Third Republic, 329-375; the National Assembly, February, 1871, meets at Bordeaux, 300, 329; the Com- mune, 330-336; Paris and the Assembly mutually suspicious, 330; Versailles declared the capital, 330; distress of the working classes in Paris, 331; revolutionary elements in Paris, 331; idea of the Commune, 332; action of the National Guard, 332; war between the Commune and the Versailles Government, 333; Government of the Com- mune, 333; the Commune and the National Assembly clash, 334; Government of Thiers, 336- 342; Rivet Law passed by the National Assembly, 337; Thiers becomes President of the Re- public, 337; liberation of the territory of, 338; reform in local government of, 339 ; army reform in, 339; question of the perma- nent form of government in, 340; the monarchist parties in, 341; resignation of Thiers, 341; MacMahon elected President, 342; the framing of the consti- tution, 342-351; establishment of the Septennate, 343^ the Assem- INDEX 793 France, continued bly and the Republicans in, 344; Constitution of 1875, 345; the Senate, 345; the Chamber of Deputies, 346; the President, 346; the ministry, 347; a parlia- mentary republic, 348; dissolu- tion of the National Assembly in, 348; the Republic and the Church, 349; struggle between MacMahon and the Chamber, 349; resignation of MacMahon and election of Grevy, 351 ; su- premacy of Republican party in, 351; Republican legislation, 351- 354; creation of a national sys- tem of education, 352; public works, 353; revision of the con- stitution (1884), 353; colonial policy, 353; rise of Boulangism, 354-358; increase of the national debt, 354; demands of the Radi- cals, 354; discontent with the Republic, 355; Wilson scandal, 355; resignation of Grevy and election of Carnot, 355 ; Boulanger crisis, 356 ; the Republic strength- ened, 357; Paris Exposition of 1889, 357; Pope advises concilia- tory policy toward the Republic in, 357; Dual Alliance with Russia (1891), 357; appearance of the Socialists in, 358; assas- sination of Carnot (1894) and election of Faure, 358; death of Faure (1899), 358; Dreyfus Case, 358-364; significance of the case, 364; separation of Church and State in, 364-371; formation of the "Bloc," 364; speech of Waldeck-Rousseau, Prime Min- ister, concerning question of Church and State (1900), 365; growth of religious orders in, 365; Waldeck-Rousseau Ministry and the Law of Associations (1901), 366; religious orders for- bidden to engage in teaching (1904), 366; the Concordat of 1801, 367; anti-clerical legisla- tion, 367; the clergy in the Drey- fus affair, 368; Pius X protests against President Loubet's visit to Victor Emmanuel III, 368; abrogation of the Concordat, 368; Law of 1905 and Associa- tions of Worship, 369; opposi- tion of Pius X, 369-370; Law France, continued of January 2, 1907, 370; separa- tion of Church and State in, 370; acquisition of colonies by, in the nineteenth century, 371- 375; French colonial empire in 1815, 371; conquest of Al- geria, 372-373; other African conquests, 373; acquisitions in Cochin-China, Western Africa, Asia, and Madagascar, 373-375; and the Suez Canal, 488; atti- tude toward her colonies, 546; possessions in Africa, 1815, 551; establishes protectorate over Tunis, 1881, 554; acquisitions in Africa, 1884-1890, 554; at the Conference of the Powers, 1876, 554; at the Congress of Berlin, 1884-1885, 555; intervenes in Egypt, 558; reasons for inter- vention of, in the Greek War of Independence, 608-609; and the Treaty of London, 1827, 609 battle of Navarino, 1827, 610 sends army into the Morea, 611 guarantees independence of Greece, 611; and the "holy places" in Palestine, 612; in the Coalition against Russia, 613; invasion of the Crimea and siege of Sebastopol, 614; Treaty of Paris, 1856, 615; attitude of, toward the breaches of the Ber- lin Treaty of 1878, 629, 640, 644; in Asia, 681; establishes trade centers at the five treaty ports of China, 686; joins England in war against China, 686; Treaty of Tientsin (1858), 686, con- firmed, 687; intervenes with Rus- sia and Germany in Japan, 696; acquires a port in China by lease, 697; helps to rescue the legations in Peking (1900), 698 Franchise, in Australia, 532; in Austria, reform in (1873), 399; reform in (1896), 401; universal (1907), 402; in Belgium, 582; in Canada, Dominion of (1867), 529; in Denmark, 594; in Eng- land (1815), 410-415; by Reform Bill of 1832, 437-438; by Re- form Bill of 1867, 463-464; for women, Mill's speech in favor of, 464; by Reform Bill of 1884, 492-493; qualifications for, 495-496; for women, present 794 INDEX Franchise, continued status of (1909), 516-517; in Finland, universal (1906), 7lS ; In France, Constitutional Charter (1814)* « iS ; Electoral Law (1817), 77; Electoral Law (1820), 80; Electoral Law (1881), 117; under the Pro- visional Government, 190; Law of t850, 909; under the Second Empire, 909; under the Third Republic, 346; in Germany, 304; in Greece, <>:U; in Holland (1815), 57;); (1848), 580; by amendments to the Constitution fl887 and Z896J, 581; in Hun- gary* 404; in Iceland, 595; in Italy, reform of (1882), 381; in Japan, (>SH; in New Zealand, ;>S(>; in Norway, 600; in Portu- gal, 577; in Prussia, 186, 396; in Roumania, 639; in Russia (1909), "iti; in Spain, universal (1890), 575; in Sweden, 600; in Switzerland, 5S(i; in Turkey (1908), 649; in Union of South Africa, 544-545 Francis I, of Austria (1768-1885), character of, 10; and Metter- nieh, :5. 15J Franeis II, King of Naples, Re- volt against. 939; flees from Naples on advance of Garibaldi, i?35; flees from Gaeta to Rome, 931 Francis Joseph I, t848—, acces- sion of, 17!>; appeals to Nicholas I for aid against Hungary, 180; interview with Napoleon 111 at Villafranea, 995; alliance of the Three Emperors, 390; and the Magyars in Hungary, SSS; re- voke's the Constitution of 1849, :^; reverses his policy, 389; grants a constitution f ISdl K to Austria, 390; attitude of Hun- gary towards, 391; yields, 393; accepts Compromise of 1867, 393; crowned King of Hun- gary (1867), 393; and the de- mands of the Czechs. :*:»7-S!>S; and the question of language, 40T; annexes Bosnia and Herze- govina ( 1908 I, 639-640 Franco-German War. 285-SOs Frankfort. German National As- sembly or Parliament of, 174, 175; work of, 1S3; rejection of Frankfort. contiuittii the work of, 185; entered by the Prussians (1866), 965; Incorpo- rated in the Prussian Kingdom, 967; Treaty of | 1871 I, :W0, ;i;lS; and relation of Treaty of, to Triple Alliance. :>!!>. 89$ aho Diet of Frankfort Frederick 111, German Emperor, March 9-June 15. 1888, S05; succeeds his father William I, 399; death of, 399 Frederick VI, King of Denmark (1808-1889), loses Norway, 599; establishes consultative assem- blies. t884, 599 Frederick VII, King of Denmark (1848-1868), 957; grants con- stitution ( IS'i'J) to the Islands ami Jutland. 593; grants con- stitutions of IS.'i'i and 1855, ;.!>:>; ami Sehleswig-Holstcin. 593 Frederick VIII, King of Den- mark, t906 , 595 Frederick William III, King of Prussia (1797-1840), character of, i!>; becomes reactionary. 38- 43; government of, 146-149; death of < 1840), 149 Frederick William IV, King of Prussia (1840-1861), character of, 149; issues the Letter Pa- tent of February (1847), 151; conflict with the United Landtag, 159; promises to call a repre- sentative assembly to draw up a constitution, 174; offered leader- ship in Germany, 184; declines the otter, 185; the "humiliation of Olmilta," is;.; grants con- stitution of 1850, lS;.-lS(i; be- comes reactionary, 341; William I becomes Regent for. 947; death of, 847 Free Trade, in England, Bismarck on, 310-319; 450-455, 518 Freiburg, 590 French Congo, founded, 353 French Constitution of 1191, 46, 57(» French Guiana, 359 French Revolution (1789), effects of, in France, 66; influence of, shown in the Constitutional Charter, 69; loss of French colonies as a result of, 371; effect of, upon England, 417, 519 INDEX 795 French Soudan, 374 Freytag, 246 Fujiyama, 687 Fulton, and the Clermont, 723 Fundamental Law of 1815 (Hol- land), 579 Gaeta, Francis II flees to, 235, 236; siege of, 237; fall of, 237 Gag Laws or Six Acts (England), 1819, 422 Galicia, 62; position in the Aus- trian Empire (1861), 390; Poles in, favored by Taaffe Ministry, 400 Galvani, 386 Galway, 484; college at, 516 Gambetta, Leon (18), 0-1 882), emer- gence of, 281 ; denounces Na- poleon III, 282; 284; votes against war with Prussia, 293; proclaims the French Repub- lic after the surrender of the Emperor at Sedan, 297; escapes from Paris and organ- izes new armies, 298; defeated, 329; attitude toward the Com- munists, 336; and the Republic, 344; attitude toward the Roman Catholic Church, 349, 366; Brog- lie Ministry against, 850; presi- dent of the Chamber of Depu- ties, 351 ; death of (1882), 355 Gapon, Father, 710 Garibaldi, Giuseppe, 1807-1882, joins Young Italy, 162; attitude toward Cavour after the cession of Nice, 231; early life, 232; and the defense of Rome, 233; deter- mines to go to Sicily, 233; and Cavour, 234; conquers Sicily and assumes the dictatorship, 235; conquers Naples, 235; proposes to attack Rome, 235; requests Victor Emmanuel to dismiss Cavour, 237; meeting with Vic- tor Emmanuel, 237; retires to Caprera, 237 Gastein, Convention of, 259, 261 Gatton, 413 General Strike, The resort to the, in Russia (1905), 711-712 Geneva Commission, 1872, 486, 591 Genoa, Republic of, incorporated in Sardinia, 3, 5, 52; " The Thour sand " embark from, 234 Gentz, 15 Oorge, Prince, son of George I of Greece, administrator of Crete, 635 George I, King of Greece, 1863 — , 634-635; acquires the Ionian Islands, 1864, 834; acquires Thei aly, t881, 634 George I, of England, Elector of Hanover, 446 George III (17G0-1820), death of, 422; opposition to Catholic Emancipation, 426; 445; and New South Wales, 531 George IV (1820-1830), acces- sion of, 422; opposition to Catholic Emancipation, 426; and the Catholic Emancipation Act, 428; death of, 428 German Confederation, organized by the Congress of Vienna (1815), 29; the Diet of, 29-30; international character of, 31-32; and Metternich, 35, 173; restored (1851), 185, 388; Holstein a part of, 257; Bismarck proposes a reform of, 262; Prussia with- draws from, 263; declared dis- solved by Prussia, 263; ceases to exist, 267-268 German East Africa, 319 German Empire, 303-328. See Germany German Southwest Africa, 319 Germany, and the Treaty of Paris (18U,), 3; the Metternich sys- tem in, 28, 35; reaction in, 28- 44; varieties of states in, 29; Act of Federation of, at the Congress of Vienna, 29, 32; the Diet of the Confederation of, 29- 30; international character of, 31- 32; problem of unity in, 32-36; demand for constitutional gov- ernment in, 35-37; the King of Prussia becomes reactionary, 38; ferment in the universities of, 39; Wartburg Festival, 39; mur- der of Kotzebue, 40; decrees of the conference of Carlsbad, 41- 44; influence of July Revolution (1830) in, 100; revolution (1840) in, 112; new measures of re- pression, 112; Metternich su- preme in, 113; revolution (18^8) in, 173; V or par lament, 174; Par- liament of Frankfort, 174; March (18^8) revolutions tri- 796 INDEX Germany, continued umphant in. 174; work of the Frankfort Parliament, 183; lead- ership in, offered to the King of Prussia, 184; the offer de- clined, 185; rejection of the work of the Frankfort Parlia- ment, 183; and the "humiliation of Olmiit/." 185; Austria demands that the old German Confedera- tion of (&15 be revived in (1851), 185; reaction in, after 1S^9, 840-843; emigration from. 341; economic transformation of 943; industrial development of, 844; rise of a wealthy mid- dle elass in, 845; intellectual activity in, 845; influence of events in Italy upon thought in, 846; founding of the National Union in. 846; Bismarck's plan for unity in, 855-856; and Schleswig-Holstein, 856-967; and the Danish war. 858; friction be- tween Austria and Prussia, 259; Convention of Gastein, 859; war between Austria and Prussia, 863-36>; Treaty of Prague, 863, 867; North German Confedera- tion formed, 868; organization and government oU 869; alliance with South German States. 370; consolidation of the new system in, 870; South German States join Prussia in war against France, J93: Franco-German war. 893-999; invasion of France, 896; Germans defeat French at Wiirth, Forbach, Spicheren, Borny, Mars-la-Tours, and Gravelotte, 896; Union of Northern and Southern States completes German unification, 301; King William 1 becomes Emperor in. 301 ; growth of national feeling in. since 1815, 303; constitution of the new Ger- man Empire. 303-305; and the Roman Catholic Church. 306; the Kulturkampf in. 306-310; causes of the Kulturkampf. 306; forma- tion of the Center Tarty, 307; Dogma of Papal Infallibility, 307; the Old Catholics, 307 ; the Falk Paws. SOS; conflict of Church and State, 308; Falk Laws suspended (1879), 309; rescinded (1SS6J, 309; religious Germany, continued orders except Jesuits permitted to return to | 1887), :W\) ; adopts the policy of protection, 310; growth of Socialism in. 319; at- tempts upon the life of the Em- peror. 313; measures against the Socialists, 313; failure of these measures and continued growth of the Socialist party in. 314; the Imperial Govern- ment of, undertakes social re- form, 315; Sickness Insurance Paw (188S), Accident Insurance Paws (1884 and t885), Old Age Insurance Paw (1889), 316; a colonial empire results from the adoption of the policy of pro- tection in. 318; colonies in Af- rica. 31!'; alliance of the Three Emperors, 390; Austro-German Treaty of t879, 331; Triple Al- liance | 1882), 331, 388; death of William I. 333; accession and death of Frederick 111. 383; ac- cession of William 11, 383; Anti- Socialist policy abandoned, 383; expansion of German industry, 334; as a naval power, 334; con- tinued growth of socialism in, 334; the Social Democratic party numerically the largest in. 335; demand for electoral reform in Prussia, 386; demand for par- liamentary reform in, 386; de- mand for ministerial responsi- bility in, 337; the present situa- tion' in ( t909 I, 388; troops with- drawn from France {1871' t87S), 338; emigration from, ceases | t908 I, 386; attitude to- ward her colonies. 546; growth of, 546; acquisitions in Africa. (881-1890, 554; at the Confer- ence of the Powers, 1876, 554; at the Conference of Berlin, 1884-1885, 'i')^: and the Congress of Berlin (1878), 685-696; 'atti- tude of, toward the breaches of the Berlin Treaty (1878), 699, 640; intervenes with Russia and Prance in Japan, (!!H>; establishes a "sphere of influence " in China i 1898), (>97; helps to rescue the legations in Peking (1900), 698 Gioherti, 1801-1852, 164-165; au- thor of " The Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians/' 164 INDEX 797 Gladstone, William Ewart, 1809- 1898, denounces the Neapolitan government, 215; and the tariff, 455; Chancellor of the Ex- chequer (1852-1855, 1859-1866) and his policy, 459; and Postal Savings Banks (1862), 459; and State Insurance (186!,), 459; in- troduces Reform Bill of 1866, which is defeated, 461-462; and the Reform Bill of 1867, 463; early life of, 465; enters Parlia- ment (1888), 466; leader of the Liberal Party, 466; First Minis- try of (1868-187//), 466; and Ireland, 467; Reforms of; — dis- establishment of the Anglican Church in Ireland (186!)), 472; Irish Land Act of 1870, 475; Forstcr Education Act of 1870, 478; abolition of the purchase system in the army (1871), 482; Civil Service reform (1870), 482; Ballot Law of 1872, 483- 484; — waning popularity of, 484; Irish University Bill of 1873 de- feated, 485; resigns but returns to office, 485; unpopularity of the foreign policy of, 486; and the Alabama award, 486; fall of ministry of, 486; Second Minis- try of, 1880-1885, 490-496; Re- form Bill of 1884, 492; Redis- tribution Act of 1885, 493; fall of the ministry of, 1885, 497; and the Irish Home Rule Move- ment, 497-499; Third Ministry of (1886), 499 ; introduces the Home Rule Bill, 500; and the Land Purchase Bill, 501 ; and the de- feat of the Home Rule Bill, 504; dissolves Parliament, appeals to the people and is defeated, 504; Fourth Ministry of (1892-1894), 507-510; introduces Second Home Rule Bill (1803), 507- 509; Parish Councils Bill of 1894, 509; resigns (180!,), 510; on the House of Lords, 510; death of (1808), 510; policy of, in South Africa, 539; and the Pretoria Convention of 1881, 540; and the London Convention of 188!,, 540; and Egypt, 560- 561; denounces the Turks, 622 Glasgow, gain of, in House of Commons by Redistribution Act of 1885, 494 (Jncisenau, 44 Gneist, estimate of, concerning cultivable land in the United Kingdom, 412 Goethe, on Frederick William IV, 149 Gogol, 653 Gordon, General, in the Soudan, 561-562; death of, 562 Goremykin, Prime Minister, issues in the name of the Tsar the " or- ganic laws," 713; 715 Gdrgei, Hungarian commander, capitulates at Vilagos, 180 Gortchakoff, Russian Chancellor, on the Congress of Berlin, 320 Goschen, George Joachim, in the Gladstone Ministry, 1868, 465; becomes a Liberal-Unionist, 504 Gotha, Socialist programme of 1875, adopted at, 312 Gramont, Duke of, and the Span- ish candidacy of Prince Leo- pold, 290-291 Granville, Lord, on England and E^ypt, 560 Grattan, 498 Gravelotte, Germans defeat French at, 296 Great Britain. See England Great Western, sails from Bristol to New York, 724 Greece, War of Independence of, 604-611; condition of the Greeks (1820), 604; intellectual revival in, 605; the Hetairia Philike founded in (181.',), 605; char- acter of the war in (1821-1820), 606; foreign intervention in, 607- 609; and the battle of Navarino (1827), 610; creation of the Kingdom of, 611; opposes the Treaty of San Stefano (1878), 624; and the Congress of Ber- lin (1878), 626; since 1833, 633- 636; reign of Otto I, 633-634; the monarchy of, becomes con- stitutional (18),!,), 634; England cedes the Ionian Islands to, 1861,, 634; Constitution of 186!,, 634; annexes Thessaly, 1881, 634; declares war against Turkey, (1807), is defeated and loses parts of Thessaly, 635; and Crete, 635; present condition of, 635; aspirations of, 635; Crete declares for union with, 1008, 639 '98 INDEX Greek Church, Ecclesiastics of, hanged, 606; in Russia, 645; Alexander III and, 670 Greenland, 594 Gregoire, elected to French Cham- ber of Deputies, is excluded, 79 Grevy, Jules, proposition of, con- cerning the Presidency of the Second Republic, 197; elected President of the Third Republic, 351 ; forced to resign, 355 Grey, Earl, Prime Minister, and the First Reform Bill, 430; re- signs, 436; recalled and given power to create Peers to pass the Reform Bill, 436; succeeded by Lord Melbourne, 451 Grey, Sir Edward, British Foreign Minister, on the infraction of the Berlin Treaty of 1878 (1908), 641 Grote, and the secret ballot, 483 Guadaloupe, French possession (1815), 371 Guam, 319 Guiana, in South America, French possession, 1815, 371; part of Dutch, acquired by England, 519 Guinea, French annexations in, 374 Guizot, Courses of, suspended, 86; reinstated, 89; and the conserv- ative party, 120; rivalry of Thiers and, 130; ministry of (1840-1848), 133-142; observa- tion of, concerning Cavour, 232; on the Ollivier Ministry and the Hohenzollern candidacy, 292 Gustavus IV, King of Sweden, 11 Gustavus V, King of Sweden, 1907— , 600 Haakon VII, King of Norway, 1905—, 600 Habeas Corpus Act, suspension of, in England, 1817, 421; suspen- sion of, in Ireland, 470 Hadley, A. T., on the importance of railroads, 725 Hague, The, Norway and Sweden and the International Arbitra- tion Tribunal at, 600; First Peace Conference (1899), 730- 733; Second Peace Conference (1907), 734-735 Hallam, Arthur, and Gladstone at Eton, 465 Ham, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte imprisoned at, 129, 199, 278 Hamburg, member of the North German Confederation, 268; member of German Empire, 304; merchants of, establish trading stations, 318 Hamburg-American steamship line, established (1847), 724 Hanotaux, description of the " bloody week " in Paris, 335, 336; on the constitution of 1 875, 348 Hanover, importance of, in the German Diet, 30; a possession of the English royal family, 31; form of government in, 36; and the Zollverein, 149; the National Union founded in, 246; supports Austria in the war of 1866, 263; conquered by Prussia, 264-265; King of, taken prisoner, 264; incorporated in the Prussian Kingdom, 267; England loses, 446 Hanseatic towns, 149 Hapsburg, House of, advantages gained at the Congress of Vienna, 8; ancient possessions of, 23; Hungary renounces al- legiance to, 179; territorial gains and losses of, 404 Harbin, 697, 699 Harcourt, Sir William Vernon, and the budget of 1894, 511 Hargreaves, 407, 722 Harrow, 477 Hartington, Lord (later Duke of Devonshire) becomes a Liberal- Unionist, 504 Haussmann, Baron, beautifies Paris, 212 Hedley, William, constructs the Puffing Billy, 724 Heidelberg, Liberals at, call the Vorparlament, 174 Heligoland, retained by England in 1815, 9, 519 Helmholtz, 246 Henry, Colonel, and the Dreyfus Case, 359; commits suicide, 361 Herzegovina occupied by Austria, 320; gained by Austria-Hun- gary, 404; formally annexed by Austria-Hungary '(1908), 405, 639-640; insurrection of, 1875, 620 INDEX 799 Hesse-Cassel, revolutionary move- ments in (1830), 112; supports Austria in the war of 1866, 263; Elector of, taken prisoner by Prussia, 264; incorporated in the Prussian Kingdom, 267 Hesse-Darmstadt, granted constitu- tion (1820), 37; supports Aus- tria in the war of 1866, 263 Hetairia Philike (1814), 605 Hohenlohe, German Chancellor, 18d',-1900, 323 Hohenzollern, The Spanish can- didacy of Leopold of, 290-292; 619 Holland, acquisitions of, bv Treaty of Paris (1814), 3; King of, a member of the German Confed- eration, 31; and the Congress of Vienna, 101 ; and the Belgians, 101-104.; influence of the July Revolution (1830) in, 103; Bel- gium becomes a kingdom inde- pendent of, 105; New, 531; Eng- land seizes Cape Colony, a pos- session of, 536; stations of, in Africa (1815), 551; since 1830, 579-581; rulers in, since 1830, 579; Fundamental Law of 1815 in, 579; Constitution of 1848 in, 580; extension of the franchise in, 581 ; colonies of, 581 ; estab- lishes trade centers at the five treaty ports of China, 686; ob- tains a trading station on the peninsula of Deshima, 690; also called The Netherlands Holstein, member of German Diet, 31, 257. See Schleswig-Holstein Holy Alliance (1815), Alexander I and, 14, 649; composition and character of, 14-16; and Metter- nich, 18; converted into an engine of oppression, 40; triumph of, in Naples, Piedmont, and Spain, 63, 564; and the Spanish-Ameri- can colonies, 64-65; powerless- ness of (1830), 100; England's defiance of, 422, 608 Holy Roman Empire, 29, 35 Holyrood Palace, 98 Home Government Association of Ireland. See Home Rule (Ire- land) Home Rule (Ireland), Movement, 492; Party formed, 497; leaders of, party adopt policy of ob- struction, 498; party holds bal- Home Rule, continued ance of power (1886), 500; First Bill for (1886), 500-504; Sec- ond Bill for (1893), 507-509 Hong Kong, ceded to England by China (1842), 685 "Hopes of Italy" (1844) by Cesare Balbo, 165 Hotel de Ville, Lafayette and Louis Philippe (1830) at, 97; meeting place of Provisional Government, 144, 191 ; proclama- tion of the French Republic at, 297 " House of Commons, The Rotten," by Lovett, 447 Hudson Bay territory, English possession, 519, 523; purchased by the Dominion of Canada, 1869, 529 Hugo, Victor, 275 Humbert I, King of Italy (1878- 1900), succeeds his father, Vic- tor Emmanuel II, 380; reforms under, 381; and the Triple Al- liance (1882)), 382; assassination of (1900), 384 Hundred Days, 13 Hungarian Constitution before 1848, 155 Hungary, a part of the Austrian Empire, 23; races in, 24; gov- ernment of, 26; national and racial movement in, 154; consti- tution of, before 1848, 155; im- portance of the nobility in, 155; feudalism in, 155; Szdchenyi and reform in, 156; the language question in the Diet of, 157; rise of a radical party in, 157; Kossuth, 158; demands of the Hungarians in 1847, 159; the decisive intervention of, 169; Kossuth's speech against Aus- tria, 169; Diet of, passes the March Laws, 170; becomes prac- tically independent, 171 ; civil dissension in, 176; Austria ex- ploits the situation in, 177; radi- cal party in, seizes control, 178; declares Francis Joseph a usurp- er, 179; war with Austria, 179; declares her independence, 179; conquered, 180; constitutional rights of, abolished, 180; Aus- tria's vengeance in, 180; attitude toward Austria in the Austro- Prussian War (1866), 266; Aus- 800 INDEX Hungary, continued tria's punishment of, 388; posi- tion of, in the Empire (1861), 390; refuses to cooperate with Austria, 390; asserts her "his- toric rights," 391 ; demands restoration of her constitution of 1848, 392; Compromise of 1867, 393-396; Francis Joseph crowned King of (1867), 393; constitution (1848) restored, 395; Magyars, the dominant race in, 395; divisive effect of the prin- ciple of nationality in, 396; op- position of Magyars to the de- mands of the Czechs in, 398; Kingdom of, since 1867, 402- 405; the Magyars and the policy of Magyarization, 403; the Croatians in, 403; race ques- tions in, 403; struggle over the question of language in, 404; suffrage in, 404. See Austria- Hungary Hunt, at Peterloo, 421; speech on the Reform Bill, 433 Huskisson, 422; economic reforms of, 423; reform in Navigation Laws, 1823-1825, 451 Ibrahim, son of Mehemet Ali, 602; conquers Morea for Turkey, 607; and the battle of Navarino, 1827, 610 Iceland, 594; granted home rule (1874), 595 Ilchester, Borough of, 433 Illiteracy, in Italy, 381 ; decline of, in England, 515; in Spain, 575 Illyrian Provinces, given to Aus- tria by Congress of Vienna, 8 Imperial Federation (England), 545-549; problem of, and its increasing importance, 546; dif- ficulties in the way of, 547; colonial conferences and, 548; confederations within the Em- pire, 549 Imperialism, in England, 487; Joseph Chamberlain and, 511 India, French possessions (1815) in, 371; Civil Service in, 482; Queen of England proclaimed Empress of (1877), 489, 52-2; English possessions in, prior to 1815, 519; work of the East India Company in, 519-520; India, continued overthrow of the Mahratta con- federacy in (1816-1818) 520; England annexes the Punjab in (1845-1849), 520; Sepoy Mutiny in (1857), 520-521; government of, transferred to the Crown (1858), 522; declared an Em- pire (1876), 522; government of, 522; population of, 522; and the South African War (1899), 544; and the Opium War, 685 Indian Mutiny, 521 Indian Ocean, French colonial ex- pansion in, under the Third Re- public, 373; French colony of Madagascar in, 374 Indo-China, French colonial ex- pansion in, under the Third Re- public, 373, 681 Industrial Legislation; — in France, under the Provisional Govern- ment (1848), 191-192;— in Eng- land, agitation for improved conditions of labor by Owen, Sadler, Fielden, and Ashley, 442; Factory Act of 1833, 442; Labor in Mines Act of 1842, 455; Factory Acts of 1844, 1847, and 1850, 456; Factory and Workshop Consolidation Act of 1878, 456; Act (1889) regulating the employment of women and children, 506-507; Factory and Workshop Act of 1901, 457;— in New Zealand, 535-536 Industrial Revolution, in France, 137; in Austria, 153; in Ger- many, 244; in England, 406-409; in Russia, 673-676; rise of the factory system, 722 Inglis, Sir Robert, speech of, in opposition to the Reform Bill, 432; Macaulay's reply to, 434 Inheritance tax, in England, 511; in New Zealand, 535 Initiative, The, in Switzerland, 589- 590 Inkermann, battle of, 614 Inquisition, The, in Spain, 47; in the States of the Church, 55 Institute of Mining Engineers at St. Petersburg, Resolution of, on the war with Japan, 706-707 Insurance Laws, Germany, Sick- ness (1883), Accident (1884 and 1885), Old Age (1889), 316 INDEX 801 Insurance, State, Germany and, 315-316; Austria and, 400; Eng- land and, 459, 515-516; New Zealand and, 535-536; Denmark and, 594 Interpellation, Right of, granted in France (1867), 281 Intervention, Doctrine of the right of, 58-60; application of, see also Congresses and Holy Alliance Ionian Islands, occupied by Eng- land, 9; protectorate of England over, 519; England cedes, to Greece, 1864, 634 Ireland, Representation in House of Commons (1815), 410; suf- frage in, 426; O'Connell founds the Catholic Association in, 427; O'Connell elected to Parliament from County of Clare, 427; re- striction of the suffrage in, 428; given increased representation, 437; famine of 1845-1847, 453, 469; Reform Bill (1868) for, 464; Gladstone and, 467; condition (1815) in, 467-469; Catholic Emancipation Act (1829), 469; franchise qualification in, raised, 469; Repeal agitation in, 469; O'Connell and the Irish party in, 469; Young Ireland, 469; de- cline of the population in, 470; and the Fenian Movement, 470; suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act in, 470; the Irish Church, 468, 471; the tithe war in, 472; disestablishment of the Irish Church (1869), 472; system of land tenure in, 472-474; misery of the peasants in, 474; the Ulster system of land tenure in, 475; Land Act of 1870, 475- 477; Irish University Bill of 1873 defeated, 485; failure of the Land Act of 1870, 490; the Three F's, Land Act of 1881 and the Land Court, 491; Re- form Bill (1884) for, 493; and the Home Rule Movement, 497; Home Rulers hold balance of power (1886), 500; First Home Rule Bill (1886), 500-504; Land Purchase Bill introduced, 1886, 501 ; policy of coercion for, under the Second Salisbury Min- istry, 505; Land Purchase Act, 1891, 505-506; Land Act of Ireland, continued 1903, 506; Second Home Rule Bill (1893), 507-509; Land Pur- chase Act of 1896, 512; Local Government Act (1898), 512; Old Age Pensions Law in, 516; Irish University or Birrell Act (1908), 516 Irish Church, position of, in 1815, 468, 471; and the Tithe War, 472; disestablishment of (1869), 472 Irish Local Government Act, 1898, 512 Irish University, established (1908) by the Birrell Act, 516 Isabella II, of Spain (1833-1868), daughter of Ferdinand VII, proclaimed Queen, 566; declared of age (1843), 568; absolutism of, 569; overthrow of, 290, 569; abdicates in favor of her son Alfonso, 570 Islands, The, of Denmark, Fred- erick VI grants a consultative assembly to, 592; Frederick VII grants a constitution (1849) to, 593 Isle of France, retained by Eng- land in 1815, 9 Ismail, Viceroy of Egypt, 1863- 1866, Khedive of Egypt 1866- 1879, extravagance of, 558; sells shares in the Suez Canal Com- pany to England (1875), 558; abdicates, 559 Italian War of 1859, 213, 225-229 Italy, decision of the Congress of Vienna concerning, 8-10, 52; the Metternich system in, 28; reac- tion and revolution in, 50-62; Napoleon on Italian unity, 50; significance of Napoleon's activ- ity in, 51; awakening of, 51- 52; dominance of Austria in, 53- 54; government in, 53-56; the Carbonari in, 56; revolution in Naples (1820), 57; revolution in Piedmont (1821), 61; influence of the July Revolution (1830) in, 100; revolutions in, 110-112; conditions in, after the revolu- tions of 1820, 110; revolutionary movements (1831) in, 110; Aus- trian intervention in, 111; the French seize Ancona, 111; re- sults of the insurrections in, 111-112; 183 0-18 48, 159-168; 802 INDEX Italv, continued after 1881, 159; Mazzini, 160- 164; Young Italy, 161; Gioberti, 164-165; D'Aseglio, 165; Balbo, 165; the Risorgimento, 166; elec- tion and policy of Pius IX in, 166; reforms in Tuscany and Piedmont, 167; revolution in the Kingdom of Naples (1848), 167; revolution in I.ombardy-Venetia, 11-2; renounces Austrian con- trol, 173; March (1848) revo- lutions triumphant in, 174; par- tially conquered, 175; battle of Custozza (1848) in, 176; con- quest of, completed, 1S1 ; battle of Novara, 181; French inter- vention in Rome, 1S2; fall of Venice, 182; reaction in, after 1848, 215; Victor Emmanuel II, King of Piedmont, and the mak- ing of the Kingdom of, 216; Cavour, 216-239; Piedmont joins England and France in a war against Russia in the Crimea, 219; the Congress of Paris dis- cusses the question of, 990; cam- paign of 1859 in, -2:25. 3*9- bat- tles of Magenta and Solferino, 395; Peace of Villafranca, 995; situation in Central, 998; Eng- land's participation in affairs in, 229; Modena. Parma, Tus- cany, and the Romagna added to the Kingdom of Piedmont, 230; cession of Savoy and Nice to France (I860), 231; Sicily and Naples conquered by Garibaldi in the name of Victor Emmanuel II, 234- 235; Pied- montese troops enter the Marches and Umbria, 236; an- nexation of the Kingdom of Naples and of Umbria and the Marches to Piedmont, 236; all, excepting Rome and Venice, united under Victor Emmanuel II (ISO IK 237: Bismarck's treatv of alliance with, 261 ; and the 'war of 1S66, 263; battle of Custozza ( 1866), 265 ; Venetia ceded to (1S66), 267, 376; neu- trality of, in Franco-German War, 294; takes possession of Rome (1S70), 301; completion of unification of, 301; Kingdom of, 376-3S7 ; difficulties confront- ing the new kingdom of, 376; the Italy, continued constitution of, 377; and the question of the Papacy, 378; Law of Papal Guarantees, 378; the Curia Romana, 379; financial status of, 380; death of Victor Emmanuel II (1878) and ac- cession of his son Humbert I, 380; the educational problem in, 380; compulsorv education laws, 1877 and 1904 in, 881; exten- sion of the suffrage ( 1882) in, 381 ; and the Triple Alliance (1882), 321. 382: Depretis Min- istry, 382; Crisp] ministries, 389- 383; colonial policy, 382; eco- nomic distress, 383; riots of (1889) in, 383; policy of repres- sion, 383. and the war with Abyssinia (1896), 383; Rudini Ministry, 383; riots of May (1898) in, 3$3; assassination of Humbert I (1900), 384; acces- sion and character of Victor Emmanuel III, 38 1; increasing prosperity of, 384-387; emigra- tion from, to South America and the United States, 386; growth of, 546; acquisitions of, in Africa (1884-1890), 554; at the Con- ference of the Powers (1876), 554; at the Berlin Conference (1884-1885), 555; attitude of, toward the breaches of the Ber- lin Treatv of 7878, 629, 640 Ito, Count,' 694 Jahn, persecution of, 43; released, 150 Jamaica, slavery abolished in (1888), 442; English possession, 519 Jameson, Dr., 542 Janina, Ali of, 602 Japan, the country and its civiliza- tion, 687-688; the government of, 688-6S9; advent of Europeans in, 6S9; adopts policy of isola- tion. 690; treatv with 'the United States (1854), 691; abolition of the Shogunate in, 692; trans- formation of, 692; abolition of the old regime (1871), 693; adopts European institutions, 693-691; becomes a constitu- tional state, 694; drives the Chinese from Korea (l$9-$) and invades Manchuria, 695; Treaty INDEX 803 Japan, continued of Shimonoseki (1895), 695-G96; intervention of Russia, France, and Germany, 696; relinquishes Port Arthur and the Liao-tung peninsula, 696; helps to rescue the legations in Peking, 698; Anglo-Japanese Treaty of 1902, 700; makes war upon Russia (1904-1905), 701-702; Port Ar- thur surrenders to, 702; cap- tures Mukden, 702; destroys Russian fleet, 702; signs Treaty of Portsmouth (1905), 702-703; and Korea, 703 note Java, 581 Jeffrey, Francis, on the steam engine, 408 Jellachich, appointed governor of Croatia, 177; begins civil war, 178; given command of all the Austrian troops in Hungary, 178; victories of,- 179 Jena, Students of, and the Bur- schenschaft, 39 . Jesuits, in Spain, 47; in Piedmont, 54; in France, 86; in Germany, 306; expelled from Germany, 308; expelled from France (1880), 353; suppressed in Spain, 569; expelled from Swit- zerland, 586 Jews, admitted to the House of Commons, 458; persecution of, in Russia, 672 Johannesburg, 541 John VI, King of Portugal, flees to Brazil, 1807, 575; returns to Portugal and accepts the Consti- tution of 1822, 576; death of, 1826, 576 Joseph, brother of Napoleon I, 45, 574 Joseph II, of Austria, 24 Josephine, Empress, 90, 127 .Juarez, President of Mexico, 277, 279 July Monarchy, 114-144. See Louis Philippe July Ordinances (1830), 92; with- drawn, 96 July Revolution of 1830, 95; wide- spread influence of, 100; in Bel- gium, 103-104; in Poland, 108; in Italy, 110; in Germany, 112 June Days (1848, France), 194 Jutland, Frederick VI grants a consultative assembly to, 592; Jutland, continued Frederick VII grants a consti- tution (1849) to, 593 Kagoshima, 691 Karnerun, German colony in Af- rica, 319 Kara George, revolt of the Ser- vians under 180/f, 604; murder of, 1817, 604; House of, 633 Kars, 626 Kent, Duke of, father of Queen Victoria, 445 Khartoum, 561-562 Kiauchau, 697 Kiel, 259; Treaty of (1814), 592, 598 Kioto, 688; Mikado leaves, 692; University established at, 693 Kissingen, battle of, 265 Kitchener, Lord, in the South Af- rican War (1899-1902), 543-544; recovers the Soudan, 1896-1898, 562 Kbniggratz, or Sadowa, battle of, between Prussia and Austria (1866), 265; importance of, to France, 288 Koraes, edits the Greek classics, 605 Korea, and the Chino-Japanese War (189 J,), 695; China recog- nizes the complete independence of, 696; Japan's apprehension concerning, 699; the Anglo- Jap- anese Treaty of 1902 and, 700; Japanese armies enter, 701; Russo-Japanese War in (1904- 1905), 701-702; by the Treaty of Portsmouth (1905) Russia recognizes Japan's paramount interests in, 702; Japan and, 703 note Kossuth, Francis, son of Louis Kossuth, and his party, 404 Kossuth, Louis, leader of the lib- eral party in Hungary, 157; speech in the Diet (1848), 169; comes into power, 178; appoint- ed President of Hungary, 179; resigns in favor of Gorgei, 180; flees to Turkey, 180 Kotzebue, murder of, 40, 649 Kruger, Paul, 538 Krupp, Alfred, 244 Kulturkampf, 306-309 Kuropatkin, General, 701 801 IXDKX Labourdonnaye, Minister of the In- terior, 90 Ladrone Islands, purcbased by German]! from Spain (1899), 319 Lafayette, elected to the Chamber of Deputies, 7S; a Leader of the Republicans in the July Revolu- tion i is,U". 9',, 193 j and the pro- gressive party, 119; ami the Greek War of Independence, 608 Laffitte, ami the progressive party in Prance, 119, iso l.aharpe. Colonel, tutor of Alex- ander 1 of Russia, 646 Laibach, Congress of \ 1821), 60 l.a Marmora, General, 999 Lamarque, General, 193 Lamartine, 199, 136; emergence of, 1H; leader of the Repub- licans in the Provisional Govern- ment, US, 1SS; on the question of the Bag 190; head of the executive Of the National Con- stituent Assembly, 193; on the mode of electing the president. i!>? ; candidate for the presi- dency of the Republic, 900 Lancashire, boroughs of, 433; gain in House of Commons by Redistribution Act of 1885, 494 Land Acts (Ireland), 1870, 175- •t7 7; failure of, 190; 1881, 491, 499; proposed 1886, 501, 505; t891, 505-506; 1896, 519; t90S, 506 Land Court (Ireland). 491 Landesgemeinde cantons, 588 Langensalia, battle of. Han- overians defeat the Prussians at, 964 Lassalle, Ferdinand, founds the Soeialist party in Germany, 319; founds a journal, the So- cial Democrat' (1865), 319; reading of his works prohibited, 314 Lateran, 379 Lauenburg, Denmark renounces all rights to. 959; bought by Prussia, 960 Law of Assoeiations, /."()/ (France), 366 Law of Papal Guarantees ( HK1 '. S7S Lebosuf, Marshal (Minister of War), 995 Ledru-Uollin. Soeialist candidate for the presidency of the Sec- ond Republic, 900 Leeds, unrepresented in Parlia- ment ( IS!,',), HI Legations, 'The. 193 Legitimacy, Principle of, at Con- gress of Vienna, 5-6 j disregard- ed, 11 Legitimists (France), I. 1 -.' 1 .cgnago, 1 IS leipsie. retained by King of Sax- ony at Congress of Vienna, S; celebration of anniversary of, at Wartburg, Si'; battle of, com- pared with Ktiniggrfits, 965 Leo XIII, Pope. 1678-1909, elec- tion of, SO!'. 380; advises con- ciliatory policy toward the Third Republic (France). t89S, 357, 368; attitude toward the Law of Papal Guarantees (1871), 379 Leopold of Coburg, elected King of Belgium, 104. Sm Leopold I, King of Belgium Leopold. Prince of Hohen/.ollern- Sigmaringen, candidacy of, for the throne of Spain. 1869-1870, 990, 570. withdrawn, 991, 570 Leopold 1, King of Belgium, 18S1- t865, 979; and the political education of Queen victoria, 445; reign of. 5SI-5S? Leopold 11, King of Belgium, 1865-1909, ami the Congo Free State. 554-557; calls a confer- ence of the Powers, 1876, 554; Congress of Berlin, 1884-1885, 555; criticism of his adminis- tration, .">.">(;; death of. 589 l.esseps. Ferdinand de, and the Sue/. Canal, 55S Letter Patent of February. 1847 (Prussia). 151 Liao-tung peninsula, Japan occu- pies, 695; China cedes, to Japan (1895), 696; Japan relinquishes, 696; the Japanese invade, 701; Russia transfers, to Japan i 1905), 70S Liao-vanii. battle of. 709 Liebknecht, Socialist leader. 313 Liechtenstein. 30 Lin. Chinese viceroy, and the Opium War (1840-1842), Lissa, Italian tleet defeated by the Austrian (1866), i?(>5 INDEX 805 Literature, in the nineteenth cen- tury, 719 Lithuanian provinces) Poland and, 663; persecution of the Jews In, 07 J Liverpool, 405 j gain in F louse of Commons by Redistribution Act of 1885, 404; and the problem of transportation, 723, 725 Liverpool, Lord, and the Six Acts, i .'.' Livingstone, David, 1818-1878, Af- rican explorations of, 552-553 Livonia, 645 Lombardo Venetian Kingdom ac- quired by Austria at Congress of Vienna, h, _<:{, 52-53; govern- ment of, 53-54; revolution in, 172, 388; reaction in, after 1848, 215; agreement at Plombieres concerning, 223; Austria loses (1859-1866), 'lot Lombardy, acquired hy Austria at Congress of Vienna, 9; revolu- tion in, 172; Austria recovers, 170; reaction in, after 18 >/8, 215; war in (1859), 225; Sar- dinia receives, by the 1'eace of Villa franca, 22G; illiteracy in (1861), 381; Austria loses, 389 London, Conferences of the Powers in (1880-1831), recog- nize the Kingdom of Belgium, 105; Conference (1840), Eng- Iand, Russia, Austria, and Prus- sia make a treaty with Turkey, 182; Protocol (1852) concerning Sc hies wi g-Holstein, 257-258; Conference (1864) unsuccessful, ~'5H; gain of, l»v Redistribu- tion Act of 1885, 494; jour- nals of, oppose Irish Home Rule, 501; Gladstonian vote in (1886), 504; the Old Age Pen- sions Law in the County of, 516; Convention of (1884), 540; Colonial Conferences in, 548; Treaty of (1827), 009 London Standard, 419 London Telegraph, October 28, 1908, interview with Emperor William [I, 327 London Times, on cause; of the Prussian victory at Kdnig- >rratz, 266; on the Dreyfus Case, 362 Lonsdale, Lord, 413 Lorraine, Germans invade, 296; large part of, ceded to Ger- many by Treaties of Versailles and Prank fort, 300; in the Ger- man Empire, 303; loss of, by Prance. 337 Loubet, Lrnile, President of the French Republic (1899-1906), 301; pardons Dreyfus, 362; visits Victor Emmanuel III (1904), 30H Louis Napoleon (King f Hol- land), 110, 127 Louis Napoleon Bonaparte (Na- poleon III) (son of Louis Na- poleon), 127-128; Boulogne fiasco, 129; favors the restoration of the Pope, 182; opportunity of, 198; his previous career, 199; elected a member of the Constituent Assembly, 199; a candidate for the presidency, 199; causes of his triumph, 200; elected presi- dent, December 10, 1848, 200; combines with the Legislative As- sembly to '-rush the Republi- cans, 201-202; demands the re- vision of the Constitution in order to prolong his Presidency, 203; Assembly votes against re- vision of the Constitution, 203; ■prepares for a coup d'etat, 203; demands from Assembly the re- peal of the Franchise Law of 1850, 203; coup d'etat of Decem- ber 2, 1851, 204; his proclama- tions, 204; appeals to the people, 205; proclaimed Emperor, De- cember 2, 1 852, 205-206; char- acter of, 200; bis programme, 207; his powers, 208-209; his marriage, 210; his activities, 21 1 ; general prosperity under, 212; with England and Pied- mont wages war against Russia in the Crimea, 212; Congress of Paris (1856), 212; birth of an heir, 212; bis policy of peace, 213; Cavour and, 220-227; his interest in Italy, 222; interview at Plombieres, 222; commands his army in Italian campaign, 225; interview with the Emperor Francis Joseph I at Villafranca, 225; reasons for his action, 226; bargain with Cavour, 230; an- nexes Savoy and Nice, 231; re- sentment of England toward, 806 INDEX Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, con- tinued 231, 274; approves of the in- vasion of the Papal States by the Piedniontese, 23(5; methods of, copied by Frederick William IV, of Prussia, 242-243; dis- astrous effect of the Italian war upon, J'iJ; vacillation of, 273; makes secret treaty of com- merce (1860) with England, 274; turns to the Liberals, 275; in- creases powers of Parliament, 275; and the Mexican Expedition, 277, 569; overthrows the Mexican Re- public, 278; failure of the ex- pedition, 279; effects of the fail- ure upon, 280; grants conces- sions to liberalism, 280; attacks upon, 282; transformation of the Empire completed under, 283; unwise adherence to his doctrine of nationalities, 285; attitude to- ward Schleswig-Holstein affair (lS6-' f ), 286; meeting at Biar- ritz (1865), 260, 286; fails to use his opportunity in 1S66, 287; failure of diplomacy of, 288; attitude toward the candi- dacy of Prince Leopold for the Spanish throne, 290; fails to secure alliances with the Powers, 294; surrenders to King Wil- liam I of Prussia at Sedan (1870), 297; growth of the So- cialists under, 331-332; and the Third Republic, 341; conquests under, 373; attitude toward Russia (1854), <>13; and the Danubian Principalities (1859), 618 Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, King of the French ( 1880-1848 I, candidacy of, 96; made Lieu- tenant-General of France, 96; proclaimed King, 98; recognized by the Powers, 100; favors elec- tion of Leopold of Coburg as King of Belgium, 104; attitude toward the revolutionary move- ments (1881) in Italy. 110; reign of, 114-144; career of, 114; his liberalism, 114; his legal title to the throne, 115; and the revised Constitution, 116; the franchise lowered (1881), 117; character of the July Monarchy, 117; insecurity of the regime. Louis Philippe, continued 118; the progressive and con- servative parties under, 119; popular unrest, 120; Casimir- Perier Ministry, 120-121; and the Legitimists, 122; Republican insurrections (1882), 123; vigor- ous measures of the government, 124; attempts upon the life of, 126; the September Laws (1835), 125-126; and the Na- poleonic legend, 127-129; per- sonal government of, 131 ; min- istry of Thiers, 131-132; minis- try of Guizot, 133-142; industrial revolution, 137; growth of social- ism under, 138-139; opposition to the policy of the Government, 139-142; overthrow of, 142-143; influence of his fall in Central Europe, 169; conquests of, 373 Louis I, King of Bavaria, aids Greeks, 608; son of, becomes King of Greece, 1833, 611 Louis I, King of Portugal (1S61- 1880), 577 Louis XV, King of France, loss of colonial empire under, 371 Louis XVI, King of France, 92, 114 Louis XVIII, King of France, (1814-1824), restored to the French throne, 2; and the First Treaty of Paris (1814), 3; and the Second Treaty of Paris (1815), 13; and Ale*xander I, 16, 647; reign of, 66-83; and the Constitutional Charter (1814), 67-70; character of, 70; difficul- ties of his situation, 71-75; the White Terror, 73; prorogues the Chamber, 74; checks the Ultras, 74; and the Congress of Aix-la- Chapelle, 75; sends army into Spain (1823), 82; death of, 82; character of his reign, 98 Louvel, assassin of Duke of Berry, 80 Lovett, Author of " The Rotten House of Commons," 447 Lowe, Robert, on the Reform Bill of 1867, 464; in the Gladstone Ministry (1868), 465 Lowell, A. L., on the franchise in England, 495-496; on the peo- ple of India, 522 Liibeck, member of the North Ger- man Confederation, 268; mem- ber of the German Empire, 304 INDEX 807 Lucca, 52 Lucerne, 584 Lucknow, 521 Luxembourg Palace, Labor Com- mission meets at, 191 Luxemburg, member of the Ger- man Confederation, 31 Lyons, Republican insurrection in (1834), 124; insurrection of workingmen in, 138 Lytton, Lord, Viceroy of India, 522 Maassen, financial reformer of Prussia, 148 Macaulay, Thomas Babington, on the First Reform Bill, 434; on Gladstone, 466 Macaulay, Zachary, and the anti- slavery agitation, 440 Macedonia, and the Treaty of San Stefano, 1878, 624; disposition of, by Congress of Berlin, 1878, 625; question of, 627 Mackintosh, and the Penal Code, 424 MacMahon, Marshal, defeated in the battle of Worth, 296; chosen President of the French Repub- lic, 342; establishment of the Septennate, 343; struggle with the Chamber, 348-349; his con- ception of the presidency, 349; resigns, 351 ; the Roman Catholic Church and the Republic under, 366 Madagascar, France sends expe- dition to, 353; French colony, 374 Madeira, part of the Kingdom of Portugal, 578 Madrid, riots in (1820), 49; the Congress of Verona and the Madrid Government, 62-63; the Christinos control, 566 Magenta, battle of, 225, 725 Mahratta Confederacy, Overthrow of, 520 Magyars, position of, in Hungary, 24, 154, 176; succeed in making Magyar the official language in Hungary (18H), 157; the Croatians rise against, 177-178; Francis Joseph I and, 388; Aus- gleich satisfactory to, 394; op- pose the demands of the Czechs, 398; and the policy of Magyariza- tion, 403; Francis Kossuth, lead- Magyars, continued er of a party of, 404; oppose the " occupation " of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 405 Mahdi, leader of revolt in the Soudan, 561-562 Mahmud II, Sultan, refuses the armistice of the Treaty of Lon- don (1827), 609-610; war with Russia (1828), 610; signs Treaty of Adrianople (1829), 611 Majuba Hill (1881), 539 Malta, retained by England in 1815, 9, 519 Manchester, unrepresented in Par- liament (1815), 414, 434-435; Anti-Corn-Law League founded at, 1839, 452; and the problem of transportation, 723, 725 Manchuria, invaded by the Jap- anese, 695; Russian entrance into, 697; Russian activity in, 699; Russo-Japanese War in, 701-702; disposition of, by Treaty of Portsmouth (1905), 703 Manifesto of August 19, 1905 (Russia), 710-711 Manifesto of October 30, 1905 (Russia), 712 Manin, Daniel, Republican leader in Venice, 173; on Italy, 221 Manitoba, admitted into the Do- minion of Canada, 1870, 529 Manuel, elected to the French Chamber of Deputies, 78 Manuel II, King of Portugal, 1908— , 578 March Days (1848), Hungary, 170, 174 March Laws (Hungary), 1848, 170-171, 177, 179 Marches, The, 235; annexed to Piedmont (1860), 236 Maria Christina, Queen Regent of Spain, 574 Maria da Gloria (Maria II), Queen of Portugal, 1826-1828, 1834-1853; Civil War with Dora Miguel, 577; death of, 577 Marie, Minister of Commerce, 192 Marie Louise, wife of Napoleon I, receives Parma, 9; forced to flee from Parma, 110 Maritime Province, acquired by Russia from China (1860), 682, 687 Maritza, 621 808 INDEX Marmont, Commander of the troops in Paris (1830), 95 Marrast, in the Provisional Gov- ernment, 188 Marseilles, uprisings in, 73, 123 Mars-la-Tours, Gennans defeat French at, 996 Martignac Ministry, 89 Martinique, French possession, 1815, 371 Marx, Karl, and Socialism in Ger- man v, 312 Massa," 223 Massawa, seized by Italy (1885 >, $89 Mauritius, Slavery in, aholished by England, 439-440; English possession (1815), 519 Maximilian, Archduke of Austria, offered the imperial crown of Mexico, 278; disastrous outcome of the adventure, 279; death of, 980 May Laws (Prussia, 1S7S, 1S7J, 1875), 308 Mazzini, Joseph (1805-1872), 160- 164; early life, 160; his intense patriotism, 161; founder of " Young Italy," 161 ; methods and aims of the society, 162- 163; and Pius IX concerning Italy, 167; one of the Triumvirs of Rome, 181; compared with Cavour, 217, 219; on education, 3S1 Mecklenburg, Government of, 36; and the Zollverein, 149 Mccklenburg-Schwerin, in the North German Confederation, 269 Mehemet AH, Viceroy of Egypt, war with Turkey, 131; founds a semi-royal house, 557-558, 609; Sultan asks aid of, against the Greeks, 607 Melbourne, Lord, in the Grey Min- istry iis.il), 430; and the politi- cal education of Queen Victoria, 445; fall of ministry of (1841), 451 Melikoff, Loris, 669 Meline, Prime Minister, and the Dreyfus Case, 360 Menelek, ruler of Abyssinia, 383 Metternich, at Congress of Vicuna, 4; and the Austrian policy, 9 ; and the Holy Alliance, 15; and the Quadruple Alliance, 18; Metternich, continued characterization and historical importance of, 90-93; and Fran- cis I, 25; his system and its application in other countries, 97-98, 35, 37-3S, 58-64; and the German universities and the press, 39-49; conferences at Carlsbad, 41-44; doctrine of the right of intervention, 58-59; and the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle, 59; his principle of intervention accepted, 59; triumph of his sys- tem, 63; his system checked, 65; opinion of the Polignac Min- istry of Charles X, 90; and Charles X, 99; and the July Revolution ( 1830), 100; on Italy, 110; intervention of, in the Papal States, 111; supreme in Germany, 113; estimate of the July Monarchy, 118-119, 145; control of, in Austria (1815- 1848), 159; and Pius IX, 166; overthrow of. 170; opinion of Cavour, 991; and the (!reek War of Independence, 608; Alex- ander I and, 649 Met/., 996; fall of, 998 Mexico, IS; expedition into, 277- 979, 569 Michel, General, 295 Miguel, Dom, King of Portugal, (1828-1834), younger son of John VI, King of Portugal, 576; proclaimed King, 1828, 577; Civil War with Maria da Gloria, 577; renounces claims to throne | 1884), 577 Mikado of Japan, 688; and the Shogunate, 691-692; recovers power, 699 Milan, insurrection in, 172; oc- cupied by the French and Sardinians (1859), 225; riots in ( 188!) ), 383 ; riots in ( 1898 ), 383 Milan, King of Servia, forced to abdicate, 1889, 6M Militarism, spread of, 728; ex- pense of, 72S-729 Mill, John Stuart, speech in favor of suffrage for women, 464 Milner, Sir Alfred, Reports on South Africa, 1899, 542-543; on the rapid growth of the Egyp- tian debt, .').">S Milvoukov, (>7S Mines, Labor in, Act (lS-i2), 455 INDEX 809 Miquclon, French possession, 1815, 371 Mir, government of, 646; cultiva- tion of land in, 65.5; land prob- lem in, 658; transformation of, t909, 717 Missolonglii, siege of (1825-1826), and fall of, 607-608 Modena, Austrian restoration in, 9, 53-53; ruler of, forced to flee, 110; restoration of the Duke of, 22t>; annexed to Pied- mont (1860), 230 Mohammed V, Sultan of Turkey, 1000—, 643 Moldavia, 1815, part of the Otto- man Empire, 601; part of Bes- sarabia ceded to, by Treaty of Paris (1856), 615. See Dan- ubian Principalities MoI£, minister of Louis Philippe, 131, 133 Molesworth, on qualifications for suffrage in boroughs, 414 note Moltke, Hellmuth von, Prussian General, 264; plans for the in- vasion of Bohemia in the war against Austria (1866), 265; superiority of the armies under, 266 Mommsen, 246 Monaco, 52 Moniteur, The, 92 Monroe Doctrine, 64-65 Montalembert, 199 Montenegro, Slavs of, aid Her- zegovina, 1875, 620; and Servia declare war against Turkey, 2876, 622-623; complete inde- pendence of> recognized by the Treaty of San Stefano, 2878, 624; declared independent by Congress of Berlin, 2878, 625- 626; Servia and, 641 Monti jo, Mile. Eugenie de, mar- ries Napoleon III, 210. See Empress Eugenie Moral and Civil Primacy of the Italians," " The, by Gioberti, 164 Moravia, 23; position in the Em- pire (1861), 390 Morea, 605; conquered, 607; French army in, 611 Morley, Lord, on the labor conV, 456; on the secret ballot, 483- 484; on Irish Home Rule, 501, 508; on relations of England and the Transvaal, 540 Morocco, 551, 601 Moscow, population of, 675; stu- dents at the University of, 678; students in, revolt, 709; riots in, 712 Mukden, 701; captured by the Jap- anese, 702 Munich, Dollinger and the Univer- sity of, 307 Municipal Corporations Act (18S5), England, 444 Murad V, 621 Murat, King of Naples, 5, 51 Music, in the nineteenth century, 720 Mutsuhito, Emperor of Japan, 2867 — , accession of, 692; grants a constitution (1889), 694 Nanking, Treaty of (18J2), 685 Naples, Kingdom of (Kingdom of the Two Sicilies), Murat, King of (181/f), 5, 51; the Congress of Vienna and, 52; Ferdinand I, King of, makes a treaty with Austria, 53; government of, 55- 56; the Carbonari, 56; Revolu- tion of 2820 in, 57; constitution granted, 57; and the Congress of Troppau (1820), 59; and the Congress of Laibach (1821), 60; Austria invades and restores absolutism in, 60-61 ; revolution in (18J/8), 167; cooperates in insurrection against Austria, 173; recalls troops, 175-176; ab- solutism restored in, 181; reaction in, after 18-'f8, 215; agreement at Plombicres con- cerning, 223; conquest of, 232- 237; Cavour's policy concerning, 234; Sicily invaded by Garibaldi (1860), 234; conquered, 235; flight of King Francis II, 235; annexed to Piedmont (1860), 236-237; government of (1815- 1860), 377; illiteracy in (1861), 381 Napoleon, Prince Jerome, be- trothed to Princess Clotilde, 223 Napoleon I, Overthrow of, 1 ; escapes from Elba and seizes the government of France, 13; the concert of Powers and, 17; on Italian unity, 50; significance of his activity in Italy, 51; the second funeral of, 128; the " Napoleonic Ideas " by Na- 810 INDEX Napoleon I, continued poleon III, 206; and the Con- cordat of 1S01, 367; and Water- loo, 418; and Switzerland, 585; Alexander I of Russia and, 646; flight of, from Russia, 722 Napoleon III. See Louis Na- poleon Bonaparte " Napoleonic Ideas," by Napoleon III, 206 Nassau, 40; supports Austria in the war of 1S66, 263; incorpo- rated in the Kingdom of Prus- sia, 267 Natal, responsible government granted to (1893), 528; Boers migrate into, 537; made a colony of England (181,3), 538; posi- tion of, in the Union of South Africa (1909), 544-545 National, The, 143 National Constituent Assembly (18-',S), France, 193 National Defense (France, 1870), Government of, 298-300 National Workshops (France), 191-193; abolished, 194 Navarino, battle of, 1827, 610 Navigation, steam, 723-724 Navigation Laws (England), 450; Huskisson's reforms of, 1828- 1825, 451; abolished (1849),45i- 455 Nemours, Duke of, son of Louis Philippe, 131 Netherlands, The. See Holland and Belgium New Brunswick, English pos- session (1815), 519, 523; re- sponsible government granted to (18-',8), 527; becomes a mem- ber of the Dominion of Canada (1867), 528 New Caledonia, 336 Newcastle, 724 Newcomen, steam-engine made bv (1705), 407 Newfoundland, 371 ; English pos- session (1815), 519, 523; re- sponsible government granted to, 527; and the Dominion of Can- ada, 529 New Guinea, part of, owned by Germany, 319 New Holland, 531 New South Wales, responsible gov- ernment granted to, 5^7; Captain Cook's voyage to, 531; in the New South Wales, continued Australian Commonwealth, 532; New Zealand separated from (1865), 534 New York Herald, and the Stan- ley expedition, 553 New Zealand, Tasman's discovery of, 531; annexed to the British Empire, 1839, 534; given re- sponsible government, 1854, 527, 534; made a separate colony, 1865, 534; becomes Dominion of, (1907), 534; advanced social legislation, 535; system of taxa- tion, 535; industrial legislation, 535; Old Age Pension Law (1898 and 1905), 536; woman suffrage in, 536; autonomy in, 546, 549 Nice, 223; annexed to France, 231 Nicholas I, Tsar of Russia, 1825- 1855, 108; aids Francis Joseph I of Austria against Hungary, 180, 654; intervenes in the Greek War of Independence, 609; ambitions of, 611-612; attitude of Na- poleon III toward, 613; reign of, 650-655; accession and train- ing, 650; system of repression by police and censorship, 651- G52; literature under, 652-653; abolishes capital punishment ex- cept for treason, 653; on serf- dom, 653; foreign policy of, 653-654; the Crimean War (185 -',-1855), and the humiliation of Russia, 654; death of, 615, 655 Nicholas II, Tsar of Russia, 1894 — , accession and policy of repression, 676; increasing dis- affection under, 677; condition of the peasantry, 677; persecu- tion of the "intellectuals," 678; and Finland, 678-680; abrogates the Finnish constitution, 679; on the possession of the Liao-tung peninsula by the Japanese, 696; enters upon a more liberal policy, 708; demands of the liberals not granted by, 709; is- sues the Manifesto of August 19, 1905, 710; and the Manifesto of October 30, 1905, 712; and a decree constituting the Coun- cil of the Empire, 713; the "or- ganic laws " issued in the name of, 713; and the First Duma, INDEX 811 Nicholas II, continued 713-715; and the Second Duma, 715-716"; alters the electoral sys- tem, 716; and the Third Duma, 716; and the transformation of the mir, 717; restores the liber- ties of Finland, 717-718; on the limitation of armaments (1898), 729; and the First Peace Con- ference at the Hague (1899), 730-733; and the Second Peace Conference at the Hague (1907), 734 Niebuhr, on the Papal States, 55 Nihilism, Rise of, 666; Stepniak and Turgenieff on, 666; persecu- tion of the Nihilists, 667; be- comes socialistic, 667; propa- ganda of, 667; policy of ter- rorism, 668-669 Nikolsburg, Preliminary Peace of, 263, 267 Nile, sources of, discovered, 552 Ningpo, opened to British trade by Treaty of Nanking (1842), 685 Nippon, 688 Nogi, General, conducts the siege of Port Arthur, 701 Nomination boroughs (England, 1815), 413 Normandy, German troops with- drawn from, 338 North America, English posses- sions in (1815), 519; British, 523-530 North German Confederation, composition of, 268; government of (1867), 269, 303; alliance with the South German States, 270-271 North German Llovd steamship line, established (1857), 724 Norway, joined with Sweden, 10, 592; Constitution of Eidsvold (1814), 595, 598; war with Sweden, 595-596; Union with Sweden, 596; rulers (1815- 1905), 596-597; constitution of 1866, 597; friction with Sweden, 597-598; abolition of the Nor- wegian nobility, 599; dissolution of the Union with Sweden and Treaty of Carlstad (1905), 599- 600; chooses Prince Charles of Denmark, who becomes Haakon VII (1905), 600; suffrage in, 600 Novara, battle of (181,9), 62, 181, 215 Nova Scotia, English possession (1815), 519, 523; responsible government granted to (181,8), 527; becomes a member of the Dominion of Canada (1867), 528 Nyassa, Lake, 552 Obrenovitch, Milosch, becomes " Hereditary Prince of the Servians" (1830), 604; House of, 633 Obstruction, adoption of the policy of, by Irish Home Rulers, 498 O'Connell, Daniel, founds the Catholic Association in Ireland, 427; elected to Parliament, 427; and the Irish party, 469, 498 O'Connor, Feargus, and the Chart- ist movement, 448 Okhotsk, 681 Oku, General, at Mukden, 701 Old Age, Insurance Law (1889), Germany, 316; Pensions Act (1908),' Great Britain, 515-516; Pension Law, New Zealand (1898 and 1905), 536; Denmark (1891) 594 Old Catholics, 307-308 Old Sarum, 413, 432 Ollivier, leader of the Third Party, 282; becomes head of the minis- try, 283; and the Hohenzollern candidacy, 291, 293 Olmiitz, flight of the Emperor to, 178, 248, 388; Bismarck on the Convention of, 252-253 Omdiirman, battle of, 1898, 562 Ontario, 527, 528, and see Canada Opium War, 181,0-181,2, 685 Orange Free State, founded by Boers from Cape Colony, 538; annexed to the British Empire (1848), 538; England renounces sovereignty over (1852), 538; and the South African War, 1899-1902, 543-544; annexed to the British Empire (1902), 544; responsible government granted to (1907), 528, 544; position in the Union of South Africa, 544- 545 Ordinances of July (1830), 92- 93; withdrawn, 96 Oregon, settlement of the Oregoi» dispute, 1846, 529 81 « INDEX "Organic Laws," The (Russia), 713 Orleans, Duchess of, 1 13 Orleans, Duke of, 91. S*t also Louis Philippe Orsini, conspiracy of, 999 i>s>.\ir I. Kins of Norway and Sweden, (844-2859, 591 Oscar 11, King of Norway and Sweden, 1878-1905; King of Sweden alone, (905-1907; fric- tion between Norway and Swe- den, 597-598; question ot* the consular service ' v .' . 599; dissolution ot" the union of Sweden and Norway and Treaty of Carlstad, 599-600; death of ( 1907 ). 600 Osman Pasha, fortifies Plevna, 693; surrenders, 694 Ottawa, federal parliament at, 598 Otto I, King of Greece, (86 :. 611; reign of. 633; be- comes a constitutional monarch, (844j ti: 'i' overthrow of. (80S, 63 1 Ottoman Empire, The Disruption of. and the Rise of the Balkan States. 601-644. Sec Turkey Oudh, Annexation of, to the Brit- ish Empire, 590 Owen. Robert, and the child labor agitation, 449 Oxford University, Religious tests in, 415: Gladstone at. 465-466; religious tests in. abolished. 483, •185^ Pact of (815 (Switierland), 584 Palacky, historian. 154 Palmerston, Lord, attitude toward Italian unity. 399; estimate of Cavour, 939; in the Grey Minis- try, 430; attitude toward the extension of the suffrage. 461; death of. 461; on the secret bal- lot, -iS:?; attitude toward the Crimean War. 613 Papal Guarantees, law of. 978 Papal Infallibility. Dogma of. 30? Papal States, restoration of, b\ Congress of Vienna. 9-10, 59; government of. 55; insurrection in (1881), 110; Austrian inter- vention, HI; French seise An- cona. 111; absolutism restored, 111; results of the insurrections. Papal States, continued 111-119; cooperate in insurrec- tion against Austria (1848- t8i9), ITS; recall troops. 175; agreement at Plombiercs con- cerning. 993, St I Koine Paris. First Treaty of (1814), 3, 5; the "Hundred Hays" in. IS; Second Treaty of (1815), 13; oppositon of (the liberal edi- tors of (8 ' ; . 94; July Revolu- tion ( 1880) in. 95, 117; Louis Philippe in. 111. 195; Republican insurrection in (188b), 193; revolution of February (18 s . 141-149; proclamation of the Sec- ond Republic in. lit; political life in (848 I, 190; and the Na- tional Workshops, 199-193; the June Days | (848), in, 194; de- clared under martial law, 909; Louis Napoleon's coup d'etat of December 9, t851, in, 903-904; the "massacre of the boule- vards." 905; international exposi- tion in < (855 '. 91 1-919; im- provements in, 919; Congress of [fi •(>'». 919, 990; excitement in. over the news of the candidacy of Prince Leopold, 991; war party in 293; 'proclama- tion of the Third Republic (1870), 991 ; siege of. 998-999; capitulation of, 999; and the Commune, 330-336; and the As- sembly, 330; distress of the work- ing classes in. 331 ; revolutionary elements in, 331-339; action ox the National Guard in. 339; war between the Commune and ttie Versailles Government, 333; gov- ernment of the Commune. the Commune and National As- sembly dash, 334; second sicce of, 334-335; Government's pun- ishment of. 335; scat of govern- ment transferred to | 1880), 359; and the Roulanger crisis. 356; exposition in' (889 in. 351 ; Treatv of. t898, Spain and the United States. 57 1; Treaty of . 615-616; Conference of (1858 I, 618 Paris, Count of. grandson of Louis Philippe. 143; Orlcanist Pretender, 341-349 Parish Councils Bill of 2894 (Eng- land), 509 INDEX 813 Parliaments, Modern, Australia, Senate and House of Repre- sentatives (1901), 534; Austria, House of Lords and House of Representatives (1867), 395; Hungary, Table of Magnates and Table of Deputies (1848), 395; Austria-Hungary, The Dele- gations (1867), 394; Belgium, Two Chambers (1881), 581; Bul- garia, Sobranje (1879), 628; Canada, Dominion of, Senate and House of Commons (1867), 529; Crete, Assembly (1907), 635 note; Denmark, Landstbing and Folkething (18G6), 594; Fin- land, Single Chamber (200), Grand Committee (60), 1906, 718; France, Senate and Cham- ber of Deputies (1815) , 345- 34G; Germany, Bundcsrath and Reichstag (1811), 301; Great Britain, House of Lords and House of Commons, 410, 437- 438, 493-496 (1885); Greece, Boule (1864), 634; Holland, States General, Upper and Lower Houses (1848), 580; Ice- land (1874), 595; Italy, Senate and Chamber of Deputies (1861), 377-378; Japan, House of Peers and House of Repre- sentatives (1889), 694; New Zealand, 534; Norway, Storthing (1814), 595; Portugal, 577-578; Prussia, House of Peers and House of Representatives (1850), 186; Roumania, Two Chambers (1881), 632; Russia, Council of the Empire and Duma (1906), 713; Spain, Sen- ate and Congress of Deputies (1876), 573; Sweden, Upper and Lower Houses (1866), 597, 600; Switzerland, Council of States and National Council (1848), 586; Turkey, Senate and Cham- ber of Deputies (1908), 642; Union of South Africa, Senate and House of Assembly (1909), 544-545 Parma, Duchy of, disposition of, by Congress of Vienna, 9, 52- 53; Marie Louise, Duchess of, forced to flee from, 110, 226; annexed to Piedmont (1860), 230 Parnell, Charles Stuart, leader of the Home Rulers, 498 Patrimony of St. Peter, 238 Peace Conferences at the Hague, First (1899), 730-733, estab- lishes Permanent Court of Arbi- tration, 733; Second (1907), 734-735; significance of, 735 Pedro I of Brazil, becomes Pedro IV of Portugal, 576; abdicates in favor of his daughter, Maria da Gloria, 576-577 Pedro V, King of Portugal, 1853- 1861, 577 Peel, Sir Robert, reforms Penal Code (182.3), 424; and the Catholic Emancipation Act, 427- 428; on the Reform Bill, 434- 435; on Queen Victoria, 445; leader of the Conservatives, be- comes Prime Minister (181/1- 1846), 451-452; reforms the tariff (1842), 452; repeal of the Corn Laws (1846), 454; over- throw of, 454; and Gladstone, 466 Peking, 684; threatened (1858), 686-687; legations in (1900), rescued by the Powers, 698; Empress-Dowager returns to, 704 Penal Code, reformed (1823) by Sir Robert Peel, 424 Perry, Commodore, sent by United States to Japan, 690, 693; the Shogun makes a treaty with (1854), 691 Pescadores Islands, China cedes, to Japan, 696 Peschiera, 173 Peter I, King of Servia, 1903—, 633 Peterloo, Massacre of, 1819, 421 Philhellenic Societies, founded in France, Germany, Switzerland, England, and the United States, 607 Philippines, 565; Spain loses, 574 Pi y Margall, 572 Picquart, Colonel, and the Dreyfus Case, 359-363; promoted Briga- dier-General, 363; becomes Min- ister of War, 363 Piedmont or Kingdom of Sar- dinia, acquires Genoa, 3, 5, 52; Victor Emmanuel I and his gov- ernment, 54-55; revolution in, and abdication of Victor Em- manuel I, 61-62; reforms of Charles Albert in, 167; sends an S14f INDEX Piedmont, continued array to aid insurrection in Lom- bard)-, 173; Charles Albert de- feated at Custona (1848), 176; abdication of Charles Albert, 181-183; Constitutional Statute (1848), 185; accession of Victor Emmanuel II, 181, 915-916; a constitutional state, 916; takes the lead in the making of the Kingdom of Italy, 916; Cavour in, 916-939; economic develop- ment of, 218; Crimean policy of, 919, 919, 613; Cavour at the Congress of Paris (1856), de- nounces the policy of Austria in Italy, 990; army strengthened in, 991; founding of the Na- tional Society, 991; allied with France in war against Austria, 225; campaign of t859, 995; Peace of Yillafranea. 995-996; Lombard; annexed to, 998, 389; Modena, Parma, Tuscany, and the Romagna annexed to. 930; army of, defeats the Papal troops at Castelfidardo, 936; Naples, Sic- ily, CJmbria, and the Marches annexed to, 936; Kingdom of, gives way to the Kingdom of Italy, 237; constitutional govern- ment in, 377; constitution of, adopted with slight variations as the constitution of Italy (1861), 377-378; illiteracy in (1861 >, 381 ; signs Treaty of Paris, (1856), 615-616 Pitt, William, Earl of Chatham. 439 Pitt, William, the Younger, on representation in Parliament, 415; and Catholic Emancipa- tion, 496 Pius IX, Pope. 1846-1878, reforms of, 166; flees from Home, 181; restored by the French, 182; his government, 915, 990; to be president of the projected Ital- ian Confederation. 996; issues major excommunication, 930; re- fuses to recognize the Kingdom of Italy, 237; loses temporal power by the Italian occupation of Rome, 301; and the Kultur- kampf, 306-309; attitude to- ward the Law of Papal Guar- antees, 378-379; death of, SOP. 380 Pius X. Tope. 1908— > protests against visit of President l.oubet of France to Victor Emmanuel III (1904), 368; condemns Law of t90S in France, 369-370; atti- tude toward the Law of Papal Guarantees, 37!) Plebiscite, in France, December 90, t851, 905; November 91, t852. 905-906; May 8, t870, 984; in Italy, March, I860, 230, 931, B36 Plehve, Minister of the Interior (Russia). 190&-1904, repressive regime of, 707; assassination of, 707 Plevna, Siege of, 693-694, 695, 639 Plombieres, Interview at, between Cavour and Napoleon 111, 999- 193, oho Plural Voting, Double Vote in F ranee by Electoral Law (1820), 81, rescinded (1881), 117; in England, 495, 517; in Belgium, 58.' Pobyedonostseff, influence of, in Russia, 670-671; on parliamen- tary institutions anil the press, 071; in the reign of Nicholas II, 076; removal of, 719 Poland, granted a constitution, 38; influence of the July Revolution ( 1880) in, 100. 108; revolution in, 105, 106-110; restoration of the Kingdom of, in 1S15, 106, 647; Alexander I grants a con- stitution to, 107, 018; friction between the Poles and the Rus- sians. 107, 649-650; failure of the insurrection < 1880-1881 K 109, 653; becomes a province of the Russian Empire, 109; influ- ence of events in Italy ( 1859- 1860) upon, 946; Russia and (1815), 015; insurrection (1868) in, 669-664; Russification of, 664-665; persecution of the Jews in, 679 Polignac Ministry, 90-91 Polish-Saxon question at the Con- gress of Vienna, 7-8 Pomerania, acquired by Prussia, 8 Pondicherry, French possession, t815, 371 Port Arthur, seized by Japan, 695; China cedes, to Japan, 696; Japan relinquishes. 696; Russia t>ccures a lease of INDEX 815 Port Arthur, continued (1808), 697, 699; Japan and the Russian fleet at, 701 ; siege of, 701 ; Japan destroys the fleet at, 702; surrenders, 702, 709; Rus- sia transfers to Japan her lease of, 703 Porte. See Turkey Porto Rico, 565, 572, 574 Portsmouth (England), local gov- ernment in, 1832, 443 Portsmouth, N. H., Treaty of (1905), 702-703 Portugal, 57; English intervention in, 423; stations of, in Africa, 1815, 551; acquisitions in Africa, 1884-1800, 554; and the Con- gress of Berlin, 188/ f -1885, 555; flight of the royal family to Brazil, 1807, 575; revolution of 1820, 576; constitution of 1822 accepted by King John VI, 576; loss of Brazil, 576; civil war between Queen Maria da Gloria and Dom Miguel, 577; death of Maria, 577; recent events in, 577; assassination of Carlos I and the Crown Prince, 1908,577; accession of Manuel II, 578; colonial possessions of, 578; es- tablishes trade centers at the five treaty ports of China, 686 Portugal, Crown Prince of, assas- sinated, 1908, 577 Posen, retained by Prussia, 8; Archbishop of, asks Bismarck's aid in behalf of the Papacy, 306- 307 Postal Savings Banks, in England, 459; in New Zealand, 535 Postal Union, International, 591 Pragmatic Sanction (Spain), 565- 566 Prague, Siege of (W f 8), 175; Peace of (1866), 263, 267; Francis Joseph I agrees to be crowned at, 398; University of, divided, 400; declared in a state of siege (1893), 401 Preferential tariffs (England and her colonies), 548 Presburg, Diet of, 155, removed to Budapest, 171 Press, in Belgium, freedom of, granted by the Constitution (1831), 582; in England, Gag Laws (1819), 422; in France, freedom of, established by Press, continued Louis XVIII, 69; Law of 1819, 78, rescinded, 81 ; attempt to destroy the freedom of the, 88; liberty of the, suspended by the July Ordinances (1830), 92; the July Monarchy and, 124-125; September Law of 1835 con- cerning, 126-127; under the Second French Republic, 190, 202; under the Second Empire, 209-210; law of 1868 concerning, 281; practically unlimited free- dom of, secured (1881), 352; and the Franco-German War, 289,291-292; in Germany, censor- ship of, after the Conference of Carlsbad, 42; and Socialism, 314; under Emperor William II. 325; in Japan, 694; in Prussia, under Frederick William IV, 150, 242; and the Franco-German War, 289, 291-292; in Russia, censor- ship of, under Nicholas I, 651- 652; Pobyedonostseff on, 671; freedom of, during the war with Japan, 708; in Spain, 1815, 47 Pretoria, 545 Pretoria Convention, 1881, 540; Morley on, 540 Prim, General, leader of the re- volt in Spain, 1865, 569 Prince Consort (Albert of Saxe- Coburg), 445 Prince Edward Island, English possession, 519, 523; responsible government granted to, 1851, 527; admitted into the Dominion of Canada, 1873, 529 Prince Imperial, son of Napoleon III, 212; and the Bonapartists, 341 Prince Regent, later George IV, 420 Progress, Certain Features of Modern, 719-736 Proportional representation, in Switzerland, 590 Protected Princes of India, 522 Protection, Policy of, Germany adopts (1879), 310-312; influ- ence of, on colonial policy, 318- 319; England and, 450-455; in the British Colonies, 548; Alexander II of Russia adopts, 674 Provisional Government (France), 143; composition of, 188 achieve- ments of, 189-193 816 INDEX Prussia, demands of, at Congress of Vienna, 6-7; acquisitions of, at Congress of Vienna, 8; and the Holy Alliance, 14-16; signs Quadruple Alliance (1815), 17; position in the Diet, 30; na- tional disappointment after 1SL1, 32-44; promise of a constitution, 35; Metternich's influence in, 35; King Frederick William III be- comes reactionary, 38;Wartburg Festival, 39-40; Carlsbad Decrees, 41-44; surrenders to the leader- ship of Austria. 44; at Congress of Troppau (1820), 59; at Con- gress of Verona (1822), 62; recognizes the Kingdom of Bel- gium, 105; and the revolution in Poland, 106-110; and the revo- lution in Germany (1830), 119; and Turkish affairs, \32; London Conference (1840), 132; 1880- 1848, 145-152; evolution of, 146- 152; revision of the system of taxation, 147; the Zollverein, 1 48- 149; death of Frederick William III, and accession of Frederick William IV. 149; the Fetter Patent of February, 18^7, prom- ises a national assembly, 151; conflict between Frederick Wil- liam IV and the United Land- tag, 152; events in Berlin, March, 18 ',8, 173; Frederick William IV promises a repre- sentative constituent assembly, 174; leadership in Germany of- fered to the King of, 184-185; rejects the work of the Frank- fort Parliament, 185; the "humiliation of Olmiitz," 185; constitution of 1850, 185-186, 306; contemplates intervention in Austro-Sardinian War, 226- 227; reaction in, 1850-1858, 240; a constitutional but not a parlia- mentary state, 241 ; control of the press, 242; the privileged class, 243; economic transforma- tion, 243-244; industrial develop- ment, 244-245; rise of a wealthy middle class, 245; intellectual foundations for the hegemonv of, 245-246; the army in, 248; army reform (1860) under Wil- liam I and von Roon, 249; op- position of the Chamber to army reform, 249; Bismarck Prussia, continued appointed president of the min- istry, 249-250; struggle between the Upper and the Lower Houses over the budget, 255; Bismarck's policy of " blood and iron " for, 255 ; the three wars of, -256; Bismarck's plans regarding Schleswig-Holstein, 257; declares war on Denmark, 258; secures Schleswig-Holstein and Lauenburg jointly with Austria by the Treaty of Vienna, 259, 593; Convention of Gastcin, 259-260; buys Lauen- burg, 260; alliance with Italy, 261; troops of, enter Holstei.i, 263; withdraws from the Con- federation, -263; war with Aus- tria and her allies (1S66), 263; General von Moltke conquers North Germany, 264; defeats Austria at Kbniggratz, 265; terms of peace with Austria, 267; annexations of, 267; and the North German Confedera- tion. 268-270; alliance with South German states, 270; posi- tion of, in 1866, 987-988; France declares war against (1870), 293; South German states join, 293-294; invasion of France, 296; victories over the French at Worth, Forbach, Spicheren, Borny, Mars-la-Tours, and Gra- velotte, 296; surrender of the Emperor Napoleon III at Sedan. 297; siesre of Paris, 298- 299; capitulation of Metz, 298; capitulation of Paris and armis- tice, 299; Treaties of Versailles and Frankfort with France, 300; unification of Germany com- pleted, William I becomes Ger- man Emperor, 301 ; position of, in the German Empire, 303-304; Protestantism in, 306; Kultur- kampf, 306-310; the Falk Laws, 308; conflict of Church and State, 30S-309; Falk Laws sus- pended (1879), rescinded (1886), religious orders, except Jesuits, permitted to return (1887), 309; death of William I, 1888, 322; accession and death of Frederick III. 322; accession of William II, 322; demand for electoral reform in, 326; demand INDEX 817 Prussia, continued for parliamentary reform, 326; military system of, adopted by other countries, 481 ; signs Treaty of Paris (1856), 615- 616; establishes trade centers at the five treaty ports of China, 686 Puebla, defeat of the French troops at, 278, 280 Puffing Billy, The, 724 Punjab, annexation of, by Eng- land, 520 Pushkin, 652 Quadrilateral, The, 173, 226 Quadruple Alliance (1815), signed by the Powers, 16-17, 59 Quebec, 523, 527, 528. See Canada Queen's University, 484, 516 Queensland, responsible govern- ment granted to, 78.59, 527; in the Australian Commonwealth, 532 Radetzky, Austrian commander in Italy, 173, 175 Railroads, in the Australian Com- monwealth, 533; in Belgium, 582; in Bulgaria, 631 ; in Canada (Ca- nadian Pacific), 530; in China, 704; in France, extension of, un- der the Second Empire, 211; in Germany, 245, 305; in Greece, 635; in Hungary, government ownership of, 403; in Italy, 385; in Japan, 693; in New Zealand, government ownership of, 535; in Roumania, 632; in Russia, Trans-Siberian, 675, 696, 697, 699, 701; Trans-Caspian, 682; invention of, 724-725; Hadley, A. T., on the importance of, in war, 725-726 Rambouillet, 94 Rand, gold discovered in the, 541 Ravenna, 233 Reaction, in Austria and Germany, 23-44; and Revolution in Spain and Italy, 45-65 "Recent Events in Romagna " (181,6), by D'Azeglio, 165 Reconstruction of Europe, 1-22 Red Cross Society, 591; Russian officials and, 709 Red Sea, Italy seizes positions on (1885), 382; route to India, 488 Redistribution Act (England), 1885, 493-494 Referendum, adopted in New Zealand, 536; in Switzerland, 588-590 Reform Bills (England), 1832, 436-438, 483, 492, 511; 1867, 463, 492; 188) t , 492-493; 1885, Redis- tribution Act, 493-494 Reform, The, 143 Reichenau, Louis Philippe in, 114 Reichsrath or Parliament of Aus- tria, 395 Reichstadt, Duke of, son of Na- poleon Bonaparte, 111, 127, also known as King of Rome and as Napoleon II Reichstag, 269, 303-304; 1877, Center the largest party in, 309; Socialist party in (1890), 314-315; Socialist party loses in (1907), 324-325 Reid, Stuart J., Lord Durham's biographer, 526 and note Reign of Louis Philippe, 114- 144 Rennes, Court of Cassation orders a retrial of Dreyfus at, 362; verdict of court-martial of, quashed, 363 Restoration, France during the, 66- 99 Reunion (formerly Bourbon), Island of, French possession, 1815, 371 Revolutions of 1820-1821, in Spain, 49-50, 62-63; in Naples, 57; in Piedmont, 61-62; reasons for the failure of the movements of 1820, 62 Revolutions of 1830, in France, 95-96; influence of, 100, 429; in Belgium, 103-104; in Poland, 108-109; in Italy, 110-112; in Germany, 112 Revolutions of 181,8, in France, 141-144, 187; influence of, 145; in Hungary, 169-171; in Bo- hemia, 171-172; in Lombardy- Venetia, 172-173; in Germany, 173-174; the March revolutions everywhere triumphant, 174; results of, 185-186 Rhodes, Cecil, and the Jameson Raid, 542 Rhodesia, 542, 545 Richardson, murder of, in Japan (1862), 691 818 INDEX Richelieu, Duke of, Minister of l ouis Will. 75; reorga the army. To; and the electoral system. 77; and the press. 7> Riego, proclaims Constitution of 1818, 19 Rio de Oro, 'SI ^ RIq Muni. SI t Riforpimento. 1!. founded by Cutout, 911 Risorgimento, The, 166; ami see 915-939 Rivet Law (France), Roberts, lord, in the South Af- rican War. 543-541 Rock,:. The. 7 ;.\ Rodjestvensky, Admiral. Russian Beet under, destroyed by \d- iniral Togo, May 1905 .' 709 Romagna, Revolutionary move- ments in 18 •' . 110; " R Ev4+t» m Rcniaoun." by l v V.e- glio. 165; agreement at Plom- bieres concerning, 993; desires annexation to Piedmont, 996; an- nexed to Piedmont I860), 990 Roman Catholic Church. Sat Catholic Chureh (Roman 1 ) Rome. Napoleon on. as the capital Of Italy, SO; and the revolu- tionary movements of 1831, 110, 111; declared a republic, 181; siege and capture of. by the French, 189; 993; not included in the new Italian Kingdom i t861 I, 937; the question of. in the new Italian Kingdom) - v . : >^: and the Catholic Chureh. 938; Seined by- Italian troops and becomes the capital of the Kingdom of Italy | 1879 I, 901; President I.oubet of Prance visits Victor Emmanuel III in. 368; and the question of the Papacy, 378-380; riots in fl889 . 388 Rome. kins: of (son of Napoleon I). J. 187, 919. St Duke of Reiehstadt Romilly. statement in House of Commons concerning the Vene- tians, 10; and the Penal Code. 494 Roon. Albrecht von. Minister of War under William 1. 949; at KoniggrSts, 965 Roosevelt. Theodore. anu the Treaty of Portsmouth ( 1905 K 709; and the Second Peace Con- Roosevelt, Theodore. COWh'nwad ference at the Hague fJ t), 734 Root. Plihu. on the significance of the Peace Conferences at tin' Hague. Rosebery, lord. Ministry of. 510- 511; and lord Salisbury. .MO K>>ssi, murder of. ISl Rotten boroughs (England, t815), 413-414 Roumanla, 404; union of Mol- davia and Wallachia into. olS; Alexander John I or Cou.-a. Prince of. 618-619; reign of Charles I. 619-690; proclaims its independence. May 91, 1877, 693; complete independence recog- nized by Treaty of San Stefano. 1878, 694; declared independent by Congress of Berlin, 1878, 695-696; forced to cede Bes- sarabia to Russia ami to receive the Dobrudscha, 695-696; since (878, 639; proclaimed a king- dom. (881, 639; aspirations ot\ 635 Roumelia. Pastern, made a part of Bulgaria by the Treaty of San Stefano. 1878, 694; disposition ot\ by the Congress of Berlin, 2>7>. 695; union ot, with Bul- garia. 1885, 699 Roxburgh, 419 Royal Geographical Society sends Cameron to rescue Livingstone, 559 Royal Statute (18H), Spain. 661 Rudini. Marquis di. Prime Minis- ter ( 1896 '. policy of pacifica- tion, 383 Rugby. 47 7 Rumania. St* Roumania Rumelia. 844 Roumelia Russell. Lord John, created Karl Russell /No'/, in the Grey Min- istry. ISO; introduces Pirst Re- form Rill in House of Commons, />;/. |30; speech. 431; intro- duces Second Reform Bill. (831, 435; introduces Third Reform Bill. 436; on the question of further reform. 446; Prime Min- ister and the Reform Bill of /Ne'e'. 469 Russia. Demands of. at the Con- gress of Vienna, t>; acquisitions Of, S; and the Second Treaty INDEX 819 j; i, 'i, continued of Paris (1815), IS; and the J July Alliance, 14-16; signs Quadruple Alliance (1815), 17; and the Congre is of Troppau, .0!*; and tin- Congress of Verona, 62; prevented from acting In the Belgian affairs, 105; recog- nizes the Kingdom of Belgium, lo.O; and the revolution in Po- land, 100-110; offers aid to Tur- key against Mehemei Ali, i:'<~'; Treaty of Unkiar Skelessi (1883) with Turkey, 132; and the London Conference (1840), 180; aids Austria against. Hungary, I HO; and the. London Confer- ence (1864), 1->*; attitude of Bismarck toward (1818), 820; alliance with France (Dual) 1891, 357; growth of, 546; at the Conference of the Powers (1876), 554,; at the Congress of Berlin (1884-1885), 555; and Finland, .000; and the Ottoman Empire, 601; and the Creek War of Independence, 606-609; and the Treaty of Condon (1827), 609; battle of Navarino (lH.il), 610; war with Turkey (1828), 610-611; Treaty of Adrianople (1829), 611; guaran- tees the independence of Greece, 611; and the Daniiliian Prin- cipalities, 611; ambitions of Nicholas I, 611-612; and the "holy places" in Palestine, 612; sends troops into Moldavia and Wallachia (1X5.1), 612; war with Turkey, 612; coalition against, 613; siege and fall of Sevastopol, 614-615, 654; Treaty of Paris, 1856, 61.0-616; disre- gards neutrality of the Black Sea, recovers part of Bessarabia, 616; declares war against Tur- key, 1877, 623; allies of, 623; siege of Plevna, 623-624; Treaty of San Stefano, 1878, 320, 624; by Congress of Berlin, 1878, retains a part of Turkish Ar- menia and receives Bessarabia, 320, 626; influence of, in Bul- garia, 62H; conspiracy against Alexander of Bulgaria, 630; atti- tude of, toward the breaches of the Berlin Treaty of 1878, 629, 640; secret treaty with Austria, Russia, ronlinued 640; reign of Alexander I, 1801-1825, 645-650; Russia in 1815, 61,0-646; Alexander I and Poland, 107, 647-648; Alex- ander's progressive domestic policy, 64g. ),j s liberal foreign policy, 640; Alexander becomes reactionary, 649; death of, 650; reign of Nicholas I, 1825-1855, 650-655; system of repression hy police and censorship, 6.01-6.52; literature under, 652-653; do- mestic policy, 6.03; foreign policy, 653-654; death of, 6.0.0; reign of Alexander II, 1855- JHXJ, accession and liberal tend- encies of Alexander II, 600; prevailing system of land ten- ure, the mir and the serfs in, 655-657; Edict of Emancipation, 1861, 607; the land problem, 657-660; establishment of the zemstvos, 660; reform of the judicial system, 661; Polish in- surrection of 1868, 662-663; Polish nobility crushed, 664; Russiflcation of Poland, 665; Alexander heeomes reactionary, 66.0; rise of Nihilism, 666-668; assassination of Alexander II, 1881, 670; reign of Alexander III, 1881-1894, 670-676; char- acter and policy of, 670; influ- ence of Pobyedonostseff, 670- 671 ; persecution of the Jews, 672; policy of Russiflcation, 672; progressive features of the reign, 673; industrial revolution, 673-674; Scrgius de Witte ap- pointed Minister of Finance (1892), 674; policy of protec- tion adopted, 674; railway con- struction, 675; rise of labor prob- lems, 675; rise of a rich bour- geoisie, 675; system of privilege undermined, 676; death of Alex- ander III, 1894, 676; Nicholas II, 189J—S 676-680; accession and policy of repression, 676; increasing disaffection under, 677; condition of the peasantry, 677; persecution of the "intel- lectuals," 678; and Finland, 678- 680; abrogates the Finnish con- stitution, 679; in Asia, 681; seeks . access to the sea, 682; acquisi- tions from China (1858-1860), 820 INDEX Russia, continued 682, 687; conquest of Turkestan, 682; intervenes with France and Germany in Japan, 696; gains entrance into Manchuria, 697; secures a lease of Port Arthur (1898), 697; helps to rescue the legations in Peking, 698; activ- ity of, in Manchuria, 699; diplo- matic negotiations with, con- cerning Manchuria, 700; Russo- Japanese War, 190^-1905, 701- 703; siege of Port Arthur, 701; Mukden captured by the Jap- anese, 702; fleet of, destroyed by the Japanese, 702; signs Treaty of Portsmouth (1905), 702-703; reaction of the Jap- anese war upon, 706; von Plehve's repressive policy in, 707; assassination of von Plehve, 707; Nicholas II enters upon a more liberal policy, 708; demands of the liberals in, not granted by the Tsar, 70S-709; disorder in, 709; Decree of Dec, 1904, 709-710; "Bloodv Sun- day" (January 22, 1905), 710; disorder in, 710; Manifesto of August 19, 1905, 710-711; gen- eral strike (October, 1905) in, 711; Manifesto of October 30, 190 5, 712; popular demand for a constitution refused, 712; Gov- ernment of, makes concessions to Finland, 713; the Tsar con- stitutes the Council of the Em- pire, 713; the "organic laws" 713; Tsar opens the Duma, May 10, 1906, 713; Tsar dis- solves the Duma, July 22, 1906, 715; the Second Duma, 715-716; Tsar alters the electoral system, 716; the Third Duma, 716; the Transformation of the mir ,1909), 717; Tsar restores the h -dies of Finland (1905), 717; ana Finland (1909), 718 Russo-Japanese War, 701-702 Sadler, Thomas, and the child labor agitation, 112 Sadowa or Koniggnitz, battle of, between Prussia and Austria (1S66), 265, 478; importance of, to France, 288 Sagasta, leader of the Spanish Liberals, 1S76, 573 Saghalin, Island of, Russia cedes to Japan the southern half of, 703 St. Croix, 594 St. John, 594 St. Louis, on west coast of Af- rica, French possession, 373 St. Lucia, retained by England in IS 15, 9, 519 St. Petersburg, revolt in (1825 I, 650; attempts to kill Tsar Alex- ander II at, 669; population of, 675; resolution of the Institute of Mining Engineers at, on the war with Japan, 706 ; representa- tives of the zemstvos meet at (190V, 708; students in, revolt, 709; "Bloodv Sunday" (Janu- ary 22, 1905) in, 710; electorate in* 711 St. Pierre, French possession, 1S15, 371 St. Simon, and socialism, 138 St. Thomas, 594 Salisbury, Lord, leader of the Con- servatives, 1881-1902, 497, First Ministry, 1885, 497; opposition of, to the Irish Home Rule and Land Bills, 503; Sec- ond Ministry, t886-1892, 505- 507; policy of coercion for Ire- land, 505; Land Purchase Act of 1891 passed, 505-506; County Councils Act of t888, 506; Social Legislation, 506-507; increase of the navy, t889, 507; and the Second "Home Rule Bill, 509; and the House of Lords, 509- 510; and Lord Rosebery, 510; Third Ministry, 1895-1902, 511- 515; assumes the Foreign Office, 511 Salmeron, 572 Salzburg, 8 Samara, 677 Samarkand, 682 Samoan Islands, 319 Samurai, The, 689, 693 San Domingo, 569 San Marino, 52 San Stefano, Treaty of, 1878, 624; opposition to, 624-625; England demands revision of, 625 Sand. Karl, assassin of Kotzebue, 40 Sand River Convention, 1852, 538; Morley on, 540 Santiago, battle of, 574 INDEX 821 Saragossa, 49 Sardinia, Island of, Victor Em- manuel I flees to, 5, 51,54; King- dom of, see Piedmont Saskatchewan, admitted to the Do- minion of Canada, 1!)05, 529 Savona, Mazzini imprisoned at, 1G1 Savoy, part of, added to France by Treaty of Paris (18W, 3; House of, 182, 215, 221, 378; agreement at Plombieres con- cerning, 223; annexation of, to Fiance (1860), 231; Amadeo of, 570-571 Saxe-Coburg, Albert of, Prince Consort, 445; Ferdinand of, elected Prince of Bulgaria, 630 Saxe-Weimar, 37 Salonika, 642; the deposed Sul- tan Abdul Hamid II, taken as a prisoner of state to, 643 Saxony, King of, restored (1815), 8; cessions of, to Prussia at Con- gress of Vienna, 8; position in the Diet, 30; government in 1815, 36; revolutionary movements in (1830), 112; supports Austria in the war of 1866, 263; in the North German Confederation, 268, 269 Scandinavian States, The, 592-600 Schaumburg-Lippe, 304 Scheurer-Kestner, and the Drey- fus Case, 360 Schleiermacher, 44 Schleswig-Holstein, question of, 256-259; Schleswig incorporated with Denmark, 257; Danish war concerning, 258; all rights to, renounced by Denmark in favor of Austria and Prusssia by the Treaty of Vienna (186V, 259; Convention of Gastein (1865), 259-260; Austria brings question of, before the Diet, 263; incorpo- rated in the Kingdom of Prussia, 267; Frederick VI and, 592; Frederick VII and, 593 School boards, England, 479, 514 Schopenhauer, 246 Schwarzenberg, Austrian Minister, 179 Schwarzhoff, General von, address at the First Peace Conference at the Hague (1899), 731 Science, in the nineteenth century, 720-721 Scotland, Representation of, in House of Commons, 1815, 410; condition in the counties of, in 1815, 412; given increased repre- sentation, 437; Act of 18SS cor- recting abuses in municipal government in, 444; Reform Bill, 1868, for, 464; Franchise Bill, 493; Gladstonian vote in, 1 886, 504; County Councils Act of 1889, 506; Old Age Pensions Law in, 516 Sebastopol, Siege of, 614; fall of, 615, 654 Second Empire, The Transforma- tion of, 272-284 Second French Republic and the Founding of the Second Empire, The, 187-214 Seeley, Sir John Robert, in his " Expansion of England " on the government of India,' 522 Senegal, French possession 1815, 371 ; Valley, annexed to France under Napoleon III, 373, 374 Separation of Church and State in France, 364-371 September Laws (1835), 125-127 Septennate, Establishment of the, 343 Seven Weeks' or Austro-German War (1866), 263-267 Serfs, Emancipation of, in Russia (1861), 657 Sergius, Grand Duke, assassinated, 710 Serrano, Marshal, 569; Regency of, 570; and the Spanish Re- public, 572 Servia, Kingdom of, 404; revolt of the Servians, 604; becomes autonomous principality tribu- tary to the Sultan, 604, 609 Slavs of, aid Herzegovina, 187 , 620; and Montenegro decJ ire war against Turkey, 187$ ,22- 623; complete indepp .^e of, recognized by the T» , of San Stefano, 1878, 62 ■??. position to the Treaty of San Stefano, 1878, 624-625; declared inde- pendent by Congress of Ber- lin, 1878, 625-626; attacks Bulgaria, 1885, 629; Treaty of Bucharest, 1886, 629; since 1878, 633; Kingdom proclaimed, 1882, 633; aspirations of, 635; protests against Austria-Hun- 822 INDEX Servia, continued gary's annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 6:19; (1909), 641- 649 Seville, 565 Shanghai, opened to British trade by Treaty of Nanking (184%), 685 Shantung, Germany establishes a "sphere of influence" in ( 1S'JS>, 697 Sheffield, unrepresented in Parlia- ment ( 1815 i. 414 Shimonoseki, Treaty of (1895), 695-696 Shogun, The, 688-689; hreaks policy of isolation, 690-691; over- throw of the Shogunate, 691; abolition of the Shogunate, 699 Siberia, 109, 646, 651, 659, 653, 656, 668, 669. 681, 689, 707, 713 Sibir, 681 Sieilies, The Kingdom of the Two. St 16 X a pies Sicily, 51, 69; conquest of, by Garibaldi, 934-935; illiteracy in, 1861, 881; emigration from, 386 Sickness Insurance Law ( 1888) in Germany, 316 Silesia, 23 Simon Ministry dismissed. 349 Six Acts or Gag Laws, England | 1819), 499 Slavery, abolished in the French colonies, 190; abolition of, in British Empire, decreed by Law of t8SS, 440; abolished in British South Africa, 1884, 537 Slave-trade, denounced at the Congress of Vienna (1815), 19; abolished by England, t807, 439 Slavonia, 177*, 396 Slavs, £5, 154, 177; attitude toward Austria in the Austro-Prussian War of 1866, 066; favored by Taaffc Ministry, 400; 404; 405 Slovenes, demands of, 397 ; in Carniola, Slavicize the province, 400 Smith, Adam, author of " Wealth of Nations," 1776, 417 Smith, Sidney, on the Irish Church, 471 Sobranje, elects Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, Prince of Bul- garia, 630 Social Democratic Party (Ger- many), 3J5 Social Legislation, in Germany, 31.7- 316; in Austria, 400; in England, 459, 506-507, 515-516; in New Zealand, 535-536; in Denmark, 594 Socialism, in France, under Louis Philippe, 13S; Louis Blanc and, 1SS, his theories, 1S9; under the Provisional Government, 188; National Workshops, 191-194; growth of, under Napoleon III, 331-339; in Germany, 319-318, 394-395; in Austria, 400-409; in England, 458; Bakounine and, 667; in Russia, 667-668, 675, 707 Sofia, capital of Bulgaria. 631 Solferino, battle of, 995, 996, 795 Solovief, attempt of, upon the life of Alexander II. 1879, 669 Somaliland, Italian protectorate established over, 389 Sonderbund ( 1847), 586 Soudan, Egypt loses, 561; recov- ery of, 56 : .?; Turkey and. C3S; and the liberation of the territory, 338; reform in local government, 339; army reform, 839; and the Republic, 340-341; outvoted in the Assembly and resigns ( t878), 341-349 Third Section, part of the Rus- sian police system, 651, 669, 671- 679 Three F's, The, 491 Thuringian Duchies, join Zoll- verein, 148. Tientsin, Treaties of, 1S5S, 686, confirmed, 1860, 687 Tithe War, Ireland. 479 Tobago, retained by England in 1815, 9. 519 Tocqucville, de, on the French Revolution of 1$.',S, 187 Todleben, at Sebastopol, 614; at siege of Plevna, 693 Togo, Admiral, destroys the Rus- sian fleet ( 1905), 709 Togoland, German colony in Af- rica, 319 Tokio, capital of Japan, 692, 693; University established at, 693 Tonkin, France sends expedition to, 353; failure of the war in, 355; annexed ( 1885), 374 Toulouse, speech of Waldeck- Rousseau at, on the question of Church and State (1900), 364- 366 INDEX 825 Tours, branch scat of the French government during the siege of Paris, 298 Trades Unions, in England, growth of, 457 Trans-Caspian railroad, 682 Transformation of the Second Em- pire, The, 272-284 Transleithania, 395. See Hungary Trans-Siberian railroad, 675, 696, 699, 701; Russia extends, to Vladivostok, 697 Transvaal, The, founding of, 538; independence of, acknowledged by Great Britain, 1852, 538; an- nexed to the British Empire, 1877,538; Majuba Hill, 539; and the Pretoria Convention, 1881, 540; and the London Convention, 1884, 540; discovery of gold, 1884, 541; Jameson Raid, 28.95, 541-542; Sir Alfred Milner's Reports on,' 1899, 542; and the South African War, 543- 544; annexed to the British Empire, 1902, 544. See Trans- vaal Colony Transvaal Colony, responsible gov- ernment granted to, 1906, 528, 544; position of, in the Union of South Africa (1909), 544-545. Transylvania, a part of Hungary, 24; allowed a certain measure of autonomy, 155; severed from Hungary, 388; position of, in the Empire (1861), 390, 392, 396; demands of the Roumanians in, 403 Treaties, Kiel (1814), Denmark and Sweden, 592; (First) Paris (1814), France and the Allies, 3, 5; (Secret) Treaty of Defensive Triple Alliance concluded at the Congress of Vienna (1815), France, England, and Austria against Russia and Prussia, 7; (Second) Paris (1815), Louis XVIII and the Allies, 13; Holy Alliance (1815), Russia and the Powers, 14; Quadruple Alliance (1815), Russia, Prussia, Austria, and England, 16-17; London (1827), England, Russia, and France on the question of Greece, 609; Adrianople (1829), Russia and Turkey, 611; London (1830- 1831), recognizes the Kingdom of Belgium, 105; Unkiar Treaties, continued Skelessi (1833), Russia and Turkey, 132; London (1840), England, Russia, Austria, and Prussia on the Eastern Ques- tion, 132; Nanking (1842), Eng- land and China, 685; (1844) United States and China (Com- mercial), 686; London Protocol (1852), concerning Schleswig- Holstein, 257-258; (1854) United States and Japan (Commercial), 691; Paris (1856), England, France, Austria, Russia, Prussia, Sardinia, and Turkey, 615-616; Tientsin (1858), England and China, France and China, 686, confirmed (1860), 687; Zurich (1859) (Preliminaries at Villa- franca, 225-226), Austria, France, and Sardinia, 228; Turin (1860), France and Sardinia, 231; 1860, Treaty of Commerce, France and England, 274; London (1861), England, Spain, and France agree to joint interven- tion in Mexico, 277; Vienna (1864), Denmark, Austria, and Prussia, 259, 593; Gastein (1865), Prussia and Austria, 259-260; Alliance (1866), Prus- sia and Italy, 261 ; Prague (1866), Prussia and Austria (Preliminary at Nikolsburg), 263, 266-268; Versailles and Frankfort (1871), Germany and France, 300-301, 338; Berlin Memorandum (1876), 620; San Stefano (1878), Russia and Turkey, 624; Berlin (1878), 625-626; Austro-German (1879), 321; Triple Alliance, Germany, Austria, and Italy (1882), 319- 321, 382; Berlin (1884-1885), concerning Congo Free State, 555-556; Bucharest (1886), Bul- garia and Servia, 629; Dual Al- liance (1891), France and Rus- sia, 357; Shimonoseki (1895), China and Japan, 695-696; Paris (1898), Spain and the United States, 574; Anglo-Japanese (1902), 700; Carlstad (1905), Sweden and Norway, 599-600; Portsmouth (1905), Russia and Japan, 702-703 Treaty ports (China), 685 Treitschke, 149, 246 826 INDEX Trevelyan. Sir George, on the polky of coerdoo in Ireland, 505 Tribtin,- (Tbo), prosecution of, un- der the July Monarchy. 194 Trinidad, retained bv England in 1815, 9, 519 Trinity College (Dublin), 184 Triple Alliance. (888, 319-399, 357, 389, 640 Triple Entente, 736 Tripoli, one of the Rarbarv States, 379; in (8J5, 551 Tripolit/a. taken by Greeks. 606 Trocadero, 63 Trochtt, General. Head of the Gov- ernment ot* National Defense, 987 Troppau. Congress of ( (880 I, 59- 60 Tsushima. Straits ot\ naval battle Of the. t905, 709 Tunis, seised by France. (88J, 391; France establishes a protectorate over (1881 . 353, 374, 554; TV- quart sent to. 359; one of the Barbary States. 379; in 1815, 551, 609 Turgenieff, 659; definition of a Nihilist. tUitS Turin. 54, til ; parliament meets at. 930, 937; Treaty of t860), 931; capital of Italy to 1865, 378; riots in | t88$ I, 383 Turkestan, conquest of, by Russia , 1845-1885 I, 689 Turkey, war with Mehemet Ali. 131; interference of Russia in. and Treaty of I'nkiar Skelessi (1888), 139; England comes to the aid of. 139; London Con- ference (1840 . 139; protects Kossuth and other Hungarian leaders. ISO; war in the Crimea. 919, 654; loss of Algeria. 379-373; Austria-Hungary and, 403; ques- tion of the integrity of i z s " . 4S9; position of. in Africa. 551; relation of Egypt to. 537; decay of the Ottoman Fmpirc. 601; the ruling class in. 609; the Eastern Question. 609; treatment of subject peoples. 603; revolt of the Servians. 604; Servia be- comes an autonomous principal- ity tributary to the Sultan. 0"04; and the Greek Mar of Independ- ence. oOl-dll ; calls upon Mehemet Turkey, continued Ali. of Egypt, for aid. 607; for- eign intervention, 607-610; battle of Navarino, 1897, 610; war with Russia, (887-1828, 610. 654; Treaty of Adrianople. 1899, 611; G ree ce becomes a kingdom, till; and the " holy places " in Pales- tine, 619; war with Russia. 619- 616; Treaty of Paris, 1856, 015; admitted to the European Con- cert. 616; from the 'Treaty of Paris to the Treaty of Berlin, 617-697; union ot' the Danubian Principalities into Roumania, (869, olS ; insurrection of Her- zegovina. 1875, 690; Berlin Memorandum. (876, 690; acces- sion of Abdul Hamid 11. 691; the Bulgarian atrocities. (876, 691-699; Servia and Montenegro declare war, 699-693; Russia de- clares war. (877, 693; siege of Plevna, 693; Treaty of San Stefano. (878, 694; Congress of Berlin. (878, revises Treaty of San Stefano. 695-696; union of the two Bulgarias, 696; Greece declares war against i (897 I, 635; revolution in. 636-644; Revolu- tion of July, t908, 636; restora- tion of the Constitution of (876, 637; aims ot the Young Turks. 6:>7-6;?S; Bulgaria declares its independence. October 5. (908, 631, 639; attitude of foreign Rowers, 638-640; Austria-Hun- gary annexes Bosnia and Her- zegovina. (908, 639; declares in favor of peace. 641 ; Austria- Hungary ami Bulgaria negotiate with. 1908 '. t'41 ; opening of the Turkish Parliament (1908), 649; counter-revolution of April, l'SO'.K 649; the Young 'Turks re- train control and depose the Sultan Abdul Hamid II, 649- 643; accession of Mohammed V. 1909, 648, Sit' 'The Disruption of the Ottoman Fmpirc and the Rise of the Balkan States. 601- 644 Tuscany, t'.e dominance of Aus- tria in. 9, 59-53; reforms in. 167; COOperates in insurrection against Austria. 173; recalls troops. 175; declared a republic. 181; restora- tion of the Grand Duke of, IS-; INDEX 827 Tuscany, rovtinut-r/. reaction in, after 18^8, 216} agreement ;>' Plombieres con- cerning! 223; restoration of the Grand Duke of, 226; annexed to Piedmont (1860), 230; govern- ment of, 377 Tyrol, The, 8 Uitlanders, and the Boers, 541 Ulster System, " tenant right " of land tenure, 475 Ultras, The (Prance, 1815), 12; Louis XVIII checks, 74-75; activity of, 78; triumph of, 82 Umbria, 235; annexation of, to Piedmont, 236 Union, Act of, 1800, 497 Union of South Africa (1909), 544- 545, 549 United Landtag, of Prussia, 151; conflict between Frederick Wil- liam IV and, 152 United States, cooperate with Eng- land to prevent the conquest of the Spanish-American colonies by the Holy Alliance, 64-65; the Monroe Doctrine in, 04-65; Ger- man emigration to, 241; and the Mexican Expedition, 277; inter- vention of, in Mexico, 279; Bis- marck on the policy of protection in, 311; Italian emigration to, 386; effect on England of the Civil War in, 461; Irish emigra- tion to, 470; and the Alabama award, 486, 591; and the Oregon dispute (18! t 6), 529; growth of, 547; at Congress of Berlin (188/,- 1885), 555; demand re- forms in the Congo, 557; recog- nize the Republic of Spain, 572; Spanish-American War (1898), 574; Jewish emigration to, 672; send Caleb Cushing to make a commercial treaty with China (18Jih), 686; send Commodore Perry to Japan (1853), 690; Treaty of, with Japan (IS.',//), 691; help to rescue the legations in Peking, 698; diplomatic nego- tiations of, with Russia concern- ing Manchuria, 700; Russo- Japanese Treaty at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, 1905, 702-703 Universities, ferment in German, 89; control of German, under Metternich, 41-42; in Prague, Universities, rontinued 400; representation of, in Great Britain, \\2, note; religious tests of, in Great Britain abolished, 483; in Ireland by the Birrell Art (1908), 516; State, founded in Belgium, 582; in Greece, 634; in Japan, 698 Unkiar Skelessi, Treaty of (18S8), 132 Valais, 585 Valencay, 47 Vatican, 379 Vaud, 585 Venetia, disposition of, by First Treaty of Paris (18U f ), 3; disposition of, by Peace of Villa- franca, ~'.i'i: not included in the new Kingdom of Italy (1801), 237; ceded to Italy by Austria (1866), 267, 376 Venice, 52; the leading city of Venetia, 172; declares itself a republic, 173; fall of (1849), 182 Verona, Congress of, 62-63; for- tress of, 173 Versailles, armistice of (1811), 299; peace of, 300-301; declared the capital (1871), 330; war be- tween Paris and the Government of, 333-336; capital transferred from (1880), 352 Viborg Manifesto (1906), 715 Victor Kmrnanuel I, King of Sar- dinia, government of, 54-55; ab- dicates, 61 Victor Emmanuel II, suc- ceeds his father as King of Sardinia, 181; accession and char- acter, 216; and the interview at Plombieres, 222-223; attitude of, toward the Preliminaries of Villafranca, 227; accepts the sovereignty of Modena, Parma, Tuscany, and the Romagna, 230; advances with his army into the Kingdom of Naples, 236; and Garibaldi, 237; all Italy (except- ing Rome and Venetia) united under his sovereignty (1861), 237; allied with Prussia in war against Austria (1866), 261 ; gains Venetia, 267; neutrality of, in Franco-German War, 294; takes possession of Rome, 301 ; programme of (1870), 377; and 828 INDEX Victor Emmanuel II, continv*cd the Papacy, 378-379; death of (1878), 380 Victor Emmanuel III, King of Italy, 1900 — , succeeds his father, Humbert I, 384; visited by President Loubet, of France f'l90! t ), 368; character of, 384; industrial expansion under, 385; increase of population under, 386; and the problem of emigra- tion under, 386; and the mon- archy in Italy, 387 Victoria (British colony), and the secret ballot, 4S4; responsible government granted to, 527; in the Australian Commonwealth, 532; legislation of, 536 Victoria, Queen of England, t8S7- 1901, accession and political education, 445; marriage to Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg, lSIfO, 445; and Hanover, 446; abolishes purchase in the army by royal ordinance, 1871, 482; proclaimed Empress of India (1877), ISO, 522; death of, 513 Victoria Nyanza, 552 Vienna, see Congress of Vienna; center of European affairs, is 15- 1848, 28; Conference of (1820), 44; industrial revolution in, 153; storm center of 1848, 169; riots in (18J/S), 170; Bohemian delegation sent to, 172; out- break in, 178; Treaty of (1864), 259, 593; Hungary governed from, 388; and the Delegations, 394; capital of Austria, 395, 397 Vilagos, Capitulation of, 180 Villafranca, Preliminaries of (1859), 225-226; annexations after, 228-939 Villele, Ministry of (1822-1828), 82, 88; fall of, 89 Villemain, 89 Villiers, and the Anti-Corn-Law League, 452 Vinogradoff, on the government of Russia and the condition of the peasantry (1902), 677 Virchow, 246 Vladivostok, founded by Russia as a naval base, I860', 682, 687; Russia secures the right to ex- tend her Trans-Siberian railroad Vladivostok, continued to, 697; Russian fleet at, 701; Japan defeats the fleet of, 702 Volta, 385 Vorparlament, 174 Waldeck, 327 Waldeck-Rousseau, leader of the "Bloc," 364; Prime Minister (1900-1902), speech at Toulouse concerning the question of Church and State, 365; and the Law of Associations, July 1, 1901, 366 Wales, representation of, in House of Commons, t815, 410; Glad- stonian vote in. 1886, 504; County Councils Act of 1888, 506; Old Age Pensions Law in, 516 Waflachia, part of the Ottoman Empire (1815), 601. See Danu- bian Principalities. Wallon Amendment, 345 Walpole, Sir Spencer, on the Eng- lish inventors, 408 and note; on the elections of 1793, 413; on the death penalty for offenses, 423, note; on Postal Savings Banks, 459; on Australia, 530 Warsaw, Grand Duchy of, 5; de- manded by Russia at Congress of Vienna, 6; division of, 8; be- comes Kingdom of Poland, 647, See Poland. Warsaw, Grand Duke driven from, 108; fall of, 109; capital of Poland, 647, 663 Wartburg Festival, 39-40, 119 Waterloo, 13, 129, 145, 170, 207, 406, 418 Watt, James, and the steam en- gine, 407. 721 " Wealth of Nations," by Adam Smith. 417 " Weekhi Political Register, The," published by Cobbett, 419 Wellington, capital of New Zea- land, 534 Wellington, Duke of, 408; and the Catholic Emancipation Act (1829), 197, i:s ; on parlia- mentary reform, 429; ministry of, put out of office, 430; asked to form a ministry, fails, 436; and the Chartist agitation in London, 449 West Indies, French possessions in, 371; slavery in the English INDEX 829 West Indies, continued colonies of, and its abolition, 439-440; English possessions in, 519; Dutch possessions in, 581; Danish possessions in, 594 Western Africa, 374 Western Australia, responsible government granted to, 1890, 528; in the Australian Common- wealth, 532 Westminster Abbey, Gladstone buried in (1898), 510; Living- stone buried in, 553 Wet, Christian de, in the South African War, 543 Wetherell, Sir C, speech against the Reform Bill, 433; on Second Reform Bill, 435 Weyler, 574 White Terror, The (France), 73- 74 Wilberforce,- and the anti-slavery agitation, 440 Wilhelmina, Queen of Holland, 1890— , 579 William I, King of Holland, 181/,- 1840, 102, 104; promulgates the Fundamental Law of 1815, 579 William II., King of Holland, 1840-18/ f 9, 579; and the Consti- tution of 18/,8, 580 William III, King of Holland, 1849-1890, 579; extension of the suffrage, 1887, 581 William I, King of Prussia, 1861- 1888, German Emperor, 1871- 1888, becomes Regent (1858), 247; succeeds his brother Fred- erick William IV, 247; char- acterization of, 248; and army reform (I860), 249-250; ap- points Bismarck President of the Ministry, 250; and the Danish War, 258; alliance with Italy against Austria, 261 ; at Koniggratz, 265; becomes Presi- dent of the North German Con- federation, 269; alliance with the South German States, 270; interview of, with Benedetti at Ems on the candidacy of Prince Leopold to the Spanish throne, 292; becomes German Emperor, 301 ; his powers as Emperor, 303-304; Emperor, 1871-1888, 305; and the Roman Catholic Church, 305-310; and Socialism, William I, continued 313, 315; attempts upon the life of, 313; alliance of the Three Emperors, 320; death of, 322 William II, King of Prussia and German Emperor, 1888 — , ac- cession and character of, 322; demands resignation of Bis- marck (1890), 323; policy of, since 1890, 323; his chancellors, 323; anti-Socialist policy aban- doned, 323; expansion of Ger- man industry and commerce under, 324; and the navy, 324; interview with, published in the London Telegraph, October 28, 1908, and demand for ministerial responsibility, 327 William IV, King of England, 1830-1837, accession of, 428; and the Third Reform Bill, 436; death of, 445 Wilson, son-in-law of President Gr£vy, 355 Windischgratz, commander of the troops in Prague, 175; conquers Vienna, 178 Witte, Sergius de, Minister of Finance and Commerce (1892), policy of, 674-676; appointed Prime Minister (1905), 712; resigns, 713; and the trans- formation of the mir (1909), 717 Wolseley, General, in Egypt, 559 Woman Suffrage, in England, Mill's speech in favor of, 464; present status of, 516-517; in New Zealand, 536; in Denmark, 594; in Norway, 600; in Fin- land, 718 Worth, battle of, 296 Wurtemberg, King of, at Congress of Vienna, 4; position in the Diet, 29-30; granted a constitu- tion (1819), 37; supports Aus- tria in the War of 1866, 263; joins Prussia in the Franco- Prussian war (1870), 294; be- comes part of the German Em- pire, 301 Yalu, battle of the, 695, 701 Yedo, 689; Mikado establishes the government at, 692; becomes Tokio, 692 Yokohama, 693 830 INDEX Yorkshire, gain in House of Com- Zemstvos, continued mans by Redistribution Act of by Alexander III. 671; Prince 1885, 4iH Sviatopolk Mirski and. 70S Young Italy, Society of, 1(51-163, Zola. Kmile. ami the Dreyfus Case, 933 360-363; body ot\ transferred to Young Turks. 636-6-14 the Pantheon (1908), 363 Zollverein, 14S; advantages of, 149 Zambesi River. Livingstone traees Zurich, Peaee of (1859), 988, 389; the course of. 559 Diet at, 5S4; constitution of the Zemstvos. established by Alex- canton of. on the initiative and ander II (1864), °"60; restricted the referendum, 5S9 AMERICAN HISTORICAL SERIES Under the editorship of Charles H. Haskins, Professor of History in Harvard University. A series of text-books intended, like the American Science Series, to be comprehensive, systematic, and authoritative. The series will aim to justify the title "American" not only by its American authorship but also by specifically regarding American educational needs. The treatment will be descriptive as well as narrative, and due attention will be given to economic and social conditions and to institutional development. Ready Europe Since 1815. By Charles D. HaZEN. School Edition. $3.00. Library Edition, ' $3-75- Historical Atlas. By. William K. SHEPHERD, Professor in Columbia University. hi preparation European History for Colleges. Middle Ages, Renaissance, and Reformation. By L. M. Larson, Assistant Professor in the University of Illinois. Europe Since the Reformation. By Guy Stanton Ford, Professor in the University of Illinois. Medieval and Modern Europe. By CHARLES W. COLBY, Professor in McGill University. The Renaissance. By PERDIHAHD Schevill, Professor in the University of Chicago. Europe in the XVII. and XVIII. Centuries. By Sidney B. Fay, Professor in Dartmouth College. History of Greece. By Paul SHOREY, Professor in the University of Chicago. History of Rome. By Jesse B. Cakter, Director of the American School of Classical Studies at Rome. History of Germany. . By GUY Stanton FORD, Professor in the University of Illinois. History of England. . By L. M. Larson, Assistant Professor in the University of Illinois. History of the United States. By FREDERICK J. Turner, Professor in Harvard University. History of American Diplomacy. By Carl Russell Fish, Professor in the University of Wisconsin. HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 34 West 33 d Street New York TEXT-BOOKS IN ECONOMICS ADAMS'S SCIENCE OF FINANCE "By Henry C. Adams, Professor in the University of Michigan. 573 pp. 8vo. (American Science Series.) $3.00. Edwin R A. Seligman, Columbia University, in "Political Science Quar- terly's—Will at once command attention ae a lasting contribution to eco- nomic literature. ... It is perhaps no exaggeration to say that Professor Adams is at the head of those American scholars who have grasped the essen- tial spirit of modern industrial life ; and it is likewise no exaggeration to claim for this volume the distinction of being one of the most original, the most sug- gestive, and most brilliant productions that have made their appearance in recent decades. DANIELS'S ELEMENTS OF PUBLIC FINANCE By "Wixthrop More Daniels, Professor of Political Econ- omy in Princeton University. 373 pp. 12mo. $1.50. £. Spenoer Baldwin, Professor in Boston University :— It is a piece of work well done both from a scientific and a literary point of view— a text-book with a style. . . . The lucid explanation of the financial system of the United States makes the book particularly valuable for the American student. SCOTT'S MONEY AND BANKING By W. A. Scott, Professor in the University of Wisconsin. Revised. 377 pp. 8vo. $2.00. H. E. Mills, Professor in Vassar College :— It is clear, comprehensive, and conservative. All iu all, it seems to me the best siugle book to use in- con- nection with a course on Money and Banking. SEAGER'S PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMICS By Henry R. Seager, Professor in Columbia University. Fourth Edition of Introduction to Economics. Revised and En- larged. 042 pp. 8vo. $2.26. David Kinley, University of Illinois:— It shows improvement with every edition and it always was a first-class book. SEAGER'S ECONOMICS, BRIEFER COURSE By Henry R. Seager, Professor in Columbia University. 467 pp. Large 12mo. £1.75. Intended primarily for those who wish to give only that amount of attention to economic theory that is essential to the intelli- gent discussion of practical economic problems. HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 34 West 33d Street New York STANDARD BOOKS IN ECONOMICS BUCHER'S INDUSTRIAL EVOLUTION Translated by Dr. S. M. WlCKETT, Lecturer in Toronto Univer- sity. 398 pp. 8vo. $2.50. The Outlook: — A work of prime importance to economic students. While German in the thoroughness or its scholarship, it is almost Gallic in its style, and is, for the most part, decidedly interesting reading. CLARK: THE LABOR MOVEMENT IN AUSTRALASIA By Victor S. Clark. 327 pp. 12mo. $1.50 net. Quarterly Journal of Economics:— A valuable work based upon investi- gation in the field. Treats judicially the various aspects of the Australian '-^or movement and estimates critically its significance. HOLLANDER AND BARNETT: STUDIES IN AMERICAN TRADE UNIONISM Edited by J. II. Hollander and G. E. Barnett, Professors In Johns Hopkins University. 380 pp. 8vo. $2.75 net. Twelve papers by graduate students and officers of Johns Hopkins University, the results of original investigations. McPHERSON : THE WORKING OF THE RAILROADS Bv Logan G. McPHERSON. 273 pp. 12mo. $1.50 net. Simply and lucidly tells what a railroad company is, what it does, and how it does it. MORE'S WAGE-EARNERS' BUDGETS A Study of Standards and Cost of Living in New York City. By Louise B. Moitrc. With a preface by Professor F. H. Gid- dings. 280 pp. 8vo. $2.50 net. A report of the first investigation carried on under the direc- tion of the Committee on Social Investigations at Greenwich House, a social settlement on the lower West Side of New York City, among workingmen's families of different races and occu- pations. ZARTMAN: THE INVESTMENTS OF LIFE INSURANCE COMPANIES By Lester W. Zartman, Instructor in Yale University. 259 pp. 12mo. $1.25 net. It analyzes investments and the earning power of the various assets of life insurance companies. The interest rate is calculated by a new and exact method. The author also discusses the rela- tions of the investments to social welfare, and the proper control of the immense assets of the companies. HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 34 West 33d Street New York \ HISTORY BOOKS IN THE HOME UNIVERSITY LIBRARY Absolutely new books. Dot reprints. " Excellent books, on topics oi reel interest by mon of woiid wide reputation. Of Till American History Tin: COLONIAL PERIOD r>\ Cbarlbs Mil. kan An- drews, Professor oi American History. Yale, Till: WARS BETWEEN B NGL AND u D LMERICA (1793-1815) By rBBooojti i.'. Smith, Pro- fessor of American History, Williams College. FROM JEFFERSON TO LIN- COLN (1818-1860) By William K£acDonald, Pro- fessor of History, Brown Uni- versity. THE CIVIL AYAH (1884- lS(i.-»> By Fredbric L. Paxson, Pro- fessor of American History, University of Wisconsin. RECONSTRUCTION V N" 1> UNION (1885-1S1S) By Pall Leland Hawortb, General History LATIN AMERICA By William K Sbepberd, Professor of History, Colum- bia, GERMANS' OF TO-DAY By Charles Tower. NAPOLEON By H. A. L. Fisher. Vico- Chancellor of Sheffield Uni- versity, author of Tkt AV- pub ition in Europe, THE DAWN OF HISTORY By J. L. Mvfrs. Professor of Ancient History, Oxford. HOME By W. Wakde Fowler, author of St THE GROWTH OF EUROPE By GrENVU I E CoiE. MEDIEVAL, EUROPE By H. W. C. Davis. Follow at Ralliol College, Oxford. THE HISTORY OF ENG- LAND By A. F. PoLLAKn. Professor Cloth bound, good paper, clear type. 256 pages per volume, bibliographies, indices, also maps or illustrations where needed. Each COmple and sold separately English History. Univer- oi London. IRISH NATIONALITY By Alio Stotoord Greek. CAN ADA By A. G. Brapuy. author of C - ': C.-;- Till: REN WSSAXCE By Eni i a Sn • ithor of A HISTORY OF FREEDOM OF THOUGHT By JokH B. Bi'kv. Regius Pro- fessor of Modem History, Cambridge. THE FRENCH RE VOLU- TION By Hilairs Bi A SHORT HISTORY OF WAR AND PEACE H Perris, author of ■ . etc. HISTORY OK OUR ( L885-1911) By G. P. Gooca. A picture" of the times. THE PAPACY AND ERN TIMES By Rev. William Bakky, D.D. POL VK EXPLORATION By Dr. W. S Brick. Leader ot the "Scotia" expedition. THE OPENING -UP OF AFRICA By Sir h. h. Johnston. THE CIVILIZATION OF CHIN v By 11. A. Cuts. Professor of Chinese, Cambridge. PEOP1 ESS VM» PRORLEMS OF INDIA By Sir T. W. HOLDERNESS, MODERN GEOGRAPHY By Pk. Marion Nkwuuun. MASTER M LRINERS By John R. Spears, author of • }1 ■ Our A'.:: v. OCEAN. A CtMioral Account of the Science of the Sea Sir Jobn Murray. TIME moving MOD- Th, THE Bx 3 50 c. net, p« Volume HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY 34 West 33d Street U\'14) NEW YORK Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. Neutralising agent: Magnesium Oxide Treatment Date: (y)^y gW PreservationTechnologies A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive ibeny Township. PA 16066 94111