Class. O-^:^ Book_^.Jd_5:i COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT iflSB^ ■or*'^ %Wed \osel Jf-/ I 1 i4.< ^ Vvtt' -^^ i;"? ' ^? / tbiv '^^ v.. A .'"' \Bosnia '^•Serq/evcc BAQK| s\-E A f i-o MODERN EUROPE BY CHARLES DOWNER HAZEN PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY NEW YORK HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY i^. ■ sO. Copyright, 1920, BY HENRY HOLT AND COMPANY . MAR 24 1920 ©CU56G160 PREFACE The present volume is, in large measure, a new edition of my Modern European History, altered, however, in important partic- ulars. Chapters on England in the Seventeenth Century, on France under Louis XIV and on the Industrial Revolution have been added, as well as one on the Conference of Paris and the present situation '"f the world. The book covers, therefore, approximately three enturies of European history and comes down to the close of the ear 1919. Numerous changes of detail have also been introduced 1 the line of greater condensation or expansion of various topics, he small nations have been brought together into a single chapter A'ith a view to greater simplicity and effectiveness of treatment. The attempt has been made to keep constantly in mind the vital, continuing factors in the evolution of modern Europe, to show clearly how the present is the product of the past. America has come to realize how ignorant she has been of Euro- pean history and of European conditions and how heavily that ignorance has cost her. Not only her citizens but also her official leaders, high and low, have frequently revealed, during the appalling crises of the last five years, a lamentable and dangerous lack of comprehension of things vital to their own welfare and to the welfare of the world. As a nation we have successfully " muddled through " the great entanglement of our times, but it is not safe for nations, any more than for individuals, to muddle, since the issue may not always be happ}', and is at any rate always purchased at too high a price. It ought to be clear even to the blind, atfter the events of the past five years, that the destinies of America and Europe are not dis- connected but are inextricably intertwined and will remain so. \\'hether we like it or not makes no difference with the situation. It behooves us, therefore, to inform ourselves as thoroughly as we can, concerning that situation, concerning the factors and the forces active in the world to-day. " History," said Napoleon, " is the torch of truth," and contemporary history offers, of course, the iv PREFACE best approach to a knowledge of the contemporary world. It must therefore form an essential and important part of our educational program. One runs little risk in prophesying, after the experience through which we have recently passed, that the history of modern Europe will occupy increasingly the attention of Americans in the years to come. No one who takes his citizenship seriously can admit that he knows nothing and cares nothing about it. He will care, if he cares for the welfare of his own country. • It is the privilege as well as the duty of every teacher and writer 'of modern European history to aid in this process of enlightenment. It is a work not only of necessary education but of elementary patriot- ism. The American citizen, if he is to think correctly on the prob- lems of his age, if he is to show intelligence and breadth of view in the exercise of his suffrage, must know, first the history of his own country, and then the history of the modern world outside. Nor is this a passing necessity of the hour ; it is a permanent requirement of the situation. Any school curriculum which makes no provision for this indispensable and richly rewarding study fails in a funda- mental obligation to America since, in that degree, it acquiesces in the un preparedness of the citizens of this country to meet and solve, with wisdom and with judgment, the great and vital questions of national policy. And no school ought to fail to give some attention to European history because it cannot give much. Better a little knowledge than none at all. Schools vary greatly in character, in resources, in the demands put upon them by the communities they serve. But where it is difficult to find time for a full year's course it may well be found possible to give one of a half a year or of three months. The present book, or any other text of a similar character and scope, admits of great flexibility in usage. If a teacher does not have the time to cover the entire ground he can with profit begin with 1789 or with 181 5 or with 1848 or with 1870, all, for various reasons, significant and natural dividing lines in modern history. Whichever one of these dates is taken as the point of departure the subsequent period will be found to present an essential unity, full of instruction and of suggestion of direct and obvious utility in equip- ping the boy or girl for life. For the study of this subject is not a mere self-indulgence, not a mere source of cultivation, though that were an amply sufficient reason for pursuing it, but is a pressing, PREFACE V urgent, and most practical requirement of the age. It is essential to the proper education of the American democracy. That democ- racy which is the best educated, not that which is merely the richest or the most populous, is destined to leadership in the modern world. C. D. H. Columbia University, December 22, 1919. CONTENTS CHAPTER I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII. XIII. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. INTRODUCTION PAGE England in the Seventeenth Century i France Under Louis XIV 27 Europe in the Eighteenth Century 49 The Old Regime in France 84 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION begrnnesigs of the revolution ii3 The Making of the Constitution 140 The Legislative Assembly 156 The Convention 175 NAPOLEON The Directory 208 The Consulate 236 The Early Years of the Empire 251 The Empire at its Height . . , : 273 The Decline and Fall of Napoleon 286 REACTION AND REVOLUTION The Congresses 308 The Industrial Revolution 331 An Era of Reform in England 339 Reaction and Revolution in France 366 Central Europe in Revolt 392 The Second French Republic and the Founding of the Second Empire 407 vii CONTENTS UNIFICATION CHAPTER PAGE XX. The Making of the Kingdom of Italy 419 XXL The Unification of Germany . 435 XXII. The Second Empire and the Franco-Prussian War . 445 ARMED PEACE XXIII. The German Empire 458 XXIV. France Under the Third Republic 483 XXV. The Kingdom of Italy since 1870 508 XXVI. Austria-Hungary since 1848 . 515 XXVII. England since 1868 527 XXVIII. The British Empire 563 XXIX. The Partition of Africa 583 XXX. The Small States of Europe 593 THE NEAR AND THE FAR EAST XXXI. The Rise of the Balkan States 610 XXXII. Russia to the War with Japan 628 XXXIIT. The Far East 642 XXXIV. Russia since the War with Japan 655 XXXV. The Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913 660 THE WORLD WAR XXXVI. The World War 679 XXXVII. Making the Peace 760 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PAGE James I 5 King Charles the First ... 6 John Hampden 9 Oliver Cromwell 13 Trial of Charles the First . . 17 Louis XIV 29 Vauban 30 Strasburg in the 17th Century . 33 Revocation of the Edict of Nantes 36 The Louvre and the Tuileries . 38 Royal Court of the Chateau de Versailles 41 Gardens and Park of Versailles in 1668 43 Colbert 45 Moliere 46 William Pitt, Earl of Chatham . 53 Peter the Great 71 Catherine II 76 Maria Theresa 82 The Palace of Versailles ... 86 The Coach Ornamented with Symbols in which Louis XVI went to His Corona- tion 88 The Parlement of Paris ... 99 Sieyes loi Protestant Worship in the Wil- derness 104 Montesquieu 107 Voltaire 108 Jean Jacques Rousseau . . . no Louis XVI 114 Coronation of Louis XVI, in the Cathedral of Rheims, 1775 . 116 Marie Antoinette 119 Turgot 121 Necker 122 The Opening of the States-Gen- eral 124 Costumes of the Three Orders . 126 Mirabeau 128 The Tennis Court Oath . . . 129 The Storming of the Bastile, July 14, 1789 131 The Session of August 4 . . . 133 The March of the Women to Versailles, October 5, 1789 . 136 The Palace of Versailles on Octo- ber 6, 1789 137 Lafayette 140 An Assignat 148 The Tuileries 152 The Return from Varennes. Arrival in Paris .... 143 The Jacobin Club 161 A Session at the Jacobin Club . 162 Liberty Cap and Pike . . . 163 Madame Roland 165 The Attack Upon the Tuileries, August 10, 1792 . . . . 170 The Prison of the Temple . . 173 Marat 174 Danton 177 Last Portrait of Louis XVI . . 178 The Execution of Louis XVI . 180 The Hall of the Convention . . 183 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 199 200 208 The Guillotine 187 The Execution of Marie Antoi- nette 191 MUe. Maillard, "Goddess of Reason" 194 Robespierre 197 The Fete of the Supreme Being, June 8, 1794 .... Card of Admission to the Festi val of the Supreme Being A Director in Official Costume Charles Bonaparte 210 Laetitia Ramolino, Napoleon's Mother 211 The House at Ajaccio in which Napoleon was Born . . . 212 The Bridge of Lodi 216 Napoleon at Areola 220 Removal of the Bronze Horses from Venice, May, 1797 Official Costume of a Member of the Council of the Five Hundred . . . Lucien Bonaparte . . Bonaparte, First Consul Josephine Josephine at Malmaison The Three Consuls . . The Duke d'Enghien . Napoleon Crowning Josephine Napoleon in the Imperial Robes Joseph Bonaparte, King of Naples Louis Bonaparte, King of Hol- land Elise Bonaparte, Princess of Lucca 263 Pauline Bonaparte, Princess of Borghese 264 Caroline Bonaparte, Duchess of Berg, and Marie Murat . 265 Joachim Murat, Duke of Berg . 266 224 232 233 236 237 242 248 249 254 255 261 262 PAGE Jerome Bonaparte 267 Napoleon Receiving Queen Louise of Prussia at Tilsit, July 6, 1807 270 Lord Nelson 271 Queen Louise of Prussia . . . 273 Empress Marie Louise . . . 284 Baron vom. Stein 2891 Pope Pius VII 291 Napoleon's Camp Bed . . . 293 Napoleon Returning to France, Decem-ber, 181 2 .... 295 Napoleon's War Horse, "Marengo" 298 The Duke of Wellington . . . 302 Bliicher 303 Napoleon Embarking on the " Bellerophon " .... 304 The Island of St. Helena . . . 304 Longwood, Napoleon's House at St. Helena 305 Napoleon's Tomb in the In- valides, Paris 306 Tomb of Napoleon at St. Helena 307 The Congress of Vienna . . . 309 Metternich 316 The Old Parliament Buildings, Burned in 1834 .... 341 Passing the Reform Bill in the House of Lords .... 348 Queen Victoria at the Age of Twenty 355 Richard Cobden 359 John Bright 361 Sir Robert Peel 362 Houses of Parliament, London. Begun 1840, completed 1852 363 Louis XVIII 367 The Construction of a Barricade 370 Street Fighting on July 28, 1830 373 Leopold I 377 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS PAGE Alexander I 379 Louis Philippe 383 Guizot 386 Louis Kossuth 393 Francis Joseph I 399 The Parliament of Frankfort . 403 Lamartine in 1832 408 Napoleon III 414 Empress Eugenie 417 Joseph Mazzini 420 Cavour 425 Garibaldi 431 Victor Emmanuel II ... . 433 William I 436 Bismarck 438 Moltke 442 Leon Gambetta 454 The Proclamation of William I as German Emperor, Ver- sailles, January 18, 187 i . 456 Dropping the Pilot 472 William II 476 Thiers 486 Marshal MacMahon .... 490 Jules Grevy 491 Jules Ferry 492 Sadi-Carnot 493 Emile Loubet 495 Alfred Dreyfus 497 Interior of the Chamber of Deputies 501 Theophile Delcasse 505 Francis Deak 517 William E. Gladstone . . . . 528 Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Beacons- field 546 Charles Stewart Parnell . . . 542 Queen Victoria at the Age of Seventy-eight 549 David Lloyd George . . . . 554 Herbert Asquith 555 Interior of the House of Commons 557 PAGE Interior of the House of Lords . 558 The Cabinet Room .... 560 Majuba Hill 576 Joseph Chamberlain . . . . 578 Paul Kruger 579 Lord Roberts 580 General Gordon 590 Lord Kitchener 591 Oscar II 601 The Congress of Berlin . . . 618 Abdul Hamid 11 626 Alexander II 632 Nicholas II 640 Francis Joseph 666 Sir Edward Grey 684 Facsimile of Article VII of the Treaty of 1839, which Guaranteed the Independ- ence and Perpetual Neu- trality of Belgium . . . 687 King Albert I 691 Marshal Joffre 693 Ruins of What was Once a Fa- mous Spot in Picturesque Verdun 708 Decorations Bestowed on the City of Verdun by France and Her Allies 709 The "Lusitania" leaving New York, May i, 1915 . , . 721 Bronze Medal Awarded to Men Who Helped sink the "Lusitania" 722 President Wilson before the Joint Session of Congress, Severing Diplomatic Rela- tions with Germany, Febru- ary 3, 1917 724 America's Declaration of War . 726 Arras Cathedral, After the War 732 The Ruins of Lens 733 xu LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS General AUenby Entering Jeru- salem 737 Marshal Foch 742 Ruins of Chateau-Thierry . . 744 Arrival of First American Troops in France .... 746 First German Prisoners Cap- tured by the Americans in the Saint-Mihiel Salient . 748 American Military Cemetery at Belleau Wood, France . . 752 Compiegne Forest, France . . 757 Croix de Guerre 758 Internment of the German Fleet 764 The Weimar Assembly . . . 768 Home-Coming Parade of the 27th Division, on Fifth Avenue, New York, March 25, 1919 773 President Poincare Opening the Peace Conference in Paris . 777 Premier Clemenceau . . . . 778 A Plenary Session of the Confer- ence of Paris 780 The Signing of the Treaty of Versailles in the Hall of Mirrors 783 Facsimile Pages of Treaty of Versailles with Signatures . 786 The People of Strasburg Cele- brating their Reunion with France 797 Expressing the National Grati- tude for Victory in the Magnificent Amphitheater of the Sorbonne .... 801 Delivery of Peace Treaty to the Austrian Delegates in the Chateau of Saint-Ger- main 812 The Chateau of Saint-Ger- main 813 MAPS PAGE Europe in 1740. (In color) Frontispiece Italy in the Eighteenth Century, 1770 58 The Growth of Prussia under Frederick the Great ... 61 Germany in 1789. (In color) . 68 The Partition of Poland ... 81 France Before the Revolution . 90 Europe in 1789. (In color) . . 120 France by Departments . . . 145 Northern Italy, Illustrating Bonaparte's First Campaign 222 Egypt and Syria 227 Europe in 181 1 277 Map Illustrating Campaigns of Napoleon 304 Europe in 1815. (In color) . . 314 Distribution of Races in Austria- Hungary 318 The German Confederation, 1815-1866. (In color) . . 322 The Unification of Italy. (In color) 428 The Growth of Prussia Since 181S Canada and Newfoundland . . Australia and New Zealand . . Africa, European Possessions in Africa in 1919. (In color) . . The Rise of the Balkan States (In color) Asia in 1914. (In color) . . . The Balkan States According to the Treaty of Bucha- rest Colonial Possessions of the European Powers in 19 10 (In color) Europe in 191 2. (In color) . Western Front, 1914 . . . Eastern Front The "Middle Europe" Scheme Italian Front Russia in 1918 After the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk . . . Western Front, 1918 . . , 447 568 572 587 588 616 652 676 680 690 694 701 714 735 741 750 \ MODERN EUROPE CHAPTER I ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY The history of the modern world is a record of highly varied activity, of incessant change, and of astonishing achievement. The lives of men have, during the last few centuries, become in- Richness of creasingly diversified, their powers have been greatly multi- modem life plied, their horizon has been enormously enlarged. New interests have arisen in rich profusion to absorb attention and to provoke exertion. New aspirations, new emotions have come to move the souls of men. Amid all the bewildering phenomena of a period rich beyond description, one interest in particular has stood out in clear and growing preeminence, has expressed itself in a multitude of ways and with an emphasis more and more pronounced, namely, the determination of the race to gain a larger measure of freedom than it has ever known before, freedom in the life of the intellect and spirit, freedom in the realm of politics and law, freedom in the sphere of economic and social relationships. , A passion that has prevailed so widely, that has transformed the world so greatly, and is still transforming it, is one that surely merits study and abundantly rewards it. Its operations constitute the very pith and marrow of modem history. Not that this passion was unknown to the long ages that preceded the modem period. The ancient Hebrews, the ancient Greeks and Romans blazed the way, leaving behind them a precious heritage of accomplishment and suggestion, and the men who made the Renaissance of the fifteenth century and the Reformation of the sixteenth contributed their imperishable part to this slow and difficult emancipation of the human race. But it is in modern times that the pace and vigor, the scope and sweep of this liberal movement have so 2 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY increased as unquestionably to dominate the age. Particularly have the last three centuries registered the greatest triumphs of this spirit. It is with these centuries that this book concerns itself. And ■ the book may well begin with a memorable and momentous struggle in one country, England. As the story proceeds we shall see the drama unroll upon a wider and more spacious stage until the whole world is ultimately involved. The seventeenth century was as critical for England as the eight- eenth was for France, as the nineteenth was for the United States and for many European countries, as the early twentieth was of^the ^'^'^^ for the world at large. In each liberty in some vital form was seventeenth ^t Stake and was Only saved and strengthened after terrific century struggles and widespread disorder and disturbance. Modern history is the record of this passionate and grim resolution of the race to be free and the freedom it has finally achieved is a cable of many strands, to the cording of which many nations have contributed, strands that are closely and intimately intertwined, each one adding to and drawing strength from the inextricable interlacing. Let no nation plume itself upon being the sole or chief author or artificer of this proud fabric. In freedom's house are many mansions, the product of the cooperative spirit of multitudes of men. Now it is the spirit of England which is touched with liame and nerved to heroism, now the spirit of France, now of Italy, now of America. The struggles in one country help forward the struggles in another. It has been a cooperative undertaking of many different peoples and in the unfolding of this progressive movement we see action and reaction continually interplay. A study of modern history ought to banish the grotesque and infantile provincialism of peoples, ought to broaden their outlook and their sympathies by the revelation which it brings that no nation and no people monopolize virtue or intelligence and that the qualities and talents which have exalted the destinies of the race have been widely diffused, that the ark of the true covenant has never been in the exclusive possession of any chosen people. The nations are all parts one of another. One of the most important agencies making for liberty in and t^he the modern period has been the parliamentary system of gov- pariiamen- emment. This has been the supreme contribution of Eng- ary sys em ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ political education of the world. So notable an achievement has been neither easy nor rapid. The free institutions ENGLISH POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS 3 , of England have been the growth of manj^ centuries, the product of slow time. The struggle for popular government forms the very warp and woof of English history and is charged with interest and excitement, made forever memorable and glorious by the resolute and desperate endeavor of a long line of heroes. This story, so replete with incident, so impressive because of the gravity of the issues involved, so stormy and arresting on its personal side by reason of the characters and activities of the leaders in the drama, cannot be summarized, either here or elsewhere. It must be studied in detail by any one who would know it, by any one who would care to see at how great a price the liberty which is our common inheritance has been bought. But a few features of the story may be alluded to. England had had a monarch since early times ; she had had a parliament since the thirteenth century ; she had had her Magna Charta, formulating and sanctioning certain rights, since 12 15. These were, however, but the beginnings of things. Into what form and stature they might grow, how much of true liberty they might guarantee, remained to be seen, and long remained. In the relation and adjustment to each other of monarch and Parliament lay the crucial point. Which should have the greater weight in the state, and how great that weight should be was the all-important, decisive question. The great crisis in the struggle between personal monarchy and parliamentary government began with the advent of the House of Stuart to the throne of England in 1603, continued, amid ex- Advent of traordinary vicissitudes, all through the seventeenth century the House and was carried over into the eighteenth. The outcome is well known. Parliament finally established its unquestioned supremacy in the state, not only within the legislative sphere, but also over the executive, for by making ministers directly and constantly responsible to it and accountable for every act of the King, it rendered itself omnipotent. There only remained for the nineteenth centurv the question as to whether Parliament itself should represent a privileged class or should represent the people. The solution given was the triumph of democracy. The English Revolution of the seventeenth century had no such comprehensive sweep as the French Revolution of the eighteenth, and yet the student, in traversing its bewildering mazes, is struck 4 ENGLAND IN THE. SEVENTEENTH CENTURY over and over again by many. astonishing points of similarity both in matters of great moment and in matters of detail. Few intel- lectual exercises within the range of historical study could be more g .. instructive or rewarding than an analytical comparison of and French these two great movements in the two most important coun- Revoiutions ^^.-^g ^^ western Europe. It was because the English constitu- tion was destined to be widely studied and imitated abroad that this long and bitter and sanguinary dispute as to what that constitution was and ought to be was of direct interest not only to Englishmen, but to the rest of the world as well. The English Revolution, although appearing local and insular as compared with the French, was so in appearance only. Too much that was of inestimable value to the world in general la}^ upon the outcome of that struggle for it ever to be considered parochial. JAMES I AND THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS Trouble began with the arrival from Scotland of the first Stuart monarch, James I, to take the seat left vacant in 1603 by the death James I ©^ ^^6 Great Elizabeth. This is one of the indisputable turning (1603-1625) points in history. James reigned from 1603 to 1625 and the tone and temper of his rule may safely be imagined from a sentence in one of his numerous and maladroit speeches : "As it is atheism and blas- phemy to dispute what God can do, so it is presumptuous, and a high contempt in a subject to dispute what a king can do, or to say that a king cannot do this or that." Here was a challenge sufficiently explicit and, indeed, James never left his people in doubt as to his purposes and intentions. He claimed more extensive powers than any of his predecessors, a more personal and exclusive authority. As Englishmen were by nature tenacious of their rights and blunt in their assertion of them, as they were temperamentally little dis- posed to accept a role of passive obedience, there was here ample material for contention, and, from the moment James first appeared on English soil until his death twenty-two years later, contention raged over the whole field of the national life. Deep was the alarm, deeper the resentment aroused among the English people by the policies of the King and by his manifest intention to exalt the throne, to debase the parliament, and to subvert the liberties of his subjects. But no open and violent breach occurred, so slow JAMES THE FIRST were Englishmen to that wrath which brooks no compromise and which quits the field only when the enemy has been beaten to the dust. That irreparable breach, that indignation that asked and gave no quarter, were reserved for the reign of James' son. "James," says the historian Green, had "destroyed that enthusi- asm of loyalty which had been the main strength of the Tudor throne. He had disenchanted his people of their blind faith in the monarchy by a policy both at home and abroad which ran counter to every national instinct. He had alienated alike the noble, the gentleman, and the trader. In his feverish desire for personal rule he had ruined the main bul- warks of the monarchy." In other words, James had sowed the wind ; it was reserved for his suc- cessor to reap the whirl- James I wind. After a painting by E. Lutterell. CHARLES I AND PARLIAMENT Charles I had some of the qualities of a good ruler. He was hard- working, methodical, dignified, thrifty. He had a fine taste for art and literature. Tasso, Ariosto, the "Faerie Queene," above charies I all Shakespeare, were his delight. But he possessed a narrow (1625-1649) and obstinate mind. He had no range of vision, no firm broad grasp of public questions. He was an unqualified egotist, showing no spark of gratitude to those who served him, no trace of constancy in friendship. He was an adept in double-dealing. "He was so constituted by nature," wrote the Venetian ambassador, "that he 6 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY never obliges anybody either by word or act." And he had the worst fault a statesman can have — he never saw things as they really were. He did not understand the English people, a failing character- istic of every monarch of the Stuart line. The Stuarts, as was said of the later Bourbons, learned nothing and forgot nothing. Charles lived in a world of dreams and theories and illusions, which were sadly out of harmony with the hard, blunt facts of life around him. He had King Ch,\rles the First From the painting by Vandyke, in the Gallery of the Louvre. a talent for intrigue but he was blind to the plain signs of the times. His confidence in himself was complete. Charles I held the same conception of the divine origin of his power as had his father. He held the same opinion that a single person, the monarch, and not the Parliament, was the central, policy of vital organ of the state, that the initiative in government should come from the throne and not from the people or the people's elected representatives. Unfortunately for him, Parliament Charles I CHARLES I AND PARLIAMENT 7 was at this very time becoming more conscious of its strength than ever before, more determined to maintain its rights and even to expand them. A clash was therefore inevitable. It began at once, and grew rapidly in intensity. Parliament refused to vote the money demanded by the King and his unpopular minister, Strafford, unless Charles would recognize that the ministers were responsible to Parliament, in other words, that the control over the administration in domestic and foreign affairs should in last resort rest with Parlia- ment. This demand, intolerable in Charles' eyes, with his ideas of kingship, was rejected. Unable to get the necessary money in a legal way, by grant of Parliament, Charles resorted to methods luegai } long regarded by Englishmen as absolutely illegal, namely, by sections forced loans, which meant arbitrary taxation by the sovereign, and arbitrary arrest in case of refusal, or punishment of the stubborn by the quartering of soldiers upon them. Resistance was widespread. Great nobles, country gentlemen, tradesmen refused to comply with the exactions as illegal and were flung into prison or otherwise per- secuted or harassed. Strafford pressed the loans with a fierce energy that only inflamed the public mind and accumulated stores of wrath that were ultimately to be wreaked upon himself as well as upon the monarch he was serving. But such methods of filling the treasury, however vigorously pursued, were inadequate to the demands of the King who had embarked upon a foreign policy that was both expensive and disastrous, and Charles was forced to summon Parliament forced t(f once more in order to get the necessary money. It proved to summon be one of the most remarkable Parliaments in the history of England. Those who had opposed the King, those who had suffered imprisonment were enthusiastically elected to it. A long list of names which were to become dear to the lovers of liberty and of constitutional guarantees everywhere were on its rolls, those of Sir John Eliot, John P>Tn, John Hampden, and many others, masters of eloquence, skilled parliamentarians, exemplars of civic courage and love of country. Among them sat a man, new to Parliament, and destined in time to succeed these earlier champions as the most famous leader in this momentous chapter of history now beginning, Oliver Cromwell. Charles wanted money and assumed a high tone in demanding it. Parliament wanted a redress of grievances and adequate guarantees 8 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY that the abuses of the past few years should cease and should never be renewed. Parliament went its way, subjecting to its scrutiny and criticism the entire field of public affairs, civil and religious, legislative and executive. This Parliament lasted from March, 1628, The Petition to March, 1629. Its most notable act was the drawing up of of Right a Petition of Right, one of the great documents in the history of popular government. It recited once more and reaffirmed the laws which forbade arbitrary taxation, forced loans and benevolences, arbitrary imprisonment without due process of law, the billeting of soldiers on citizens in time of peace. This Petition of Right, which ranks along with Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights in English constitutional history, was, in essence, a remorseless arraignment of the conduct of Charles I. Charles was forced to accept it, with all its emphatic limitations upon the power of the monarch. Then the King got his supplies, voted enthusiastically by the Parliament. It seemed as if Parliament's sole and exclusive right to exercise the taxing power was now safe and beyond dispute. Not at all. The danger had but just begun. Charles, having gained his imme- diate end, the vote of supplies, and angry at the independent and censorious attitude of Parliament and at the humiliation involved in the Petition of Right, now dissolved Parliament, and determined not ^^ ^. to call another. For eleven years he adhered to this resolution. The King . ■' rules without From 1629 to 1640 no Parliament met in England. This was Pariiament ^ period of Unmitigated, autocratic rule. Practically, Charles was an absolute monarch, doing what he liked and as he liked. It was a period in which the liberties of Englishmen were largely in abeyance, in which autocracy in state and church reigned practically unchecked, a period of gloom and terror. Arbitrary taxes of one kind or another were imposed, ferocious sentences were visited upon the recalcitrant, the rights guaranteed by the Petition were rendered a hollow mockery. Sir John Eliot and eight members of Parliament were thrown into the Tower, where Eliot shortly died, one of the great martyrs in this fierce struggle for liberty. But Charles' opponents were undaunted and fought on as best they could. One of the outstanding incidents in this perilous time was that furnished by John Hampden. One of the ways in which Charles I tried to get money from his subjects without asking the consent of their representatives was the exaction of funds from them for the building of ships. The HAMPDEN'S OPPOSITION TO THE KING John Hampden and ship-money King maintained that this was not a tax but was simply a payment for exemption from the obUgation of personally defending the coun- try. John Hampden, a well-to-do country gentleman, refused to pay his assessment. His object was to force the matter into the courts and to arouse the attention of all England to the danger in which she stood by compelling a judicial decision as to the legality or illegality of the King's policies. Though Hamp- den was assessed only twenty shillings, he saw and he was resolved that every one should see that in those twenty shillings of "ship- money" lay the whole question as to whether the King or the House of Commons should be supreme in England. For if the King might take what money he pleased, then he could do as he pleased, then he could govern in opposition to the wishes of the nation, indefinitely. Hampden lost his case but his action was enormously educative upon public opinion and in p^^jgi^ the end contributed greatly of the to the cause of the Parlia- *^°"'^' ment. Of the twelve judges only two voted in his favor. Three others supported him on merely technical grounds, not on the merits of the case. Seven declared in favor of the King and laid down the broad principle that no law for- bidding arbitrary taxation could bind the royal will. "I never read or heard," said one of the judges, "that lex was rex, but it is common and most true that rex is lex." Finch, the Chief -Justice, summed up the opinion of the court in the statement: "Acts of Parliament to take away the King's royal power in the defense of his kingdom are void ; they are void Acts of Parliament to bind the King not to command the subjects, their persons, and goods, and I say their money too, for no Acts of Parliament make any difference." If this decision of the judges were accepted by Englishmen as the law of the land there need never be another Parliament in England, for the King could raise what money he chose and consequently John Hampden From a print by I. Houbraken. 10 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY could govern as he chose, without let or hindrance. But by their very clearness and explicitness these judges greatly contributed in the end to the diminution of the royal power. Englishmen would have no such monarchy as that, without at least a struggle. This struggle they now had and it was highly sensational in character and left the monarchy provisionally in ruins and permanently trans- formed. For while monarchy, temporarily wrecked, was later restored, it never became again the institution it had been. At this exceedingly complicated chapter of English history we can only glance. The reader must go elsewhere for any adequate description of the English Civil War and the amazing convulsions which caused England to rock and reel for twenty years. Every aspect of the national life was involved, every aspect changed. Religion was joined with politics in this wild and frenzied contest, religious passions heightened the flames ignited by political passions and scorching, indeed, was the ensuing conflagration. It is an absorbing and lurid story. But we are interested here in following one thread only in this wondrously tangled skein, the fortunes of King and Parliament in their struggle for supremacy and control. A mere summary of events must suflfice. In 1640, after ruling for eleven years without a Parliament, Charles was forced to call The Short that body again because he was involved in a war with Scot- Parliament la^nd and needed more money than he could get by the various arbitrary processes to which he had been resorting. This body is known as the Short Parliament, as it lasted only twenty-three days, when it was dissolved, so greatly was the King irritated at its attitude. But Charles' needs continuing, he was again forced to call the people's representatives, and in November, 1640, there assembled the Long Parliament, so-called because it continued in exist- Pariiament encc, in One form or another, for thirteen years. It was summoned, immediately apparent that the heat of controversy had not cooled. Parliament would not vote a penny either for the Scotch war or for anything else without first squaring accounts with the King. It prosecuted his two chief agents of oppression in state and church, the Earl of Strafford, and, later. Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, and brought about their execution. It demanded a comprehensive redress of grievances and it raked the conduct and policy of the reign with a devastating fire of criticism. It drew up a Grand Remonstrance, a popular manifesto setting forth the whole CHARLES AND THE FIVE MEMBERS ii dark case against the monarch and asserting the rights of ParUament. The King, infuriated, resolved to crush this mounting spirit of opposi- tion once for all. On January 4, 1642, accompanied by a band „, . of cavaliers, armed with swords and pistols, Charles I went to and the Westminster Hall, resolved to seize five members of the House niembers of Commons who were most obnoxious to him. Among these of the House were Pym and Hampden. Leaving his band of "rufiflers" outside, Charles, attended by his nephew, crossed the inviolable threshold of the House of Commons which no king might lawfully cross, advanced up the chamber to the Speaker's chair and demanded the five members, asking the Speaker if they were there. Speaker Lenthall's reply has remained historic and will long so remain. "May it please your Majesty," he said, kneeling before him in all outward reverence, "I have neither eyes to see nor tongue to speak in this place, but as the House is pleased to direct me." "Well, well," Charles retorted angrily, "'tis no matter. I think my eyes are as good as another's." Looking over the assembly he discovered that his intended victims were not present. They had, indeed, been hurried out by their fellow members at the first rumor of the King's approach. "I see," said Charles at last, "all my birds are flown, but I do expect you will send them to me." If they did not, he added, he would take his own method of getting them. He then withdrew from the House amid shouts of "Privilege! Privilege!" from the indignant members. He went out, says an eye-witness, "in a more discontented and angry passion than he came in." ENGLAND'S CIVIL WAR This attempt of the King to coerce Parliament aroused deep and universal horror and resentment. The people of England were inexpressibly shocked in their innermost feelings. So raw an outrage upon law and decency was a natural incitement to civil war. As a matter of fact, the King, in crossing that sacred threshold, had really crossed the Rubicon. A week later the five returned, in tri- Beginning umph, to the chamber amid the frenzied acclamations of the °^ ^^^^ ^^^ people. Charles withdrew from London and a few months later on the evening of a stormy day, August 22, 1642, raised the royal standard in the courtyard of the castle that crowned the hill at Nottingham. England's Civil War began. The question as to 12 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY who should rule the island that was set in the silver sea was to be answered by the primitive and immemorial process of the race in settling its high disputes, namely, by the appeal to force. The war between King and Parliament lasted several years and brought in its train the most surprising changes. As England had The King's ^o Standing army each side was obliged to get recruits as best supporters [^ could and to train and equip them as rapidly as possible. The King was supported in general by a majority of the members of • the House of Lords and by a strong minority of the Commons as well. Catholics and High Church Episcopalians were in his ranks. The majority of the Commons, the Presbyterians, and the dissenters The from the Established Church, particularly the advanced Independents Puritans or Independents, as they were called, were on the side of Parliament. These Independents or Separatists were destined shortly to become the leaders of the "Rebellion," as the King called it. They rejected both the Episcopal and the Presbyterian form of church organization and held that each community should organize and control its own church. They were Congregationalists. Having been persecuted in the past some of them had fled for refuge to Hol- land and later to America. The Pilgrim Fathers and the Puritans who founded the colony of Massachusetts Bay were of this class. While the term " Puritan" was frequently used very loosely to cover most Protestants, whether Low Church Episcopalians, Presbyterians, or Independents, it gradually became especially identified with the last, as the most radical reformers in religious matters and in social usages. The revolution which was now impending is known in his- tory as the Puritan Revolution. For two years the Civil War dragged on a doubtful course, with ups and downs for either side. Then occurred a change. The parliamentary cause found an incomparable leader, a man emerging rapidly from the confusion of the times, singularly endowed for just such work as the times demanded, a man destined to go far in the military and civil contentions of his age, and to play so commanding and unique a part as to give his name to this period of English history. "I was by birth a gentleman, living neither in any considerable height nor yet in obscurity," such was Oliver Cromwell's account of himself. Cromwell came of an important country family, widely connected, and long conspicuous for sturdy loyalty and public spirit THE EARLY LIFE OF CROMWELL 13 Cromwell His father and three of his uncles had sat in the later Parliaments of Elizabeth. John Hampden was his cousin. Born in 1599 he had the grammar school education of his native town, Huntingdon, ^^^j jj^^ and at the age of seventeen he entered Cambridge University, of diver The day of his matriculation was the very day on which Shakespeare died at Stratford-on -Avon. But the spirit of the Renaissance, so marvelously person- ified in the great poet, never breathed upon young Crom- well. The radiance of art and literature left him cold. He was the offspring of a very different spirit, the authentic and faithful child of Puritanism and for him, as some one has said, "a single vol- ume comprehended all literature, and that volume was the Bible." Intense re- ligiousness, extraor- O1.1VER Cromwell dinary energy of character, independence of judgment, fearlessness in conduct were early seen to be outstanding features of his personality. He had been a member of several Parliaments, but it was the Civil War that first brought him into prominence. It revealed the fact that he was a born soldier and consummate leader of men. Cromwell saw the defects of the parliamentary army, the rea- reorganizes son why it was not conquering the King's aristocratic troops. ^^^ ^^^^ "A set of poor tapsters and town apprentices," he said, "would never fight against men of honor." They must be fired with an emotion equal to that of the chivalry of the Cavaliers and that emotion must be religious enthusiasm. Cromwell proceeded to organize first his regi- 14 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY ment, and after that the army, on a system new in military history. " I raised such men," he later related to Parhament, "as had the fear of God before them, as made some conscience of what they did ; and from that day forward, I must say to you, they were never beaten, and whenever they were engaged against the enemy, they beat continually." Here we have the war in a nutshell and the reason for its success. No swearing, no drinking was tolerated among Cromwell's troops. Men intensely in earnest, God-fearing, Bible-reading, hating impiety in every form, fond of prayer-meetings, they constituted, as Cromwell said with pride, "a lovely company." They were the best-trained soldiers in Europe. In discipline and skill and valor Cromwell's "Ironsides" profoundly impressed the imagination of that day and their desperate courage and fiery zeal swept all before them. Memorable, indeed, were their victories at Marston Moor (1644) and at Naseby (1645), under the inspiring Marston leadership of this Huntingdon gentleman-farmer, now become Moor and " a.n almost ideal general of cavalry — furious in the charge, Naseby ° ^ ° rapid in insight, wary, alert, and master of himself," as one of his biographers justly says. "God made them as stubble to our swords. . . . Give glory, all the glory, to God," wrote Cromwell concerning Marston Moor. "God our Strength" was the watch- word of the day of Naseby. "He seldom fights without some text of Scripture to support him," wrote a chaplain of this pious and pulverizing general. Beneath the impact of warriors energized as were these, every one of whom considered himself a divinely appointed agent for the chastisement of the wicked, the royal armies were scattered like Defeat chaff. The forces of Parliament were everywhere victorious. of Charles jj^ j5^y Charles was driven to take refuge with the Scotch army, which forthwith surrendered him to Parliament. The Civil War was over. With the surrender of the person of the King the crisis was safely passed. Royal pretensions were defeated, the danger of absolute rule was averted, Parliament was supreme. But a new crisis began at once to develop, intricate, obscure, fateful. No sooner had the war ceased than party spirit in Parliament revived in full vigor. Political warfare as bitter and destructive as the military warfare raged in England for several years. Its course can only be summarized here, most inadequately. Revolutions do not quickly subside but are TRIANGULAR NEGOTIATIONS 15 wont to pass through several phases each more extreme than its predecessor, and England was at this moment in mid-revolution. And first, there was a triangular contest between the King, the Parliament, and the army. The King, though a prisoner, had many supporters and represented the principle of authority based The King the upon centuries of history. Parliament represented the prin- Parliament, ciple of representative government and favored making the ^°** ^^^ *"°^ Presbyterian form of church organization and doctrine the established and sole religious system of the land, to which all should be compelled to conform. The army demanded the effective guarantee of civil liberty and, what was new and startling, real religious toleration. It was opposed to Presbyterian domination in the state, as it was opposed to the restoration of the monarch to this throne. The toleration praised by Cromwell and by Milton, a greater intellect, excluded, it is true, the Catholics from its protecting circle, but was broad and spacious enough for all shades of Protestantism and represented a great advance upon the previous religious thought of Englishmen. Whether in action these Independents would live up to the liberality of their thought remained, of course, to be seen. Events quickly precipitated memorable actions which landed the army in the saddle and made the idol of the army the real ruler of England. In 1648 Parliament was negotiating with the captive King with a view to his restoration to power on the basis of his acceptance of Parliament's view concerning religious organization. Charles, a born intriguer, spun out the negotiations, exultant at the prospect of splitting his enemies. At the same time Parliament showed its fierce intolerance in passing an ordinance for the suppres- sion of blasphemies and heresies, which Cromwell had long opposed. This ordinance decreed the penalty of death to those who held certain opinions on doctrinal matters, and imprisonment of all who held that church government by Presbytery was anti-Christian or unlawful. The army, vigorously opposed to any restoration of the King and independent in its religious feelings, was indignant at the turn things were taking. Its formal remonstrances passed unheeded. Then it struck, and struck hard. On the morning of December 6, 1648, Colonel Pride was stationed with a body of troops at the „ . . , „ 11- Pndes Purge door of the House of Commons for the purpose of excludmg such members of the House as were displeasing to the army officers. Over forty members were arrested and on the following day more i6 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY than sixty others, and many who were not arrested were prevented from entering the Chamber. This outrage is known in history as Pride's Purge. There was no trace of legality in it. It was an act of pure mihtary violence and it was nothing else. "By what right do you act?" a member asked. "By the right of the sword," is said to have been the response. The army installed itself in the place of power, and power uncontrolled save by its own will. The whole previous system of English government reeled under the terrific blow. Parliament and Monarchy were scorned and flouted by the soldiery. The House of Commons continued in its mutilated state, a mere phantom, entirely dependent upon the army. By the mon- strous exclusion of over a hundred and forty members it now counted only fifty or sixty regular attendants and was called in the coarse language of the people the " Rump." It was this body which, under orders from the army, created a High Court of Justice to try the King. On January 20, 1649, the trial began. Charles refused to make any defense, flatly deny- execution of ing the authority of the Coyft. The Court consisted of only the Charles I bitterest enemies of the King, for only such would consent to act as members of it. On the 27th, Charles was sentenced to death as a tyrant and a traitor to his country. Three days later he was beheaded in front of his palace of Whitehall, an enormous crowd looking on. In this supreme and awful moment he bore himself with unflinching fortitude. Lord Morley, in his life of Cromwell, characterizes the High Court of Justice that did this famous and melancholy deed as neither better nor worse than an ordinary drum- head court-martial, and he adds: "The two most sensible things to be said about the trial and execution of Charles I have often been said before. One is that the proceeding was an act of war, and was just as defensible or just as assailable, and on the same grounds, as the war itself. The other remark, though tolerably conclusive alike by Milton and by Voltaire, is that the regicides treated Charles precisely as Charles, if he had won the game, un- doubtedly promised himself with law or without law that he would treat them. The author of the attempt upon the Five Members in 1642 was not entitled to plead punctilious demurrers to the revo- lutionary jurisdiction. From the first it had been My head or thy head, and Charles had lost." TRIAL OF CHARLES THE FIRST Trial of Charles the First A, the King; B, the lord president, Bradshaw; G, table with mace and sword; H, benches for the Commoners ; /, arms of the Commonwealth, which the usurpers have caused to be affixed ; K, Oliver Cromwell ; M, spectators. i8 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY THE COMMONWEALTH AND CROMWELL The monarch had fallen, but had the monarchy? Charles I left a son, known in history as Charles II. But Charles II was not des- Engiand fined to begin his reign until many eventful years had inter- a republic vcned. The " Rump Parliament " as the mutilated fragment of the House of Commons was derisively called, voted that henceforth England should be a Commonwealth, that is, a republic, instead of a kingdom. The old institutions were now defunct and England was launched upon a series of constitutional experiments which proved difificult and short-lived. The monarch was gone, the House of Lords had ceased to exist, the House of Commons, such as it was, was the center of authority, and was to work in conjunction with a Council of State, composed of members of the House and of generals of the army. This Council of State, consisting of forty-one indi- viduals, was to be the executive. But during the period the real ruler was Oliver Cromwell, the idol of the army. It had been the army that had effected this trans- formation of the government ; it was the army that now formed V^^ ^ the real center of power. The army had been essentially the wealth creation of Cromwell and it was the strongest military force the*army'^ in Europe. Had the republic not had the army behind it, it could not have long endured, as unquestionably the great majority of Englishmen were monarchists to the core. The govern- ment of the Commonwealth was governed by a minority. The new regime found itself encompassed on all sides with enemies. Disruptive passions were everjrwhere unloosed ; wild ideas were The Irish ^^ ^^^ ^^^' ^^^ three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and support Ireland were falling apart ; a general dissolution of the hariesn state and of society seemed impending. Ireland proclaimed Charles II as King and Irish Catholics and Irish royalist Protestants were organizing to overthrow the Commonwealth. The Scotch were tending in the same direction. Meanwhile foreign countries, horrified by the execution of the King, looked askance and glowered. Through this mass of dangers Oliver Cromwell, the man of the hour, hacked his way with swiftness and success and made Britaim more unified than she had ever been, more powerful, and more feared and respected abroad. The immediate point of danger was Ireland and thither Cromwell was dispatched. He fell upon the unhappy CROMWELL IN IRELAND AND SCOTLAND 19 land like a thunderbolt. His campaign opened with an incident that has left a deep stain upon his name, the storming of Drogheda (Sep- tember 3, 1649) or rather the "massacre" of two thousand _ „ people, after the storming, and in a frenzy of rage, quarter being conquers refused. " I am persuaded," said Cromwell, after the butchery, ^'■^'*°'* "that this is a righteous judgment of God upon these barbarous wretches, who have imbrued their hands in so much innocent blood ; and that it will tend to prevent the effusion of blood for the future. Which are the satisfactory grounds to such actions, which otherwise cannot but mark remorse and regret." This victory was followed by a rapid series of others and Ireland was thoroughly conquered, and with ruthless severity. Then she was pitilessly punished. A large part of the land was confiscated and handed over to Englishmen and the native landowners became fugitives in the poor and desolate parts of their country. Cromwell sowed in Ireland a plentiful supply of dragon's teeth. His "settlement" of affairs has been hated ever since with a deep and abiding hatred. To this day the peasants of Ireland speak of the "Curse of Cromwell." Scotland's turn came next. Charles II had landed there from France, whither he had fled upon the death of his father. The whole Scottish nation was behind him and a large part of the Defeats the people of England were only waiting until it should be safe Scotch for them to support his cause. Cromwell's conquest of Scotland was even more rapid than that of Ireland. At Dunbar, on Septem- ber 3, 1650, he seized his opportunity and added to his roll of victories another resounding name. His army advanced to the charge with the watchword, "The Lord of Hosts." The clash was fierce but lasted only an hour. Above the roar of the battle Cromwell was heard shouting, "Let God arise, let his enemies be scattered," and as the tide turned he sang the 117th Psalm, "O praise the Lord, all ye nations ; praise him, all ye people." The victory was complete, 3000 of the enemy killed on the field, thousands more in the sub- sequent chase, 10,000 prisoners, all the artillery taken, 15,000 stand of arms, 200 flags. A year later another battle and another victory, that of Worcester, and Cromwell sheathed his sword, his military career at an end. Charles II fled to the Continent, there to spend a decade eating the bitter bread of exile. 20 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY "Peace hath her victories no less renowned than war," sang Milton in the sonnet which he wrote at this time in honor of the Lord-General. Cromwell was now fifty-two years of age and at the height of his power and prestige. His return to London was one long triumphal journey. The House of Commons formally thanked him for his services, voted him a large income and placed at his disposal Hampton Court, erected by the magnificent Woolsey in his Cromwell's ^^^'^ ^^ pride. Cromwell was now virtually dictator, so vast commanding was his influence, though technically he was only a member of posi ion ^y^^ Council of State. He bore himself with modesty and for more than a year and a half he cooperated energetically with the other members of that body in the pressing and thorny tasks of restoring order in a state whose life had been shaken and torn by the unexampled convulsions of the time. Essentially conservative by nature, he labored incessantly for a sound and just "settlement of this nation," a task bristling with difficulties, a task to which he devoted the remainder of an arduous and singularly unselfish life, a problem for which, however, he was never destined to find a solution. To evolve order from chaos requires more time than was to be vouchsafed the leader of the Ironsides. The ideal of the " Commonwealth Men" was a high one, that of a free state controlled by the elected representatives of the people and guaranteeing liberty of thought and speech, but the difficulty in the way of the realization of this ideal lay in the fact that were a new Parliament freely elected it would probably prove a royalist body. The people of England had resented the arbitrary conduct of the King, Charles I, but they were monarchists still, not republi- cans. They believed neither in a Commonwealth, nor in reli- opposed gious liberty, the very things in which the army passionately to military believed. Cromwell and his friends had no desire to set up government '^ government by the army. They wished government by civil- ians, government by an executive and a Parliament. But Cromwell did not for a moment desire an executive representing Parliament and dependent upon it, in other words the system which, after prolonged contentions and many fluctuations of fortune, has finally been established in England. He wished the executive to be independent, the Parliament to be independent, both to be coordinate, neither to be subject to the other. Whereas the fundamental feature of the parliamentary system as we see it in operation to-day is the fusion CROMWELL AND PARLLAMENT 21 of the executive and the legislature, Parliament really choosing the executive and controlling it. Cromwell's mind was massive and solid, essentially moderate and conservative, keenly observant, intensely practical. Yet he was driven by the irresistible pressure of events into many a radical 1 , . . A 1 1- • T^ 1- 1 Cromwell's and revolutionary action. 4 believer in Parliament, he got difficulties along no better with it than had Charles I and it was the pro- ^'*^. found irony of his life that he delivered it more deadly blows than ever the King had been able to, and that during the course of his career as ruler he resorted to many of the practices for which Charles and Strafford and Laud had been compelled to pay the supreme and awful price. One of the most famous of these blows was given in the j^ear 1653 and is, after the execution of the King, the most conspicuous land- mark in the history of the times. The "Rump" Parliament was still in existence, that is, what remained after thirteen years and various "purges" of the famous Long Parliament called by Charles I in 1640. No new election had occurred, no new appeal to the voters during all these years. Cromwell and his officers continually urged the Parliament to dissolve. Parliament declined to do so. It continued its debates, becoming constantly more and more unpopular. Some of its members accepted bribes, others were especially eager to secure fat appointments for relatives. Negotiations went on between the leaders of Parliament and the army, looking toward a dissolution and a new election. No agreement could be reached. Each side had its own plan, and finally on April 20, 1653, Parliament passed the one it favored, and the one the army disapproved. Then occurred a famous scene. "This is thfe time," said Crom- well to a friend, "I must do it." He rose and began to speak, reproaching Parliament bitterly for its numerous faults and its rrife,ny sins of omission and commission. Then, his passion dissolves mounting, he told them that the Lord had done with them and t^e Long had chosen other and worthier instruments for carrying on His work. Some one interrupted him, whereupon he became enraged. Clapping his hat on his head and leaving his seat he stamped up and down the floor of the House, saying, "You are no Parliament, I say you are no Parliament. Come, come, we have had enough of this : I will put an end to your prating. Call them in." Where- upon the doors opened and in came a troop of musketeers. Sir 22 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY Henry Vane cried out in protest, whereupon Cromwell turned upon him, shouting, "O, Sir Henry Vane, Sir Henry Vane, the Lord deliver me from Sir Henry Vane." He hurled brutal and coarse epithets at this member and that. Pointing at the Speaker, he said, "Fetch him down," and indicating Algernon Sidney, he ordered the soldiers to "put him out." Picking up the mace, the symbol of the authority of the House, he said, "What shall we do with this bauble? Here, take it away," and gave it to a musketeer. He ordered the House cleared of all its members and as they passed out, he shouted: "It is you that have forced me to do this, for I have sought the Lord night and day that He would rather slay me than put me on the doing of this work!" He then commanded that the doors be locked, and went back to Whitehall. This is one of the most famous scenes in English history and one of the most outrageous. It remains as one of the indelible blots upon Cromwell's career. The Huntingdon farmer had eclipsed Charles I, king by divine right, in the art of destroying venerable institutions. No great sympathy need be wasted upon Parliament. It was only a Rump and after its various "purges" and proscriptions had become a mere semblance of a legislature. Strictly it rested upon no more solid basis of legality than did Cromwell himself. Yet it stood, after all, for the old tradition of Parliament and many of the old associations clustered about it in men's minds. Its destruction by military force and amid a torrent of unrestrained abuse and contumely was a grave and lamentable shock to the public mind. Moreover it did not decrease Oliver's difficulties as he proceeded on his stormful way. As a detail, it shows us Cromwell in one of the few moments in his life when he completely lost his temper. The English constitution was no more. Every political institution of England now lay in ruins. King, Lords, and Commons had been overthrown. Cromwell alone remained standing amid this Cromwell . , . ,.^ , virtually welter of ruin, and Cromwell for the rest of his life was virtual dictator dictator, without the title of king but with more power than any Stuart ever wielded. Attempts, not very successful, were made to cover up this Cromwell- ian dictatorship, which Cromwell himself did not for a moment desire but which he felt was imposed upon him by God. Having destroyed the Long Parliament, he called another composed of "persons fearing God," specially selected by himself and the officers THE PROTECTORATE 23 of the army at the suggestion of the "godly clergy." This proved such an impracticable and crotchety assembly that it passed away unregretted after a life of five months. It is known in history as Praisegod Barebone's Parhament, after the rather unusual name of one of its members. Before ending its existence this Parliament formally resigned its powers into the hands of the Lord-General. For nearly five years, from 1653 to 1658, Cromwell bore the title of Lord Protector of the Commonwealth. He was king in all but name, and more than king in power. His authority nominally rested upon an Instrument of Government, a document drawn Lord up by the leading officers of the army, the first and only ^f'^the'^''"^ written constitution England has ever had. The Instrument common- established a Parliament also and Cromwell called several Par- ^® * liaments during his "reign," but could work with them no better than with former ones and dismissed them or broke them as occasion re- quired. The important feature of the histor}^ of these years is the rule of the one man. Cromwell never succeeded in bringing about that permanent settlement in the institutions and life of England which he ardently desired and which he recognized as so necessary after the many turbulent and destructive years that had passed since the Stuarts first challenged the liberties of Englishmen. Cromwell could not build a S3^stem and an order that could endure, could not rally the people of England about him in enthusiastic and hearty cooperation, for the simple reason that his ideas and those of the majority did not agree. In this respect his work proved ephemeral. He could only build on shifting sands. His rule was really a military rule and he was more despotic than ever Charles I had been. But his aims and his character were far higher. 'He was honest and upright and unselfish and the fundamental things for which he stood were unquestionably for the good of England. And as one of his biographers, Frederic Harrison, correctly says: "In the whole modern history of Europe, Oliver is the one ruler into whose presence no vicious man could ever come ; whose service no vicious man might enter." In one respect his rule shone with a peculiar splendor. His foreign policy was one of great success. He had one of the qualities without which no ruler can be truly great ; he surrounded himself with able men, and used their services to the utmost. He was himself a man of large mold and fitted for large affairs. This was as apparent 24 ENGLAND IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY in his foreign policies as in his domestic. In the great contest that was going on between France and Spain, he took sides with France The Both were Catholic countries, but one was tolerant, protecting Protectors j^g Protestants in a considerable way by the Edict of Nantes ; brUhant ,, ,, ^ -^ ^ . . >t foreign the Other represented the very essence oi intolerance. More- pohcy over, apart from this, England had her special reasons for disliking Spain, a country that was strenuously opposed to England's claims in the field of American commerce and colonization. "His greatness at home," wrote Clarendon, a contemporary and by no means a friendly critic of Cromwell, "was but a shadow of the glory he had abroad." The English and the French won a great victory over Spain, and England thereby gained Dunkirk and the island of Jamaica in the West Indies. The period of the Common- wealth and the Protectorate was also the period of the great struggle between England and Holland for commercial supremacy, and England by her Navigation Act of 165 1, and by the naval war that followed, achieved here also a large measure of success. England again became a European power of the first rank as she had not been since the time of the Plantagenets. Foreign nations feared and courted her. "There is not a nation in Europe," said Cromwell, "but is very willing to ask a good understanding with you," in which modest phrase lay a great and justifiable pride. The Venetian ambassador to England declared that the court of Cromwell was the most brilliant, and the most respected in Europe ; that six kings had sent ambassadors to seek his interest and regard. Louis XIV sent a mission of great magnificence to the Protector to present to him a sword of honor, studded with precious stones. It was not an Englishman, but a foreigner, who later said, "Cromwell, with his lofty character, is the most enlightened statesman who ever adorned the Protestant world." At the zenith of his power, and in his fifty-ninth year, Cromwell died, on the third of September, 1658, the anniversary of two of Death of his most famous victories, Dunbar and Worcester. After a Cromwell public funeral of great pomp, his body was borne to West- minster Abbey and there buried. COLLAPSE OF CROMWELL'S SYSTEM 25 THE RESTORATION Then the system he had built up rapidly collapsed. His son, Richard, succeeded him as Protector, but, utterly unequal to the situation, was forced to abdicate after a few months. Then chariesii Charles H, son of Charles I, came from France, and the historic (1660-1685) monarchy was restored. Lords and Commons also were restored amid manifestations of popular approval. The day of the attempt at religious toleration was over, and the reign of Charles II was one of pronounced religious oppression, known for its Act of Uniformity, Test Act, Conventicle Act, and Five Mile Act, statutes of great harshness leveled not only at Catholics but at Presbyterians and Independents as well. There was a great revulsion, also, from the austere morality of Puritanism and the new reign was one of lax moral standards. And a touch of ignoble savagery was added to the record by the order of the House of Commons that Cromwell's, body should be taken from the Abbey, that it should be hung from the gallows of Tyburn, and that the head should be fixed upon a pole and set up in front of Westminster Hall. This odious deed was done. In regard to the fundamental issue which lay at the center of all the troubled history narrated in this chapter, the relation of King and Parliament and their respective powers, nothing was definitely settled. That problem went over to the next century, as we shall see. Charles II had the same high conception of the prerogatives of the King as had his Stuart predecessors, the same dislike of Parlia- ment, but he was too prudent to force the issue to the breaking point, too little disposed to run the risk of being seht "on his travels" again. And so he died in bed as King of England, in 1685. But his brother, James II, had no such modicum of discretion, and therefore he spent three years only in Whitehall. He was an avowed Catholic, his wife was Catholic, and he showed unmis- james ir takably that he desired the restoration of Catholicism in Eng- (1685-1688) land. This possibility Englishmen were in no mood to tolerate, and the famous Revolution of 1688 was the result. Mary, James' daughter, was a Protestant, and had married William of Orange, the leader of the Protestants of the Continent. William and Mary were invited to England by the Protestants of every shade. James fled to France. Parliament drew up another of the great documents 26 ENGLAND IX THK SEVENTEENTH CENTURY of En^^Iish liberty, the Hill of Kights (1689) by which the Kingw; forbidden to suspend or violate the laws, to levy taxes or raise troo[;s without the consent of Parliament, to deny his subjects the full exercise of the rij^ht of petition, or to curtail the right of trial by jury. William and jMary, accepting these provisions, were recognized ]jy Parliament as the lawful sovereigns of England. Such is what is called "The Glorious Revolution" of 1688. What it signified is this : Parliament, not the King, was the supreme power jj,,. of the state, since Parliament, not Divine Right, could deter- Kcvoiution ininc the succession to the throne. Parliament had rejected James II, lawful King, and had not put in his place his son, his lawful successor. It was evident that if Parliament could do this, could set aside a legitimate monarch for one more to its taste, then Parliament, and not the monarchy, was paramount. Other struggles were necessary to fashion out of this parliamentary supremacy that form of government which we call the "cabinet system," and which we know to-day. Hut an important milestone in the progress of ICnglish constitutional development and of popular liberty was set up by the revolutionists of 1688. REFERENCES Cheney, A SliorL llislnry of Kni^land, pp. .38,3-558. Ckoss, a History oj Jinghuul ami Greater Britain, pp. 427-675. Okkkn, a Short History of the English People, Chaps. VIII-IX. Chicynky, Readings in English History, pp. 418-590. RoKiNSON, Readings in European History, Vol. II, Chap. XXX. Oakdinick, The Puritan Resolution. Cf)r,invjN Smttii, 7^he United Kingdom. MouiAW, Oliver Cromwell. IIakkison, Oliver Cromwell. (JARUiNEK, Cromwell's Place in History. FRAXcr: t\i>»hi< i>o(;j,s xiv IMI'OHTAXr;/; or l HANC;/. in MOf;hJ<\ JJIS'IOPV WnfiN l^^^uis XIV iissumtd corrimand of the state, ujx^n the death of Mazarin, in i66f, the golden aj^e of monarchy began for France and for KurofXi, I'he Ir^ng and diflficiilt protx-ss of growth now produced a rare and luxuriant fruitage. A turbulent and un- Loui» xiv, certain hhtory culminate enable her to assume an aggressive and expansive p'-jlicy. Her prr/sperity and her prjwer shone against the background of a a^ntinent dividerj intr; small states and into two or thrfx- large ones which, like Austria and Spain, were dwJining in strength, although still far from being negligible quantities. France was the most coherent, ajmpact state in Europe. She had solved more of her f^sential problems than had the other nations, and the energies of her \>cj)\A(: harJ (\(:wi-\()\)cA U) a higher pit/;h, Frana;, Austria, and Spain ha^J long b*:^;n involved in struggles with ear;h other for su- premaf.-y. The changing fortunes of their tease and bitter rivalry had h>een shown in the murderous Thirty Years' War (lOiH-iO^H) through which FCurof>e harl only rw;ently pass<:rj, the longf:;st, mr^t gfmeral, and m'^/st devastating war the Continent ha^J ever known, and whr^rf; outrx^me indicate^] unmistakably the waxing of Franrx and the waning of the other two, 'I*hat was ende^J by the Treaty of V\'c-stphalia (1648) but the rivalry was to carry over into the reign 27 28 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV of Louis XIV and, indeed, was largely to dominate it, although its issue was no longer seriously in doubt. Louis XIV has himself described the general situation which he faced when he took charge of the government in 1661. " Everything was quiet everywhere," he writes in his memoirs, "no, movement nor semblance of movement anywhere in the kingdom that could inter- rupt or hamper my plans. Peace was established with my neighbors probably for as long a time as I should myself desire." He thus saw himself master at home and able to give peace or war to Europe, whichever he might prefer. That he would choose war was the most certain thing in the world. In the first place Louis warlike war was regarded as a fixed and permanent factor of civilization ambitions ^^ ^^len constituted. If it ceased for a moment, it was ex- pected to reappear, just as bad weather was expected to follow good. Princes considered war a natural function of royalty. In the second place Louis' imagination was absorbed in the achieve- ment of his own glory, and the greatest glory, as history showed, had always fallen to the lot of the world's warriors and conquerors, its Alexanders, Ccesars, Charlemagnes. Louis intended to play a great historic role, to be a great actor upon the human stage. " The praise of history," he said, "is something exquisite." He would show the world that "there was still a King on earth." "To have' a crown is not everything, one must know how to wear it," was another of his opinions. Holding such traditional views, it is not surprising that Louis was almost continually at war for over half a century, and that he sought domination of Europe by arms. He had an able minister of war in Lou vols (16-vwa'), a man who loved "order" and "system" and who displayed prodigious activity, Louvoisand ^ sense for detail and a capacity for general views, in his Vauban great work of perfecting the army and making it the most powerful Europe had yet seen. Louis also had in Vauban (v6-boh') a great military engineer, who revolutionized the art of attacking and defending fortified positions. Vauban calculated everything nicely and accurately, the time in the trenches, the angle of fire, the hour for the assault, the moment for capitulation so that some- times ladies were invited to witness the surrender and were not kept waiting. Sieges were begun and ended to an accompaniment of violins. A siege by Vauban was a work of art, a beautiful, methodi- cal, systematic operation. He perfected the art of defense also. LOUIS THE FOURTEENTH 29 Louis XIV after G. de la Haye From Le Grand Steele by Emile Bourgeois. 30 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV Louis attacks the Spanish Netherlands (1667) Expressions came into use to indicate his mastery: "A town be- sieged by Vauban is a town taken" ; "A town defended by Vauban is an impregnable town." Vauban constructed along the exposed frontiers a first and' second line of fortifications which really closed France and which, toward the end of the reign, sufficed to check and stop the invasion of the country. WARS AGAINST SPAIN AND HOLLAND With such aids as Louvois and Vauban and with an able body of commanders, of whom Turenne (tii-ren') and Conde (con-da') were the chief, Louis could go far — and he did, although his armies would seem to us very small, probably never more than 200,000 men. In the spring of 1667, the international situation proving propitious and a satisfactory pretext being forthcoming, Louis suddenly attacked Spain, an old enemy and now a mediocre opponent. The attack was made upon the Spanish Netherlands, that is, upon what we know as Belgium. Louis sent to Madrid a "Treatise" on the rights of the French Queen to these provinces, a book of 270 quarto pages. Without waiting for a reply he en- tered Flanders. The south- ern part of the Netherlands was speedily overrun, one town falling after another. The campaign was a short one, and remarkably successful. There was no serious resistance. But this rapid success alarmed Europe. The Dutch, particularly,, became greatly excited, fearing, as the French minister wrote home, lest their own republic should be lost within two years and Holland should merely become "a maritime province of France." They Vauban From an original picture by Lebrun in the War Office at Paris. WAR WITH HOLLAND 31 persuaded England and Sweden to enter an alliance against Louis. This Triple Alliance and its offer of mediation, accompanied by a threat of war if not accepted, cut Louis "to the quick." a Triple But he called "prudence to his support," to use his phrase, ^^^^?,^ and, deciding that he had neither the number of troops England, necessary nor allies of the requisite quality, he accepted the ^'"^ Sweden mediation. The result was the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (aks-la- sha-pel') (1668), a treaty between France and Spain, by which Louis abandoned his sweeping pretensions to the Spanish Netherlands, but retained about a dozen of the towns he had conquered. Louis thus pushed back his frontiers where, as he said, they were "a little close." His entrance into his new cities was a dazzling event, car- riages of gold and crystal, saddle cloths embroidered in gold, courtiers blazing with diamonds, ladies bright with silks and plumes and laces. A Frenchman who witnessed the scene wrote that "all that is known of the magnificence of Solomon and the grandeur of the King of Persia is not to be compared with the pomp that sur- rounded the King on this trip." But, despite appearances, the King of France was in anything but an agreeable mood. He had been blocked by Holland, and he knew it. "Cut to the quick," as he said, by this insolent and . • ungrateful people, and irritated particularly by a medal struck angry at in Holland and representing "Joshua arresting the Sun in *^^ "^"^ his Course," Louis resolved to annihilate that country. He went about this project with his accustomed deliberation and sagacity. He spent four years in preparation, diplomatic and military. He built up an imposing alliance to cooperate with him, and he broke up the Triple Alliance, by winning England and Sweden away. Thus he completely isolated Holland. Then he fell upon her like a thunderbolt. Louis did not deign formally to declare war. He merely an- nounced it, April 6, 1672, by a placard in which he attributed it to the "little satisfaction" he had found in the Dutch States- warwith General. His campaign was a series of easy and stunning Holland triumphs. He besieged four towns at one and the same time and the four fell, in fact, in four days (June 4-7, 1672). Utrecht (u'-trekt) also was captured. Holland was panic-stricken. Am- sterdam thought itself lost, the enemy being at the gates. One last resource the Dutch had, their dikes. These they now cut and 32 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV the country all around was inundated. Amsterdam became an island of the Zuyder Zee. Holland thus gained time for negotiations and, under the resolute leadership of William of Orange, she built up an imposing alliance against Louis. The theater of operations was thereby enlarged and Louis was consequently obliged to scatter his efforts. The war, begun in so triumphal a manner, dragged on for several years, but slowed down and threatened to approach a standstill. The advan- tage which the French enjoyed at the outset was lost by this dividing of their forces. Holland was terribly ravaged, and unexampled sieverities of treatment were meted out to her in the most systematic manner. "Necessity knows no law," said Louis, thus anticipating a phrase made famous in our own unhappy day. But Holland held out, and the alarm of other countries at the menace which threatened all from France increased. The result was that peace was finally made at Nimwegen (nim'-wa-gen) (1678). Louis Nimwegen was willing to stop the war if he could show a string of advan- ^^^"^^^ tageous annexations. As the powers, for one reason or another, had had enough of fighting, they were ready to compromise. Once more Spain was selected to pay the piper. She was forced to re- linquish Franche-Comte (frohsh-koh-ta') to France and also certain additional towns in the Netherlands. Louis had announced the terms he would accept. Although he had not accomplished what he had set out to, nevertheless he had kept the initiative up to the end, and he was resolved to show that he still held the whip hand. The war had been fought on foreign soil. The King of France had held a European coalition at bay. He had negotiated as master, not as equal. And he had annexed valuable territory. Louis XIV thus appeared in 1679 as the conqueror of Europe. Since he had taken control of the government he had added to France, Dunkirk, Franche-Comte, and half of Flanders, and Louis ^ peace had just been made, practically according to the terms Great " he had laid down. The City of Paris expressed public opinion when it officially bestowed upon him the title of "Great." Nevertheless the King was not as satisfied as he appeared to be. He had had to abate much from his hopes of 1672. Holland, which he had intended to destroy, was still intact, was, indeed, very much alive. Louis was fully conscious that he had maintained himself against a multitude of enemies and yet he felt that the work was of FRANCE ANNEXES STRASBURG 34 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV an unfinished character. He showed his real feehng by disgracing his minister of foreign affairs, as if it were he who had been responsible for what, after all, had been a failure. To cover up his partial discomfiture and to aggrandize his states in time of peace as in time of war, Louis now instituted certain so-called "Chambers of Reunion," or packed courts, whose aggressions duty it was to determine just how much territory the King in time of France had acquired under the terms of various treaties, peace including those of Nimwegen and Westphalia. Some of the phrases used in those treaties were vague or elastic. To the clauses ceding certain places, there had been added such words as "and their bailiwicks, territories, domains, seigniories, dependencies, and annexes." The duty of the "Chambers" was to determine just what was included in the case of each cession. While the process pretended to be judicial, no opportunity for legal defense was given to the persons or powers threatened with dispossession. The new policy speedily yielded rich results. Thus, in September, 1679, the Chamber of Besangon "reunited" to France eighty villages declared to be dependencies of the County of Montbeliard, and, in August, 1680, all the rest of the county. In the same way, in a time of peace, extensive annexations were made in Alsace, leaving prac- tically only one important place untouched, Strasburg. In Septem- ber, 1 68 1, that city was "reunited" outright, without legal formality, and in the following month the King entered it in a gilded coach, drawn by eight horses. Three years later the Emperor signed a treaty recognizing these transfers. Louis' policy of annexation was apparently as successful in times of peace as in times of war. These continued aggressions aroused the apprehensions of Europe again and a new coalition against Louis began to form. This was hastened by an act which Louis committed at home, and which showed the same arrogant disregard of all established rights ; namely, his persecution of the Protestants. LOUIS XIV AND THE PROTESTANTS Since Henry IV had issued the Edict of Nantes (nants) in 1598 Th Edict ^^^ position of the Protestants, or Huguenots, of France of Nantes seemed reasonably satisfactory. They enjoyed many essen- ^^^'^^ tial religious and civil rights, and they prospered greatly. They were richer, man for man, than the Catholics, and they showed THE EDICT OF NANTES 35 great vigor in many lines of activity, a vigor and energy partly derived, no doubt, from the fighting stock from which they came. There were, perhaps, a million and a half of them out of a total population of nineteen million. Louis XIV showed, from the beginning, his dislike of the Protes- tants and of Protestantism. In his nature there was no spirit of toleration. He was offended by the presence in the king- dom of men who differed from him in opinion. He believed policy that there ought to be uniformity and unity in the religious °^ ^"?' life of France, that the existence of different religions was a disfigurement of the state. For many years, however, the Edict of Nantes continued to stand, only now it was interpreted and en- forced as narrowly and as rigorously as possible, so that the liberties granted were considerably reduced in practice. Beyond the strict letter of the law, no favors of any kind. This policy, however, soon gave way to one of partial and sporadic attack, which was not very conspicuous, but which, although arousing no great clamor, operated incessantly and effectively in undermining the rights and the security of this religious minority. That it was the highest duty of the King to extirpate heresy in the realm was the burden of many sermons and ecclesiastical utterances. Gradually more serious blows began to be rained upon the heads of the devoted Huguenots. Ways were found or invented of destroying , . , , , , 1 , 1 T , • 1 • Louis policy many of the churches they had built. In the smgle provmce of sup- of Poitou (pua-to') question was raised about 74 temples, and, ^'^^^tJl^^igj^ as a result, 64 of them were destroyed. Finally in 1679 the government began to adopt more rigorous measures, and for six years a relentless, comprehensive plan of bribery, intimidation, and general oppression was followed, culminating in a pitiless campaign to force the conversion of the Protestants to Catholicism. One method, forever infamous, was the quartering upon Protestant families of rough and licentious soldiers or dragoons. So great was the terror inspired by these dragonnades, as they were called, that, rather than endure them entire communities announced their "conversion," 22,000 in Beam (ba-ar'), 60,000 in the district of Bordeaux, within a space of two weeks. Revocation Finally, in 1685, Louis formally revoked the Edict of ^dict Nantes, which had been in force for eighty-seven years. He of Nantes ordered the demolition of all Protestant churches, the closing of 36 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV Protestant schools, the baptism by Cathohc priests of all children who should be born to Protestants, the banishment of all Huguenot ministers. The King's act received almost universal applause. La Fontaine, Madame de Sevigne, Bossuet, extolled the pious achievement. In judging this act we must remember that tolerance was a virtue almost unknown in the seventeenth century, in many Protestant Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, 16S5 From an old print, reproduced in Erdmannsdorfer's Deutsche Geschichle von 164S-1740. lands, as in Catholic. Nevertheless by it France retrograded a century. And she failed in her attempt to stamp out heresy, for the Huguenots managed to exist under the odious persecution. „„ , / France, by this act, not only sacrificed her moral leadership, £>Cect or ' ■' revocation but she lost perhaps a quarter of a million of her most ener- in France ^^^j^ ^^^ vigorous people, for the Huguenots emigrated in large numbers to England, Holland, Brandenburg, America, carrying with them their devotion to their religion, their intelligence and CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XIV 37 industry, and their hatred of Louis XIV. All this force went to strengthen foreign countries, which were destined to be the enemies of France. In 1697 twenty-five per cent of the population of Berlin consisted of Huguenot refugees. The Revocation of the Edict of Nantes exasperated the Protes- tants in every country, reenforcing at the same time the animosity aroused by the previous actions of the King. It had much to do with the overthrow of James II of England and the sum- " °^^" moning by the English Parliament of William of Orange to the throne, which meant the close union of Great Britain and Holland henceforth in opposition to France. CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XIV Not only Louis' policy, but also his personality, profoundly im- pressed the Europe of his day. Louis XIV was the perfect pattern of a prince. He was twenty-two years old when he took his position easily, naturally, quite to the manner born, in the very center of the stage. He had come to the throne in 1643, but, being ^^ p^mce only a child, the direction of affairs had lain in other hands, par- ticularly in those of Mazarin (maz'-a-rin), a diplomatist and states- man trained in the school of Richelieu (resh-lye'). But upon the death of Mazarin in 1661 Louis resolved to be king in fact as well as in name. He had a commanding presence in which grace and dignity and seriousness were so happily combined that he seemed taller than he was, for he was only of medium height. As a youth he was fond of novels and of poetry, was proficient in tournaments, ran well, was an excellent dancer, knew how to take his part in theatricals and was not averse to masquerades and jokes. The young lords and ladies who shared his pleasures had, however, the taste or the discretion never to overstep the mark, never to cross the awful line that separated friendliness from familiarity. Louis enjoyed being King. The profession was one that pleased him thoroughly and he did not conceal his delight in i{. He himself wrote some reflections on it, one of which was that " the trade Louis of King is grand, noble, delightful." But Louis did not make the King the mistake of thinking it an easy trade. He was careful to study its requirements and conscientious in discharging its duties. He did not plunge ahead recklessly, making important decisions without reflection. He was prudent, circumspect, not trusting to, nor 38 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV The Louvre and the Tuileries From an old print, reproduced in Philippson's Das ZeitaUer Ludwigs XIV . EDUCATION OF LOUIS XIV 39 expecting, any sudden illumination from on high. He took kingship seriously, both on its practical and its decorative, its prosaic and its symbolical, sides. He was a hard, habitual, methodical worker, shirking nothing, ever eager to learn. He presided over interminable councils, granted innumerable interviews, listened attentively to long and tedious reports, interrogated vigorously his secretaries, his generals, his advisers, and then weighed their words. And every day he gave the same close attention to the pleasures and diversions of the court as to great policies of state, and, while about him every one seemed active and agitated, he alone seemed calm. For fifty years, despite more or less bad health, stomach trouble, and acute headaches, due, no doubt, to some extent to his enormous eating and to bad teeth, Louis kept up this regimen of work, method- ical, without haste and without rest, always at the same tasks at the same hours. "With an almanac and a watch you could tell three hundred leagues away just what he was doing," wrote Saint Simon. This man, who thus showed exemplary and steadfast application to his business, was, however, of only ordinary ability, of onl}- ordinary intelligence. Louis' general education had been poor. He had His * learned little from his tutors and sometimes he himself felt education his deficiencies. "It is bitterly humiliating," he once wrote con- cerning his lack of knowledge of history, "to be ignorant of things which every one else knows." His military education, however, resulted in his being an excellent rider, able to sit his saddle fifteen hours running, if necessary, in making him a fearless soldier, and in giving him a respectable knowledge of the organization of an army and of the conduct of a campaign. In diplomacy he had had his training at the hands of Mazarin, who was certainly broken to all the intrigues of European politics, who, though a Cardinal of the Church, was not innocent of the ways of this world and whose political principles were not marked by any excessive austerity. Mazarin had for many years managed the diplomatic affairs . ... of France with subtlety and success, guiding the state through pupil of many a raging storm, past many a murderous reef, and was ^^^n"* in a position to give his princely pupil much invaluable- instruction. He inoculated him with maxims of very doubtful ethical qifality. One of these, which Louis learned thoroughly and took well to heart, was that a ruler must be ready to sacrifice every scruple, even per- 40 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV sonal honor, for the advantage of the state ; another was that every man can be bought and that, therefore, a ruler should seek to know every man's price ; another was that distrust of every human being ■ is the beginning of all wisdom for a monarch. I Under such instruction Louis learned to dissimulate and lie "even perfidiously and sometimes odiously." His state of mind was one of constant suspicion of those about him, and his problem was how to penetrate through the mask to the rogue or scoundrel behind. Mazarin had that high satisfaction that sometimes comes to the teacher, the knowledge that his pupil has thoroughly assimilated the lesson imparted. Mazarin admired the progress, writing, "The King is growing in wisdom and dissimulation" ; and he took what he considered a pardonable pride in hearing one day the story of how King Louis, aged fifteen, had deceived both a Cardinal and a Jesuit at one and the same moment ! Such were some of the traits of character, such the training of the man who was destined to give his name to his age, who took the „. . . , sun as his emblem, sole source of light and life, who was known His ideal ° ' absolute as the Sun-King, and whose pride was as the pride of the monarchy pharaohs. When -Louis XIV mounted the throne, as actual ruler, he had a very definite theory of the part a monarch should play in the life of a nation, a theory which he was able to realize in practice with singular completeness. We find his ideal expressed in his own Memoirs in these words: "All eyes are fixed upon him alone; to him alone are all desires directed ; he alone receives every mark of homage, he alone is the object of every hope. Nothing is attempted, nothing is expected, nothing done, save through him alone. His gracious favors are regarded as the sole source of happiness ; no one believes it possible to mount higher save as he comes nearer to his person, to his esteem. AH else is vanity." THE CREATOR OF VERSAILLES One of the sins to which Louis XIV confessed when dying was his excessive passion for building. Kings have generally been inclined to be builders, to leave imposing memorials of their reigns in works of architecture, but no King of France ever built so much as Versailles " his great Louis XIV. His Supreme and remarkable achievement was P"**® the creation of the palace of Versailles (ver-salz'), which some of his ecclesiastical flatterers compared with the creation of the THE CREATION OF VERSAILLES 41 1 42 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV world, knowing more or less about that professionally. It was the most monumental royal residence in Europe. Begun in 1661, it was a quarter of a century in building. Emanating from Louis' own thought, it was his work, in inception, in development, in completion. Nothing that he did in his long life absorbed so com- pletely his attention or gave him such constant and supreme satis- faction. He overruled his architects repeatedly and ordered other- wise. Not only the building but its interior decoration proceeded year after year under the watchful, critical eye of the King. Every marble, every fresco, everj^ chandelier had to pass the royal censor- ship. Every art and artist in France was called upon for contribu- tions to the stupendous whole. The result was such a palace as the world had never seen. Resplendent with gold and marble, glittering with mirrors, adorned with paintings, tapestries, medal- lions, depicting the history of the reign, the triumphs of the King, the whole set in the midst of a wonderful park, itself a work of art, with endless lawns, avenues, vistas, terraces, with lakes, fountains, groves, peopled with bronze and marble statues, with shrubbery cut and kept in geometrical forms, all harmoniously and elaborately combined, — the palace of Versailles, when completed, amazed the world by its splendor. What was more, it satisfied the King. Here he lived and moved and had his being. Here lived the court, also, consisting of the great nobles whom Louis had cured of their war-like and independent habits, and whom he had converted into social satellites and parasites. Versailles was the paradise of the spoiled children of fortune. The spectacle offered by this animated, aesthetic, artificial society was rare and curious. Versailles was the .coronation and the apotheosis of the pride of one man. And no one of all the gilded throng that crowded the salons and terraces enjoyed Versailles as much as did the central figure of the pageant. Such was the setting, such the rich and spacious background, against which the comedy and tragedy of absolute monarchy in the Unhappy ^^^ °^ ^^^ perfection was played. For, in truth, there was effects of tragedy as well as comedy in this creation of a capital that S Vers"aS ^^^^ ^^^ ^"^^'^ °^ ^^'^^>' °^her king in Christendom. All this was tremendously expensive, and France really existed for other things than simply the aesthetic satisfaction of Louis XIV. The building of Versailles threw the carefully studied financial system of Colbert (kol-bar'), the King's tireless and intelligent A ROYAL RESIDENCE 43 44 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV finance minister, clean out of plumb, with far-reaching consequences. Also it meant the withdrawal of the King and nobles away from the real life of France into the factitious life of a fabulous chateau and of a town made to order by royal decree. Louis was separated from the nation. He lived in splendor apart, continually surrounded by courtiers, continually breathing the heavy and heady incense of adulation. "The founding of Versailles," says a distinguished French historian, "had more considerable and graver consequences than any war that Louis fought or than all his wars together." Ver- sailles represents a moment in French history, that of monarchy unapproachable, and unapproached elsewhere. Nothing could be added to that particular conception. LOUIS' ENCOURAGEMENT OF ART AND LETTERS "The love of glory takes precedence over everything else in my soul," Louis admits with candor. It was unfortunate both for him and for France and for Europe that in his mind glory was largely synonymous with success in war. The glory of the lawmaker, the glory of the Meecenas under whose inspiration flourish arts and sciences and letters and all civilizing agencies Louis did not despise, far from it, but glory so acquired was in his opinion of an inferior quality. And in this opinion artists, scientists, and men of letters themselves concurred, lavishing their finest talent upon the commemoration of his achieve- ments in arms. Louis desired to make his reign memorable in every line of activity, and great was his success, aided, studied, and secured, as it was, by his enlightened and energetic minister, Colbert, whose eye was everywhere, whose powers of work were so unremitting and so concentrated that he was able to fill the equivalent of a dozen ministries of to-day, and to touch the national life at very many points. Colbert conceived, for instance, the project of an elaborate investi- gation and codification of the laws, the elimination of all confusion Colbert and ^^^ contradictions from them, and he promised the King the codification "benediction of the world" if he would introduce reason where aws ^Y[ ^^s unreason, clarity where all was obscurity, if, in. short, he would create "a complete and perfect body" of law. As a matter of fact during the reign several elaborate ordinances were issued which considerably improved the situation and rendered easier AUGUSTAN AGE OF FRENCH LITERATURE 45 and sciences the later and more famous codifications carried through by Napoleon. Colbert also sought to direct and stimulate the intellectual and artistic life of France toward the same end, the exaltation and the glory of the King, which, in his opinion,- was the only worthy Encourage- end of Frenchmen in every branch of human endeavor. By ment of arts the careful encouragement of academies of painting, sculpture, architecture, music, and literature, by helping scientists of every kind, mathematicians, physi- cists, chemists, astronomers, he sought to enrich and refine the civilization, the culture and learning and taste of France, and to identify the person and the prestige of the King with all these high exploits. Louis entered sympathetically into all these plans of his minis- ter. He knew that when men spoke of the Augustan age they meant that Augus- tus had seen, in his day, what Louis intended pos- terity should see in his, namely, that the promotion and encouragement of arts and letters is one of the highest and most enduring distinctions of a great prince.- In one department of creative art did this reign shine with peculiar brilliancy. The French literature of the seventeenth century has a long roll of distinguished names, and the larger number of prench them belong in the second half of that century : Moliere literature (mo-lyar'), incomparable satirist of men and manners, whose seventeenth thirty comedies include several which are among the treasures century of the French theater; Racine (ra-sen'), sincere and unaffected interpreter of great passions and great experiences, whose tragedies are among the most eloquent and most finished examples of French verse; La Fontaine (la fon-tan'), whose Fables, grave or gay, reveal CULBERT 46 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV a delicate art and grace, placed at the service of a humane and kindly philosophy; Madame de Sevigne (sa-ven-ya'), whose Letters are an invaluable panorama of the life of her time, of court life, of life in Paris, of country life ; Bossuet (bo-sii-a'), the majes- tic, sonorous pulpit orator, whose sermons are examples of the eloquence and the dignified prose of a stately period of French history ; Boileau, poet and founder of literary criticism ; and La Bruyere (la brii-yar'), essayist and moralist, with a gift for sarcastic and vivid portrait- ure. These are not all of the men of letters whose work honored the reign of the proud King and gave prestige to the French language and French literature abroad. Indeed, owing to this illustrious group of writers the language of France started on its con- quest of cultivated people everywhere and ultimately came to occupy in the modern world the position which Greek had occupied in the ancient. Portrait of Moliere INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT But Louis' supreme interest, his heart of hearts, was not in this field of literary and artistic achievement. Nor was it in all that varied activity in material things associated with the name of Encourage- -^ ° ment of Colbert, activity directed toward the creation of sound and in ustry prosperous national finances, toward the founding and promo- tion of colonial establishments, toward the development of industries and commerce, toward the balanced and comprehensive exploitation of the wonderful natural resources of France. To all of this Colbert gave himself body and soul for more than twenty years, and the wealth and economic power of France in the world were greatly THE SPANISH SUCCESSION 47 furthered by his activity. The King gave support, sometimes vigorous, sometimes languid, to the carefully studied, wide-ranging projects of his diligent and strenuous minister, whose consuming ambition was to make France the richest country in the world. But Louis' heart was elsewhere, unfortunately for France. As we have seen, his real interest was war. THE LAST THIRTY YEARS OF LOUIS' REIGN Louis' reign falls into two divisions which are quite sharply dis- tinguished from each other. Up to the time of his revocation of the Edict of Nantes he was greatly successful. His wars and his annexa- tions caused his fame to spread far and wide throughout the world. He continued to reign for thirty years longer, but these were His years of increasing difificulty for France, and of a growing and '^*^^'' ^^^^ ominous national distress. He had made his country thoroughly hated and feared abroad. He committed other aggressions and was engaged in other wars : that of the so-called League of Augs- burg (agz'-berg) which dragged on for nearly a decade from 1688 to 1697, during which France stood alone against Europe and from which she gained nothing ; and particularly that of the Spanish Succession, which lasted from 1701 to 1713, a conflict more wide- spread than even the Thirty Years' War. This conflict was a struggle for the spoils of the immense Spanish Empire, European and Ameri- can, the old roj^al house of Spain having died out. England, Hol- land, France, the Empire, and other countries participated. All the more important battles went against the French, a new and a humiliating experience for the Grand Monarch. Marlborough, with his victories of Blenheim (blen'-im) and Malplaquet (mal- pla-ka'), and Prince Eugene of Austria, were the heroes of the war. And out of it England acquired the most — Gibraltar and Minorca from Spain, and Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, and the Hudson Bay region from France, thus beginning the expulsion of France from North America. Austria gained the Spanish Netherlands, which were henceforth called the Austrian Netherlands ; and she also gained important territories in Italy — Milan and Naples. France only gained the recognition of a grandson of Louis XIV as King of Spain, Philip V, but she was forced to agree that France and Spain should never be united. Louis had thus lived to taste the bitterness of defeat. His last 48 FRANCE UNDER LOUIS XIV years were years of gloom. He lost his son and his grandson, and when he died in 17 15 he left his kingdom to his great-grandson, a The end of child of five. And to this child he left a troubled inheritance, the reign ^ country whosc population had fallen from nineteen million to seventeen, a state exhausted, impoverished, and approaching bankruptcy, a people in distress and misery, already murmuring faint thoughts of revolution, all as a result of a selfish and over- weening ambition. Saint Simon says that when his subjects heard of the death of Louis XIV they "trembled with joy" and "thanked God for their deliverance." "The experiment of Absolute Monarchy," comments a recent writer, "had been tried, and had failed." REFERENCES Adams, G. B., The Growth of the French Nation, Chap. XIII. DucLAUx, Short History of France, pp. 132-151. Wakeman, The Ascendancy of France, Chaps. IX-XI, XIV-XV. Perkins, France under the Regency, Chaps. V-IX. RoBEsrsoN, Readings in European History, Vol. II, Chap. XXXI. V A/"^ CHAPTER III EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY The reign of Louis XIV has carried us well into the eighteenth century, to which, indeed, it was a natural introduction. It was followed by another long reign, that of Louis XV, which lasted from 17 15 to 1774, a reign in which absolute monarchy, as developed so completely and so brilliantly under the Grand Monarch, continued to function in France, arousing, as the century wore on, greater and greater discontent among the people of that country until they finall}' rose in insurrection and swept the whole system away in the famous French Revolution, ending tragically the career of Louis' successor, Louis XVI. But France, though the leading country on the continent of Europe all through this period, was, after all, only one of the numer- ous actors upon the historic stage. The policies and purposes of other nations, the nature of their problems, the trend of their development, were necessarily of the greatest significance in shaping and determining the collective life of Europe and must be examined in any survey of the times, however brief. The destinies of all the European nations are closely interlocked. The conduct of one reacts upon the others. The incessant interplay of all these diverse forces makes European history a very complicated subject, but also, for that very reason, a most instructive one. What was Europe like in the eighteenth century ? One thing, at least, it was not : it was not a unity. There were states of every size and shape and with every form of government. The States of the Church were theocratic ; capricious and cruel Europe in despotism prevailed in Turkey ; absolute monarchy in Russia, ^'^s Austria, France, Prussia ; constitutional monarchy in England ; while there were various kinds of so-called republics — federal republics in Holland and Switzerland," a republic whose head was an elective king in Poland, aristocratic republics in Venice and Genoa and in the free cities of the Holy Roman Empire. 49 50 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ENGLAND AND PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT Of these states the one that was to be the most persistent enemy of France and of French ideas throughout this period was England, a commercial and colonial empire of the first importance. This empire, of long, slow growth, passed through many highly sig- centuryin nificant experiences during the eighteenth century. Indeed English ^i-j^^ century is one of the most momentous in English history, rendered forever memorable by three great series of events which in important respects transformed the national life of England and her international relations, giving th m the character and tendency which have been theirs ever since. These three streams of tendency or lines of evolution out of which the modern power of Britain has emerged were : the acquisition of what are still the most valuable parts of her colonial empire, Canada and India ; the estab- lishment of the parliamentary system of government, that is, govern- ment of the nation by its representatives, not by its royal house, the undoubted supremacy of Parliament over the Crown ; and the begin- nings of what is called the Industrial Revolution, that is, of the modern factory system of production on a vast scale which during the course of the nineteenth century made England easily the chief industrial nation of the world. The evolution of the parliamentary system of government had, of course, been long in progress but it was immensely furthered by the advent in 17 14 of a new royal dynasty, the House of Han- Accession of _ / ^ ... the House of ovcr, still at this hour the reigning family, although as a result Hanover ^£ ^-j^^ European War the title has been changed by proclama- tion of July 17, 1917, to that of the House of Windsor. The struggle between Crown and Parliament, which had been long proceeding and had become tense and violent, as we have seen, in the seventeenth century in connection with the attempts of the Stuart kings to make the monarchy all-powerful and supreme, ended finally in the eight- eenth century with the victory of Parliament and the establishment of what is known as the parliamentary or cabinet system of govern- ment, a system destined in the nineteenth century to be widely adopted by other nations. In 1688 Parliament, by mere legislative act had altered the line of succession by passing over the direct, legitimate claimant because he was a Catholic, and by calling to the throne William and Mary ACCESSION OF THE HOUSE OF HANOVER 51 because they were Protestants, but in so doing it did not pass outside the House of Stuart. Queen Anne, who succeeded WilUam and who ruled from 1701 to 17 14, was a Stuart. But in 1701 Parhament again determined the hne of succession by again passing over the legitimate claimant because he was a Catholic and by providing that in case Queen Anne should die without direct heirs, as she did, the throne should pass to George, Elector of Hanover, and the reason for this action was the same as for that of 1688, namely be- ::ause England was resolved upon having a Protestant as king. Thus the older branch of the royal family was set aside, and a younger or collateral branch was put in its place. This was a plain defiance of the ordinary rules of descent which generally underlie the monarchical system everywhere. It showed that the will of Parliament was superior to the monarchical principle, that, in a way, the monarchy was elective. Still other important consequences followed from this act. George I, at the time of his accession to the English throne in 17 14 fifty-four years of age, was a German. He continued to be a German prince, more concerned with his electorate of Hanover than xhe eariy^ with his new kingdom. He did not understand a word of Hanoverians English and, as his ministers were similarly ignorant of German, he was compelled to resort to a dubious Latin when he wished to com- municate with them. He was King from 1714 to 1727, and was followed by his son, George II, who ruled from 1727 to 1760 and who, though he knew English, spoke it badly and was far more interested in his petty German principality than in imperial Britain. The first two Georges, whose chief interest in England was the money they could get out of it, therefore alloweid their ministers to Darry on the government and they did not even attend the jje^ejo-j^g^x meetings of the ministers where questions of policy were of cabinet decided. For forty-six years this royal abstention continued, government The result was the establishment of a regime never seen before in any country. The royal power was no longer exercised by the King, but was exercised by his ministers, who, moreover, were members of Parliament. In other words, to use a phrase that has become famous, the King reigns but does not govern. Parliarpent really governs, through a committee of its members, the ministers. The ministers must have the support of the majority party in Par- liament, and during all this period they, as a matter of fact, relied 52 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY upon the party of the Whigs. It had been the Whigs who had carried through the revolution of 1688 and who were committed to the The Whigs principle of the Umitation of the royal power in favor of the in power sovereignty of Parliament. As George I and George II owed their throne to this party, and as the adherents of the other great party, the Tory, were long supposed to be supporters of the discarded Stuarts, England entered upon a period of Whig rule, which steadily undermined the authority of the monarch. The Hanoverian kings owed their position as kings to the Whigs. They paid for their right to reign by the abandonment of the powers that had hitherto inhered in the monarch. The change that had come over their position did not escape the attention of the monarchs concerned. George II, compelled to accept ministers he detested, considered himself "aprisoner upon the throne." "Your ministers. Sire," said one of them to him, "are but the instruments of your government." George smiled and replied, "In this country the ministers are king." ENGLAND'S COLONIAL EXPANSION Besides the introduction of this unique form of government the other great achievement of the Whigs during this period was an extraordinary increase in the colonial possessions of England, the Seven the real launching of Britain upon her career as a world power. Years' War ^^ ^ great imperial state. This sudden, tremendous expansion was a result of the Seven Years' War, which raged from 1756 to 1763 in every part of the world, in Europe, in America, in Asia, and on the sea. Many nations were involved and the struggle was highly complicated, but two phases of it stand out particularly and in high relief, the struggle between England and France, and the struggle between Prussia on the one hand and Austria, France, and Russia on the other. The Seven Years' War remains a mighty land- mark in the history of England and of Prussia, its two conspicuous beneficiaries. England found in William Pitt, later Earl of Chatham, an incom- parable leader, a great orator of a declamatory and theatrical type, an incorruptible statesman, a passionate patriot, a man instinct WiUiam itt ^^^^ energy, aglow with pride and confidence in the splen- dor of the destinies reserved for his country. Pitt infused his own energy, his irresistible driving power, into every branch of the public THE EARL OF CHATHAM 53 service. Head of the ministry from 1757 to 176 1, he aroused the na- tional sentiment to such a pitch, he directed the national efforts with such contagious and imperious confidence, that he turned a war that had begun badly into the most glorious and successful that England had ever fought. On the sea, in India, and in America, victory after victory over the French rewarded the nation's extraordinary efforts. Pitt boasted that he alone could save the country. Save it he surely did. He was the greatest of war ministers, im- parting his indomitable reso- lution to multitudes of others. No one, it was said, ever entered his office without com- ing out a braver man. His triumph was complete when Wolfe defeated Montcalm upon the Plains of Abra- ham. By the Peace of Paris, which closed this epochal struggle, England acquired from France disputed areas of Nova Scotia, all of Canada, and the region between the Alleghanies and the Mississippi River, and also acquired peace of Florida from Spain. From France, too, she snatched at the ^"'^ same time supremacy in India. Thus England had become a veri- table world-empire under the inspiring leadership of the "Great Commoner." Her horizons, her interests, had grown vastly more spacious by this rapid increase in military renown, in power, in terri- tory. She had mounted to higher influence in the world, and that, too, at the expense of her old historic enem}^ just across the Channel. GEORGE III AND PARLIAMENT But all this prestige and greatness were imperiled and gravely com- promised by the reign that had just begun. George III had, in 1760, William Pitt, Eael of Chatham 54 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY come to the throne which he was not to leave until claimed by death sixty years later. "The name of George III," writes an English historian, "cannot be penned without a pang, can hardly be penned ■ Accession of witliout a cursc, such mischief was he fated to do the country." I George m Unlike his two predecessors, he was not a German, but was a son of England, had grown up in England and had been educated there, and on his accession, at the age of twenty-two, had announced in his most famous utterance that he "gloried in the name of Briton." But wisdom is no birthright, and George III was not des- tined to show forth in his life the saving grace of that quality. With many personal virtues, he was one of the least wise of monarchs and one of the most obstinate. |» His mother, a German princess, attached to all the despotic notions of her native land, had frequently said to him, "George, be a king." This maternal advice, that he should not follow the example George III of the first two Georges but should mix actively in public to the cabi- affairs, fell upon fruitful soil. George was resolved not only net system . ^ ° -^ to reign, but to govern in the good old monarchical way. This determination brought him into a sharp and momentous clash with the tendency and the desire of his age. The historical signifi- cance of George III lies in the fact that he was resolved to be the chief directing power in the state, that he challenged the system of government which gave that position to Parliament and its ministers, that he threw himself directly athwart the recent constitutional devel- opment, that he intended to break up the practices followed during the last two reigns and to rule personally as did the other sovereigns of the world. As the new system was insecurely established, his vigorous intervention brought on a crisis in which it nearly perished. George III, bent upon being king in fact as well as in name, did not formally oppose the cabinet system of government, but sought to Political make the cabinet a mere tool of his will, filling it with men who methods of would take orders from him, and aiding them in controlling ^""^^^ Parliament by the use of various forms of bribery and in- fluence. It took several years to effect this real perversion of the cabinet system, but in the end the King absolutely controlled the ministry and the two chambers of Parliament. The Whigs, who since 1688 had dominated the monarch and had successfully asserted the predominance of Parliament, were gradually disrupted by the insidious royal policy, and were supplanted by the Tories, who were DISRUPTION OF THE BRITISH EMPIRE 55 ilways favorable to a strong kingship and who now entered upon a jeriod of supremacy which was to last until well into the eighteenth ;entury. After ten years of this mining and sapping the King's ideas tri- miphed in the creation of a ministry which was completely sub- nissive to his will. This ministry, of which Lord North was the xhe ministry eading member, lasted twelve years, from 1770 to 1782. Lord of Lord North "^orth was a minister after the King's own heart. He never pre- ended to be the head of the government, but accepted and executed he King's wishes with the ready obedience of a lackey. The royal LUtocracy was scarcely veiled by the mere continuance of the outer orms of a free government. THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION Having thus secured entire control of ministry and Parliament, jeorge III proceeded to lead the British Empire straight toward lestruction, to what Goldwin Smith has called "the most ragical disaster in English history." The King and his tools nitiated a policy which led swiftly and inevitably to civil war. ^or the American Revolution was a civil war within the British empire. The King had his supporters both in England and in \,merica ; he had opponents both in America and England. Party livisions were much the same in the mother country and in the :olonies, Whigs versus Tories, the upholders of the principle of self- government against the upholders of the principle of the royal )rerogative. In this appalling crisis, not only was the independence )f America involved, but parliamentary government as worked out n England was also at stake. Had George III triumphed not only vould colonial liberties have disappeared, but the right of Parliament :o be predominant in the state at home would have vanished. The A'higs of England knew this well, and their leaders, Pitt, Fox, Burke, jloried in the victories of the rebellious colonists. The struggle for the fundamental rights of free men, for that was vhat the American Revolution signified for both America and Eng- and, was long doubtful. France now took her revenge for the paii of Lord lumiliations of the Seven Years' War by aiding the thirteen ^"""^^ ■olonies, hoping thus to humble her arrogant neighbor, grown so great It her expense. It was the disasters of the American War that saved he parliamentary system of government for England by rendering 56 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY the King unpopular, because disgracefully unsuccessful. In 1782 Lord North and all his colleagues resigned. This was the first time that an entire ministry had been overthrown. George the Third's attempt to be master in the state had failed and although the full consequences of his defeat did not appear for some . . time, nevertheless they were decisive for the future of England. of the The king "might henceforth reign, but he was not to govern. American ^q gg^ ^]^jg cardinal principle of free government under monarch - Revolution ° r- r- & ical forms established, an empire was disrupted. From that disruption flowed two mighty consequences. The principles of republican government gained a field for development in the New World, and those of constitutional or limited monarchy a field in one of the famous countries of the Old. These two types of govern- ment have since exerted a powerful and an increasing influence upon other peoples desirous of controlling their own destinies. Their importance as models worthy of imitation has not yet been exhausted. But the disaster of the American War was so great that the immedi- ate efifect was a decided impairment of England's prestige. It is a En land's curious fact that after that she was considered by most of the loss of rulers of Europe a decaying nation. She had lost her most pres ige valuable colonies in America. The notion was prevalent that her successes in the Seven Years' War had not been due to her own ability but to the incapacity of Louis XV, whereas they had been due to both. The idea that it was possible to destroy England was current in France, the idea that her empire was really a phantom empire which would disappear at the first hostile touch, that India could be detached far more easily than the thirteen colonies had been. It was considered that as she had grown rich she had lost her virility and energy and was undermined by luxury and sloth. At the same time, although in flagrant contradiction to the sentiments just described, there was a vague yet genuine fear of her. Though she had received so many blows, yet she had herself in the past given so many to her rivals and especially to France that they did well to have a lurking suspicion after all as to her entire decadence. The rivalry, centuries old, of France and England, was one of the chief elements of the general European situation. It had shown no signs „ , ^ J of abating. The issues of the French Revolution were to cause England and '' the French it to flame up portentously. It dominated the whole period Revolution ^^^^ ^^ Waterloo. In England the Revolution was des- tined to find its most redoubtable and resolute enemy. THE CONDITION OF ITALY . 57 THE ITALIAN STATES In Italy, on the other hand, it was to find, partly a receptive pupil, partly an easy prey. The most important thing about Italy was that it was unimportant. Indeed there was no Italy, no united, single country, but only a collection of petty states, generally back- . j . ward in their political and economic development. Once lection of masters in their own house, the Italians had long ago fallen ^^^ ^ ^^ from their high estate and had for centuries been in more or less subjection to foreigners, to Spaniards, to Austrians, sometimes to the French. This had reacted unfavorably upon their characters, and had made them timid, time-serving, self-indulgent, pessimistic. They had no great attachment to their governments, save possibly in Piedmont and in the republics of Venice and Genoa, and there was no reason why they should have. Several of the gov- •^g^kness of ernments were importations from abroad, or rather imposi- their govern- tions, which had never struck root in the minds or interests of ™^°*^ the people. The political atmosphere was one of indifference, weari- ness, disillusionment. However, toward the end of the eighteenth century there were signs of an awakening. The Italians could never long be unmindful of the glories of their past. They had their haunting traditions which would never allow them to forget or renounce their rights, however oppressed they might be. They were a people of imagination and of fire, though they long appeared to foreigners quite the reverse, as in fact the very stuff of which willing slaves are made, a view which was seriously erroneous. It cannot be said that there was in the eighteenth century any movement aiming at making Italy a nation, but there were poets and historians who flashed out, now and then, with some patriotic phrase or figure that revealed vividly a shining goal on the distant horizon Aspirations toward which all Italians ought to press. "The day will for unity come," said Alfieri, "when the Italians will be born again, audacious on the field of battle." Humanity was not meant to be shut in by such narrow horizons as those presented by these petty states, but was entitled to more spacious destinies. This longing for national unity was as yet the passion of only a few, of men of imagination who had a lively sense of Italy's great past and who also possessed an instinct for the future. A French writer expressed a mood quite general with cultivated people when she said : "The Italians are far 58 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ITALY IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 1770 THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE 59^ more remarkable because of what they have been and because of what they might be than because of what they now are." Seeds of a new Italy were already germinating. They were not, however, to yield their fruit until well into the nineteenth century. GER]SL\NY — THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE Turning to the east of France we find Germany, the country that was to be the chief battlefield of Europe for many long years, and that was to undergo the most surprising transformations. Ger- xhe German many, like Italy, was a collection of small states, only these states form r , . , . , -^ , the Holy states were tar more numerous than m the penmsula to the Roman south. Germany had a form of unity, at least it pretended E™?""* to have, in the so-called Holy Roman Empire. How many states were included in it, it is difficult to say ; at least 360, if in the reckon- ing are included all the nobles who recognized no superior save the emperor, who held their power directly from him and were subject to no one else. There were more than fifty free or imperial cities, holding directly from the emperor and managing their own affairs ; and numerous ecclesiastical states, all independent of each other. Then there were small states like Baden and Wiirtemberg and Bavaria and many others. In all this empire there were only two states of any importance in the general affairs of Europe — Prussia and Austria. This empire with its high-sounding names, " Holy " and " Roman," ■ was incredibly weak and inefficient. Its emperor, not hereditary but elective, was nothing but a pompous, solemn pretense. He ^^^ had no real authority, could give no orders, could create no phantom armies, could follow out no policies, good or bad, for the ®™p®''°'' German princes had during the course of the centuries robbed him of all the usual and necessary attributes of power. He was little more than a gorgeous figure in a pageant. There were, in addition, an imperial diet or national assembly, and an imperial tribunal, but they were as palsied as was the emperor. What was important in Germany was not the empire, which was powerless for defense, useless for any serious purpose, but the separate states that composed it, and indeed only a few of these had ^j^^ ^^^^^ any significance. All these petty German princelings re- German sponded to two emotions. All were jealous of their independ- ence and all were eager to annex each other's territory. They 6o EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY never thought of the interests of Germany, of the empire, of the Fatherland. What power they had they had largely secured by despoiling the empire. Patriotism was not one of their weaknesses. Each was looking out emphatically for himself. To make a strong, united nation out of such mutually repellent atoms would be nothing less than magical. The material was most unpromising. Neverthe- less the feat has been accomplished, as we shall see, although, as in the case of Italy, not until well on into the nineteenth century. The individual states were everything, the empire was nothing, and with it the French Revolutionists and Napoleon were destined to play Austria and great havoc. Two states, as has been said, counted par- Prussia the ticularly, Austria and Prussia, enemies generally, rivals only impor- ■' a j • tant states always, allies sometimes. Austria was old and famous, in Germany prussia really quite new but rapidly acquiring a formidable reputation for ambition. The former was ruled by the House of Hapsburg, -the latter by the House of Hohenzollern. There was no Austrian nation, but there was the most extraordinary jumble of states and races and languages to be found in Europe, whose sole bond of union was loyalty to the reigning house. The Hapsburg dominions were widely, loosely scattered, though the main bulk The Hapsburg of them was in the Danube valley. There was no common dominions Austrian patriotism ; there were Bohemians, Hungarians, Milanese, Netherlands, Austrians proper, each with a certain sense of unity, a certain self-consciousness, but there was no single nation comprehending, fusing all these elements. Austria was not like France or England. Nevertheless there were twenty-four millions of people under the direction of one man, and therefore they were an important factor in the politics of Europe. PRUSSIA In the case of Prussia, however, we have a real though still rudimen- tary nation, hammered together by hard, repeated, well-directed p . . blows delivered by a series of energetic, ambitious rulers. the Hohen- Prussia as a kingdom dated only from 1 701 , but the heart of this zoUerns state was Brandenburg, and Brandenburg had begun a slow upward march as early as the fifteenth century, when the Hohen- zollerns came from South Germany to take control of it. In the six- teenth century the possessions of this family were scattered from the region of the Rhine to the borders of Russia. How to make them PRUSSIA 6 1 62 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY into a single state, responsive to a single will, was the problem. In each section there were feudal estates, asserting their rights against their ruler. But the Hohenzollerns had a very clear notion of what they wanted. They wished and intended to increase their own power as rulers, to break down all opposition within, and without steadily to aggrandize their domains. In the realization of their program, to which they adhered tenaciously from generation to generation, they were successful. Prussia grew larger and larger, the government became more and more autocratic, and the emphasis in the state came to be more and more placed upon the army. Mirabeau (me- ra-bo') was quite correct when he said that the great national in- dustry of Prussia was war. Prussian rulers were hard-working, generally conceiving their mission soberly and seriously as one of service to the state, not at all as one inviting to personal self-indul- gence. They were hard-headed, and intelligent in developing the economic resources of a country originally little favored by nature. They were attentive to the opportunities afforded by German and European politics for the advancement of rulers who had the neces- sary intelligence and audacity. In the long reign of Frederick II, called the Great (i 740-1 786), and unquestionably far and away the ablest of all the rulers of the Hohenzollern dynasty, we see the bril- liant and faithful expression of the most characteristic features, methods, and aspirations of this vigorous royal house. The successive monarchs of Prussia justified the extraordinary em- phasis they put upon military force by pointing to the fact that their countrv had no natural boundaries but was simply an undif- Importance - '^ -' of the army ferentiated part of the great sandy plain of North German}', m Prussia ^j^^^ ^^ rivcr or no mountain range gave protection, that the way of the invader was easy. This was quite true, but it was also equally true that Prussia's neighbors had no greater protection from her than she from them. As far as geography was concerned, invasion of Prussia was no easier than aggression from Prussia. At any rate every Prussian ruler felt himself first a general, head of an army which it was his pride to increase. Thus the Great Elector, who had ruled from 1640 to 1688, had inherited an army of less than 4,000 men, and had bequeathed one of 24,000 to his successor. The father of Frederick II had inherited one of 38,000 and had left one of 83,000. Thus Prussia with a population of two and a half millions had an army of 83,000, while Austria with a population of 24,000,000 THE YOUTH OF FREDERICK THE GREAT 63 had one of less than 100,000. With this force, highly drilled and amply provided with the sinews of war by the systematic and rigor- ous economies of his father, Frederick was destiried to go far. He is one of the few men who have changed the face of Europe. By war, and the subsidiary arts that minister unto it, Frederick pushed his small state into the very forefront of European politics. Before his reign was half over he had made it one of the Great Powers, every- where reckoned as such, although in population, area, and wealth, compared with the other Great Powers, it was small indeed. FREDERICK THE GREAT As a youth all of Frederick's tastes had been for letters, for art, for music, for philosophy and the sciences, for conversation, for the deli- cacies and elegancies of culture. The French language and French literature were his passion and remained his chief '^ ^°" source of enjoyment all through his life. He wrote French verses, he hated military exercises, he played the flute, he detested tobacco, heavy eating and drinking, and the hunt, which appeared to his father as the natural manly and royal pleasures. The thought that this youth, so indifferent or hostile to, the stern, bleak, serious ideals of duty incumbent upon the royal house for the welfare of Prussia, so interested in the frivolities and fripperies of life, so carelessly self- indulgent, would one day be king and would probably wreck the state by his incompetence and his levity, so enraged the father, Frederick William I, a rough, boorish, tyrannical, hard-working, and intensely patriotic man, that he subjected the Crown Prince to a Draconian discipline which at times attained a pitch of barbarity, caning him in the presence of the army, boxing his ears before' the common people, compelling him from a prison window to witness the execution of his most intimate friend, who had tried to help him escape from this odious tyranny by attempted flight from the country. In such a furnace was the young prince's mettle steeled, his heart hardened. Frederick came out of this ordeal self-contained, cynical, crafty, but sobered and submissive to the fierce paternal will. He did not, according to his father's expression, "kick or rear" again. For several years he buckled to the prosaic task of learning his future trade in the traditional HohenzoUern manner, discharging the duties of minor offices, familiarizing himself with the dry details of administration, and invested with larger responsibilities as 64 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY It was thought his reformation seemed, in the eyes of his father, satisfactorily to progress. When he came to the throne in 1 740 at the age of twenty-eight he came equipped with a free and keen intellect, with a character of iron, ^ J . , and with an ambition that was soon to set the world in flame. Frederick ,r i • becomes He ruled for forty-six years and before half his reign was over ^°^ it was evident that he had no peer in Europe, that he would adopt a manner of life quite dif- ferent from his father's. Instead, however, there was the same austerity, the same simplicity, the same intense devotion to work, the same single- ness of aim, that aim being the exaltation of Prussia. The machinery of government was not altered, but it was now driven at unprecedented speed by this vigorous, aggressive, supple per- sonality. For Frederick possessed supreme abil- ity and displayed it from the day of his accession to the day of his death. He was, as Lord Acton has said, "the most con- summate practical genius that, in modern times, has inherited a throne." His first important act revealed the character Frederick the Great From an engraving by Cunejo, after the painting by Cunningham. Attacks Austria and and the intentions of the ruler. For this man, who as a youth had loathed the life of a soldier and had shirked its obligations seizes Silesia ^^ j^^^ ^^ ^^ ^^^^j^j^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ pj.Qve himself one of the great military commanders of the world's history. He was the most success- FREDERICK'S POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 65 ful of the robber barons in which the annals of Germany abounded, and he had the ethics of the class. He invaded Silesia, a large and rich province belonging to Austria and recognized as hers by a pe- culiarly solemn treaty signed by Prussia. But Frederick wanted it and considered the moment opportune as an inexperienced young woman, Maria Theresa (ma-re'-a te-re'-sa), had just ascended the Austrian throne. " My soldiers were ready, my purse was full," said Frederick concerning this famous raid. Of all the inheritance of Maria Theresa, "Silesia," said he, "was that part which was most useful to the House of Brandenburg." " Take what you can," he also remarked, "you are never wrong unless you are obliged to give Frederick's back." In these utterances Frederick paints himself and his political reign in imperishable colors. Success of the most palpable p"""^"!"'^^ sort was his reward. Neither plighted faith, nor chivalry toward a woman, nor any sense of personal honor ever deterred him from any policy that might promise gain to Prussia. One would scarcely suspect from such hardy sentiments that Frederick had as a young man written a treatise against the statecraft of Machiavelli (mak-i-a- v^el'-li). That eminent Florentine would, it is safe to say, have been entirely content with the practical precepts according to which his titled critic fashioned his actual conduct. The true, authentic spirit Df Machiavelli's political philosophy has never been expressed with greater brevity and precision than by Frederick. "If there is any- thing to be gained by being honest, honest we will be ; and if it is necessary to deceive, let us be scoundrels." If there is any defense for Frederick's conduct to be found in the [act that his principles or his lack of them were shared by most of his :rowned contemporaries and by many other rulers before and since, lie is entitled to that defense. He himself, however, was never much :oncerned about this aspect of the matter. It was, in his opinion, frankly negligible. Frederick seized Silesia with ease in 1740, so unexpected was the attack. He thus added to Prussia a territory larger than Massa- Ausetts, Connecticut, and Rhode Island combined, and a pop- The Siiesian ulation of over a million and a quarter. But having seized it, ^^'s lie was forced to fight intermittently for twenty-three years before he could be sure of his ability to retain it. The first two Siiesian wars ( 1 740-1 748) are best known in history as the wars of the Austrian Succession. The third was the Seven Years' War, a world conflict, as 66 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY we have seen, involving most of the great states of Europe, but im- portant to Frederick mainly because of its relation to his retention of Silesia. THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR It was the Seven Years' War (i 756-1 763) that made the name and fame of Frederick ring throughout the world. But that deadly struggle several times seemed about to engulf him and his country in utter ruin. Had England not been his ally, aiding with her subsidies and with her campaigns against France, in Europe, Asia, America, and on the high seas, thus preventing that country from fully co- operating against Prussia, Frederick must have failed. The odds against him were stupendous. He, the ruler of a petty state with not more than 4,000,000 inhabitants, was confronted by a coalition of Austria, France, Russia, Sweden, and many little German states, with a total population perhaps twenty times as large as Prussia's. This coalition had already arranged for the division of his kingdom. He was to be left only Brandenburg, the primitive core of the state, the original territory given to the House of HohenzoUern in 141 5 by the emperor. Practically the entire continent was united against this little state which a short time before had hardly entered in to the calculations Con uest of o^ European politics. But Frederick was undaunted. He Saxony overran Saxony, a neutral country, seized its treasury because he needed it, and, by a flagrant breach of international usage, forced its citizens to fight in his armies, which were thus considerably increased. When reproached for this unprecedented act he laconi- cally replied that he rather prided himself on being original. The war thus begun had its violent ups and downs. Attacked from the south by the Austrians, from the east by the Russians, and always outnumbered, Frederick, fighting a defensive war, owed his salvation to the rapidity of his manoeuvres, to the slowness of those of his enemies, to his generally superior tactics, and to the fact that there was an entire lack of coordination among his adversaries. He Rossbadi, won the battle of Rossbach in 1757, his most brilliant victory, November s. whose fame has not yet died away. With an army of only ^'^^ 20,000 he defeated a combined French and German army of 55,000 in an engagement that lasted only an hour and a half, took 16,000 prisoners, seventy- two cannon, and sustained a loss of less FREDERICK AND THE SEVEN YEARS' WAR 67 :han a thousand men himself. Immense was the enthusiasm evoked )y this Prussian triumph over what was reputed to be the finest irmy in Europe. It mattered little that the majority of the con- quered army were Germans. The victory was popularly considered me of Germans over French, and such has remained its reputation ;ver since in the German national consciousness, thus greatly stirred md vivified. Two years later Frederick suffered an almost equally disastrous iefeat at the hands of the Austrians and Russians at Kunersdorf. 'I have had two horses killed under me," he wrote the night ifter this battle, "and it is my inisfortune that I still live Kunersdorf, nyself. ... Of an army of 48,000 men I have only 3,000 August 12, eft. ... I have no more resources and, not to lie about it, '. think everything is lost." Later, after another disaster, he wrote : "I should like to hang my- ielf, but we must act the play to the end." In this temper he fought )n, year after year, through elation, through depression, with ^ ^ ^^^^^ iefeat behind him and defeat staring him in the face, relieved character of -yy occasional successes, saved by the incompetence and folly * ^ ^^^ )f his enemies, then plunged in gloom again, but always fighting for :ime and for some lucky stroke of fortune, such as the death of a lostile sovereign with its attendant interruption or change of policy, rhe story is too crowded, too replete with incident, to be condensed lere. Only the general impression of a prolonged, racking, desperate struggle can be indicated. Gritty, cool, alert, and agile, Frederick nanaged to hold on until his enemies were willing to make peace. He came out of this war with his territories intact but not increased, silesia he retained, but Saxony he was forced to relinquish. ^^^ , ^e came out of it, also, prematurely old, hard, bitter, mis- Seven Years' mthropic, but he had made upon the world an indelible im- ^' Dression. His people had been decimated and appallingly im- Doverished ; nevertheless he was the victor and great was his renown. Frederick had conquered Silesia in a month and had then spent many ^ears fighting to retain it. All that he had won was fame, but that he mjoyed in full and overflowing measure. THE LATER YEARS OF THE REIGN Frederick lived twenty-three years longer, years of unremitting and /ery fruitful toil. In a hundred ways he sought to hasten the recuper- 68 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY ation and the development of his sorely visited land, draining marshes, clearing forests, encouraging industries, opening schools, Frederick in welcoming and favoring immigrants from other countries. time of Indeed over 300,000 of these responded to the various induce- peace ments offered, and Frederick founded more than 800 villages. He reorganized the army, replenished the public treasury, remodeled the legal code. In religious affairs he was the most tolerant ruler in Europe, giving refuge to the Jesuits when they were driven out of Catholic countries — France, Portugal, Spain — and when their order was abolished by the Pope himself. "In Prussia," said he, "every one has the right to win salvation in his own way." In practice this was about the only indubitable right the individual possessed, for Frederick's government was unlimited, although cht^rTcter of frequently enlightened, despotism. His was an absolute his govern- monarchy, surrounded by a privileged nobility, resting upon an impotent mass of peasantry. His was a militarist state and only nobles could become general officers. Laborious, rising at three in summer, at four in the winter, and holding himself tightly to his mission as "first servant to the King of Prussia," Frederick knew more drudgery than pleasure. But he was a tyrant to his finger tips, and we do not find in the Prussia of his day any room made for that spirit of freedom which was destined in the immediate future to wrestle in Europe with this outworn system of autocracy. In 1772 the conqueror of Silesia proceeded to gather new laurels of a similar kind. In conjunction with the monarchs of Russia and The first Austria he partially dismembered Poland, a crime of which the partition of world has not yet heard the last. The task was easy of ° ^"^ accomplishment, as Poland was defenseless. Frederick frankly admitted that the act was that of brigands, and his opinion has been ratified by the general agreement of posterity. When Frederick died in 1786, at the age of seventy-four, he left his kingdom nearly doubled in size and with a population more than p . . . doubled. In all his actions he thought, not of Germany, but of the Great Prussia, always Prussia. Germany was an abstraction that an ermany ^^^ ^^ j^^j^ upon his practical mind. He considered the German language boorish, "a jargon, devoid of every grace," and he was sure that Germany had no literature worthy of the name. Nevertheless, he was regarded throughout German lands, beyond Prussia, as a national hero, and he filled the national thought and GERMANY IN 1789 llohrnzollorn Lands Wot lin T.a n.ls Wittolshnrh Lands Prussia I I Albertine I I Bavaria Franconian line I I Ernestine I 1 Palatinate Ol.lo nbnriS Lands Haps biirii L ands r~ I nenniark I I Imperial Cities I ^ I I I llol!,tein and i I Kcclesiastical I I Oldenburg States iickstiidt •Mt-CI Altopa Laucji- g .aucnburi THE RISE OF RUSSIA 69 imagination as no other German had done since Luther. His per- sonaUty, his ideas, and his methods became an enduring and potent factor in the development of Germany. But the trouble with despotism as a form of government is that a strong or enlightened despot may so easily be succeeded by a feeble or foolish one, as proved to be the case when Frederick died a weak and was succeeded in 1786 by Frederick William II, under suc^elds a whom and under whose successor came evil days, contrasting strong one most unpleasantly with the brilliant ones that had gone be- fore. RUSSIA Lying beyond Austria and Prussia, stretching awaj^ indefinitely into the east, was the other remaining great power in European politics, Russia. Though the largest state on the continent, Russia did not enter upon the scene of European politics as a factor of importance until very late, indeed until the eighteenth century. During that century she took her place among the great European powers and her influence in the world went on increasing down to the outbreak, in 19 14, of the European War. Her previous history had been peculiar, Race and differing in many and fundamental respects from that of her religion western neighbors. She had lived apart, unnoticed and unknown. She was connected with Europe by two ties, those of race and religion. The Russians were a Slavic people, related to the Poles, the Bohemians, the Serbs, and the other branches of that great family which spreads over Eastern Europe. And as early as the tenth century they had been converted to Christianity, not to that form that prevailed in the West, but to the Orthodox Greek form, which had its seat in Constantinople. The missionaries who had brought religion and at the same time the beginnings of civilization had come from that city. After the conquest of Constantinople by the infidel Turks in 1453 the Russians considered themselves its legit- imate heirs, the representatives of its ideas and traditions. Con- stantinople and the Eastern Empire of which it had been the capital exercised over their imaginations a spell that only increased with time. But the great central fact of Russian history for hundreds of years was not her connection with Europe, which, after all, was slight, but 70 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY her connection with Asia, which was close and profound in its effects. The Principality of Muscovy, as Russia was then called from its Russia in- capital, Moscow, was conquered by the Mongols, barbarians conquered by ^rom Asia, in the thirteenth century, and for nearly three Asiatic tribes hundred years Russian princes paid tribute and made occa- sional visits of submission to the far-off Great Khan. Though con- stantly resenting this subjection, they did not escape its effects. They themselves became half-Asiatic. The men of Russia dressed in Oriental fashion, wearing the long robes with long sleeves, the tur- bans, and slippers of the East. They wore their hair and beards long. The women were kept secluded and were heavily veiled when in public. A young girl saw her husband for the first time the day of her marriage. There was no such thing as society as we understand the term. The government was an Oriental tyranny, unrestrained, regardless of human life. In addressing the ruler a person must completely prostrate himself, his forehead touching the floor; a difficult as well as a degrading attitude for one human being to assume toward another. In time the Russians threw off the Mongol domination, after ter- rible struggles, and themselves in turn conquered northern Asia, that is, Siberia. A new royal house came to the throne in 1613, the House of Romanoff, which ruled in Russia until 191 7. PETER THE GREAT, 1672-1725 But the Russians continued to have only the feeblest connection with Europe, knowing little of its civilization, caring less, content to vegetate in indolence and obscurity. Out of this dull and laggard state they were destined to be roughly and emphatically roused by one of the most energetic rulers known to history, Peter the Great, whose reign of thirty-six years (1689-1725) marks a tremendous epoch, both by what it actually accomplished and by what it indicated ought to be the goal of national endeavor. As a boy Peter had been given no serious instruction, no training in self-control, but had been allowed to run wild, and had picked up all Peter's sorts of acquaintances and companions, many of them for- boyhood eigncrs. It was the chance association with Europeans liv- ing in the foreign quarter of Moscow that proved the decisive fact of • his life, shaping his entire career. From them he got a most irregular, haphazard, but original education, learning a little German, a little THE YOUTH OF PETER THE GREAT 71 Dutch, some snatches of science, arithmetic, geometry. His chief boyish interest was in mechanics and its relation to the mihtary art. With him playing soldier was more serious than with most boys. He used to build wooden fortresses, surrounded with walls and moats and bastions. Some of his friends would defend the redoubt while he and the others at- tacked it. Sometimes lives were lost, always some were wounded. Such are the fortunes of war, though not usually of juvenile war. "The boy is amusing himself," was the comment of his sister, who was exercising the regency in his name. Passionately fond of mili- tary games, Peter was also absorbingly inter- ested in boats and ships, and eagerly learned all he could of navigation, which was not much, for the arts of shipbuilding and navigation were in their very infancy in Russia. Learning that his sister Sophia was planning to ignore his right to the throne and to become ruler herself, he dropped his sham fights and his sailing, swept his sister aside into a nunnery, and assumed control of the state. Convinced that Europe was in every way su- xhe acces- perior to Russia, that Russia had everything to gain and ^^°^ °* Petei nothing to lose from a knowledge of the ways and institutions of the western countries, Peter's policy from the beginning to the end of his reign was to bring about the closest possible connection between his backward country and the progressive and brilliant civilization which had been built up in England, France, Holland, Italy, and Germany. Peter the Great From an engraving by Anderloni. 72 EUROPE L\ THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY But even with the best intentions this was not an easy task. For Russia had no point of physical contact with the nations of Western The Dolic Europe. She could 'not freely communicate with them, for of the " opcB between her and them was a wall consisting of Sweden, Poland, ^'" °^ and Turkey. Russia was nearly a land-locked country. Sweden controlled all that coast line along the Baltic which ultimately became Russian, Turkey controlled all the coast line of the Black Sea. The only port Russia possessed was far to the north, at Archangel, and this was frozen during nine months of the year. To communicate freely and easily with the West, Russia must "open a window" somewhere, as Peter expressed it. Then the light could stream in. He must have an ice-free port in European waters. To secure this he fought repeated campaigns against Turkey and Sweden. W^ith the latter power there was intermittent war for twenty years, very successful in the end, though only after distressing reverses. He conquered the Baltic Provinces from Sweden, Courland, Esthonia, and Livonia, and thus secured a long coast line. Russia might now have a navy and a merchant fleet and sea-borne commerce. "It is not land I want, but water," Peter had said. He now had enough, at least to begin with. Meanwhile he had sent fifty young Russians of the best families to England, Holland, and Venice to learn the arts and sciences of the , West, especially shipbuilding and fortifications. Later he had travels in gone himself for the same purpose, to study on the spot the the West civilization whose superiority he recognized and intended to im- pose upon his own country, if that were possible. This was a famous voyage. Traveling under the strictest incognito, as "Peter Mikail- ovitch," he donned laborer's clothes and worked for months in the shipyards of Holland and England. He was interested in everything. He visited mills and factories of every kind, asking innumerable questions: "What is this for? How does that work?" He made a sheet of paper with his own hands. During his hours of recreation he visited museums, theaters, hospitals, galleries. He saw printing presses in operation, attended lectures on anatomy, studied surgerj' a little, and even acquired some proficiency in the humble and useful art of pulling teeth. He bought collections of laws, and models of all sorts of machines, and engaged many officers, me- chanics, printers, architects, sailors, and workmen of every kind, to go to Russia to engage in the task of imparting instruction to THE REFORMS OF PETER THE GREAT 73 a nation which, in Peter's opinion, needed it and should receive it, willy-nilly. Peter was called home suddenly by the news of a revolt among the imperial troops devoted to the old regime and apprehensive of the coming innovations. They were punished with every refine- g^ ment of savage cruelty, their regiments disbanded, and a revolt at veritable reign of terror preceded the introduction of the °°^^ new system. PETER'S TRANSFORMATION OF RUSSIA Then the Czar began with energy his transformation of Russia, as he described it. The process continued all through his reign. It was not an elaborate, systematic plan, deliberately worked out ^j^^ beforehand, but first this reform, then that, was adopted and of Peter's enforced, and in the end the sum total of all these measures of '^ ^"^"^ detail touched the national life at nearly every point. Some of them concerned manners and customs, others economic matters, others matters purely political. . Peter at once fell upon the long beards and Oriental costumes, which, in his opinion, symbolized the con- servatism of Old Russia, which he was resolved to shatter. Arming himself with a pair of shears, he himself clipped the liberal beards and moustaches of many of his nobles, and cut their long coats at the knee. They must set the style and the style must be that of France and Germany. Having given this sensational exhibition of his imperial purpose, he then compromised somewhat, allowing men to wear their beards long, but only on condition of submitting to a graduated tax upon those ornaments. The approbation of the emperor, the compulsion of fashion, combined with considerations of economy, rapidly wrought a surprising change in the appearance of the manhood of Russia. Barbers and tailors were stationed at the entrances of towns to facilitate the process by slashing the offending members until they conformed to European standards. Women were forbidden to wear the veil and were released from the captivity of the harem, or terem, as it was called in Russia. Peter had attended the "assemblies" of France and England and had seen men and women dancing and conversing together in public. He now ordered the husbands and fathers of Russia to bring their wives and daughters to all social entertainments. The adjustments were awkward at first, the women frequently standing or sitting 74 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY stiffly apart at one end of the room, the men smoking and drinking by themselves at the otlier. But finally society as understood ih Europe emerged from these temporary and amusing difficulties. Peter gave lessons in dancing to some of his nobles, having himself acquired that accomplishment while on his famous trip. They were expected, in turn, to pass the art on to others. The organs of government, national and local, were remodeled by the adoption of forms and methods known to Sweden, Germany, and other countries, and the state became more efficient and at Creation of ' an army and the samc time more powerful. The army was enlarged, ^ "^^^^ equipped, and trained mainly in imitation of Germany. A navy was created and the importance of the sea to the general life of the nation gradually dawned upon the popular intelligence. The economic development of the country was begun, factories were established, mines were opened, and canals were cut. The church was brought into closer subjection to the state. Measures were taken against vagabondage and robbery, widely prevalent evils. Education of a practical sort was encouraged. The Julian calendar was introduced and is still in force, though the other nations of Europe have since adopted another and more accurate chronology. Peter even undertook to reform the language of Russia, striking out eight of the more cumbersome letters of the alphabet and simpli- fying the form of some of the others. All these changes encountered resistance, resistance born of indo- lence, of natural conservatism, of religious scruples — was it not ^ . impious for Holy Russia to abandon her native customs and to llesistance ' i i ■ to these imitate the heretics of the West ? But Peter went on smashing reforms j^-g ^^y through as bcst he could, crushing opposition by fair means and by foul, for the quality of the means was a matter of in- difference to him, if only they were successful. Here we have the spectacle of a man who, himself a semi-barbarian, was bent upon civilizing men more barbarous than he. As the ancient capital, Moscow, was the stronghold of stif^ conserv- atism, was wedded to the old ideas and customs, Peter resolved to ^, , J. build a new capital on the Baltic. There, on islands and The foundmg '■ of Saint marshcs at the mouth of a river which frequently overflowed, Petersburg ^^ built at frightful cost in human life and suffering the city of St. Petersburg. Everything had to be created literally from the ground up. Forests of piles had to be driven into the slime to the THE FOUNDING OF SAINT PETERSBURG 75 solid earth beneath to furnish the secure foundations. Tens of "thousands of soldiers and peasants were drafted for the work. At first they had no implements, but were forced to dig with sticks and carry the rubbish away in their coats. No adequate provisions were made for them ; they slept unprotected in the open air, their food was insufftcient, and they died by thousands, only to be replaced by other thousands. All through the reign the desperate, rough process went on. The will of the autocrat, rich in expedients, triumphed over all obstacles. Every great landowner was required to build in the city a residence of a certain size and style. No ship might enter without bringing a certain quantity of stone for building purposes. St. Petersburg was cut by numerous canals, as were the cities of Holland. The Czar required the nobles to possess boats. Some of them, not proficient in the handling of these novel craft, were drowned. Toward the close of this reign Peter transferred the government to this city which stood on the banks of the Neva, a monument to his imagination, his energy, and his persistence, a city with no hampering traditions, with no past, but with only an un- trammeled future, an appropriate expression of the spirit of the New Russia which Peter was laboring to create. PETER'S CHARACTER He was, indeed, a strange leader for a people which needed above all to shake itself free from what was raw and crude, he was himself so raw and crude. A man of violent passions, capable and guilty of orgies of dissipation, of acts of savage cruelty, hard and fiendish in his treatment even of those nearest to him, his sister, his wife, and his son, using willingly as instruments of progress the atrocious knout and wheel and stake, Peter was neither a model ruler, nor a model man. Yet, with all these traits of primal barbarism in his nature, he had many redeeming points. Good-humored, frank, and companionable under ordinary circumstances, he was entirely natural, as loyal in his friendships as he was bitter in his enmities. Masterful, titanic, there was in him a wild vitality, an immense energy, and he was great in the singleness of his aim. He did not succeed in transforming Russia ; that could not be accomplished in one generation nor in two. But he left an army of 200,000 men, he connected Russia with the sea by the coast line of the Baltic, thus 76 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY opening a contact with countries that were more advanced, intel- lectually and socially, and he raised a standard and started a tradition. PETER'S SUCCESSORS Then followed upon his death a series of mediocre rulers, under whom it seemed likely that the ground gained might be lost. But Elizabeth under Elizabeth (1741-1762) Russia played an important part (1741-1762) in the Seven Years' War, thus showing her altered position in Europe, and with the ad- vent of Catherine II (1762- 1 796) the process of Europeanizing Russia and of expanding her territories and magnify- ing her position in in- ternational politics was resumed with vigor and carried out with success. Catherine was a Ger- man princess, the wife of the Czar Peter III, Catherine the Great who, prOVmg a (1762-1796) worthless ruler, was deposed, after a reign of a few months, then done to death, probably with the connivance of his wife. Catherine became empress, and for thirty- four years ruled Russia with an iron hand. Fond of pleasure, fond of work, a woman of intellectual tastes or at least pretensions, which she satisfied by intimate correspondence with Voltaire, Diderot, and other French philosophers of the day, being rewarded for her condescension and her favors by their enthusiastic praise of her as the "Semiramis of the North," Catherine passes as one of the enlightened despots of her century. Being of western birth, she naturally sympathized with the policy of introducing western civilization into Russia, and gave that policy her vigorous support. Catherine II After the portrait by Shebanoff. CATHERINE THE GREAT 77 But her chief significance in history is her foreign policy. Three countries, we have seen, stood between Russia and the countries of Western Europe — Sweden, Poland, and Turkey. Peter had conquered the first and secured the water route by the Baltic. Cath- ^ ,. • , •> Catherine s erine devoted her entire reign to conquering the other two. foreign The former she accomplished by infamous means and with ^° "^^ rare completeness. By the end of her reign Poland had been utterly destroyed and Russia had pushed her boundaries far westward until they touched those of Prussia and Austria. Catherine was not able to dismember Turkey as Poland was dismembered, but she gained from her the Crimea and the northern shores of the Black Sea from the Caucasus to the Dniester. She had even dreamed of driving the Turk entirely from Europe and of extending her own influence down to the Mediterranean by the establishment of a Byzantine empire that should be dependent upon Russia. But any dream of getting to Constantinople was a dream indeed, as the troubled history of a subsequent century was to show. Henceforth, however, Europe could count on one thing with certainty ; namelj^, that Russia would be a factor to be considered in any rearrangement of the map of the Balkan peninsula, in any determination of the Eastern ques- tion. This rise of Russia, like the rise of Prussia, to a position of com- manding importance in European politics, was the work of the eighteenth century. Both were characteristic products of that age. EUROPEAN CIVILIZATION IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY The more one examines in general the governtnents of Europe in I the eighteenth century, and the policies which they followed or attempted to follow, the less is one impressed with either their , I ^ ' ^ Low tone of ( wisdom or their morality. The control was everywhere in the European I hands of the few and was everywhere directed to the advan- p°'^*"^^ tage of the few. The idea that it was the first duty of the state to assure, if possible, the welfare of the great majority of the _. . . ^ people was not the idea recognized in actual practice. The aggrandize- first duty of the state was to increase its dominions by hook or ^^^'^ crook, and to provide for the satisfaction of the rulers and the privi- leged classes. One could find in all Europe hardly a trace of what we call democracy. Europe was organized aristocrati- everywiTe're^ cally, and for the benefit of aristocracies. This was true even in power 78 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY in such a country as England, which had a parhament and estab- hshed liberties ; even in republics, like Venice or Genoa or the cantons of Switzerland. The condition of the vast mass of the people in every country was the thing least considered. It was everjrwhere deplorable, though varying more or less in different countries. The masses, who condition of were peasants, were weighed down and hemmed in by laws the masses ^^^ institutions and customs that took no account of their well-being. In one way or another they were outrageously taxed, so that but a small fraction of what they earned went for their own support. Throughout most of Europe they did not possess what we regard as the mere beginnings of personal liberty, for, except in England and France, serfdom, with all its paralyzing restrictions, was in force. No one dreamed that the people were entitled to education so that they might be better equipped for life. The great substructure of European society was an unhappy, unfree, unpro- tected, undeveloped mass of human beings, to whom opportunity for growth and improvement was closed on every side. If the governments of Europe did not seriously consider the interest of the most numerous and weakest class, on whose well-being de- A gloomy pended absolutely the ultimate well-being of the nations, outlook (^[(^ they discharge their other obligations with any greater understanding or sense of justice? It cannot be said that they did. The distempers in every state were numerous and alarming. The writings of contemporaries abound in gloomy prophecies. There was a widespread feeling that revolutions, catastrophes, ruin were im- pending, that the body politic was nowhere in sound condition, extravagance Exccssive expenditures for the maintenance of extravagant and taxation ^^Q^-^g^ foj- sumptuous buildings, for favorites of every stripe and feather, excessive expenditures for armies and for wars, which were frequent, resulted in increasing disorder in the finances of the various nations. States resorted more and more to loans with the result that the income had to go for the payment of the interest. Deficits were chronic, and no country except England had a budget, or public and official statement of expenditures and receipts. Taxes were increasing and were detestably distributed. Everywhere in Europe the richer a man was the less he paid proportionately. As new taxes were imposed, exemptions, complete or partial, went with them, and the exemptions were for the nobility and, in part THE DESPOTS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 79 for the middle classes, where such existed. Crushing therefore was the burden of the lower orders. It was truly a vicious circle. These evils were so apparent that now and then they prompted the governing authorities to attempt reform. Several rulers in various countries made earnest efforts to improve conditions. These Benevolent were the "benevolent despots" of the eighteenth century despotism who tried reform from above before the French tried it from below. On the whole they had no great or permanent success, and the need of thoroughgoing changes remained to trouble the future. Not only were the governments of Europe generally inefficient in all that concerned the full, symmetrical development of the economic, intellectual, and moral resources of the people, not only were _, ' I r- I J fjjg govern- they generally repressive and oppressive, allowing little scope to ments of the principle of liberty, but they were, in their relations to ^""""p® each other, unprincipled, unscrupulous. The state was conceived as force, not at all as a moral being, subject to moral obligations and restraints. The glory of rulers consisted in extending the boundaries of their states, regardless of the rights of other Material peoples, regardless even of the rights of other rulers. The success the code that governed their relations with each other was prim- ard of con- itive indeed. Any means were legitimate, success was the *^"*^* only standard of right or wrong. "He who gains nothing, loses," wrote Catherine of Russia, one of the "enlightened" despots. The dominant idea in all government circles was that the greatness of the state was in proportion to its territorial extent, not in proportion to the freedom, the prosperity, the education of its people. The prevalence of this idea brought it about that every nation sought to be ready to take advantage of any weakness or distress that might appear in the situation of its neighbors. Armies must be con- ^, , . . The faith- stantly at hand and diplomacy must be ready for any scurvy lessness of trick or infamous crime that might promise hope of gain. It ™°"^''*=^s followed that treaties were to be broken whenever there was any advantage in breaking them. "It is a mistake to break your word without reason," said Frederick II, "for thus you gain the reputation of being light and fickle." To keep faith with each other was no duty of rulers. There was consequently no certainty in interna- tional agreements. This indifference to solemn promises was nothing new. The eight- eenth century was full of flagrant violations of most explicit interna- 8o EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY tional agreements. There was no honor among nations. No state had any rights which any other state was bound to respect. These monarchs, "enhghtened" and "benevolent" or not, as the case ^, . might be, all agreed that they ruled by divine right, bv the The insecu- ^ '^ ....... . . ^ . . ■ rity of will of God. Yet this decidedly imposing origin of their ^*^'^^ authority gave them no sense of security in their relations with each other, nor did it give to their reigns any exceptional purity or unworldly character. The maxims of statecraft which they followed were of the earth, earthy. While bent upon increasing their own power they did not neglect the study of the art of undermining each other's power, however divinely buttressed in theory it might be. Monarchs were dethroned, states were extinguished, boundaries were changed and changed again, as the result of aggressive wars, during the eighteenth century. Moreover, the wars of that Wars of ag- =' * •' . , . gression time Were famous for the exactions of the victors and for the numerous scandalous fortuiies made by some of the commaiidcrs. It was not the French Revolutionists nor was it Napoleon who introduced these customs into Europe. They could not, had they tried, have lowered the tone of war or statecraft in Europe. At the worst they might only imitate their predecessors. HOW THE OLD REGIME WAS UNDERMINED The Old Regime in Europe was to be brought tumbling down in unutterable confusion as a result of the storm which was brewing in France and which we are now to study. But that regime had been undermined, the props that supported it had been destroyed, by its own official beneficiaries and defenders. The Old Regime was disloyal to the very principles on which it rested, respect for the established order, for what was old and traditional, for what had come down from the past, regard for legality, for engagements, among loyalty to those in authority. How little regard the monarchs monarchs ^^ Europe themselves had for principles which they were accus- tomed to pronounce sacred, for principles in which alone lay their own safety, was shown by the part they played in the great events of the eighteenth century already alluded to, the war of the Austrian grabs Succession, and the Partition of Poland. By the first the ruler suesia q£ Austria, Maria Theresa, was robbed of the large and valuable province of Silesia by Prussia, aided by France, both of which states 82 EUROPE IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY The Par- tition of Poland had recently signed a peculiarly solemn treaty called the Prag- matic Sanction, by which her rights had been explicitly and emj^hati- cally recognized. Frederick II, however, wanted the province, took it, and kept it. This case shows how lightly monarchs regarded legal obligations, when they conflicted with their ambitions. The other case, the Partition of Poland, was the most iniquitous act of the century. Poland was in geographical extent the largest state in Europe, next to Russia. Its history ran far back. But its govern- ment was utterly weak. Therefore in 1772 Prussia, Austria, and Russia at- tacked it for no cause save their own greed, and tore great fragments away, annexing them to their own territories. Twenty years later they completed the process in two additional partitions, in 1793 and 1795, thus entirely annihilating an ancient state. This shows how much regard the monarchs of Europe had for established institu- tions, for established authorities. Two things only counted in Old Europe — force and will, the will of the sovereign. But force and will Force, the ^ order of the may be used quite as easily for revolution, for the overthrow ^^^ of what is old and sacred, as for its preservation. There need be no surprise at anything that we may find Napoleon doing. He had a sufficient pattern and exemplar in Frederick the Great and in Catherine of Russia, only recently deceased when his meteoric career began. Maria Theresa From a pastel in the possession of the Grand Duke Frederick, Vienna. CLIMAX OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 83 The eighteenth century attained its legitimate dimax in its closing decade, a memorable period in the history of the world. The The crash Old Regime in Europe was rudely shattered by the overthrow of R/*imf In the Old Regime in France, which country, by its astonishing Europe actions, was to dominate the next quarter of a century. REFERENCES Age or William Pitt : Larson, Short History of England, Chap. XXI ; Macaulay, Essays, William Pitt, Earl of Chatham. William Pitt and the Conquest of Canada : Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 452-465; F. Harrison, Chatham, pp. 94-113; Green, Short History of the English People, pp. 745-757. The Seven Years' War and the Intjependence of the United States : Green, pp. 757-786. The Industrial Revolution and the x\merican Revolution : Cheyney, Short History of England, pp. 576-596. British Colonial Expansion : Seeley, Expansion of England, Lect. IV. Frederick William I, the Father of Frederick the Great : Henderson, Short History of Germany, II, 87-104; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution 6f Prussia, pp. loi-iii ; Lavisse, The Youth of Frederick the Great, Chap. II ; Carlyle, Frederick the Great, Vol. I, Book IV, Chaps. Ill and IV. The Youth of Frederick the Great: Henderson, Vol. II, pp. 111-122; Lavisse, The Youth of Frederick the Great; R. P. Dunn Pattison, Leading Figures in European History, pp. 329-357; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 65-67. The Wars OF Frederick THE Great : Henderson, Vol. II, Chap. IV; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 10-22. Frederick the Great in Time of Peace: Henderson, Vol. II, Chap. V; Priest, pp. 23-24. Frederick the Great ant) the First Partition of Poland : Perkins, France under Louis XV, Vol. I, Chap. XXI; Rambaud, The History of Russia, Vol. II, pp. 122-130. Russia before Peter the Great: Rambaud, Vol. I, Chap. XX; Morfill, Story of Russia, Chaps. V and VI. Peter the Great's Travels in the West: Oscar Browning, Peter the Great, Chaps. X-XII; Motley, Peter the Great, pp. 7-27; Rambaud, Vol. I, Chap. XXII. Reforms of Peter the Great: Wakeman, The Ascendancy of France, pp. 299-310; Browning, Peter the Great, Chap. XV; Schuyler, Peter the Great, Vol. I, Chap. XXV ; Vol. II, Chaps. LVII and LXIII. The Fount)ing of St. Petersburg : Schuyler, Vol. II, Chap. XL VI ; Browning, Chap. XX. CHAPTER IV THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE THE FRENCH REVOLUTION The French Revolution brought with it a new conception of the state, new principles of politics and of society, a new outlook upon life, a new faith which seized the imagination of multitudes, inspiring j them with intense enthusiasm, arousing boundless hopes, and pre- cipitating a long and passionate struggle with all those who feared or hated innovation, who were satisfied with things as they were, who found their own conditions of life comfortable and did Attracts liberals not wish to be disturbed. Soon France and Europe were everywhere (jiyided into two camps, the reformers and the conservatives, those believing in radical changes along many lines and those who believed in preserving what was old and tried, either because they and repels profited by it or because they felt that men were happier and conservatives more prosperous in living under conditions and with institu- tions to which they were accustomed than under those that might be ideally more perfect but would at any rate be strange and novel and uncertain. RELICS OF FEUDALISM In order to understand the French Revolution it is necessary to ex- amine the conditions and institutions of France out of which it grew ; The Revoiu- i"^ Other words, the Old Regime. Only thus can we get our tion a transi- sense of perspective, our standard of values and of criticism, feudalism to The Revolution accomplished a sweeping transformation in democracy ^^g jj£g ^^ France. Putting it in a single phrase it accom- plished the transition from the feudal system of the preceding cen- turies to the democratic system of the modern world. The entire structure of the French state and of French society was remodeled and planted on new and far-reaching principles. 84 MONARCHY BY DIVINE RIGHT 85 The essence of the feudal system was class divisions and acknowl- idged privileges for all classes above the lowest. The essence of ^^^^^^.^ of he new system is the removal of class distinctions, the aboli- the feudal tion of privileges, the introduction of the principle of the ^^^ ^™ quality of men, wherever possible. What strikes one most in contemplating the Old Regime is the jrevalence and the oppressiveness of the privileges that various ;lasses enjoyed. Society was simply honeycombed with ;hem. They affected life constantly and at every point. Regime [t is not an easy society to describe in a few words, for the ^^^^_^ "^ i . privilege irariations were almost endless. But, broadly speaking, md leaving details aside, French society was graded from top to jottom, and each grade differed, in legal rights, in opportunities for enjoyment and development, in power. The system culminated in the monarch, the lofty and glittering jhead of the state, the embodiment of the might and the majesty of the ination. The king claimed to rule by the will of God, that is, „, by divine right, not at all by the consent of the people. He was divine right responsible to no one but God. Consequently in the actual ° ^'^^^ o^iuluct of his office he was subject to no control. He was an absolute m )narch. He could do as he chose. It was for the nation to obey. The will of the king and that alone was, in theory, the only thing that counted. It determined what the law should be that should govern i twenty-five million Frenchmen in their daily lives. "This thing is [legal because I wish it," said Louis XVI, thus stating in a single ■ phrase the nature of the monarchy, the theory, and the practice also, if the monarch happened to be a strong man. The king made I the laws, he levied the taxes, he spent them as he saw fit, he de- . clared wars, made peace, contracted alliances according to his I own inclination. There was in theory no restriction upon his archTbso- power, and all his subjects lay in the hollow of his hand. He ^"*® '** power could seize their property ; he could imprison them by a mere order, a /ettre de cachet, without trial, and for such a period as he desired ; he could control, if not their thoughts, at least the expres- sion of them, for his censorship of the press, whether employed in the publication of books or newspapers, could muzzle them absolutely. So commanding a figure required a broad and ample stage for the part he was to play, a rich and spacious background. Never was a being more sumptuously housed. While Paris was the capital of 86 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE THE SPLENDOR OF VERSAILLES 87 France, the king resided twelve miles away amid the splendors of Versailles. There he lived and moved and had his being in a palace which, as we have seen, was the envy of every other king in -j^ j^^^^^ Christendom and which furnished an imposing setting for a of his most brilliant and numerous court. For the court of Versailles '■^^''^^'''^^ (ver-salz') which so dazzled Europe was composed of 18,000 people, perhaps 16,000 of whom were attached to the personal service of the king and his family, 2000 being courtiers, the favored guests of the house, nobles who were engaged in a perpetual round of pleasures and who were also busily feathering their own nests by soliciting, of course in polished and subtle ways, the favors that streamed from a lavish throne. Luxury was everywhere the prevailing note. Well may the occupants of the palace have considered themselves, in spirit and in truth, the darlings of the gods, for earth had not anything to show more costly. The king, the queen, the royal children, the king's brothers and sisters and aunts all had their separate establishments under the spacious roof. The queen alone had 500 servants. The royal stables contained nearly 1900 horses and more than 200 carriages, and the annual cost of this service . ° A most ex- alone was the equivalent of $4,000,000. The king's table cost pensive more than a million and a half. As gaiety was unconfined, "^"""^ so necessarily was the expenditure that kept it going, for every one in this household secured what, in the parlance of our vulgar democracy, is called a handsome "rake-off." Thus ladies-in-waiting secured about $30,000 each by the privilege they enjoyed of selling candles that had once been lighted but not used up. Queen Marie Antoinette (mar'-i-an-toi-net') had four pairs of shoes a week,, which constituted a profitable business for somebody. In 1789 the total cost of all this riot of extravagance amounted to not far from $20,000,000. No wonder that men spoke of the court as the veritable nation's grave. Not only were the king's household expenses pitched to this exalted scale, but, in addition, he gave money or appointments or pensions freely, as to the manner born, to those who gained his favor. It ^^^ ^^ ^ has been estimated that in the fifteen years between 1774, lordbounti- when Louis XVI came to the throne, and 1789, when the whirl- wind began, the King thus presented to favorites the equivalent of more than a hundred million dollars of our money. For those who basked in such sunshine it was unquestionably a golden age. 88 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE FRANCE AN ILL-ORGANIZED STATE Such was the dazzhng apex of a state edifice that was rickety in the extreme. For the government of France was ill-constructed and the times were decidedly out of joint. That government was not a miracle of design, but of the lack of it. Complicated, ill-adjusted, the various branches dimly defined or overlapping, it was thoroughly The Coach Ornamented with Symbols in Which Louis XVI Went to His Coronation in 1774 From E. F. Henderson's Symbol and Satire in the French Revolution. unscientific and inefficient. The king was assisted by five councils which framed the laws, issued the orders, conducted the business of the state, domestic and foreign, at the capital. Then for purposes The old of local government France was split up into divisions, but, provinces unfortunately, not into a single, simple set. There were forty "governments," so called, thirty- two of which corresponded closely to the old provinces of France, the outcome of her feudal histor}^ But those forty "governments" belied their name. They did little THE GOVERNMENT OF FRANCE 89 [[overning, but they furnished many lucrative offices for the higher lobiUty who were appointed "governors" and who resided generally n Versailles, contributing their part to the magnificent ceremonial jf that showy parade ground. The real, prosaic work was done in the thirty-six "generalities," as another set of divisions was called. Over each of these was an in- tendant who was generally of the middle or bourgeois class, accus- tomed to work. These intendants were appointed by the king to arry on the royal government, each in his own district. They The in- jenerally did not originate much, but they carried out the orders tendants [that came from the capital and made their reports to it. Their power was practically unrestricted. Upon them depended in large measure the happiness or the misery of the provinces. Judging from the fact that most of them were very unpopular, it must be admitted that this, the real working part of the national government, did not contribute to the welfare of the people. The intendants were rather the docile tools of the misgovernment which issued from the five councils which were the five fingers of the king. As the head is, so are the members, and the officials under the intendants for the smaller local areas enjoyed the disesteem evoked by the oppressive or unjust policies of their superiors. Speaking broadly, local self-government did not exist in France, but the local, like the national, government was directed and determined in Versailles. Were a bridge to be repaired over some little „ stream hundreds of miles from Paris, were a new roof required seif- for a village church, the matter was regulated from Paris, after s^^^'^^ent exasperating delay. It was the reign of the red tkpe in every sense of the word. The people stood like dumb, driven cattle before this monstrous system. The only danger lay in the chance that they might not always remain dumb. Here obviously was no school for popular political education — a fact which explains many of the mistakes and failures of the people when, in the Revolution, they themselves undertook to rule, the monarchy having failed egregiously to discharge its functions efficiently or beneficently. Let no one suppose that because France was a highly centralized monarchy, culminating in the person of the king, that therefore the French government was a real unity. Nothing could be further from the truth. To study in detail the various aspects of the royal gov- ernment, its divisions and subdivisions, its standards, its agents, its 90 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE 1 •• • '~"-y-< ... Rousseau s Europe as then constituted. These principles powerfully in- democratic iluenced the course of the Revolution and have been preached i"'"*"p'^s with fervor and denounced with passion by rival camps ever since. They have made notable progress in the world since Rousseau gave them thrilling utterance, but they have still much ground to traverse before they gain the field, before the reign of democracy everywhere prevails. 112 THE OLD REGIME IN FRANCE There were many other writers who, by attacking this abuse and that, contributed powerfully to the discrediting, the sapping of the Old Regime. A conspicuous group of them busied themselves prevailing with economic studies and theories, enunciating principles economic which, if applied, would revolutionize the industrial and commercial life of the nation by sweeping away the numerous and formidable restrictions which hampered it and which permeated it with favoritism and privilege, and by introducing the maximum of liberty in commerce, in industry, in agriculture, just as the writers whom we have described enunciated principles which would revolu- tionize France politically and socially. All this seed fell upon fruitful soil. Remarkable was to be the harvest, as we shall shortly see. The Revolution was not caused by the philosophers, but by the conditions and evils of the national life and by the mistakes of the government. Nevertheless these writers were a factor in the Revo- lution, for they educated a group of leaders, instilled into them ^, . „ certain decisive doctrines, furnished them with phrases, formu- The influ- ^ ence of the las, and arguments, gave a certain tone and cast to their minds, the*ei\°^ imparted to them certain powerful illusions, encouraged an eenth cen- exccssive hopcfulness which was characteristic of the move- ""^^ ment. They did not cause the Revolution, but they exposed the causes brilliantly, focused attention upon them, compelled discussion, and aroused passion. REFERENCES The King, the Administration, and the Court : Lowell, The Eve of the French Revolution, Chaps. I and II ; Mathews, The French Revolution, Chap. I ; Perkins, France under the Regency, pp. 1 29-141; Taine, Ancient Regime, pp. 86-124; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, Chap. II. Taxation and Finance : Lowell, pp. 207-242 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 66-78. The Privileged and Unprivileged Classes : Mathews, Chaps. II and IV ; Lowell, Chaps. Ill, VI, and XIII. The Intluence of Men of Letters : Tocqueville, The Old Regime and the Revolution, pp. 1 70-1 81; Mathews, Chap. V; Morley, Voltaire, Chaps. I and V; Lowell, pp. 274-302. CHAPTER V BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION Under Louis XVI the financial situation of France became more and more serious, until it could no longer be ignored. The cost of the participation in the American Revolution, added to the enor- mous debt inherited from the reigns of Louis XIV and Louis XV condUion of and to the excessive and unregulated expenditures of the state *^e national and the wastefulness of the court, completed the derangement of the national finances and foreshadowed bankruptcy. In the end this crisis forced the monarch to make an appeal to the people by summoning their representatives. But before taking so grave a step, the consequences of which were incalculable, the government tried various expedients less drastic, which, however, for various reasons failed. Louis XVI was the Louis xvi unhappy monarch under whom these long accumulating ills (^ 754- 1793) culminated. The last of the rulers of the Old Regime, his reign covered the years from 1774 to 1792. It falls into three periods, a brief one of attempted reform (i 774-1 776) and then a relapse for the next twelve years into the traditional methods of the Bourbon mon- arch}^ and after that the hurricane. CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XVI During his youth no one thought that Louis would ever be monarch ; so many other princes stood between him and the throne that his suc- cession was only a remote contingency. But owing to an un- precedented number of deaths in the direct line this contin- i^ the arts gency became reality. Louis mounted the throne, from °^ govern- which eighteen years later, by a strange concourse of events, he was hurled. He had never been molded for the high and dangerous office. He was twenty years old and the Queen, Marie Antoinette, but nineteen when they heard of the death of Louis XV, and in- stinctively both expressed the same thought, "How unhappy are 113 114 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION ^^ 'i. '% Louis XVI From the engraving by Nargeot, after the painting by Callet. we! We are too young to rule." The new King was entirely un- trained in the arts of government. He was good, well-intentioned, he had a high standard of morality and duty, a genuine desire to serve CHARACTERISTICS OF LOUIS XVI 115 his people. But his mind lacked all distinction, his education had been poor, his processes of thought were hesitating, slow, uncertain. Awkward, timid, without elegancies or graces of mind or bodj', no king could have been less to the manner born, none could have seemed more out of place in the brilliant, polished, and heartless court of which he was the center. This he felt himself, as others felt it, and he often regretted, even before the Revolution, that he could not abdicate and pass into a private station which would have been far more to his taste. He was an excellent horseman, he was excessively fond of hunting, he practiced with delight the craft of locksmith. He was ready to listen to the advice of wiser men, but, and this was his fatal defect, he was of feeble will. He had none of the masterful qualities necessary for leadership. He was quite unable to see where danger lay and where support was to be found. He was not unintel- ligent, but his intelligence was unequal to his task. He was a poor judge of men, yet was greatly influenced by them. . He gave way now to this influence, which might be good, now to that, which might be bad. He was, by nature, like other princes of his time, a reforming monarch, but his impulses in this direction were intermittent. At the beginning of his reign Louis XVI was subject to the influence of Turgot (tiir-go'), one of the wisest of statesmen. Later he was sub- ject to that of the Queen — to his own great misfortune and also to that of France. MARIE ANTOINETTE (i75S-i793) The influence of women was always great in France under the Bour- bon monarchy, and Marie Antoinette was no exception to the rule. Furthermore that influence was frequenth^ disastrous, and here again in the case of the last queen of the Old Regime there was no exception. If the King proved inferior to his position, the Queen proved no less inferior to hers. She was the daughter of the great Empress Maria Theresa of Austria, and she had been married to Louis XVI in the hope that thus an alliance would be cemented between the two states which had so long been enemies. But, as many Frenchmen disliked everj^thing about this alliance, she was unpopular and exposed to much harsh criticism from the moment she set foot in France. She was beautiful, gracious, and vivacious. She possessed in large measure some of the very qualities the King so conspicuously lacked. She had a strong will, power of rapid decision, a spirit of Ii6 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION MARIE ANTOINETTE 117 initiative, daring. But she was lacking in wisdom, in breadth of judgment; she did not understand the temperament of the French people or the spirit of the times. Born to the purple, her outlook upon life did not transcend that of the small and highly privileged class to which she belonged. She had grown up in Vienna, one of the gayest capitals of Europe. Her education was woefully defective. When she came to France to become the wife of Louis XVI, she hardly knew how to „ ^i write. She had had tutors in everything, but they had defectivjL availed her little. She was willful and proud, unthinking ^ducatio^ and extravagant, intolerant of disagreeable facts, frivolous, impatient of all restraint, fond of pleasure and of those who ministered unto it. She committed many indiscretions both in her conduct and in the kind of people she chose to have about her. Because of these she was grossly calumniated and misjudged. Marie Antoinette was the center of a group of rapacious people who benefited by existing abuses, who were opposed to all reform. Quite unconsciously she helped to aggravate the financial situation and thus to hasten the catastrophe. IMPEXDIfyG BANKRUPTCY At the beginning of his reign Louis intrusted the management of finances to a man of rare ability and courage, Turgot. Turgot had been intendant of one of the poorest provinces of France. By applying there the principles of the most advanced econo- Turgot, mists, which may be summed up as demanding the utmost •=°^t''°'ie'^ ' - "^ ^ of finance liberty for industry and trade, the abolition of all artificial (1774-1776) restrictions and all minute and vexatious governmental regulations, .. he had made his province prosperous. He now had to face the '. problem of the large annual deficit. The continuance of annual deficits could mean nothing else than ultimate bankruptcy. Turgot announced his program to the King in tl^words, "No bankruptcy, no increase of taxation, no more borro^nn|>J' He hoped to jj; extricate the national finances by two processes, by effecting financial economies in expenditures, and by developing public wealth so ^° "^^ that the receipts would be larger. The latter object would be achieved by introducing the regime of liberty into agriculture, in- dustry, and commerce. Ii8 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION Turgot was easily able to save many millions by suppressing useless expenditures, but in so doing he offended all who enjoyed those Economic sinecures, and they flew to arms. The trade in foodstuffs was reforms hopelessly and dangerously hampered by all sorts of artificial and pernicious legislation and interference by the state. All this he swept aside, introducing free trade iti grain. A powerful class of speculators was thus of^nded. He abolished the trade guilds, which restricted production^ by-' limiting the number of workers in each line, and by guarding jealously the narrow, inelastic monopolies they had established. Their abolition was desirable, but all the masters of the guilds and corporations became his bitter enemies. Turgot abolished an odious tax, the royal corvee, which required the peasants to work without pay on the public roads. Instead, he provided that all sucRN^i\^ould be paid for and that a tax to that end should be levied upon all landowners, whether belonging to the privileged or the unprivileged classes. The former were resolved that this should not be, this odious equality of all before the tax- „. . collector. Thus all those who battened and fattened off the old His enemies . _ force his system combined in merciless opposition to Turgot, and, reen- dismissai forced by the parlements particularly, and by Marie Antoinette, they brought great pressure upon the King to dismiss the obnoxious minister. Louis yielded and dismissed the ablest supporter the throne had. Both monarchs were grievously at fault, the King for his lack of will, the Queen for her willfulness. "M. Turgot and I are the only persons who love the people," said Louis XVI, but he did not prove his love by his acts. A few days earlier Turgot had written him, "Never forget, your Majesty, that it was weakness which brought Charles I to the block." This incident threw a flood of light upon the nature of the Old egime. All reformers were given warning by the fall of Turgot. No changes that should affect the privileged classes ! As directo'rof the national finances could be made sound only by reforms the finances which would affect those classes, there was no way out. Re- form was blocked. Necker, a Genevan banker, succeeded Turgot. He was a man who had risen by his own efforts from poverty to great wealth. He, too, encountered opposition the His financial instant he proposed economies. He took a step which in- report furiated the members of the court. He published a financial report, showing the income and the expenditures of the state. This NECKER'S FINANCIAL REPORT 119 -ia -"MiClAi, Marie Antoinette From the engraving by Geile, after the painting by Vigee le Brun. had never been done before, secrecy having hitherto prevailed in such matters. The court was indignant that such high mysteries should be revealed to the masses, particularly as the report showed 120 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION just how much went annually in pensions to the courtiers, as free gifts for which they rendered no services whatever. For such unconscionable audacity Necker was overthrown, the King weakly yielding once more to pressure. This time the court took no chances, but secured a minister quite according to its taste, in Calonne (ka-lon'). No minister of linance could be more agreeable. Calonne's purpose was to please, controller ^^^d please he did, for a while. The members of the court had general Only to make their wishes known to have them gratified. Calonne, a man of charm, of wit, of graceful address, had also a philosophy of the gentle art of spending which was highly ap- preciated by those about him. ' ' A man who wishes to borrow must ap- pear to be rich, and to appear rich he must dazzle by spending freely." Money flowed like water during these halcyon times. In three years, in a time of profound peace, Calonne borrowed nearly $300,000,000. It seemed too good to be true, and it was, by far. The evil days drew nigh for an accounting. It was found in August, 1786, that the treasury was empty and that there were no more fools general tax willing to loan to the state. It was a rude awakening from to avert state ^ blissful dream. But Calonne now showed, what he had not bankruptcy shown before, some sense, He proposed a general tax which should fall upon the nobles as well as upon the commoners. It was therefore his turn to meet the same opposition from the privileged classes which Turgot and Necker had met. He, too, was balked, and resigned. SUMMONING OF THE STATES-GENERAL, 1789 His successor, Lomenie de Brienne, encountered a similar fate. As there was nothing to do but to propose new taxes, he proposed them. The parlement of Paris immediately protested and demanded the con- vocation of the States-General, asserting the far-reaching principle that taxes can only be imposed by those who are to pay them. The King attempted to overawe the parlement, which, in turn, defied the King. All this, however, was no way to fill an empty treasury. Finally the government yielded and summoned the States-General Necker to meet in Versailles on May i, 1789. A new chapter, of in- recaiied calculable possibilities, was opened in the history of France. Necker was recalled to head the ministry, and preparations for the coming meeting were made. iv' '1 r '"* < ' nil »^o.«>f >; iF Co ^% InorP^Ku'"'"' •.^' k/' .^■" ( 'r THE STATES-GENERAL The States-General, or assembly representing the three estates of the realm, the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners, was an old institution in France, but one that had never developed as had The States- the parliament of England. The last meeting, indeed, had General a been held 17s years before. The institution might have feudal ' ^ -^ ^ institution been considered dead. Now, in a great national crisis, it was revived, in the hope that it might pull the state out of the deplorable situation into which the Bourbon mon- archy had plunged it. But the States-General was a thoroughly feudal 1 institution and France was tired of feudalism. Its organization no longer conformed to the wishes or needs of the nation. Previously each one of the three estates had had an equal num- ber of delegates, and the delegates of each state had met separately. It was a three-chambered body, with two of the chambers consisting en- tirely of the privileged classes. There was ob- jection to this now, since, with two against one, it left the nation exactly where it had been, in the power of the privileged classes. They could veto anything that the third estate alone wanted ; they could impose anything they chose upon the third estate, voting in°the URGOT After a pasfel by Joseph Ducreux. In Other words, if organized as states- ° General by their vote of two to one. hitherto, they could prevent all reform which in any way affected themselves, and yet such reform was an absolute necessity. Consulted on this problem the parlement of Paris pronounced in favor of the customary organization ; in other words, itself a privileged 122 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION body, it stood for privilege. Tlie parlement immediately became as unpopular as it had previously been popular, when opposing the monarch. Necker, now showing one of his chief characteristics which was to make him impossible as a leader in the new era, half settled the question and left it half unsettled. He, like the King, lacked the power of decision. He was a banker, not a statesman. 1 1 was announced The third , , ... estate given that the third es- doubie mem- ^sX^ should havc as bership many members as the two other orders com- bined. Whether the three bodies should still meet and vote separately was not decided, but was left undetermined. But of what avail would be the double membership of the third estate — repre- senting more than nine- tenths of the population — unless all three met to- gether, unless the vote was by individuals, not by chambers ; by head, as the phrase ran, and not by order ? In dodging this question Necker was merely showing his own incapacity for strong leadership and was laying up abundant trouble for the immediate future. - Necker After the drawing by J. S. Duplessis. THE OPENING OF THE STATES-GENERAL The States-General met on May 5, 1789. There were about 1200 members, of whom over 600 were members of the third estate. In reality, however, that class of the population had a much larger representation as, of the 300 representatives elected by the clergy, over 200 were parish priests or monks, all commoners by origin and, to a considerable extent, in sympathy. Each of the three orders GENERAL DEMAND FOR A CONSTITUTION 125 had elected its own members. At the same time the voters, and the vote was nearly universal, were asked to draw up a formal statement of their grievances and of the reforms they favored. Fifty or sixty thousand of these statements or cahiers have come down to ^j^^ cahiers us and present a vivid and instructive criticism of the Old or statements Regime, and a statement of the wishes of each order. On ° grievances certain points there was practical unanimity on the part of clergy, nobles, and commoners. All ascribed the ills from which the country suffered to arbitrary, uncontrolled government, all talked of the necessity of confining the government within just limits by xhe cahiers establishing a constitution which should define the rights of express the the king and of the people, and which should henceforth be nation for a binding upon all. Such a constitution must guarantee in- constitution dividual liberty, the right to think and speak and write, — henceforth no lettres de cachet nor censorship. In the future the States-General should meet regularly at stated times, and should share the law- making power and alone should vote the taxes, and taxes should henceforth be paid by all. The clergy and nobility almost unani- mously agreed in their cahiers to relinquish their exemptions, for which they had fought so resolutely only two years before. On the other hand, the third estate was willing to see the continuance of the nobility with its rights and honors. The third estate demanded the suppression 'of feudal dues. There was in their cahiers no hint of a desire for a violent revolution. They all expressed a deep affection for the King, gratitude for his summoning of the States- General, faith that the worst was over, that now, in a union of all hearts, a way would easily be discovered out of the unhappy plight in which the nation found itself. An immense wave of hopefulness swept over the land. This opti- mism was based on the fact that the King, when consenting to call the States-General, had at the same time announced his accept- „,. ^ The opti- ance of several important reforms, such as the periodical mism of the meeting of the States-General, its control of the national p^°p^® finances, and guarantees for the freedom of the individual. But the King's chief characteristic, as we have seen, was his feeble- ness of will, his vacillation. And from the day the deputies arrived in Versailles to the day of his violent overthrow this was a fatal factor in the history of the times. In his speech opening the States-General on May 5, the King said not a word about the thought that was 124 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION DEADLOCK IN THE STATES-GENERAL 125 in everyone's mind, the making of a constitution. He merely announced that it had been called together to bring order into the distracted finances of the country. Necker's speech was no ^j^ .^^^ more promising. The government, moreover, said nothing cision of the about whether the estates should vote by order or by head. "'^ The crux of the whole matter lay there, for on the manner of organ- ization and procedure depended entirely the outcome. The govern- ment did not come forward with any program, even in details. It shirked its responsibility and lost its opportunity. ORGANIZATION OF THE STATES-GENERAL A needless but very serious crisis was the result. The public was disappointed and apprehensive. Evidently the recent liberalism of the King had evaporated, or he was under *a pressure which xhe conflict he had no strength to withstand. A conflict between the of the orders orders began on May 6 which lasted until the end of June and which ended in embittering relations which at the outset had seemed likely to be cordial. Should the voting be by order or by member, should the assembly consist of three chambers or of one? The difficulty arose in the need of verifying the credentials of the be three members. The nobles proceeded to verify as a separate ^^""^j^gp""^ chamber, by a vote of 188 to 47 ; the clergy did the same, but by a smaller majority, 133 to 114. But the third estate refused to verify until it should be decided that the three orders were to meet together in one indivisible assembly. This was a matter of ^j^^ ^^j^^ life or death with it, or at least of power or impotence. Both estate delays sides stood firm, the government allowed things to drift, angry passions began to develop. Until organized the States-General could do no business, and no organization could be effected until this crucial question was settled. Week after week went by and the dangarous deadlock continued. Verification in common would mean the abandonment of the class system, voting by member and not by order, and the consequent preponderance of the third estate, which considered that it had the right to preponderate as representing over nine-tenths of the population. Fruitless attempts to win the two upper orders by inviting them to join the third estate were repeatedly made. Finally the third estate announced that on June 1 1 it would begin verification and the other orders were invited for the last 126 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION time. Then the parish priests began to come over, sympatliizing with the commoners rather than with the privileged class of their then declares own Order. Finally on June 17 the third estate took the Itself the momentous step of declaring itself the National Assembly, Assembly a distinctly revolutionary proceeding. ATTEMPTED SUPPRESSION QF THE STATES-GENERAL The King now, under pressure from the court, made a decision highly unwise in itself and foolishly executed. When, on June 20, the members of the third estate went to their usual meeting place they found the entrance blocked by soldiers. They were told that Costumes of the Three Orders there was to be a special royal session later and that the hall was closed' in order that necessary arrangements might be made for it, a pretext as miserable as it was vain. What did this action mean ? No one knew, but every one was apprehensive that it meant that the assembly itself, in which such earnest hopes had centered, was to be brought to an untimely end and the country plunged into greater misery than ever by the failure of the great experiment. For a moment THE TENNIS COURT OATH 127 the members were dismayed and utterly distracted. Then, as by a common impulse, they rushed to a neighboring building in a side ; street, which served as a tennis court. There a memorable session occurred, in the large, unfinished hall. Lifting their president, the distinguished astronomer, Bailly, to a table, the members surged about him, ready, it seemed, for extreme measures. There they . took the famous Tennis Court Oath. All the deputies present, The Tennis Swith one single exception, voted "never to separate, and to Court Oath ' reassemble wherever circumstances shall require, until the constitu- tion of the kingdom shall be established." On the 23d occurred the royal session on which the privileged classes counted. The King pronounced the recent acts of the third estate ; illegal and unconstitutional, and declared that the three orders ^j^^ ^.^y^, i should meet separately and verify their credentials. He session, [ rose and left the hall while outside the bugles sounded around ^""^ ^^ ! his coach. The nobility, triumphant, withdrew from the hall ; , the clergy also. But in the center of the great chamber the third 1 estate remained, in gloomy silence. This was one of the solemn, f critical moments of history. Suddenly the master of ceremonies advanced, resplendent in his official costume. "You have heard the King's orders," he said. "His ISIajesty requests the deputies of the third estate to withdraw." Behind the grand master, at the • door, soldiers were seen. Were they there to clear the hall ? The King had given his orders. To leave the hall meant abandonment of all that the third estate stood for ; to remain meant disobedience to the express commands of the King and probably severe punish- ment. The occasion brought forth its man. Mirabeau, a noble whom his fellow nobles had refused to elect to the States-General and who had then been chosen by the third estate, now arose and advanced , . . , , , r • Defiance of impetuously and imperiously toward the master of ceremonies, the King de Breze, and with thunderous voice exclaimed, "Go tell your ^P^^^^^^ ^^ master that we are here by the will of the people and that we shall not leave except at the point of the bayonet." Then on motion of Mirabeau it was voted that all persons who should lay violent hands on any members of the National Assembly would be "infamous and traitors to the nation and guilty of capital crime." De Breze reported the defiant eloquence to the King. All eyes were fixed upon the latter. Not knowing what to do Louis made a motion indicating BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION weariness, then said: "They wish to remain, do they? Well, let them." Two days later a majority of the clergy and a minority of the nobility went over to the Assembly. On June 27 the King com-. The King manded the nobility and clergy to sit with the third estate in yields g^ single body. Thus the question was finally settled, which should have been settled before the first meeting in May. The National Assembly was now complete. It immediately appointed a committee on the constitution. The Na- tional Assembly, accom- plished by this fusion of the three estates, adopted the title Constituent Assembly because of the character of the work it had to do. No sooner was this crisis over than another began to The King develop. A second at- attempts tempt was made by the again to suppress the King, again mspired Assembly ^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^ g^p. press the Assembly or effec- tively to intimidate it, to re- gain the ground that had been lost. Considerable bodies of soldiers began to appear near Versailles and Paris. They were chiefly the foreign mercenaries, or the troops from frontier stations, supposedly less responsive to the popular emotions. On July II Necker and his colleagues, favorable to reform, were sud- denly dismissed and Necker was ordered to leave the country im- mediately. What could all this mean but that reaction and repres- sion were coming and that things were to be put back where they had been? The Assembly was in great danger, yet it possessed no physical force. What could it do if troops were sent against it ? MiRABEAU From an engraving by Fiesinger, after a draw- ing by J. Guerin. THE TENNIS COURT OATH 129 I30 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION POPULAR INSURRECTION: THE BASTILLE, THE TRICOLOR The violent intervention of the city of Paris saved the day and gave the protection which the nation's representatives lacked, assur- Paris and i^'^g their continuance. The storming of the Bastille was an the storm- incident which instantly seized the imagination of the world, Bastille, and which was disfigured and transfigured by a mass of legends July 14 |-]^g^(- sprang up on the very morrow of the event. The Bastille was a fortress commanding the eastern section of Paris. It was used as a state prison and had had many distinguished occupants, among others Voltaire and Mirabeau, thrown into it by lettres de cachet. It was an odious symbol of arbitrary government and it was also a strong fortress which these newly arriving troops might use. There was a large discontented and miserable class in Paris ; also a lively band of radical or liberal men who were in favor of reform and were alarmed and indignant at every rumor that the Assembly on which such hopes were pinned was in danger. Paris was on the side of the Assembly, and when the news of the dismissal of Necker arrived it took fire. Rumors of the most alarming character spread rapidly. Popular meetings were addressed by impromptu and impassioned orators. The people began to pillage the shops where arms were to be found. Finally they attacked the Bastille and after a confused and bloody battle of several hours the fortress was in their hands. They had lost about two hundred men, killed or wounded. The crowd savagely murdered the commander of the fortress and several of the Swiss Guard. Though characterized by these and other acts of barbarism, nevertheless the seizure of the Bastille was everywhere regarded in France and abroad as the triumph of liberty. Enthusiasm was widespread. The Fourteenth of July was declared the national holiday and a new flag, the tricolor, the red, white, and blue, was adopted in place of the old white banner of the Bourbons, studded with the fleur-de-lis. At the same time, quite spontaneously, Paris gave itself a new form of municipal government, superseding the old royal form, and organized a new military force, the National Guard, which was destined to become famous. Three days later Louis XVI came to the capital and formally ratified these changes. Meanwhile similar changes were made all over France. Municipal governments on an elective basis and national guards were created THE STORMING OF THE BASTHXE 132 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION everywhere in imitation of Paris. The movement extended to rural France. There the peasants, impatient that the Assembly had let two months go by without suppressing the feudal dues, took outbreaks things into their own hands. They turned upon their oppres- against gQj-g ^^^ made a violent "war upon the chateaux," destroying- feudalism ' j o the records of feudal dues if they could find them or if the owners gave them up ; if not, frequently burning the chateaux them- selves in order to burn the odious documents. Day after day in the closing week of July, 1789, the destructive and incendiary process went on amid inevitable excesses and disorders. In this method feudalism was abolished — not legally but practically. It remained to be seen what the effect of this victory of the people would be upon the National Assembly. THE ASSEMBLY INAUGURATES A SOCIAL REVOLUTION Its effect was immediate and sensational. On the 4th of August, a committee on the state of the nation made a report, describing the The night incidents which were occurring throughout the length and session of breadth of the land, chateaux burning, unpopular tax col- "^"^ "* lectors assaulted, millers hanged, lawlessness triumphant. It was night before the stupefying report was finished. Suddenly at eight o'clock in the evening, as the session was about to close, a noble- man, the Viscount of Noailles (no-I'), rushed to the platform. The only reason, he said, why the people had devastated the chateaux was the heavy burden of the seigniorial dues, odious reminders of feudalism. These must be swept away. He so moved and instantly another noble, the Duke d'Aiguillon (a-giie-yon'), next to the king the greatest feudal lord in France, seconded the motion. A frenzy Privilege of generosity seized the Assembly. Noble vied with noble laid low in the enthusiasm of renunciation. The Bishop of Nancy renounced the privileges of his order. Parish priests renounced their fees. Judges discarded their distinctions. Rights of chase, rights of tithes, went by the board. Representatives of the cities and provinces gave up their privileges, Brittany, Burgundy, Lorraine (lo-ran'), Languedoc (lang'-we-dok). A veritable delirium of joy swept in wave after wave over the Assembly. All night long the excitement continued amid tears, embraces, rapturous applause, a very ecstasy of patriotic abandonment, and by eight in the morning THE SESSION OF AUGUST 4 133 134 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION thirty decrees, more or less, had been passed and the most extraor- A social dinary social revolution that any nation has known had been revolution voted. The feudal dues were dead. Tithes were abandoned ; the guilds, with their narrow restrictions, were swept away ; no longer were offices to be purchasable, but henceforth all Frenchmen were to be equally eligible to all public positions ; justice was to be free ; provinces and individuals were all to be on the same plane. Distinctions of class were abolished. The principle of equality was henceforth to be the basis of the state. Years later participants in this memorable session, in which a social revolution was accomplished or at least promised, spoke of it with excitement and enthusiasm. The astonishing session was Louis XVI proclaimed closcd with a Tc Dcum in the chapel of the royal palace *to r^f ^^ ^^^ suggestion of the Archbishop of Paris, and Louis X\T, French who. had had no more to do with all this than you or I, was ^ ^'^^ officially proclaimed by the Assembly the "Restorer of French Liberty." Thus was the dead weight of an oppressive, unjust past lifted from the nation's shoulders. Grievances, centuries old, vanished into the night. That it needed time to work out all these tumultuous Reaction '^ threatened and rapturous resolutions into clear and just laws was a fact once more ignored by the people, who regarded them as real legislation, not as a program merely sketched, to be liUed in slowly in detail. Hence when men awoke to the fact that not everything was what it seemed, that before the actual application of all these changes many adjustments must or should be made, there was some friction, some disappointment, some impatience. The clouds speedily gathered again. Because a number of nobles and bishops had in an outburst of generosity relinquished all their privileges, it was not at all certain that their action would be ratified by even the majority of their orders, and it was indeed likely that the contrary would prove true. The contagion might not extend beyond the walls of the assembly hall. And many even of those who had shared the fine enthusiasm of that stirring session might feel differently on the morrow. This The counter- proved to be the case, and soon two parties appeared, sharply revolutionists distinguished from each other, the upholders of the revolution thus far accomplished and those who wished to undo it and to re- cover their lost advantages. The latter were called counter-revolu- tionaries. From this time on they were a factor, frequently highly THE COUNTER-REVOLUTIONISTS 135 significant, in the history of modern France. Although after the Fourteenth of July the more stiff-necked and angry of the courtiers, led by the Count of Artois (ar-twa'), brother of the King, had left the country and had begun that "emigration" which was to do much to embroil France with Europe, yet many courtiers still „ remained and, with the powerful aid of Marie Antoinette, intrigues of played upon the feeble monarch. The Queen, victim of *^ *^°"'* slanders and insults, was temperamentally and intellectually inca- pable of understanding or sympathizing with the reform movement. She stiffened under the attacks, her pride was fired, and she did what she could to turn back the tide, with results highly disastrous to herself and to the monarchy. Another feature of the situation was the subterranean intriguing, none the less real because difficult accurately to describe, of certain individuals who thought they had much to gain by troubling the waters, such as the Duke of Orleans, cousin of the King, immensely wealthy and equally unscru- pulous, who nourished the scurvj' ambition of overthrowing Louis XVI and of putting the House of Orleans in place of the House of Bourbon. All through the Revolution we find such elements of personal ambition or malevolence, anxious to profit by fomenting the general unrest. At every stage in this strange, eventful history we observe the mixture of the mean with the generous, the insincere with the candid, the hypocritical and the oblique with the honest and the patriotic. It was a web woven of mingled yarn. Such were some of the possible seeds of future trouble. In addi- tion, increasing the general sense of anxiety and insecurity, was the fact that two months went by and yet the King did not ratify or accept the decrees of August 4, which, without his acceptance, atdtude"^ ^ lacked legal force. Certain articles of the constitution had inspires been already drafted, and these, too, had not yet received the royal sanction. Was the King plotting something, or were the plotters about him getting control of him once more? The people lived in an atmosphere of suspicion ; also thousands and thousands of them were on the point of starvation, and the terror of famine reenforced the terror of suspicion. Out of this wretched condition of discontent and alarm was and born another of the famous incidents of the Revolution. Early popular in October rumors reached Paris that at a banquet offered ^"^p'"*"* at Versailles to some of the crack regiments which had been sum- 136 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION moned there the tricolor had been stamped upon, that threats had been made against the Assembly, and that the Queen, by her pres- ence, had sanctioned these outrages. On October 5 several thousand women of the people, set in motion in some obscure way, started to march to Versailles, drawing cannon The march with them. It was said they were going to demand the reduc- women to ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ price of bread and at the same time to see that VersaiUes those who had insulted the national flag should be punished. They were followed by thousands of men, out of work, and by many doubtful characters. Lafayette, hastily gathering some of the The March of the Women to Versailles, October 5, 1789 After an anonvmous water-color. The royal family forced to leave Versailles Guards, started after them. That evening the motley and sinister crowd reached Versailles and bivouacked in the streets and in the vast court of the royal palace. All night long obscure preparations as for a battle went on. On the morning of the 6th the crowd forced the gates, killed several of the guards, and invaded the palace, even reaching the entrance to the Queen's apartments. The Queen fled to th.e apartments of the King for safety. The King finally appeared on a balcony, surrounded by members of his family, addressed the crowd, and promised them food. The outcome of this extraordinary and humiliating day was that the King was persuaded to leave the proud palace of Versailles and go to Paris to live in the midst of his so-called subjects. At two o'clock 138 BEGINNINGS OF THE REVOLUTION the grim procession began. The entire royal family, eight per- sons, packed into a single carriage, started for Paris, drawn at a walk, surrounded by the women, and by bandits who carried on pikes the heads of the guards who had been killed at the entrance to the palace. "We are bringing back the baker, and the baker's wife, and the baker's son !" shouted the women. At eleven o'clock that night Louis XVI was in the Tuileries (twe'le-riz). Ten days later the Assembly followed. The King, and the As- sembly were now under the daily supervision of the people of Paris. In reality they were prisoners. Versailles was definitely menf ''"'^ abandoned. From this moment dates the great influence of removed to ^}^g Capital. A single city was henceforth always in a position to dominate the Assembly. The people could easily bring their pressure to bear for they were admitted to the thousand or more seats in the gallery of the Assembly's hall of meeting and they con- sidered that they had the freedom of the place, hissing unpopular speakers, vociferating their wishes. Those who could not get in congregated outside, arguing violently the measures that were being discussed within. Now and then someone would announce to them from the windows how matters were proceeding in the hall. Shouts of approval or disapproval thus reached the members from the vehement audience outside. REFERENCES Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette : Lowell, The Eve of the French Rev- olution , pp. 11-24. Turcot : Say, Turgol, Chaps. V-VIII ; Morley, Miscellanies, Vol. n, pp. 41-57, 111-162; Lowell, pp. 235-238; Robinson, Readings in European History, Vol. II, pp. 386-391. Attempts at Reform: Mathews, The French Revolution, pp. 91-110. Summoning OF THE States-General : Mathews, pp. 11 i-i 18; Stephens, History of the French Revolution, Vol. I, Chap. I; Bourne, The Revolu- tionary Period in Europe, pp. 88-92 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 96-118. The Cahiers : Lowell, Chap. XXI; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 159-169; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 248-251 ; University of Pennsylvania, Translations and Reprints, Vol. IV, pp. 24-36. Meeting of the St.ates-General : Mathews, pp. 111-124; Stephens, Vol. REFERENCES 139 Ij PP- 55^67; MacLehose, From the Monarchy to the Republic, Chaps. IV-VI; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 145-158 ; Anderson, Co>istitutions and Documents, Nos. i and 2. The Fall of the Bastille : Mathews, pp. 125-137; Stephens, Vol. I, pp. 128-145; MacLehose, Chap. VIII; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 159-169. The Fourth OF August : Mathews, pp. 138-144; Anderson, No. 4; Acton, Lectures on the French Revolution, pp. 94-102 ; Bourne, pp. 100-103. The Fifth and Sixth of October : Mathews, pp. 144-149 ; Stephens, Vol. I, pp. 219-228; MacLehose, Chaps. XI and XII; Bourne, pp. 104-106. CHAPTER VI THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION THE DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN Lafayette proposes the Declaration The States-General which met in Ma}^ 1789, had in June adopted the name National Assembly. This body is also known as the Con- stituent Assembly, as its chief work was the making of a constitution. It had begun work upon the constitution while still in Versailles and the first fruit of its labors was the Declaration of the Rights of Man, a statement of the rights which belong to men because they are human beings, which are not the gift of any govern- ment. The Declara- tion was drawn up in imita- tion of Ameri- can usage. Lafa- yette, a hero of the American Revolu- tion, and now a prominent figure in the French, brought forward a draft of a declaration just before the storming of the Bas- tille (bas-tel')- He urged two chief reasons for its adoption ; first it would present the people with a clear conception of the elements of liberty, which, once understanding, they would insist upon possess- ing ; and, secondly, it would be an invaluable guide for the Assembly 140 Lafayette From an engraving by Lavachez, after Duplessis-Bertaux. DECLARATION OF THE RIGHTS OF MAN 141 in its work of elaborating the constitution. All propositions could be tested by comparison with its carefully defined principles. It would be a guarantee against mistakes or errors by the As- concerning sembly itself. Another orator paid a tribute to America, ex- the Deciara- plaining why "the noble idea of this declaration, conceived in another hemisphere, ' ' ought to be transplanted to France. Opponents of the proposal declared it useless and harmful because bound to distract the members from important labors, as tending to waste time on doubtful generalizations, as leading to hair-splitting and endless debate, when the Assembly's attention ought to be focused on the pressing problems of legislation and administration. The Assembly took the side of Lafayette and, after intermittent discus- sion, composed the notable document in August, 1789. As a result of the events of October 5, described above, the King accepted it. The Declaration, which has been called "the most remarkable The Decla- fact in the history of the growth of democratic and republican ration a ideas" in France, as "the gospel of modern times," was not composite . . product the work of any single mind, nor of any committee or group of leaders. Its collaborators were very numerous. The political discussions of the eighteenth century furnished many of the ideas and even some of the phrases. English and American example counted for much. The necessities of the national situation were factors of importance. The Declaration of the Rights of iMan laid down the principles of modern governments. The men who drew up that document believed these principles to be universally, true and every- j^ ortance where applicable. The^" did not establish rights — they of the merely declared them. Frenchmen well knew that they were composing a purely dogmatic text, but they felt that they were inaugurating a new phase in the history of humanity, that, by solemnly formulating the creed of the future, they were rendering an inestimable service, not to France alone but to the world. Though America had set the example, it was felt that France could "perfect" it for the other hemisphere. The seventeen articles of this creed asserted that men are free and equal, that the people are sovereign, that law is an expression of the popular will, and that in the making of it the people may par- ^^ ^, ^ '^ '^ ^ '^ Its contents ticipate, either directly, or indirectly through their repre- sentatives, and that all officials possess only that authority which has 142 TllIC MAKINC; ()!■ rillC CONS'I TirTION been (IrliiulcK' \i,\\r\\ lluiii by law. i\\\ those 'liberties of the person, ol free speech, iwc assembly, justice administered by one's peers, which had been worked out in England and America were asserted. Tlu'se piiiiciples were the opposite of those of the Old Regime. If incorporated in laws and institutions, they meant the permanent abolition of that system. As a mailer of fact the expectation thai ihe Declaration would con- stitute a new evangel for the world has nol proved so great an exag- widespread geratioii as the optimism of its authors and the pessimism of ihe'Dec^ " its critics would promi)t one to think. When men wish any- larntion where to recall the rights of man it is this P'rench document that they ha\'e in mind. The Declaration long ago passed beyond the frontiers of !•" ranee. It has been studied, copied, or denounced nearly everywhere. It has been an indisputable factor in the political and social evolution of modi-rn i"",urope. During the past century, whenever a nation has aspired to liberty, it has sought its principles in this French Declaration. The Declaration was, of course, only an ideal, a goal toward which society should aim, not a fuHillment. It was a list of princijoles, not the realisation of those |)rincii)les. It was a declaration of rights, not a guarantee of rights. The problem of how to guarantee what was so succinctly declared has filled more ihaii a t-entury of French history. We shall now see how far the Assembly which drafted this Declaration was willing or able to go in applying its principles in the constitution, of which il was the i)reamble. TIIK Ni:W CONSTITUTION .\('(T,l'Ti:i) I5V nif: KING 'I'he (-onstitution was only slowly I'laborated. .Some of its more fundamental articles were adopted in 1781). But numerous laws were How the passed in \yqo and 1791, which were really parts of the con- constitution stitution. Tluis it grew piece by i)iece. Finally all this was ma e legislation was revised, retouched, and codified into a single document, which was accepted by the King in i7()i. Though some- times called the Constitution of 1789, it is more generally and more correctly known as the Constitution of 1 7<)i . Tt was the first written constitution France had ever had. iManuMl under very different c-onditions from those under which the constitution of the United States had been franred only a short time before, it resembled the PRINCIPLES OF THP: CONSTITUTION 143 work of the Philadelphia Convention in that it was conspicuously the product of the spirit of compromise. With the exception of the vigorous assertions of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, which was prefixed to it, the document was marked by as great a moderation as was consistent with the com- prehensive changes that were demanded by public opinion. It is permeated through and through with two principles, the ^^^ funda- sovereignty of the people, all governmental powers issuing mental from their consent and will, and the separation of the powers p'"^*^''' ^^ sharply from each other, of the executive, the legislative, and the judicial branches, a division greatly emphasized by Montesquieu as the sole method of insuring liberty. The form of government was to be monarchical. This was in conformity with the wishes of the people as expressed in the cahiers, and with the feelings of the Constituent Assembly. But "_ whereas formerly the king had been an absolute, henceforth he a constitu- was to be a limited, a constitutional ruler. Indicative of the ^^^^^^ mon- archy profound difference between these two conceptions, his former title. King of France and of Navarre, now gave way to that of King of the French. Whereas formerly he had taken what he chose out of the national treasury for his personal use, now he was to receive a salary or civil list of the definite amount — and no more — of 25,000,000 francs. He was to appoint the ministers or heads of the cabinet departments, but he was forbidden to select mem- The powers bers of the legislature for such positions. The English system °^ t^« ''•^s of parliamentary government was deliberat'ely avoided because it was believed to be vicious in that ministers could bribe or influence the members of Parliament to do their will, which might not at all be the will of the people. Ministers were not even to be permitted to come before the legislature to defend or explain their policies. A departure from the priijciple of the separation of powers, in general so closely followed, was shown in the granting of the veto power to the king. The king, who had hitherto made the laws, xhe question was now deprived of the law-making power, but he could pre- °^ ^^^ ^^*° vent the immediate enforcement of an act passed by the legislature. There was much discussion over this subject in the Assembly. Some were opposed to any kind of veto ; others wanted one that should be absolute and final. The, Assembly compromised and granted the king a suspensive veto, that is, he might prevent the application 144 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION of a law voted by two successive legislatures, namely, for a possible period of four years. If the third legislature should indicate its approval of the law in question, then it was to be put into operation whether the king assented or not. The king was to retain the conduct of foreign affairs. He was to appoint and receive ambassadors, was to be the head of the navy and army, and was to appoint to higher offices. The Assembly at first thought of leaving him the right to make peace and war, then, fearing that he might drag the nation into a war for personal or 'dynastic and not national purposes, it decided that he might propose peace or war, but that the legislature should decide upon it. The legislative power was given by the Constitution of 179 1 to a single assembly of 745 members, to be elected for a term of two years. Several of the deputies desired a legislature of two chambers, tution and cited the example of England and America. But the creates a second chamber in England was the House of Lords, and legislature " the French, who had abolished the nobility, had no desire to establish an hereditary chamber. Moreover the English system was based on the principle of inequality. The French were founding their new system upon the principle of equality. Even among the nobles themselves there was opposition to a second chamber — the provincial nobility fearing that only the court nobles would be mem- bers of it. On the other hand, the Senate of the United States was a The legis- concession to the states-rights feeling, a feeling which the co^nsi^ts French wished to destroy by abolishing the provinces and the single local provincial patriotism, by thoroughly unifying France, chamber Thus the plan of dividing the legislature into two chambers was deliberately rejected, for what seemed good and sufficient reasons. ELECTORAL SYSTEM How was this legislature to be chosen? Here we find a decided departure from the spirit and the letter of the Declaration, which had Citizens asserted that all men are equal in rights. Did not this mean active and universal suffrage ? Such at least was not the opinion of the passive Constituent Assembly, which now made a distinction between citizens, declaring some active, some passive. To be considered an active citizen one must be at least twenty-five years of age and must pay annually in direct taxes the equivalent of three days' wages. FRANCE BY DEPARTMENTS 145 %• 146 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION This excluded the poor from this class, and the number was large. It has been estimated that there were somewhat over 4,000,000 active citizens and about 3,000,000 passive. The active citizens alone .had the right to vote. But even the}' did not vote directly for the members of the legislature. They chose electors at the ratio of one for every 100 active citizens. These electors must meet a much higher property qualification, the lature elected equivalent of f romi 1 50 to 200 days' wages in direct taxes. As indirectly ^ matter of fact this resulted in rendering eligible as electors only about 43,000 individuals. These electors chose the members of the legislature, the deputies. They also chose the judges under the new system. Thus the Constituent Assembly, so zealous in abolishing old privileges, was, in defiance of its own principles, establishing new ones. Political rights in the new state were made the monopoly of those who possessed a certain amount of property. There was no property qualification required for deputies. Any active citizen was eligible, but as the deputies were elected by the propertied men, the latter would in all probability choose only propertied men — the electors would choose from their own class. The judicial power was completely revolutionized. Hitherto judges had bought their positions, which carried with them titles and privileges and which they might pass on to their sons. Henceforth An elective "^ judgcs, of whatever rank in the hierarchj', were to be elected judiciary j^y ^^g electors described above. Their terms were to range from two to four years. The jury, something hitherto unknown, to France, was now introduced for criminal cases. Hitherto the judge had decided all cases. For purpose of administration and local government a new system was established. The old thirty- two provinces were abolished and France was divided into eighty-three departments of nearly divided into uniform sizc. The departments were divided into arron- departmen s dissenients, these into cantons, and these into municipalities or communes. These are terms which have ever since been in vogue. France, from being a highly centralized state, became one highly decentralized. Whereas formerly the central government had been France de- represented in each province by its own agents or office-holders, centralized ^-^g intendants and their subordinates, in the departments of the future the central government was to have no representatives. The electors, described above, were to choose the local departmental \^ ^/ THE CONSTITUTION OF 1791 147 officials. It would be the business of these officials to carry out the decrees of the central government. But what if they should disobey ? The central government would have no control over them, as it would not appoint them and could neither remove nor discipline them. DEFECTS OF THE CONSTITUTION The Constitution of 1791 represented an improvement in French government ; yet it did not work well and did not last long. As a first experiment in the art of self-government it had its value, -or . ^f but it revealed inexperience and poor judgment in several the central points which prepared trouble for the future. The executive eovemmen and the legislature were so sharply separated that communication between them was difficult and suspicion was consequently easily fostered. The king might not select his ministers from the legisla- ture, he might not, in case of a difference of opinion with the legis- lature, dissolve the latter, as the English king could do, thus allowing the voters to decide between them. The king's veto was not a weapon strong enough to protect him from the attacks of the legis- lature, yet it was enough to irritate the legislature, if used. The distinction between active and passive citizens was in plain and flagrant defiance of the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and inevitably created a discontented class. The administrative de- centralization was so complete that the efficiency of the national gov- ernment was destroyed. France was split up into eighty-three frag- ments ; and the coordination of all these units, their direction toward great national ends in response to the will of the nation as a whole, was rendered extremely difficult, and in certain crises impossible. The work of reform carried out by the Constituent Assembly was on an enormous scale, immensely more extensive than that of our Federal Convention. We search history in vain for any companion „. piece. It is unique. Its destructive work proved durable Constituent and most important. Much of its constructive work, how- ^^^"^ ^ ever, proved very fragile. Mirabeau expressed his opinion in saying that " the disorganization of the kingdom could not be better worked out." CHURCH LANDS SEIZED AND SOLD There were other dangerous features of the situation which inspired alarm and seemed to keep open and to embitter the relations of 148 THE MAKING OF THE CONSTITUTION various classes and to foster opportunities for the discontented and the ambitious. The legislation concerning the Church proved highly divisive in its effects, ilt began with the confiscation of its property ; it was continued in the attempt profoundly to alter its organization. The States-General had been summoned to provide for the finances of the country. As this problem grew daily more pressing, as various attempts to meet it proved futile, as bankruptcy was imminent, the Assembly finally decided to sell for the state the vast properties of the Church. The argument was that the Church was not the declared ^° ^ owner but was merely the administrator, enjoying only the national ^gg Qf ^j-^g yast wealth which had been bestowed upon it by the faithful, but bestowed for public/'^ational purposes, namely, the maintenance of houses of worship, schools, hospitals ; and that if the state would otherwise pro- vide for the carrying out of the intentions property fa Serie Gof) k>triauie4----tiatt(>riaAMXJ . de^tiiKpiante--s > not so scrupulous. They were rude, active, forceful, indif- ferent to law, if law stood in the way. They were realists and believed in the application of force wherever and whenever necessary. Indeed their great emphasis was always put upon the necessity of the state. That justified everything. In other words anything was legitimate that might contribute to the safety or greatness of the Republic, whether legal or not. But the merely personal element was even more important in divid- ing and envenoming these groups. The Girondists hated the three leaders of the Jacobins, Robespierre, Marat, and Danton. Marat and Robespierre returned the hatred, which was thus easily fanned PARTY STRUGGLES IN THE CONVENTION 177 to fever heat. Danton, a man of coarse fiber but large mold, above the pettiness of jealousy and pique, thought chiefly and instinctively only of the cause, the interest of the country at j^^^^^^ the given moment. He had no scruples but he had a keen sense for the practical and the useful. He was anxious to work with the Girondists, anxious to smooth over situations, to avoid extremes, to subordinate per- sons to measures, to ignore the spirit of faction and intrigue, to keep all republicans work- ing together in the same har- ness for the welfare of France. His was the spirit of easy- going compromise. But he met in the Girondists a stern, unyielding opposition. They would have nothing to do with him, they would not cooperatr with him, and they, finall\ ranged him among their ene- mies, to their own irreparable harm and to his. The contest between these two parties grew shriller and more vehement every day, ending in a life and death struggle. It began directly after the meeting of the Con- vention, in the discussion as to what should be done with Louis XVI, now that monarchy was abolished and the monarch a prisoner of state. TRIAL AND EXECUTION OF LOUIS XVI The King had unquestionably been disloyal to the Revolution. He had given encouragement to the emigres and had entered into the hostile plans of the enemies of France. After the meeting of the ^j^^ ^^ Convention a secret iron box, fashioned by his own hand, had and the been discovered in the Tuileries containing documents which proved beyond question his treason. Ought he to have the full Danton From an engraving by J. Caron, after the painting by David. 178 THE CONVENTION The Jaco- bins demand his execution without trial punishment of a traitor or had he been already sufficiently punished, by the repeated indignities to which he had been subjected, by im- prisonment, and by the loss of his throne? Might not the Conven- tion stay its hand, refrain from exacting the full measure of satis- faction from one so sorely visited and for whom so many excuses lay in the general goodness of his character and in the extraordinary perplexities of his position, perplexities which might have baffled a far wiser person, at a time when the men of clearest vision saw events as through a glass, darkly ? But mercy was not in the hearts of men, particularly of the Jacobins, who considered Louis the chief culprit and unworthy of consideration. The Jacobins at first would not hear even of a trial. Robespierre demanded that the King be exe- cuted forthwith by a mere vote of the Convention, and Saint-Just (sah-zhiist'), a satellite of Robespierre, re- called that "Caesar was des- patched in the very presence of the Senate without other formality than twenty-two . dagger strokes." But Louis was given a trial, a trial, how- ever, before a packed jury, which had already shown its hatred of him, before men who were at the same time his accusers and his judges. The trial lasted over a month, Louis himself appearing at the bar, answering the thirty- three questions which were put to him and which covered his conduct during the Revolution. His statements were considered un- The trial of Satisfactory. Despite the eloquent defense of his lawyer the Convention voted on January 15, 1793, that "Louis Capet" was "guilty of conspiracy against the liberty of the Nation and of a criminal attack upon the safety of the state. " The vote was unani- Last Portrait of Louis XVI After a crayon by Ducreux, three days before the execution. Louis XVI THE TRIAL OF LOUIS XVI 179 mous, a few abstaining from voting but not one voting in the nega- tive. Many of the Girondists then urged that the sentence be sub- mitted to the people for their final action. Robespierre combated this idea with vigor, evidently fearing that the people would not go the whole length. This proposition was voted down by 424 votes against 283. What should be the punishment ? Voting on this question began at eight o'clock in the evening of January 16, 1793. During twenty- four hours the 721 deputies present mounted the platform one after the other, and announced their votes to the Convention. At eight o'clock on the evening of the 17th the vote was completed. The president announced the result. Number voting, 721 ; a majority, 361. For death, 387 ; against death, or for delay, 334. On Sunday, January 21, the guillotine was raised in the square fronting the Tuileries. At ten o'clock Louis mounted the fatal steps with courage and composure. He was greater on the scaffold _. than he had been upon the throne. He endeavored to speak, tion of the "Gentlemen, I am innocent of that of which I am accused. "^^ May my blood assure the happiness of the French." His voice was drowned by a roll of drums. He died with all the serenity of a profoundly religious man. COALITION OF NATIONS AGAINST FRANCE The immediate consequence of the execution was a formidable in- crease in the number of enemies France must conquer if she was to live, and an intensification of the passions involved. France Occasioned was already at war with Austria and Prussia. Now England, ecu*don^of Russia, Spain, Holland, and the states of Germany and Italy Louis xvi entered the war against her, justifying themselves by the "murder of the King," although all had motives much more practical than this sentimental one. It was an excellent opportunity to gain territory from a country which was plainly in process of dissolution. Civil war, too, was added to the turmoil, as the peasants of the Vendee, 100,000 strong, rose against the Republic which was the murderer of the king and the persecutor of the church. Dumouriez (dii-mo-rya'), an able commander of one of the French armies, was plotting against the Convention and was shortly to go over to the enemy, a traitor to his country. i8o THE CONVENTION .^.'ZSMkiJI^ The Con- vention STRONG GOVERNMENT i8i The ground was giving way everywhere. The Convention stiffened for the fray, resolved to do or die, or both, if necessary. No govern- ment was ever more energetic or more dauntless. It voted to raise 300,000 troops immediately. It created a Committee of ,j.. General Security, a Committee of Public Safety, a Revolu- vention tionary Tribunal, all parts of a machine that was intended chlnl^^r' to concentrate the full force of the nation upon the problem strong gov- of national salvation and the annihilation of the republic's *™"®'^* enemies, whether foreign or domestic. But while it was doing all this the Convention was floundering in the bog of angry party politics. Dissension was beginning its work of dividing the republicans, preparatory to consuming them. The first struggle was between the Girondists and the Jacobins. The Giron- dists wished to punish the men who had been responsible for the September Massacres. They wished to punish the Commune for numerous illegal acts. They hated Marat and were able to get a vote from the Convention sending him before the Revolution- ary Tribunal, expecting that this would be the end of him. divided by Instead, he was acquitted and became the hero of the populace of Paris, more powerful than before and now wilder than ever in his denunciations. Sanguinary Marat, feline Robespierre, were resolved on the annihilation of the Girondists. Danton, thinking of France and loathing all this discord, when the nation was in danger, all this exaggeration of self, this contemptible carnival of intrigue, thinking that Frenchmen had enemies enough to fight without tear- ing each other to pieces, tried to play the' peacemaker. But he had the fate that peacemakers frequently have. He accomplished nothing for France and made enemies for himself. COMMUNE ORGANIZES INSURRECTION AGAINST GIRONDISTS The Commune, which supported the Jacobins, and which idolized Marat and respected Robespierre, intervened in this struggle, using, to cut it short, its customary weapon, physical force. It organized an insurrection against the Girondists, a veritable army of 80,000 men with sixty cannon. Marat, himself a member of the Conven- tion, climbed to the belfry of the City Hall and with his own hand sounded the tocsin. This was Marat's day. He, self-styled Friend of the People, was the leader of this movement from the beginning i82 THE CONVENTION to the end of the fateful June 2, 1793. The Tuileries, where the Convention sat, was surrounded by the insurrectionary troops. The Convention was the prisoner of the Commune, the Government of France at the mercy of the Government of Paris. The Commune Girondist demanded the expulsion of the Girondist leader from the Con- leaders vcntion. The Convention protested indignantly against the from the conduct of the insurgents. Its members resolved to leave the Convention j^^jj -j^ ^ body. They were received with mock deference by the insurgents. The demand of their president that the troops disperse was bluntly refused until the Girondists who had been denounced should be expelled. The Convention was obliged to return to its hall conquered and degraded and to vote the arrest of twentj^-nine Girondists. For the first time in the Revolution the assembly elected by the voters of France was mutilated. Violence had laid its hand upon the sovereignty of the people in the interest of the rule of a faction. The victory of the Commune was the victory of the Jacobins, who, by this treason to the nation, were masters of the Convention. But not yet masters of the country. Indeed this high-handed crime of June 2 aroused indignation and resistance throughout a large section of France. Had the departments no rights which tiireTtened the Commune of Paris was bound to respect ? The Girondists with civU called the departments to arms against this tyrannical crew. They responded with alacrity, exasperated and alarmed. Four of the largest cities of France, Lyons, Marseilles, Bordeaux, and Caen, took up arms, and civil war, born of politics, added to the civil war born of religion in the Vendee, and to the ubiquitous foreign war, made confusion worse confounded. In all some sixty departments out of eighty-three participated in this movement, three-fourths of France. To meet this danger, to allay this strong distrust of Paris felt by the departments, to show them that they need not fear the dictatorship of the Commune, the Convention drafted in great haste the constitution which it had been summoned to make, but which it had for months ignored in the heat of party A new con- politics. And the Constitution of 1793, the second in the stitntion history of the Revolution, guarded so carefully the rights of constructed the departments and the rights of the people that it made Parisian dictation impossible. NEW EXPERIMENT IN CONSTITUTION-MAKING 183 THE CONSTITUTION OF 1793 The Constitution of 1793 established universal suffrage. It also carried decentralization farther than did the Constitution of 1791, which had carried it much too far. The Legislature was to ns chief be elected only for a year, and all laws were to be submitted to provisions the people for ratification or rejection before being put into force. This is the first appearance of the referendum. The executive was The Hall of the Convention to consist of twenty-four members chosen by the legislature out of a list drawn up by the electors and consisting of one person from each department. This constitution worked like a charm in dissipating the distrust of the departments. Their rights could not be better- safeguarded. Submitted to the voters the constitution was overwhelmingly ratified, over 1,000,000 votes in its favor, less than 12,000 in opposition. But this is the only way in which this constitution ever worked. So thoroughly did it decentralize the state, so weak did it leave the i84 THE CONVENTION central government, that even those who had accepted it cordially saw that it could not be applied immediately, with foreign armies The consti- Streaming into France from every direction. What was tution needed for the crisis, as every one saw, was a strong govern- suspen e rnent. Consequently by general agreement the constitution was immediately suspended, as soon as it was made. The suspension was to be merely provisional. As soon as the crisis should pass it should be put into operation. Meanwhile this precious document was put into a box in the center of the convention hall and was much in the way. THE REIGN OF TERROR To meet the crisis, to enable France to hew her way through the tangle of complexities and dangers that confronted her, a provisional government was created, a government as strong as the one The . . Convention provided by the constitution was weak, as eflficient as that becomes would have proved inefficient. The new system was frankly based on force, and it inaugurated a Reign of Terror which has remained a hissing and a by-word among the nations ever snice. This provisional or revolutionary government was lodged in the Convention. The Convention was the sole nerve center whence shot forth to the farthest confines of the land the iron resolutions that beat down all opposition and fired all energies to a single end. The Convention was dictator, and it organized a government that was more absolute, more tyrannical, more centralized than the Bourbon monarchy, in its palmiest days, had ever dreamed of being. Montesquieu's sacred doctrine of the separation of powers, which the Constituent Assembly had found so excellent, was ignored. The machinery of this provisional government consisted of two im- portant committees, appointed by the Convention, the Committee of Machinery of Public Safety and the Committee of General Security ; also sipnaigovern- ^^ Representatives on Mission, of the Revolutionary Tribunal, ment and of the political clubs and committees of surveillance in the cities and villages throughout the country. The Committee of Public Safety consisted at first of nine, later of twelve members. Chosen by the Convention for a term of a month, its members were, as a matter of fact, reelected month after month, changes only occurring when parties changed in the Assembly. Thus THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC SAFETY 185 Danton, upon whose suggestion the original committee had been created, was not a member of the enlarged committee, reorganized after the expulsion, of the Girondists. He was dropped be- Xhc Coin- cause he censured the acts of June 2, and his enemy Robespierre mittee of became the leading member. At first this committee was ^^^^l'^ charged simply with the management of foreign affairs and of the army, but in the end it became practically omnipotent, directing the state as no single despot had ever done, intervening in every de- partment of the nation's affairs, even holding the Convention itself, of which in theory it was the creature, in stern and terrified subjection to itself. Installing itself in the palace of the Tuileries, in the former royal apartments, it developed a prodigious activity, framing endless decrees, tossing thousands of men to the guillotine, sending thousands upon thousands against the enemies of France, guiding, animating, tyrannizing ruthlessly a people which had taken such pains to declare itself free, only to find its fragile liberties, so resoundingly affirmed in the famous Declaration, ground to powder beneath this iron heel. No men ever worked harder in discharging an enormous mass of business of every kind than did the members of the Committee of Public Safety. Hour after hour, around a green table, they listened to reports, framed decrees, appointed officials. Sometimes over- come with weariness they threw themselves on mattresses spread upon the floor of their committee room, snatched two or three hours of sleep, then roused themselves to the racking work again. Under them was the Committee of General Security, whose mittee of' business was really police duty, maintaining, order throughout General the country, throwing multitudes of suspected persons into prison, whence they emerged only to encounter another redoubtable organ of this government, the Revolutionary Tribunal. This Tribunal had been created at Dan ton's suggestion. It was an extraordinary criminal court, instituted for the purpose of trying trai- tors and conspirators rapidly. No appeal could be taken .^j^^ ^^ from its decisions. Its sentences were always sentences of lutionary death. Later, when Robespierre dominated the Committee '^"^"'^^^ of Public Safety, the number of judges was increased and thej^ were divided into four sections, all holding sessions at the same time. Appointed by the Committee, the Revolutionary Tribunal servilely carried out its orders. It acted with a rapidity that made a cruel farce of justice. A man might be informed at ten o'clock that he was i86 THE CONVENTION to appear before the Revolutionary Tribunal at eleven. By two o'clock he was sentenced, by four he was executed. The Committee of Public Safety had another organ — the Repre- sentatives on Mission. These were members of the Convention sent, two to each department, and two to each army, to see that the tives on will of the Convention was carried out. Their powers were Mission practically unlimited. They could not themselves pronounce the sentence of death, but a word from them was sufficient to send to the Revolutionary Tribunal any one who incurred their suspicion or displeasure. There were other parts of this governmental machinery, wheels within wheels, revolutionary clubs, affiliated with the Jacobin Club in Paris, revolutionary committees of surveillance. Through them the y will of the great Committee of Public Safety penetrated to the tiniest ■^- ,ji hamlet, to the remotest corner of the land. The Republic was held '■^T,.- tight in this closely woven mesh. I |/ This machinery was created to meet a national need, of the most /" ^ pressing character. The country was in danger, in direst danger, of submersion under a flood of invasion ; also in danger of disruption from within. The authors of this system were originally men who appreciated the critical situation, who grasped facts as they were, who were resolute to put down every foreign and domestic this^go^T °»j^ enemy, and who thrilled the people with their appeals to emmentai J5^ bQm^filgsg self-sacnficmg patriotism. Had this machinery machinery ^^ , ■ , i r i • i i ■ ■ been used m the way and for the purpose intended, it is not likely that it would have acquired the dismal, repellent reputation with posterity which it has enjoyed. France would have willingly endured and sanctioned a direct and strong government,, ruthlessly subordinating personal happiness and even personal security to the needs of national welfare. No cause could be higher, and none makes a wider or surer appeal to men. But the system was not restricted to this end. It was applied to satisfy personal and part)^ intrigues and spites, it was used to further the ambitions of individuals, it was crassly distorted and debased. The system did not spring full blown from the mind of any man or any group. It grew piece b/ piece, now this item being added, now that. Those who fashioned it be- A system lieved that only by appealing to or arousing one of the emo- basedonfear tions of men, fear, could the government get their complete and energetic support. The success of the Revolution could not be REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT 187 assured simply by love or admiration of its principles and its deeds — that was proved by events, the difficulties had only increased. There were too many persons who hated the Revolution. But even these had an emotion that could be touched, the sense of fear, horror, dread. That, too, is a powerful incentive to action. "Let terror be the order of the day," such was the official philosophy of the creators of this government, and it has given their system its name. ^"^Ci i) The Guillotine After a contemporary drawing. Punish disloyalty swiftly and pitilessly and you create loyalty, if not from love, at least from fear, which will prove a passable substitute. The Committee of Public Safety and the Convention lost no time in striking a fast pace. To meet the needs of the war a general call for troops was issued. Seven hundred and fifty thousand men Great citizen were secured. "What we need is audacity, and more audacity, armies raised and always audacity" was a phrase epitomizing this aspect of history, a phrase thrown out by Danton, a man who knew how to sound the bugle call, knew how to mint the passion of the hour in striking form ..-^yV i88 THE CONVENTION and give it the impress of his dynamic personahty. Carnot, one of the members of the Committee of Pubhc Safety, performed hercu- lean feats in getting this enormous mass of men equipped, disciplined, and officered. A dozen armies were the result and they were hurled in every direction at the enemies of France. Representatives of the Convention accompanied each general, demanding victory of him or letting him know that his head would fall if victory were not forth- coming. Some failed, even under this terrific incentive, this literal choice between victory or death, and they went to the scaffold. It was an inhuman punishment but it had tremendous effects, inspiring desperate energy. The armies made superhuman efforts and were wonderfully successful. A group of fearless, reckless, and thoroughly competent commanders emerged rapidly from the ranks. We shall shortly observe the reaction of these triumphant campaigns upon the domestic political situation. While this terrific effort to hurl back the invaders of France was going on, the Committee of Public Safety was engaged in a lynx- The law of eyed, comprehensive campaign at home against all domestic "suspects" enemies or persons accused of being such. By the famous law of "suspects," every one in France was brought within its iron grip. This law was so loosely and vaguely worded, it indicated so many classes of individuals, that under its provisions practically any one in France could be arrested and sent before the Revolutionary Tribunal. All were guilty of treason, and punishable with death, who "having done nothing against liberty have nevertheless done nothing for it." No guilty, and also no innocent, man could be sure of escaping so elastic a law, or, if arrested, could expect justice from a court which ignored the usual forms of law, which, ultimately, de- prived prisoners of the right to counsel, and which condemned them in batches. Yet the Declaration of the Rights of Man, which had seemed a new evangel to an optimistic world, had stated that hence- forth no one should be arrested or imprisoned except in cases de- termined by law and according to the forms of law. A tree is judged by its fruits. Consider the results in this case. In every city, town, and hamlet of France arrests of suspected persons were made en masse, and judgment and execution were rendered in almost the same summary and comprehensive fashion. Only a few instances can be selected from this calendar of crime. The city of Lyons had sprung to the defense of the Girondists after their expul- THE REIGN OF TERROR 189 sion from the Convention on June 2. It took four months and a half and a considerable army to put down the opposition of this, the second city of France. When this was accomplished the Conven- tion passed a fierce decree: "The city of Lyons is to be de- stroyed. Every house which was inhabited by the rich shall treatment be demolished. There will remain only the homes of the °* Ly°°s . poor, of patriots, and buildings especially employed for industries, and those edifices dedicated to humanity and to education." The name of this famous city was to be obliterated. It was henceforth to be known as the Liberated City {Commune affranchie). This savage sentence was not carried out, demolition on so large a scale not being easy. Only a few buildings were blown to pieces. But over 3500 persons were arrested and nearly half of them were executed. The authorities began by shooting each one individually. The last were mowed down in batches by cannon or musketry fire. Similar scenes were enacted, though not on so extensive a scale, in Toulon (tb-16h') and Marseilles (mar-salz'). It was for the Vendee that the worst ferocities were reserved. The Vendee had been in rebellion against the Republic, and in the interest of counter-revolution. The people had been angered by the laws against the priests. Moreover the people of that punishment section refused to fight in the Republic's armies. It was en- tirely legitimate for the government to crush this rebellion but it did so only after an indescribably cruel war, in which neither side gave quarter. Carrier (kar-ya'), the representative on mission sent out by the Convention, established a gruesome record for barbarity. He did not adopt the method followed by the Revolutionary „. . Tribunal in Paris which at least pretended to try the accused barity of before sentencing them to death. This was too slow a process. ^"'^"^ Prisoners were shot in squads, nearly 2000 of them. Drowning was resorted to. Carrier's victims were bound, put in boats, and the boats then sunk in the river Loire. Women and children were among the number. Even the Committee of Public Safety was shocked at Carrier's fiendish ingenuity and demanded an explanation. He had the insolence to pretend that the drownings were accidental. "Is it my fault that the boats did not reach their destination?" he asked. The number of bodies in the river was so great that the water was poisoned and for that reason the city government of Nantes forbade the eating of fish. Carrier was later removed by the Committee, 190 THE CONVENTION but was not further punished by it, though ultimately he found his way to the guillotine. Meanwhile at Paris the Revolutionary Tribunal was daily sending its victims to the guillotine, after trials which were travesties of jus- tice. Guillotines were erected in two of the public squares and tionary each day saw its executions. Week after week went by, and Tribunal head after head dropped into the insatiable basket. Many of the victims were emigres or non-juring priests who had come back to France, others were generals who had failed of the indispen- sable victory ^nd had been denounced as traitors. Others still were persons who had favored the Revolution at an earlier stage and had worked for it, but who had later been on the losing side in the fierce party contests which had rent the Convention. Nowadays political struggles lead to the overthrow of ministers. But in France, as in Renaissance Italy, they led to the death of the defeated party, or at least of its leaders. As the blood-madness grew in intensity, it was voted by the Convention, in order to speed up the murderous pace, that the Revolutionary Tribunal after hearing a case for three days might then decide it without further examination if it considered "its conscience sufficiently enlightened." The Girondists were conspicuous victims. Twenty-one of them were guillotined on October 31, 1793, among them Madame Roland, who went to the scaffold "fresh, calm, smiling," according to a friend who saw her go. She had regretted that she "had not been born a Spartan or a Roman," a superfluous regret, as was shown by The Gxecu- tion of the the manner of her death, "at only thirty-nine," words with Girondist which shc closcd the passionate Memoirs she wrote while in prison. Mounting the scaffold she caught sight of a statue of liberty. "O Liberty, how they've played with you !" she exclaimed. She had been preceded some days before by Marie Antoinette, the daughter of an empress, the wife of a king, child of fortune and of mis- The execu- fortune beyond compare. The Queen had been subjected tion of Mane xo an obsccnc trial, accused of indescribable vileness the Antoinette ... , t r t i > »- ^ iOctpber i6. Corruption of her son. If I have not answered," she cried, _^^^ " it is because nature herself rejects such a charge made against a mother: I appeal to all who are here." This woman's cry so moved the audience to sympathy that the officials cut the trial short, allowing the lawyers only fifteen minutes to finish. The Queen bore herself courageously. She did not flinch. She was brave to the end. EXECUTION OF MARIE ANTOINETTE 191 ^^^H^^|y^«.,,i^a99[ ...iJ**^ ^^^^^^^^^^^HSLi MmjSx m^ ly ^^^ - ~ ^.^i Wff^'^^f3^ W^^^^^^ ^ i 1 ^ #-^ B i ?|ii-_.K*i i^^F' ' ' ' '"Wim fc;*5^^^-, -%^ ^Hf ""'^ip^ ^B '9^ Ik "*** ^' yss^^f^^^s^iWil^^i-^ J 1^ ^■S'^m ji J %&^^^j^ ^ 5%w..J ^' T • |PS W V" ! ' "Wjfea l^'^^'Wi^L^— . Hi "^S :9M|^^^g ■mMs^^^^i hi a> 192 THE CONVENTION Marie Antoinette has never ceased to command the sympathy of posterity, as her tragic stor}^ and the fall to which her errors partly led and the proud and noble courage with which she met her mournful fate have never ceased to move its pity and respect. She stands in history as one of its most melancholy figures. Charlotte Corday, a Norman girl, who had stabbed the notorious Marat to death, thinking thus to free her country, paid the penalty with serenity and dignity. All through these months men witnessed The Reign ^ tragic procession up the scaffold's steps of those who were of Terror great by position or character or service or reputation : Bailly, celebrated as an astronomer and as the Mayor of Paris in the early Revolution; the Duke of Orleans, who had played a shameless part in the Revolution, having been demagogue enough to discard his name and call himself Philip Equality, and having infamously voted, as a member of the Convention, for the death of his cousin, Louis XVI ; Barnave (bar-nav'), next to Mirabeau one of the most brilliant leaders of the Constituent Assembly ; and so it went, daily executions in Paris and still others in the provinces. Some fleeing the terror that walked by day and night, caught at bay, committed suicide, like Condorcet, last of the philosophers, and gifted theorist of the Republic. Still others wandered through the countr3^side haggard, gaunt, and were finally shot down, as beasts of the field. Yet all this did not constitute "the Great Terror," as it was called. That came later. Thus far there was at least a semblance or pretense of punishing the enemies of the Republic, the enemies of France. But now these odious methods were to be used as means of destroying political and personal enemies. Politics assumed the character and risks of war. We have seen that since August lo, 1792, there were two powers in the state, the Commune, or Government of Paris, and the Convention, or Government of France, now directed by the Committee of mune versus Public Safety. These two had in the main cooperated thus the Conven- fg^j- overthrowing the monarchy, overthrowing the Giron- tion . ^ -^ ' * dists. But now dissension raised its head and harmony was no more. The Commune was in the control of the most violent party that the Revolution had developed. Its leaders were Hebert (a-bar') and Chaumette (sho-met'). Hebert conducted a journal, the Pere Duchesne, which was both obscene and profane and which was widely read in Paris by the lowest classes. Hebert and Chau- THE COMMUNE OF PARIS 193 mette reigned in the City Hall, drew their strength from the rabble of the streets which they knew how to incite and hurl at their enemies. They were ultra-radicals, audacious, truculent. They constantly demanded new and redoubled applications of terror. For a while they dominated the Convention. Carrier, one of the Convention's representatives on mission, was really a tool of the Commune. A NEW CALENDAR It was the Commune which now forced the Convention to attempt the dechristianization of France. For this purpose a new calendar was desired, a calendar that should discard Sundays, saints' a republican days, religious festivals, and set up novel and entirely secular calendar divisions of time. Henceforth the month was to be divided not into weeks, but into decades or periods of ten days. Every tenth day was to be the rest day. The days of the months were changed to indicate natural phenomena, July becoming Thermidor, or period of heat ; April becoming Germinal, or budding time ; November becoming Brumaire, or period of fogs. Henceforth men were to date, not from the birth of Christ, but from the birth of Liberty. The Year One of Liberty began September 21, 1792. The world was young again. The day was divided into ten hours, not twenty-four, and the ten were subdivided and subdivided into smaller units. This calendar was made obligatory. But great was the havoc created by the new chronology. Parents were required to instruct their chil- dren in the new method of reckoning time. " But the parents had been brought up on the old system and experienced much difficulty in telling what time of day it was according to the new terminology. Watchmakers were driven to add another circle to the faces of their watches. One circle carried the familiar set of figures, the other carried the new. Thus was one difficulty partially conjured away. The new calendar lasted twelve years. It was frankly and inten- tionally anti-Christian. The Christian era was repudiated. More important was the attempt to improvise a new religion. Reason was henceforth to be worshiped, no longer the Christian God. A begirming was made in the campaign for dechristian- ^^^ . ization by removing the bells from the churches, " the Eternal's against " su- gewgaws," they were called, and by making cannon and coin p^""^*'*'*"* out of them. Death was declared to be "but an eternal sleep" — 194 THE CONVENTION thus Heaven, and Hell as well, was abolished. There was a demand that church spires be torn down "as by their domination over other buildings, they seem to violate the principle of equality," and many were consequently sacrificed. This sorry business reached its climax The Worship i^ the formal establishment by the Commune of Paris of the of Reason Worship of Reason. On November lo, 1793, the Cathedral of Notre Dame was converted into a "Temple of Reason." The cere- mony of that day has been famous for a century and its fame may last another. A dancer from the opera, wear- ing the three colors of the re- public, sat, as the Goddess of Reason, upon the Altar of Liberty, where formerly the Holy Virgin had been en- throned, and received the homage of her devotees. After this many other churches in Paris, and even in the prov- inces, were changed into Tem- ples of Reason. The sacred vessels used in Catholic serv- ices were burned or melted down. In some cases the stone saints that ornamented, or at least diversified, the fagades of churches, were thrown down and broken or burned. At Notre Dame in Paris they were boarded over, and thus preserved for a period when their contamination would not be feared or felt. Every tenth day services were held. They might take the form of philosophical or political discourses, or the form of popular banquets or balls. The proclamation of this Worship of Reason was the high-water mark in the fortunes of the Commune. The Convention had been compelled to yield, the Committee of Public Safety to acquiesce in conduct of which it did not approve. Robespierre was irritated, i 1 J ^rr^. 1 ■ |V ^ »• «^' ^1 K :M| .^ , fl W ^^^^ ~-'5M^ J ^1 m- ^*J# 1 Bi Hi ' \i 1 1 Mi.LE. Maillard, " Goddess of Reason" After the painting by Garneray. ! FALL OF HEBERTISTS AND DANTONISTS 195 partly because he had a reUgion of his own which he preferred and which he wished in time to bring forward and impose upon France, partly because as a member of the great Committee he re- j^ . sented the existence of a rival so powerful as the Commune, opposes the The Hebertists had shot their bolt. Robespierre now shot his. ^ ertists In a carefully prepared speech he declared that "Atheism is aristo- cratic. The idea of a Supreme Being who watches over oppressed innocence and who punishes triumphant crime, is thoroughly demo cratic." He furtively urged on all attacks upon the blasphemous Commune, as when Dan ton declared, "These anti-religious mas- querades in the Convention must cease." But Robespierre was the secret enemy of Danton as well, though for a very different reason. The Commune stood for the Terror in all its forms and demanded that it be maintained in all its vigor. On the other hand, Danton, Camille Desmoulins, and their friends, „ , , ^ , _ , . Robespierre ardent supporters of the Terror as long as it was necessary, opposes the believed tha4 now the need for it had passed and wished its ^^'^*°°*s*s rigor mitigated and the system gradually abandoned. The armies of the Republic were everywhere successful, the invaders had been driven back, and domestic insurrections had been stamped out. Sick at heart of bloodshed now that it was no longer required, the Dantonists began to recommend clemency to the Convention. THE OVERTHROW OF THE COMMUNE The Committee of Public Safety was opposed to both these factions, the Hebertists and the Dantonists, and Robespierre was at the center of an intrigue to ruin both. The description of the machinations and manoeuvres which went on in the Convention cannot be under- taken here. To make them clear would require much space. It must suffice to say that first the Committee directed all its powers against the Commune and dared on March 13, 1794, to order the arrest of Hebert and his friends. Eleven days later they were guil- lotined. The rivalry of the Commune was over. The Convention was supreme. But the Committee had no desire to bring the Terror to an end. Several of its members saw their own doom in any lessening of its severity. Looking out for their own heads, they therefore resolved to kill Danton, as the representative of the dangerous policy of mod- eration. This man who had personified as no one else had done the 196 THE CONVENTION national temper in its crusade against the allied monarchs, who had been the very central pillar of the state in a terrible crisis, who, when The fate France was for a moment discouraged, had nerved her to new of Danton effort by the electrifying cry, "We must dare and dare again and dare without end," now fell a victim to the wretched and frenzied struggles of the politicians because, now that the danger was over, he advocated, with his vastly heightened prestige, a return to modera- tion and conciliation. Terror as a means of annihilating his country's enemies he approved. Terror as a means of oppressing his fellow- countrymen, the crisis once passed, he deplored and tried to stop. He failed. The wheel was tearing around too rapidly. He was one of the tempestuous victims of the Terror. When he pleaded for peace, for a cessation of sanguinary and ferocious partisan politics, his rivals turned venomously, murderously against him. Conscious of his patriotism he did not believe that they would dare to strike him. A friend entered his study as he was sitting before the fire in revery and told him that the Committee of Public Safety had ordered his arrest. "Well, then, what then?" said Danton. "You must resist." "That means the shedding of blood, and I am sick of it. I would rather be guillotined than guillotine," he replied. He was urged to fly. "Whither fly?" he answered. "You (^o not carry your country on the sole of your shoe," and he muttered, "They will not dare, they will not dare." But they did dare. The next day he was in prison. In prison he was heard to say, "A year ago I proposed the establishment of the Revolutionary Tribunal. I ask pardon for it, of God and man." And again, "I leave everything in frightful confusion; not one of them understands anything of government. Robespierre will follow me. I drag down Robespierre. One had better be a poor fisherman than meddle with the governing of men." On the scaffold he ex- claimed, " Danton, no weakness !" His last words were addressed to the executioner. ' ' Show my head to the people ; it is worth showing. ' ' The fall of Danton left Robespierre the most conspicuous person on the scene, the most influential member of the Convention and of the Robespierre Committee of Public Safety. He was master of the Jacobins. dictator fj^g Commune was filled with his friends, anxious to do his bidding. The Revolutionary Tribunal was controlled and operated by his followers. For nearly four months, from April 5 to July 27, he was practically dictator. MAXIMILIEN ROBESPIERRE 197 A very singular despot for a people like the French. His qualities were not those which have characterized the leaders or the masses of that nation. The most authoritative French historian of this period, Aulard, notes this fact. As a politician Robespierre was "astute, mysterious, undecipherable." "What we see of his soul is most repellent to our French instincts of frankness and loy- alty. Robespierre was a hypocrite and he erected hypocrisy into a system of government." He had begun as a small provincial lawyer. He fed upon Rousseau, and was the narrow and anaemic embodiment of Rousseau's ideas. He had made his reputation at the Jacobin Club, where he delivered character of speeches care- Robespierre fully retouched and finished, abounding in platitudes that pleased, entirely lack- ing in the fire, the dash, the stirring, im- promptu phrases of a Mirabeau or a Danton. His style was correct, mediocre, thin, formal, academic. "Virtue" was his stock in trade and he made virtue odious by his everlasting talk of it, by his smug assumption of moral superiority, approaching even the hazardous pretension to perfection. He was forever singing his own praises with a lamen- table lack of humor and of taste. " I have never bowed beneath the yoke of baseness and corruption," he said. He won the title of "The Incorruptible." Robespierre After a contemporary sketch attributed to Gerard. 198 THE CONVENTION As a politician his policy had been to use up his enemies, and. every rival was an enemy, by suggesting vaguely but opportunely that they were impure, corrupt, immoral, and by setting the springs in motion that landed them on the scaffold. He had himself stepped softly, warily, past the ambushes that lay in wait for the careless or the impetuous. By such processes he had survived and was now the man of the hour, immensely popular with the masses, and feared by those who disliked him. How would he use his power, his opportunity ? He used it, not to bring peace to a sadly distracted country, not to heal the wounds, not to clinch the work of the Revolution, but to at- The " Reign tempt to force a great nation to enact into legislation the ideas of Virtue " of a highly sentimental philosopher, Rousseau. It was to be a Reign of Virtue. Robespierre's ambition was to make virtue tri- umphant, a laudable purpose, if the definition of virtue be satis- factory and the methods for bringing about her reign honorable and humane. But in this case they were not. Robespierre stands revealed, as he also stands condemned, by the two acts associated with his career as dictator, the proclamation of a new religion and the Law of Prairial, altering for the worse the already monstrous Revolutionary Tribunal. Robespierre had once said in public, "If God did not exist we should have to invent Him." ship of "the Fortunately for a man of such poverty of thought as he, he Supreme did not have to resort to invention but found God already invented by his idolized Rousseau. He devoted his atten- tion to getting the Convention to give official sanction to Rousseau's ideas concerning the Deity. The Convention at his instigation formally recognized "the existence of the Supreme Being and the Immortality of the Soul." On June 8, a festival was held in honor of the new religion, quite as famous, in its way, as the ceremonies connected with the inauguration, a few months before, of the Worship of Reason. It was a wondrous spectacle, staged by the master hand of the artist David. A vast amphitheater was erected in the gardens of the Tuileries. Thither marched the members of the Convention in solemn procession, carrying flowers and sheaves of grain, Robes- pierre at the head, for he was president that day and played the pontiff, a part which suited him. He set fire to colossal figures, symbolizing Atheism and Vice, and then floated forth upon a long rhapsody. "Here," he cried from the platform, "is the Universe assembled. O Nature, how sublime, how exquisite, thy power ! WORSHIP OF THE SUPREME BEING 199 200 THE CONVENTION Card of Admission to the Festival of THE Supreme Being How tyrants will pale at the tidings of our feast!" A hundred thousand voices chanted a sacred hymn which had been composed for the occasion and for which they had been training for a week. Robes- Robespierre pierre stood the cynosure of all eyes, at the very summit of as pontiff ambition, receiving boundless admiration as he thus inaugu- rated the new worship of the Supreme Being, and breathed the intoxicating incense that arose. Profound was the irony of this scene, the in- credible culmination of a century of skepticism. Some ungodl}^ persons made merry over this mummery, indulg- ing in indiscreet gibes at "The Incorruptible's" ex- pense. The power of sar- casm was not yet dead in France, as this man who never smiled now learned. Two days later Robespierre caused a bill to be introduced into the Convention which showed that this delicate hand could brandish dag- gers as well as carry flowers and shocks of corn. The irreverent, the dangerous, must be swept like chaff into the burning pit. This The Law of bill, which became the Law of 22d Prairial, made the proce- dure of the Revolutionary Tribunal more murderous still. The accused were deprived of counsel. Witnesses need not be heard in cases where the prosecutor could adduce any material or "moral" proof. Any kind of opposition to the government was made punish- able with death. The question of guilt was left to the "enlightened conscience" of the jury. The jury was purged of all members who were supposed to be lukewarm toward Robespierre. The accused might be sent before this packed and servile court either by the Con- vention, or by the Committee of Public Safety, or by the Committee of General Security, or by the public prosecutor alone. In other words, any life in, France was at the mercy of this latter ofificial, Fouquier-Tinville, a tool of Robespierre. The members of the Convention itself were no safer than others, nor were the members of the great Committee, if they incurred the displeasure of the dictator. Now began what is called the Great Terror, as if to distinguish it Prairial THE FALL OF ROBESPIERRE 201 from what had preceded. In the thirteen months which had preceded, the 22d of Prairial 1200 persons had been guillotined in Paris. In forty-nine days between that date and the fall of Robespierre, on the 9th of Thermidor, 1376 were guillotined. On two days alone, namely the 7th and 8th of July, 150 persons were executed. Day after day the butchery went on. It brought about the fall of Robespierre. This hideous measure united his enemies, those who feared him because they stood for clemency, and those 'who feared him because, though Terrorists themselves, they knew that he had marked them for destruction. They could lose no more by opposing him than by acquiescing, and if they could overthrow him they would gain the safety of their heads. Thus in desperation and in terror was woven a conspiracy — not to end the Terror, but to end Robespierre. The storrn broke on July 27, 1794 (the 9th of Thermidor). When Robespierre attempted to speak in the Convention, which had cowered under him and at his demand had indelibly debased itself by passing the infamous Law of Prairial, he was shouted down. Cries of "Down with the tyrant!" were heard. Attempting to arouse the people in the galleries, he this time met with no response. The magic was gone. There was a confused, noisy struggle, xhe arrest of lasting several hours. Robespierre's voice failed him. " Dan- Robespierre ton's blood is choking him !" exclaimed one of the conspirators. Finally the Convention voted his arrest and that of his satellites, his brother, Saint-Just, and Couthon. All was not yet lost. The Revolutionary Tribunal was devoted to Robespierre and, if tried, there was an excellent chance that he would be acquitted. The Commune likewise was favorable to him. 1 1 took the initiative. It announced an insurrection. Its agents broke into his prison, released him, and bore him to the City Hall. Thereupon the Convention, hearing of this act of rebellion, declared him and his associates outlaws. No trial therefore was necessary. As soon as rearrested he would be guillotined. During the evening and early hours of the night a confused attempt to organize an attack against the Convention went on. But a little before midnight a drench- ing storm dispersed his thousands of supporters in the square, and execu- Moreover, Robespierre hesitated, lacked the spirit of decision *J°^ '^^ . . Robespierre and daring. The whole matter was ended by the Convention sending troops against the Commune. At two in the morning these 202 THE CONVENTION troops seized the Hotel de Ville and arrested Robespierre and the leading members of the Commune. Robespierre had been wounded in the fray, his Jaw fractured by a bullet. He was borne to the Convention, which decHned to receive him. "The Convention unanimously refused to let him be brought into the sanctuary of the law which he had so long polluted," so ran the official report of this session. That day he and twenty others were sent to the guillotine. An enormous throng witnessed the scene and broke into wild acclaim. On the two following days eighty-three, more executions took place. France breathed more freely. The worst, evidently, was over. In the succeeding months the system of the Terror was gradually aban- ^^ _,. doned. The various branches of the terrible machine of gov- The Ther- ° midorian emment were either destroyed or greatly altered. A milder reaction regime began. The storm did not subside at once, but it sub- sided steadily, though not without several violent shocks, several attempts on the part of the dwindling Jacobins to recover their former position by again letting loose the street mobs. The policy of the Convention came to be summed up in the cry " Death to the Terror and to Monarchy !" The Convention was now controlled by the moderates but it was unanimously republican. Signs that a monarchical party was reappearing, demanding the restoration of the Bourbons, but not of the Old Regime, prompted the Convention to counter-measures designed to strengthen and perpetuate the Re- public. THE THIRD CONSTITUTION, i795 To accomplish this and thus prevent the relapse into monarchy, the Convention drew up a new constitution, the third in six years. Though the radicals of Paris demanded vociferously that the sus- pended Constitution of 1793 be now put into force, the Convention refused, finding it too "anarchical" a document. Instead, it framed the Constitution of 1 795 or of the Year Three. Universal suffrage was Its pro- abandoned, the motive being to reduce the political importance visions Qf the Parisian populace. Democracy, established on August 10, 1792, was replaced by a suffrage based upon property. There was practically no protest. The example of the American states was quoted, none of which at that time admitted universal suffrage. The suffrage became practically what it had been under the monar- THE CONSTITUTION OF i795 203 chical Constitution of 1791. The national legislature was hence- forth to consist of two chambers, not one, as had its predecessors. The example of America was again cited. "Nearly all the ^ legislature constitutions of these states," said one member, "our seniors of two in the cause of liberty, have divided the legislature into two *^ ^™ chambers ; and the result has been public tranquillity. " It was, how- ever, chiefly the experience which France had herself had with single- chambered legislatures during the last few years that caused her to abandon that form. One of the chambers was to be called the Council of Elders. This was to consist of 250 members, who must be at least forty years of age, and be either married or widowers. The other, the Council of the Five Hundred, was to consist of mem- bers of at least thirty years of age. This council alone was to have the right to propose laws, which could, however, not be put into force unless accepted by the Council of Elders. The executive power was to be exercised by a Directory, con- sisting of live persons, of at least forty years of age, elected by the Councils, one retiring each year. The example of America The was again recommended but was not followed because the Directory Convention feared that a single executive, a president, might re- mind the French too sharply of monarchy or might become a new Robespierre. The Constitution of 1795 was eminently the result of experience, not of abstract theorizing. It established a bourgeois re- ^^^ Republic public, as the Constitution of 1791 had established a bourgeois' no longer monarchy. The Republic was in the hands, therefore, of a ®™°"^ "^ privileged class, property being the privilege. But the Convention either did not wish or did not dare to trust the voters to elect whom they might desire to the new Councils. Was there not danger that they might elect monarchists and so hand over the new republican constitution to its enemies ? Would the members of the Convention, who enjoyed power, who did not wish to step down and out, and yet who knew that they were unpopular because of the record of the Convention, stand any chance of election to the new legislature? Yet the habit of power was agreeable to them. Would the Republic be safe ? Was it not their first duty to ,^^^ suppie- provide that it should not fall into hostile hands ? mentary Under the influence of such considerations the Convention passed two decrees, supplementary to the constitution, providing 204 THE CONVENTION that two-thirds of each Council should be chosen from the present members of the Convention. The constitution was overwhelmingly approved by the voters to whom it was submitted for ratification. But the two decrees aroused decided opposition. They were represented as a barefaced The consti- ^^ tution ratified device whereby men who knew themselves unpopular could by the voters y^^^^ themselves in power for a while longer. Although the decrees were finally ratified, it was by much smaller majorities than had ratified the constitution. The vote of Paris was overwhelmingly against them. OPPOSITION TO THE DECREES Nor did Paris remain contented with casting a hostile vote. It proposed to prevent this consummation. An insurrection was Buona-Parte organized against the Convention, this time by the bourgeois and Murat a,nd wealthier people, in reality a royalist project. The Con- vention intrusted its defense to Barras (ba-ras') as commander-in- chief. Barras, who was more a politician than a general, called to his aid a little Corsican officer twenty-five years old who, two years before, had helped recover Toulon for the Republic. This little Buona-Parte, for this is the form in which the famous name appears in the official report of the day, was an artillery officer, a believer in the efficacy of that weapon. Hearing that there were forty cannon in a camp outside the city in danger of being seized by the insurgents, Bonaparte sent a young dare-devil cavalryman, Joachim Murat, to get them. Murat and his men dashed at full speed through the city, drove back the insurgents, seized the cannon and dragged them, always at full speed, to the Tuileries, which they reached by six o'clock in the morning. As one writer has said, "Neither the little general nor the superb cavalier dreamed that, in giving Barras cannon to be used against roj^alists, each was winning a crown for himself." The cannon were placed about the Tuileries, where sat the Conven- tion, rendering it impregnable. Every member of the Convention The insur- ^^^ given a rifle and cartridges. On the 13th of Vendemiaire rection of (Octobcr 5) ou camc the insurgents in two columns, down the dfi^Jire streets on both sides of the Seine. Suddenly at four-thirty (October 5, in the afternoon a violent cannonading was heard. It was ^'^^ Bonaparte making his debut. The Convention was saved and an astounding career was begun. This is what Carlyle, in his THE END OF THE CONVENTION 205 vivid way, calls "the whiff of grapeshot which ends what we spe- cifically call the French Revolution," an imaginative and inaccurate statement. Though it did not end the Revolution, it did, however, end one phase of it and inaugurate another. THE CONVENTION DISSOLVED Three weeks later, on October 26, 1795, the Convention declared itself dissolved. It had had an extraordinary history, only a few aspects of which have been described in this brief account, us record of In the three years of its existence it had displayed prodigious victories activity along many lines. Meeting in the midst of appalling national difficulties born of internal dissension and foreign war, attacked by sixty departments of France and by an astonishing array of foreign powers, England, Prussia, Austria, Piedmont, Hol- land, Spain, it had triumphed all along the line. Civil war had been stamped out ; and in the summer of 1795 three hostile states, Prussia, Holland, and Spain, made peace with France and withdrew from the war. France was actually in possession of the Austrian Netherlands and of the German provinces on the west bank of the Rhine. She had practically attained the so-called natural boundaries. War still continued with Austria and England. That problem was passed on to the Directory. During these three years the Convention had proclaimed the Republic in the classic land of monarchy, had voted two constitutions, had sanctioned two forms of worship, and had finally separated church and state, a thing of extreme difficulty in any Euro- vention and pean country. It had put a king to death, had organized **i^ ^^p^^Iic and endured a reign of tyranny, which long discredited the very idea of a republic among multitudes of the French, and which immeasur- ably weakened the Republic by cutting off so manj- men who, had they lived, would have been its natural and experienced defenders for a full generation longer, since most of them were young. The Republic used up its material recklessly, so that when the man arrived who wished to end it and establish his personal rule, this sallow Italian Buona- Parte, his task was comparatively easy, the opposition being leaderless or poorly led. On the other hand, the Republic had had its thrilling victories, its heroes, and its martyrs, whose careers and teachings were to be factors in the history of France for fully a century to come. 2o6 THE CONVENTION The Convention had also worked mightily and achieved much in the avenues of peaceful development. It had given France a system Its peaceful of weights and measures, more perfect than the world had ever achievements seen, the metric system, since widely adopted by other coun- tries. It had laid the foundations and done the preliminary work for The metric a codification of the laws, an achievement which Napoleon system ^^s ^q Carry to completion and of which he was to monopolize the renown. It devoted fruitful attention to the problem of national education, believing with Danton, that "next to bread, education is the first need of the people," and that there ought to be a national system, free, compulsory, and entirely secular. The time has come, said the eloquent tribune, to establish the great principle which Popular appears to be ignored, "that children belong to the Republic education before they belong to their parents." A great system of pri- mary and secondary education was elaborated, but it was not put into actual operation, owing to the lack of funds. On the other hand, much was done for certain special schools. Among the invaluable creations of the Convention were certain institutions whose educational fame has Steadily increased, whose influence has been profound, Seated""^ the Normal School, the Polytechnic School, the Law and Medical Schools of Paris, the Conservatory of Arts and Crafts, the National Archives, the Museum of the Louvre, the National Library, and the Institute. While some of these had their roots in earlier institutions, all such were so reorganized and amplified and enriched as to make them practically new. To keep the balance of our judgment clear we should recall these imperishable services to civilization rendered by the same assembly which is more notorious because of its connection with the iniquitous Reign of Terror. The Republic had its glorious trophies, its honorable records, from which later times were to derive inspiration and instruction. REFERENCES The Establishment of the Republic : Aulard, The French Revolution, Vol. II, Chap. IV; Fisher, H. A. L., The Republican Tradition in Europe, Chap. IV; Stephens, History of the French Revolution, Vol. II, pp. 150-180; Mathews, The French Revolution, pp. 207-224. Trial and Execution of Louis XVI : Acton, Lectures on the French Revolu- tion, pp. 249-255 ; Carlyle, French Revolution, Vol. II, Book III, Chaps. VI- VIII (section entitled "Regicide"). REFERENCES 207 The Reign of Terror : Mathews, pp. 224-251 ; Stephens, Vol. II, Chaps. X and XI; Gardiner, B. M., The French Revolution, pp. 156-187; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 338-371. Overthrow of Hebertists and Dantonists : Gardiner, pp. 188-204. Robespierre: Mathews, pp. 252-265; Morley, Miscellanies, Vol. I (essay on Robespierre); Gardiner, pp. 204-220; Acton, Chap. XIX. Reaction after the Overthrow of Robespierre : Mathews, pp. 266- 285; Gardiner, pp. 221-253; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIII, pp. 372- 397- t The Constitution of i 795 : Bourne, The Revolutionary Period in Europe, pp. 223-231 ; Aulard, Vol. Ill, Chap. VII. CHAPTER IX THE DIRECTORY prosecution of the war ' The Directory lasted from October 27, 1795, to November 19, 1799. ^^ _. It took its name from the form of the executive branch of the The Direc- tory (179s- RepubUc, as determined by the Constitution of 1795. Its ^'^'^ history of four years was troubled, uncertain, and ended in a violent overthrow. Its first and most pressing prob- lem was the continued prosecution ^jjg of the war. As already stated, Prussia, Spain, and Holland had withdrawn from the coali- tion and had made peace with the Convention But England, Aus- tria, Piedmont, and the lesser German states were still in arms against the Republic. The first duty of the Directory was, there- fore, to continue the war with them and to defeat them. France had al- ready overrun the Austrian Nether- lands, that is, modern Belgium, and had declared them annexed to France. But to compel Austria, the owner, to recognize this annexation she must be beaten. The Directory, therefore, pro- ceeded with vigor to concentrate its attention upon this object. As France had thrown back her invaders, the fighting was no longer on French soil. She now became the invader, and that long series of conquests of various European countries by aggressive French armies began, which was to end only twenty years later with the fall of the greatest commander of modern times, if not of all history. 208 A Director in Official Costume Redrawn after a sketch by Le Dm. THE .FAMILY OF BONAPARTE 209 The campaign against Austria, planned by the Directory, included two parallel and aggressive movements against that country — an attack through southern Germany, down the valley of the Danube, ending, it was hoped, at Vienna. This was the cam- The cam- paign against paign north of the Alps. South of the Alps, in northern Italy, Austria France had enemies in Piedmont or Sardinia and again in Austria, which had possession of the central and rich part of the Po valley, namely, Lombardy, with Milan as the capital. The campaign in Germany was confided to Jourdan (zhor-don') and Moreau (mo-ro') ; that in Italy to General Bonaparte, who made of it a stepping-stone to fame and power incomparable. EARLY LIFE OF NAPOLEON BONAPARTE Napoleon Bonaparte was bom at Ajaccio (a-yat'-cho) in Corsica in 1769, a short time after the island had been sold by Genoa to France. The family was of Italian origin but had for two centuries and a half been resident in the island. His father, by descent Charles Bonaparte, was of the lesser nobility but was poor, ^ Corsican indolent, pleasure-loving, a lawyer by profession. His mother. Frenchman Laetitia Ramolino, was a woman of great beauty, of remark- ^ °^*'°°" able will, of extraordinary energy. Poorly educated, this "mother of kings" was never able to speak the French language without ridiculous mistakes. She had thirteen children, eight of whom lived to grow up, five boys and three girls. The father died when the youngest, Jerome, was only three months old. Napoleon, the second son, was educated in French military schools at Napoleon Brienne and Paris, as a sort of charity scholar. He was educated at very unhappy, surrounded as he was by boys who looked schooiTin down upon him because he was poor while they were rich, ^''^'^^e because his father was unimportant while theirs belonged to the noblest families in France, because he spoke French like the foreigner he was, Italian being his native tongue. In fact he was tormented in all the ways of which schoolboys are past-masters. He became sullen, taciturn, lived apart by himself, was unpopular with his fellows, whom, in turn, he despised, conscious, as he was, of powers quite equal to any of theirs, of a spirit quite as high. His boyish letters home were remarkably serious, lucid, intelligent. He was excellent in mathematics, and was fond of history and geography. At the 210 THE DIRECTORY " When I was a young lieutenant of artillery," later a favor- ite phrase with Napoleon age of sixteen he left the miUtary school and became a second lieu- tenant of artillery. One of his teachers described him at this time as follows : " Reserved and studious, he prefers study to amusement of any kind and enjoys reading the best authors ; is diligent in the study of the abstract sciences, caring little for anything else. He is taciturn and loves solitude, is capricious, haughty, and excessively self-centered. He talks little but is quick and energetic in his replies, prompt and incisive in repartee. He has great self- esteem, is ambitious, with aspirations that will stop at nothing. Is worthy of patron- age." Young Bonaparte read the intoxicating literature of re- volt of the eighteenth century, Voltaire, Tur- got, particularly Rous- seau. "Even when I had nothing to do," he said later, "I vaguely thought that I had no time to lose." As a young sub-lieu- tenant he had a wretchedly small salary. "I have no resources here but work," he wrote his mother. "I sleep very little. I go to bed at ten, I rise at four. I have only one meal a day, at three o'clock." He read history extensively, regarding it as "the torch of truth, the destroyer of prejudice." He tried his hand at writing essays, novels, but particularly a history of Corsica, for at this time his great ambition was to be the historian of his native land. He hated France and dreamed of a war of independence for Corsica. He spent much time in Corsica, securing long furloughs, which, moreover, he overstayed. As a consequence he finally lost his position in the army which, though poorly salaried, still gave him a living. He returned to Paris in 1792, hoping to regain it, but the disturbed state of affairs was not propitious. Without a profession, Charles Bonaparte After the painting by Belliard, engraved by Read. BONAPARTE DURING THE REVOLUTION without resources, he was almost penniless. He ate in cheap res- taurants. He pawned his watch — and, as an idle but interested spectator, he witnessed some of the famous "days" of the . ' ' -'A spectator Revolution, the invasion of the Tuileries by the mob on the of the 20th of June, when Louis XVI was forced to wear the bonnet /^^'°'"*'°° rouge, the attack of August lo when he was deposed, the September Massacres. Bonaparte's opinion was that the soldiers should have shot a few hundred, „ , ' Renders use- then the crowd ful service to would have run. t^^ R«P"biic He was restored to his command in August, 1792. In 1793 he dis- tinguished himself by helping recover Toulon for the Republic and in 1795 by defending the Convention against the insurrection of Vendemi- aire, which was a lucky crisis for him. Having conquered a Parisian mob, he was himself conquered , T T Bonaparte by a woman. He marries fell madly in love Josephine Beauharnais With Josephine Beauharnais (bo-ar-na'), a widow six years older than himself, whose hus- band had been guillo- tined a few days before the fall of Robespierre, leaving her poor and with two children. Josephine did not lose her heart but she was impressed, indeed half terrified, by the vehemence of Napoleon's passion, the intensity of his glance, and she yielded to his rapid, impetuous courtship, with a troubled but vivid sense that the future had great things in store for him. "Do they" (the Direc- tors) "think that I need their protection in order to rise?" he had exclaimed to her. "They will be glad enough some day if Laetitia Ramolixo, Napoleon's Mother From a painting in the Town Hall at Ajaccio. 212 THE DIRECTORY I grant them mine. My sword is at my side and with it I can go far." "This preposterous assurance," wrote Josephine, "affects me The House at Ajaccio in which Napoleon Was Born From a drawing by F. Clementson. to such a degree that I can believe everything may be possible to this man, and, with his imagination, who can tell what he may be tempted to undertake?" BONAPARTE'S OPPORTUNITY 213 BONAPARTE'S CAMPAIGN IN ITALY Two days before they were married Bonaparte was appointed to the command of the Army of Italy. His sword was at his side. He now unsheathed it and made some memorable passes. Two days after the marriage he left his bride in Paris and started comm^/er for the front, in a mingled mood of desperation at the separa- °^ *^^^ ^""^y 1^1", , • ■ , , °i Italy tion and of exultation that now his opportunity had come. Sending back passionate love-letters from every station, his spirit and his senses all on fire, feeling that he was on the very verge of achievement, he hastened on to meet the enemy and, as was quickly evident, "to tear the very heart out of glory." The wildness of Corsica, his native land, was in his blood, the land of fighters, a true son the land of the vendetta, of concentrated passion, of lawless °* Corsica energy, of bravery bej^ond compare, concerning which Rousseau had written in happy prescience twenty years before, "I have a presenti- ment that this little island will some day astonish Europe." That day had come. The young eagle it had nourished was now preening for his flight, prepared to astonish the universe. The diflficulties that confronted Bonaparte were numerous and no- table. One was his youth and another was that he was unknown. The Army of Italy had been in the field three years. Its generals did not know their new commander. Some of them were older than he and had already made names for themselves. They resented this appointment of a junior, a man whose chief exploit had been a street fight in Paris. Nevertheless when this slender, round-shouldered, small, and sickly-looking young man appeared they saw instantly that they had a master. He was imperious, laconic, reserved with them. "It was necessary," hesaid afterward, " in order to com- ^^^^^^^^^^^ mand men so much older than myself." He was only five feet and his two inches tall but, said Massena, "when he put on his gen- s^°^''^'^ eral's hat he seemed to have grown two feet. He questioned us on the position of our divisions, on the spirit and effective force of each corps, prescribed the course we were to follow, an- nounced that he would hold an inspection on the morrow, and on the day following attack the enemy." Augereau, a vulgar and famous old soldier, full of strange oaths and proud of his tall figure, was abusive, derisive, mutinous. He was admitted to the General's presence and passed an uneasy moment. "He frightened 214 THE DIRECTORY me," said Augereau, "his first glance crushed me. I cannot under- stand it." It did not take these officers long to see that the young general meant business and that he knew very thoroughly the art of war. His speech was rapid, brief, incisive. He gave his orders succinctly and clearly and he let it be known that obedience was the order of the day. The cold reception quickly became enthusiastic cooperation . Bonaparte won ascendancy over the soldiers with the same light- ning rapidity. They had been long inactive, idling through meaning- „ . less manoeuvres. He announced immediate action. The re- Bonaparte and the sponse was instantaneous. He inspired confidence and he so lers inspired enthusiasm. He took an army that was discouraged, that was in rags, even the officers being almost without shoes, an army on half rations. He issued a bulletin which imparted to them his own exaltation, his belief that the limits of the possible could easily be transcended, that it was all a matter of will. He got into their blood and they tingled with impatience and with hope. "There was so much of the future in him," is the way Marmont described the impression. "Soldiers," so ran this bulletin, "soldiers, you are Bonaparte's i^l-fcd and almost naked ; the government owes you much, it bulletins to can give you nothing. Your patience, the courage which you ^ ^^^^ exhibit in the midst of these crags, are worthy of all admira- tion; but they bring you no atom of glory; not a ray is reflected upon you. I will conduct you into the most fertile plains in the world. Rich provinces, great cities will be in your power; there you will find honor, glory, and wealth. Soldiers of Italy, can it be that you will be lacking in courage or perseverance?" Ardent images of a very mundane and material kind rose up before him and he saw to it that his soldiers shared them. By portraying very earthly visions of felicity Mahomet, centuries before, had stirred the Oriental zeal of his followers to marvelous effort and achievement. Bonaparte took suggestions from Mahomet on more than one occasion in his life. Bonaparte's first Italian campaign has remained in the eyes of mili- tary men ever since a masterpiece, a classic example of the art of war. Bonaparte's ^^ lasted a year, from April, 1796, to April, 1797. It may be first Italian Summarized in the 'words, "He came, he saw, he conquered." campaign y^^ confronted an allied Sardinian and Austrian army, and his forces were much inferior in number. His policy was therefore BONAPARTE IN ITALY 215 to see that his enemies did not unite, and then to beat each in turn. His enemies combined had 70,000 men. He had about half that number. SHpping in between the Austrians and Sardinians he de- feated the former, notably at Dego, and drove them eastward. Then he turned westward against the Sardinians, defeated them at Mon- dovi and opened the way to Turin, their capital. The Sardinians sued for peace and agreed that France should have the provinces Bonaparte of Savoy and Nice. One enemy had thus been eliminated by forces the ,.,. ,. .,, Sardinians to the rag heroes, now turned mto wmged victories. Bona- sue for peace parte summarized these achievements in a bulletin to his men, ^^^y- ^'96) which set them vibrating. "Soldiers," he said, "in fifteen days you have won six victories, taken twenty-one stands of colors, fifty-five pieces of cannon, and several fortresses, and conquered the richest part of Piedmont. You have taken 1500 prisoners and killed or wounded 10,000 men. . . . But, soldiers, you have done nothing, since there remains something for you to do. You have still battles to fight, towns to take, rivers to cross." Bonaparte now turned his entire attention to the Austrians, who were in control of Lombardy. Rushing down the southern bank of the Po, he crossed it at Piacenza (pe-a-chen'-zii). Beaulieu (bo-le-e), the Austrian commander, withdrew beyond the Adda River. „. ' -^ The cam- There was no way to get at him but to cross the river by the paign against bridge of Lodi, a bridge 350 feet long and swept on the other ^^^ ustnans side by cannon. To cross it in the face of a raking fire was necessary but was well-nigh impossible. Bonaparte ordered his grenadiers forward. Halfway over they were mowed down by the Austrian fire and began to recoil. Bonaparte and other generals rushed to the head of the columns, risked their lives, inspired their men, and the result was that they got across in the very teeth of the murder- xhe bridge ous fire and seized the Austrian batteries. "Of all the actions °^ ^'^^'^ in which the soldiers under my command have been engaged," reported Bonaparte to the Directory, "none has equaled the tre- mendous passage of the bridge of Lodi." From that day Bonaparte was the idol of his soldiers. He had shown reckless courage, contempt of death. Thenceforth they called him affectionately "The Little Corporal." The Austrians xhe struggle retreated to the farther side of the Mincio and to the mighty **"■ Mantua fortress of Mantua. On May 16 Bonaparte made a triumphal entry into Milan. He sent a force to begin the siege of Mantua. That M >> S? -"" THE BATTLE OF ARCOLA 217 was the key to the situation. He could not advance into the Alps and against Vienna until he had taken it. On the other hand, if Austria lost Mantua, she would lose her hold upon Italy. Four times during the next eight months, from June, 1796, to Jan- uary, 1797, Austria sent down armies from the Alps in the attempt to relieve the beleaguered fortress. Each time they were de- _ , , . , , Bonaparte s feated by the prodigious activity, the precision of aim, of the methods of French general, who continued his policy of attacking his ^^"^ ^^^ enemy piecemeal, before their divisions could unite. By this policy his inferior forces, for his numbers were inferior to the total of the opposed army, were always as a matter of fact so applied as to be superior to the enemy on the battlefield, for he attacked when the enemy was divided. It was youth against age, Bonaparte being twenty-seven, Wurmser and the other Austrian generals almost seventy. It was new methods against old, originality against the spirit of routine. The Austrians came down from the Alpine passes in two 'divisions. Here was Bonaparte's chance, and wonderfully did he use it. " In war," said Moreau to him two years later, " the greater number always beat the lesser." "You are right," replied Bonaparte. "Whenever, with smaller forces, I was in the presence of a great army, arranging mine rapidly, I fell like a thunderbolt upon one of its wings, tumbled it over, profited by the disorder which always ensued to attack the enemy elsewhere, always with my entire force. Thus I defeated him in detail and victory was always the triumph of the larger number over the smaller." All this was accomplished only by forced marches. "It is our legs that win his battles," said his soldiers. He shot his troops back and forth like a shuttle. By the rapidity of his movements he made up for his numerical weakness. Of course this success was rendered possible by the mistake of his opponents in dividing their forces when they should have kept them united. Even thus, with his own ability and the mistakes of his enemies cooperating, the contest was severe, the outcome at times trembled in the balance. Thus at Areola, the battle raged for three 1 1 r ^"® battle days. Again, as at Lodi, success depended upon the control of of Areola a bridge. Only a few miles separated the two Austrian divi- ^^°^^^^^''^^^ sions. If the Austrians could hold the bridge, then their junction would probably be completed. Bonaparte seized a flag and rushed upon the bridge, accompanied by his staff. The Austrians 2i8 THE DIRECTORY leveled a murderous fire at them. The columns fell back, several officers having been shot down. They refused to desert their general but dragged him with them by his arms and clothes. He fell into a morass and began to sink. "Forward to save the General !" was the cry and immediately the French fury broke loose, they drove back the Austrians and rescued their hero. He had, however, not repeated the exploit of Lodi. He had not crossed the bridge. But the next day his army was victorious and the Austrians retreated once more. The three days' battle was over (November 15-17, 1796). Two months later a new Austrian army came down from the Alps for the relief of Mantua and another desperate battle occurred, at Rivoli. On January 13-14, 1797, Bonaparte inflicted a crush- Jf^Rivoif^ ing defeat upon the Austrians, routed them, and sent them (January 13- spinning back into the Alps again. Two weeks later Mantua ^^' ^^'^ surrendered. Bonaparte now marched up into the Alps, constantly outgeneraling his brilliant new opponent, the young Arch- duke Charles, forcing him steadily back. When on April 7 he reached Austria asks the little town of Leoben, about 100 miles from Vienna, for peace. Austria sued for peace. A memorable and crowded year o/i-eoben, of effort was thus brought to a brilliant close. In its twelve April, 1797 months' march across northern Italy the French had fought eighteen big battles, and sixty-five smaller ones. "You have, besides that," said Bonaparte in a bulletin to the army, "sent 30,000,000 francs from the public treasury to Paris. You have enriched the Museum of Paris with 300 masterpieces of ancient and modern Italy, which it has taken thirty ages to produce. You have con- quered the most beautiful country of Europe. The French colors float for the first time upon the borders of the Adriatic." In another proclamation he told them they were forever covered with glory, that when they had completed their task and returned to their homes their fellow-citizens, when pointing to them, would say, "He was of the A,rmy of Italy." Thus rose his star to full meridian splendor. No wonder he believed in it. All through this Italian campaign Bonaparte acted as if he were the head of the state, not its servant. He sometimes followed Bonaparte ... , . ^ and the the advice of the Directors, more often he ignored it, fre- Directory quently he acted in defiance of it. Military matters did not alone occupy his attention. He tried his hand at political manipu- BONAPARTE CONQUERS VENICE 219 lation, with the same confidence and the same success which he had shown on the field of battle. He became a creator and a destroyer of states. Italy was not at that time a united country but was a col- lection of small independent states. None of these escaped the transforming touch of the young conqueror. He changed the old aristocratic Republic of Genoa into the Ligurian Republic, giving it a constitution similar to that of France. He forced doubtful princes, like the Dukes of Parma and Modena, to submission and heavy payments. He forced the Pope to a similar humiliation, taking some of his states, sparing most of them, and levying exactions. His most notorious act, next to the conquest of the sue- Bonaparte cessive Austrian armies, was the overthrow, on a flimsy pre- conquers" text and with diabolic guile, of the famous old Republic of Venice (1797) Venice. "Once did she hold the gorgeous East in fee; And was the safeguard of the West : the worth Of Venice did not fall below her birth, Venice, the Eldest Child of Liberty." Such was the thought that came to the poet Wordsworth as he con- templated this outrage, resembling in abysmal immorality the con- temporary partition of Poland at the hands of the monarchs of Prussia, Austria, and Russia. At least this clear, bright, pagan republican general could have claimed, had he cared to, that he was no worse than the kings of the eighteenth century who asserted that their rule was ordained of God. Bonaparte was no worse ; he was also no better ; he was, moreover, far more able. He conquered Venice, one of the oldest and proudest states in Europe, and held it as a pawn in the game of diplomacy, to which he turned with eagerness and talent, now that the war was over. Austria had agreed in April, 1797, to the preliminary peace of Leo- ben. The following summer was devoted to the making of the final peace, that of Campo Formio, concluded October 17, 1797. During these months Bonaparte lived in state in the splendid villa of Monte- bello, near Milan, basking in the dazzling sunshine of his sudden and amazing fortune. There he kept a veritable court, receiving ambassadors, talking intimately with artists and men of letters, Bonaparte surrounded by young officers, who had caught the swift con- and his court tagion of his personality and who were advancing with his advance to prosperity and renown. There, too, at Montebello, 220 THE DIRECTORY Napoleon at Arcola After the painting by Gros. BONAPARTE AS DIPLOMAT 221 were Josephine and the brothers and the sisters of the j^oung victor and also his mother, who kept a level head in prosperity as she had in adversity — all irradiated with the new glamour of their changed position in life. The young man who a few years before had pawned his watch and had eaten six-cent dinners in cheap Parisian restaurants now dined in public in the old manner of French kings, allowing the curious to gaze upon him. A bodyguard of Polish lancers attended whenever he rode forth. His conversation dazzled by its ease and richness. It was quoted everywhere. Some of it was calculated to arouse concern in high quarters. "What I have done so far," he said, "is nothing. I „ ^ ' 7 o Bonaparte s am but at the beginning of the career I am to run. Do you flights of imagine that I have triumphed in Italy in order to advance ^^^^ the lawyers of the Directory ? . . . Let the Director)^ attempt to deprive me of my command and they will see who is the master. The nation must have a head who is rendered illustrious by glory." Two years later he saw to it that she had such a head. The treaty of Campo Formio initiated the process of changing the map of Europe which was to be carried on bewilderingly in the 3'ears to come. Neither France, champion of the new principles of politics, nor Austria, champion of the old, differed in their methods. Both bargained and traded as best they could and the result was an The division agreement that contravened the principles of the French Revo- °^ ^^^ ^poUs lution, of the right of peoples to determine their own destinies, the principle of popular sovereignty. For the agreement simply regis- tered the arbitrament of the sword, was frankly based on force, and on nothing else. French domestic policy had been revolutionized. French foreign policy had remained stationary. By the Treaty of Campo Formio Austria relinquished her posses- sions in Belgium to France and abandoned to her the left bank of the Rhine, agreeing to bring about a congress of the German states The treaty of to effect this change. Austria also gave up her rights in Lom- Campo • 1 /^- 1- 11- Formio bardy and agreed to recognize the new Cisaplme Republic (October, which Bonaparte created out of Lombardy, the duchies of ^'^^^^ Parma and Modena, and out of parts of the Papal States and Venetia. In return for this the city, the islands, and most of the mainland of Venice, were handed over to Austria, as were also Dalmatia and Istria. Austria became an Adriatic power. The Adriatic ceased to be a Venetian lake. 222 THE DIRECTORY BONAPARTE AS ROBBER OF ART GALLERIES 223 The French people were enthusiastic over the acquisition of Bel- gium and the left bank of the Rhine. They were disposed, however, to be indignant at the treatment of Venice, the rape of a repub- xhe wishes lie by a republic. But they were obliged to take the fly with °f the the ointment and to adapt themselves to the situation. Thus people not ended the famous Italian campaign, which was the stepping- nonsuited stone by which Napoleon Bonaparte started on his triumphal way. :: He had, moreover, not only conquered Italy. He had plundered her. One of the features of this campaign had been that it had been based upon the principle that it must pay for itself and yield a profit in addition, for the French treasury. Bonaparte de- plundered manded large contributions from the princes whom he con- ^^^ quered. The Duke of Modena had to pay ten million francs, the Re- public of Genoa fifteen, the Pope twenty. He levied heavily upon Milan. Not only did he make Italy support his army, but he sent large sums to the Directory, to meet the ever threatening deficit. Not only that, but he shamelessly and systematically robbed her of her works of art. This he made a regular feature of his career as conqueror. In this and later campaigns, whenever victorious, he had his agents ransack the galleries and select the pictures, her art which he then demanded as the prize of war, conduct which ^^®"®^ greatly embittered the victims but produced pleasurable feelings in France. The entry of the first art treasures into Paris created great excitement. Enormous cars bearing pictures and statues, carefully packed, but labeled on the outside, rolled through the streets to the accompaniment of martial music, the waving of flags, and shouts of popular approval: "The Transfiguration" by Raphael; "The • Christ" by Titian; the Apollo Belvedere, the Nine Muses, the Laocoon, the Venus de Medici. During his career Bonaparte enriched the Museum of the Louvre (lovr) with over a hundred and fifty paintings by Raphael, Rem- brandt, Rubens, Titian, and Van Dyck, to mention only a few of the greater names. After his fall years later many of these were returned to their former owners. Yet many remained. The famous bronze horses of Venice, of which the Venetians had robbed Constantinople centuries before, as Constantinople had long before that robbed Rome, were transported to Paris after the conquest of Venice in 1797, were transported back to Venice after the overthrow of Napoleon and were put in place again, there to remain for a full 100 years, until 224 THE DIRECTORY BONAPARTE'S RETURN TO PARIS 225 the year 19 15, when they were removed once more, this time by the Venetians themselves, for purposes of safety against the dangers of the Austrian war of that year. After this swift revelation of genius in the Italian campaign the laureled hero returned to Paris, the cynosure of all eyes, the center of boundless curiosity. He knew, however, that the wav to „ ..... ■' Bonaparte s keep curiosity alive is not to satisfy it, for, once satisfied, it return to turns to other objects. Believing that the Parisians, like the ^^"^ ancient Athenians, preferred to worship gods that were unknown, he discreetly kept in the background, affected simplicity of dress and demeanor, and won praises for his "modesty," quite ironically mis- placed. Modesty was not his forte. He was studying his future very carefully, was analyzing the situation very closely. He would have liked to enter the Directory. Once one of the five he could have pocketed the other four. But he was only twenty-eight and Directors must be at least forty years of age. He did not wish or intend to imitate Cincinnatus by returning with dignity to the plow. He was resolved to "keep his glory warm." Perceiving that, as he expressed it, "the pear was not yet ripe," he meditated, and the result of his meditations was a spectacular adventure. After the Peace of Campo Formio only one power remained at war with France, namely England. But England was most formidable — because of her wealth, because of her colonies, because of her „ , . ' ' England navy. She had been the center of the coalition, the pay- still the mistress of the other enemies, the constant fornenter of trouble, ^^^'^y the patron of the Bourbons. "Our Government," said Napoleon at this time, "must destroy the English monarchy or it must expect itself to be destroyed by these active islanders. Let us concentrate our energies on the navy and annihilate England. That done, Europe is at our feet." The annihilation of England was to be the most constant subject of his thought during his entire career, baffling him at every stage, prompting him to gigantic efforts, ending in catastrophic failure eighteen years later at Waterloo, and in the forced repinings of St. Helena. BONAPARTE'S EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION The Directory now made Bonaparte commander of the Army of England, and he began his first experiment in the elusive art of de- stroying these "active islanders." Seeing that a direct invasion of 226 THE DIRECTORY England was impossible, he sought out a vulnerable spot which should at the same time be accessible, and he hit upon Egypt. Not that Appointed Egypt was an English possession, for it was not. 1 1 belonged to commander ^-j^e Sultan of Turkey. But it was on the route to India ; and " Army of Bonaparte, like many of his contemporaries, considered that England " England drew her strength, not from English mines and factories, from English brains and- characters, but from the fabulous wealth of India. Once cut that nerve and the mighty colossus would reel and fall. England was not an island ; she was a world-empire. As such she stood in the way of all other would-be world-empires, then as later. The year 19 14 saw no new arguments put forth by her enemies in regard to England that were not freely uttered in 1797. Bona- parte denounced this "tyrant of the seas" quite in our latter-day style. If there must be tyranny, it was intolerable that it should be exercised by others. He now received the ready sanction of the Directors to his plan for the conquest of Egypt. Once conquered, Egypt would serve as a basis of operations for an expedition to India, which would come in time. The Directors were glad to get piansThe^ him SO far away from Paris, where his popularity was burden- conquest of some, was, indeed, a constant menace. The plan itself, also, Egypt , t- > < was quite in the traditions of the French foreign office. More- over the potent fascination of the Orient for all imaginative minds, as offering an inviting, mysterious field for vast and dazzling action, operated powerfully upon Bonaparte. What destinies might not be carved out of the gorgeous East, with its limitless horizons, its immeasurable, unutilized opportunities? The Orient had appealed to Alexander the Great with irresistible force as it now appealed to this imaginative young Corsican, every energy of whose rich and complex personality was now in high flood. "This little Europe has not enough to offer," he remarked one day to his school-boy friend, Bourrienne. "The Orient is the place to go to. All great reputa- tions have been made there." "I do not know what would have happened to me," he said later, "if I had not had the happy idea of going to Egypt." He was a child of the Mediterranean and as a boy had drunk in its legends and its poetry. As wildly imaginative as he was intensely practical, both imagination and cool calculation recommended the adventure. Once decided on, preparations were made with promptness and in utter secrecy. On May 19, 1798, Bonaparte set sail from Toulon THE EGYPTIAN EXPEDITION 227 with a fleet of 400 slow-moving transports bearing an armj' of 38,000 men. A brilliant corps of young generals accompanied him, Berthier, Murat, Desaix, Marmont, Lannes, Kleber, tried and tested in Italy the year before. He also took with him a traveling library in which Plutarc h's Lives and Xenophon's Anadasis and the Koran were a few of the significant contents. Fellow-voyagers, also, were over one hundred EGYPT AND S\TIIA Scale of Miles Beirut D&iascus distinguished scholars, scientists, artists, engineers, for this expedition was to be no mere military promenade, but was designed to widen the bounds of human knowledge by an elaborate study of the products and customs, the history and the art of that country, famous, yet little known. This, indeed, was destined to be the most permanent and valuable result of an expedition which laid the broad foundations of modern Egyptology in The Description of Egypt, a monumental work which presented to the world in sumptuous form the discoveries and investigations of this group of learned men. 228 THE DIRECTORY The hazards were enormous. Admiral Nelson with a powerful English fleet was in the Mediterranean. The French managed to The seizure escape him. Stopping on the way to seize the important of Malta position of Malta and to forward the contents of its treasury to the Directors, Bonaparte reached his destination at the end of June and disembarked in safety. The nominal ruler of Egypt was the Sultan of Turkey, but the real rulers were the Mamelukes, a sort of feudal military caste. They constituted a splendid body of cavalrymen, but they were no match for the invaders, as they lacked infantry and artillery, and were, moreover, far inferior in numbers. Seizing Alexandria on July 2 the French army began the march to Cairo. The difficulties of the march were great, as no account had The march been taken, in the preparations, of the character of the climate to Cairo g^j^fj ^Y^Q countr3^ The soldiers wore the heavy uniforms in vogue in Europe. In the march across the blazing sands they experi- enced hunger, thirst, heat. Many perished from thirst, serious eye troubles were caused by the frightful glare, suicide was not infrequent. Finally, however, after nearly three weeks of this agony, the Pyramids The batti came in sight, just outside Cairo. There Bonaparte ad- of the ministered a smashing defeat to the Mamelukes, encourag- yrami s -^^ j^.^ soldicrs by one of his thrilling phrases, "Soldiers, from the summit of these pyramids forty centuries look down upon you." The Battle of the Pyramids, July 21, 1798, gave the French control of Cairo. The Mamelukes were dispersed. They had lost 2000 men. Bonaparte had lost very few. But no sooner had the French conquered the country than they became prisoners in it. For, on August i, Nelson had surprised the French fleet as it was Wing in the harbor of Abukir Bay, east of Alex- n de- andria, and had captured or destroyed it. Only two battle- stroys the ships and a frigate managed to escape. This Battle of the renc eet ]\[jig^ g^g [^ ^gg Called, was One of the most decisive sea fights of this entire period. It was Bonaparte's first taste of British sea power. It was not his last. Bonaparte received the news of this terrible disaster, which cut him off from France and cooped him up in a hot and poor country, with superb composure. "Well ! we must remain in this land, and come forth great, as did the ancients. This is the hour when characters of a superior order should show themselves." And later he said that the THE SIECxE OF ACRE 229 English "will perhaps compel us to do greater things than we in- tended." He had need of all his resources, material and moral. Hearing that the Sultan of Turkey had declared war upon him, he resolved, in January, 1799, to invade Syria, one of the Sultan's provinces, „ . wishing to restore or reaflfirm the confidence of his soldiers by sion of Syria fresh victories and thinking, perhaps, of a march on India or ^^''^^^ on Constantinople, taking "Europe in the rear," as he expressed it. If such was his hope, it was destined to disappointment. The crossing of the desert from Egypt into Syria was painful in the ex- treme, marked b}' the horrors of heat and thirst. The soldiers marched amid clouds of sand blown against them by a suffocating wind. They, however, seized the forts of Gaza and Jaffa, and de- stroyed a Turkish army at Mt. Tabor, near Nazareth, but were arrested at Acre, which they could not take by siege, because The siege it was on the seacoast and was aided by the British fleet, but °^ ^"^ which they partly took by storm, only to be forced finally to with- draw because of terrific losses. For two months the struggle for Acre went on. Plague broke. out, ammunition ran short, and Bona- parte was again beaten by sea power. He led his army back to Cairo in a memorable march, covering 300 miles in twenty-six days, over scorching sands and amidst appalling scenes of disaster and des- peration. He had sacrificed 5000 men, had accomplished nothing, and had been checked for the first time in his career. On reaching Cairo he had the effrontery to act as if he had been triumphant, and sent out lying bulletins, not caring to have the truth known. A few weeks later he did win a notable victory, this time at Abukir, against a Turkish army that had just disembarked. This he correctly described when he announced, "It is one of the finest I have „, „ ,,, , The Battle of ever witnessed. Of the army landed by the enemy not a Abukir (juiy man has escaped." Over 10,000 Turks lost their lives in this, ^^' '''^-' the last exploit of Bonaparte in Egypt. BONAPARTE RESOLVES TO RETURN TO FRANCE For now he resolved to return to France, to leave the whole adven- ture in other hands, seeing that it must inevitably fail, and to seek his fortune in fairer fields. He had heard news from France that made him anxious to return. A new coalition had been formed during 230 THE DIRECTORY his absence, the French had been driven out of Italy, France itself was threatened with invasion. The Directory was discredited and g . unpopular because of its incompetence and blunders. Bona- situation in parte did not dare inform his soldiers, who had endured ^^'^^^ so much, of his plan. He did not even dare to tell Kleber (kla-bar'), to whom he intrusted the command of the army by a letter which reached the latter too late for him to protest. He set sail secretly on the night of August 21, 1799, accompanied by Berthier (ber-tia'), Murat, and five other ofificers, and by two or three scientists. Kleber was later assassinated by a Mohammedan fanatic and the French army was forced to capitulate and evacuate Egypt, in August, 1 801. That ended the Egyptian expedition. I.t was no easy thing to get back from Egypt to France with the English scouring the seas, and the winds against him. Sometimes The return the little sail-boat on which Bonaparte had taken passage was from Egypt beaten back ten miles a day. Then the wind would shift at night and progress would be made. It took three weeks of hugging the southern shore of the Mediterranean before the narrows between Africa and Sicily were reached. These were guarded by an English battleship. But the French slipped through at night, lights out. Reaching Corsica they stopped several daj's, the winds dead against them. It seemed as if every one on the island claimed relationship with their fellow-citizen who had been rendered "illustrious by glory." Bonaparte saw his native land for the last time in his life. Finally he sailed for France, and was nearly overhauled by the British, who chased him to almost within sight of land. The journey from the coast to Paris was a continuous ovation. The crowds were such that frequently the carriages could advance but slowly. Eve- nings there were illuminations everywhere. When Paris was reached, delirium broke forth. He arrived in the nick of time, as was his wont. Finally the pear was ripe. The government was in the last stages of unpopularity and discredit. Incompetent and corrupt, it was also unsuc- Ine unpop- ^ ' uiarity of the cessful. The Directory was in existence for four years, from Directory October, 1795, to November, 1799. Its career was agitated. The defects of the constitution, the perplexing circumstances of the times, the ambitions and intrigues of individuals seeking personal advantages and recking little of the state, had strained the institutions of the country almost to the breaking point, and had created a wide- BONAPARTE AS CONSPIRATOR 231 spread feeling of weariness and disgust. Friction had been constant between the Directors and the legislature, and on two occasions the former had laid violent hands upon the latter, once arresting a group of royalist deputies and annulling their election, once doing the same to a group of radical republicans. They had thus made sport of the constitution and destroyed the rights of the voters. Their foreign policy, after Bonaparte had sailed for Egypt, had been so tion formed aggressive and blundering that a new coalition had been formed against ■ r 1 1 A • 1 • France against France, consistmg of England, Austria, and Russia, which country now abandoned its eastern isolation and entered upon a period of active participation in the affairs of western Europe. The coalition was successful, the French were driven out of Germany back upon the Rhine, out of Italy, and the invasion of France was, perhaps, impending. The domestic policy of the Directors had also resulted in fanning once more the embers of religious war in Vendee. In these troubled waters Bonaparte began forthwith to fish. He established connections with a group of politicians who for one reason and another considered a revision of the constitution desirable and necessary. The leader of the group was Sieyes (se-a-yas'), Bonaparte a man who plumed himself in having a complete knowledge of ^'^ ^^^^ the art and theory of government and who now wished to endow France with the perfect institutions of which he carried the secret in his brain. Sieyes was a man of Olympian conceit, of oracular utterances, a coiner of telling phrases, enjoying an immoderate reputation as a constitution-maker. His phrase was now that to accomplish the desired change he needed "a sword." He would furnish the pen himself. The event was to prove, contrary to all proverbs, that the pen is weaker than the sword, at least when the latter belongs to a Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte, who really despised "this cunning priest," as he called him, was nevertheless quite willing to use him as a stepping-stone. Heaping flatteries upon him he said : "We have no government, because we have no constitution ; at least not the one we need. It is for your genius to give us one." PLOTTING A COUP D'ETAT The plan these and other conspirators worked out was to force the Directors to resign, willy-nilly, thus leaving France without an execu- tive, a situation that could not possibly be permitted to continue; 232 THE DIRECTORY then to get the Council of Elders and the Council of the Five Hundred to appoint a committee to revise the constitution. Naturally Sieyes and Bonaparte were to be on that committee, if all went well. Then let wisdom have her sway. The conspirators had two of the Directors on their side and a majority of the Elders, and fortunately the President of the Council of Five Hundred was a brother of Napoleon, Lucien Bonaparte, a shallow but cool-headed rhetorician, to whom the honors of the critical day were destined to Jm^ be due. Thus was plotted in the dark the coiip d'etat of Bru- What is a maire which landed coupdetat? Napoleon in the sad- dle, made him ruler of a great state and opened a new and prodigious chapter in the history of Europe. There is no English word for coup d'etat, as fortunately the thing described is alien to the history of English-speak- ing peoples. 1 1 is the seizure of the state, of power, by force and ruse, the over- throw of the form of govern- ment by violence, by arms. There had been coups d'etat before in France. There were to be others later, in the nineteenth century. But the coup d'etat of i8th and 19th Bru- maire (November 9 and 10, 1799) is the most classical example of this device, the most successful, the most momentous in its consequences. But how to set the artful scheme in motion ? There was the danger that the deputies of the Five Hundred might block the way, danger The risk the ^^ ^ popular insurrection in Paris, of the old familiar kind, if the conspirators rumor got abroad that the Republic was in peril. The conspira- ^^°^ tors must step warily. They did so — and they nearly failed — and had they failed, their fate would have been that of Robespierre. Official Costume of a Member of the Council of the Five Hltndred From a water-color hv David. THE END OF THE DIRECTORY 233 A charge was trumped up, for which no evidence was given, that a plot was being concocted against the RepubUc. Not an instant must be lost, if the state was to be saved. The Council of Elders, ^, , , mformed of this, and already won over to the conspiracy, i8th Bru- thereupon voted, upon the i8th of Brumaire, that both Councils ^^"^ should meet the following day at St. Cloud, several miles from Paris, LuciEN Bonaparte From the painting by R. Lefevre. and that General Bonaparte should take command of the troops for the purpose of protecting them. The next day, Sunday, the two Councils met in the palace of St. Cloud. Delay occurring in arranging the halls for the extraordinary 234 THE DIRECTORY meeting, the suspicious legislators had time to confer, to concert opposition. The Elders, when their session finally began at two „ . o'clock, demanded details concerning the pretended plot. the Council Bonaparte entered and made a wild and incoherent speech, ers They were "standing on a volcano," he told them. He was no "Caesar," "Cromwell," intent upon destroying the liberties of his country. "General, you no longer know what you are saying " whispered Bourrienne, urging him to leave the chamber, which he immediately did. This was a bad beginning, but worse was yet to come. Bonaparte went to the Council of Five Hundred, accompanied by four grena- Bonaparte diers. He was greeted with a perfect storm of wrath. Cries of in the " Outlaw him, outlaw him ! " " Down with the Dictator, down Council of the Five With the tyrant !" rent the air. Pandemonium reigned. He Hundred received blows, was pushed and jostled, and was finally dragged fainting from the hall by the grenadiers, his coat torn, his face bleed- ing. Outside he mounted his horse in the courtyard, before the soldiers. It was Lucien who saved this badly bungled day. Refusing to put the motion to outlaw his brother, he left the chair, made his Lucien saves Way to the courtyard, mounted a horse, and harangued the the day soldicrs, telling them that a band of assassins was terrorizing the assembly, that his life and that of Napoleon were no longer safe, and demanding^ as President of the Five Hundred, that the soldiers enter the hall and clear out the brigands and free the Council. The soldiers hesitated. Then Lucien seized Napoleon's sword, pointed it at his brother's breast, and swore to kill him if he should ever lay violent hands on the Republic. The lie and the melodrama worked. The soldiers entered the hall, led by Murat. The legis- lators escaped through the windows. That evening groups of Elders and of the Five Hundred who fa- vored the conspirators met, voted the abolition of the Direc- U)ry over^ ^^^y* ^^'^ appointed three Consuls, Sieyes, Ducos, and General thrown, Bouapartc, to take their place. They then adjourned for io°T799*^'^ four months, appointing, as their final act, committees to cooperate with the Consuls in the preparation of a new con- stitution. Establish- ^he three Consuls promised "fidelity to the Republic, one nent of the and indivisible, to liberty, equality, and the representative system of government." At six o'clock on Monday morning BONAPARTE FIRST CONSUL 235 every one went back to Paris. The grenadiers returned to their garrison singing revolutionar}- songs and thinking most sincerely that they had saved the Repubhc and the Revolution. No outbreak occurred in Paris. The coup d'etat was popular. Government bonds rose rapidly, nearly doubling in a week. Such was the Little Corporal's rise to civil power. It was fortu- nate, as we have seen, that not all the ability of his remarkable family was monopolized by himself. Lucien had his particular share, a distinct advantage to his kith and kin. REFERENCES Early Life of Napoleon Bonaparte : Fisher, Napoleon (Home University Library), pp. 7-28; Johnston, R. M., Napoleon, pp. 1-25; Fournier, Napoleon /, Chaps. I and II; Rose, J. H., Life of Napoleon I, Chaps. I-IV; Sloane, Napoleon Bonaparte, Vol. I, Chaps. Ill and V ; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. I, pp. 309-312. Bonaparte's First Italian Campaign: Fisher, pp. 28-56; Johnston, pp. 27-47; Fournier, pp. 72-110; Rose, Vol. I, Chaps. V-VII; Sloane, Chaps. XXV-XX\T; Tarbell, Ida M., Napoleon's Addresses, Selections from the Prorlamations, Speeches, and Correspondence of Napoleon Bonaparte. The Egyptlan Expedition : Fisher, pp. 56-72 ; Fournier, Chap. VI ; Rose, Vol. I, Chaps. VIII and IX ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. VIIT, Chap. XIX. The Coup d'Etat of Brumaire : Johnston, pp. 59-79; Fournier, Chap. VIII; Rose, Vol. I, Chap. X ; Sloane, Vol. II, Chaps. X and XI; FySe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 135-144. CHAPTER X THE CONSULATE THE FORM AND PATTERN OF THE MAN Thus the famous young warrior had clutched at power and was not soon to let it slip. It had been a narrow escape. Fate had trembled dangerously in the balance on that gray November Sunday afternoon, but the gambler had won. His thin, sal- low face, his sharp, metallic voice, his abrupt, imperious gesture, his glance that cowed and ter- rified, his long dis- ordered hair, his deli- cate hands, became a part of the history of the times, mani- festing the intensely vivid impression which he had made upon his age and was to deepen. He was to etch the im- press of his amaz- ing personality with deep, precise, bold strokes upon the institutions and the life of France. He was, in reality, a flinty young despot with a pronounced taste His love for military glory. "I love power," he said later, "as a of power musician loves his violin. I love it as an artist, in a position to indulge his taste. 236 Bonaparte, First Consul From an engraving by Momal, after Isabey. He was now ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CONSULATE Pending a wider and a higher flight, there were two tasks that called for the immediate attention of the three Consuls, who now took the place formerly occupied by the five Directors. A new constitution must be made, and the war against the coalition must be carried on. THE FOURTH CONSTITUTION (1799) The Constitution of the Year VHI (1799), the fourth since the beginning of the Revolution, hastily composed and put into force a month after the The making coup d'etat, was °^ the Con- stitution of m Its essentials the Year the work of Bona- '^"^ parte and was designed to place supreme power in his hands. This had not been at all the pur- pose of Sieyes or of the committees appointed to draft the document. But Sieyes's plan, which had not been carefully worked out but was con- fused and uncertain in many particulars, en- countered the abrupt disdain of Bonaparte. There was to be a Grand Elector with a palace at Versailles and an income of six million francs a year. This was the place evidently intended Josephine After a drawing by Isabey. for Bonaparte, who immediately killed it with the statement that he had no desire to be merely "a fatted pig." Impatient with this scheme and with others suggested by the committees. Bona- Bonaparte parte practically dictated the constitution, using, to be sure, the con^ti- such of the suggestions made by the others as seemed to him good or harmless. The result was the organization of that phase tution maker 238 THE CONSULATE of the history of the Repubhc which is called the Consulate and which lasted from 1799 to 1804. The executive power was vested in three Consuls who were to be elected for ten years and to be reeligible. They were to be elected by the Senate but, to get the system started, the constitution Bonaparte • ^ ^ First indicated who they should be — Bonaparte, First Consul ; Consul Cambaceres (kon-ba-sa-ras'), the second, and Lebrun (le-brun'), the third. Practically all the powers were to be in the hands of the First Consul, the appointment of ministers, ambassadors, officers of the army and navy, and numberless civil officials, including judges, the right to make warand peace, and treaties, subject to the sanction of the legislature. The First Consul was also to have the initiative in all legislation. Bills were to be prepared by a Council of State, were then to be submitted to a body called the Tribunate, which was to have the The legisia- right to discuss them but not to vote them. Then they were tive power ^.o go to the Legislative Body, which was to have the power to vote them, but not discuss them. Moreover this "assembly of 300 mutes" must discharge its single function of voting in secret. xjjg There was also to be a fourth body, higher than the others — Senate ^-j-jg Senate, which was to be the guardian of the constitution and was also to be an electing body, choosing the Consuls, the members of the Tribunate and the Legislative Body from certain lists, prepared in a cumbersome and elaborate way, and pretending to safeguard the right of the voters, for the suffrage was declared by the constitution to be universal. No time need be spent on this aspect of the constitution, for it was a sham and a deception. All this elaborate machinery was designed to keep up the fiction of the sovereignty of the people, the great assertion of the Revolution. The Republic continued to exist. The people were voters. Powers of ' z' ' . the First They had their various assemblies, thus ingeniously selected. Consul Practically, however, and this is the matter that most con- cerns us, popular sovereignty was gone ; Bonaparte was sovereign. He had more extensive executive powers than Louis X\T had had under the Constitution of 179 1. He really had the legislative power also. No bill could be discussed or voted that had not been first prepared by his orders. Once voted it could not go into force until he promulgated it. France was still a republic in name ; practically, however, it was a monarchy, scarcely veiled at that. Bonaparte's WAR WITH AUSTRIA 239 position was quite as attractive as that of any monarch by divine right, except for the fact that he was to hold it for a term of ten years only and had no power to bequeath it to an heir. He was to remedy these details later. BONAPARTE'S CENTR.ALIZED SYSTEM Having given France a constitution, he secured the enactment of a law which placed all the local government in his hands. There was to be a prefect at the head of each department, a subprefect Bonaparte for each arrondissement, a mayor for every town or com- establishes a -^ -^ . centralized mune. The citizens lost the power to manage their own local administra- affairs, and thus their training in self-government came to an *'^^ system end.. Government, national and local, was centralized in Paris, more effectively, even, than in the good old days of the Bourbons and their intendants. Having set his house in order, having gained a firm grip on the reins of power, Bonaparte now turned his attention to the foreign enemies of France. The coalition consisted of England, Austria, and ^^^ against Russia. England was difficult to get at. The Russians the second were dissatisfied with their allies and were withdrawing from cooperation. There remained Austria, the enemy Bonaparte had met before. BONAPARTE'S SECOND ITALIAN CAMPAIGN, 1800 One Austrian army was on the Rhine and Bonaparte sent Moreau to attack it. Another was in northern Italy and he went in person to attend to that. While he had been in Egypt the Austrians had won back northern Italy. Melas (ma'-las), their general, had driven Massena (ma-sa-nii') into Genoa, where the latter hung on like grim death, with rations that would soon be exhausted. Bonaparte's plan was to get in between the Austrians and their own country, to attack them in the rear, thus to force them to withdraw from the siege of Genoa, in order to keep open their line of communication. In the pursuit of this object he accomplished one of his most famous exploits, the crossing of the Great Saint Bernard Pass over The cross- the Alps, with an army of 40,000, through snow and ice, ^s&mt dragging their cannon in troughs made out of hollowed logs. Bernard Pass It was a matter of a week. Once in Italy he sought out the Austrians 240 THE CONSULATE and met them unexpectedly at Marengo (June 14, 1800). The battle came near being a defeat, owing to the fact that Bonaparte blundered badly, having divided his forces, and that Desaix's (de-sa') division was miles away. The battle began at dawn and went disastrously for the French. At one o'clock the Austrian com- mander rode back to his headquarters, believing that he had won and that the remaining work could be left to his subordinates. The French were pushed back and their retreat threatened to become a stampede. The day was saved by the appearance of Desaix's division on the scene, at about five o'clock. The battle was resumed with fury, Desaix himself was killed, but the soldiers avenged his glorious death by a glorious victory. By seven o'clock the day of strange vicissitudes was over. The Austrians signed an armistice abandoning to the French all northern Italy as far as the Mincio'. Six months later Moreau won a decisive victory over the Aus- „ trians in Germany at Hohenlinden (December 3, 1800), thus defeats the opening the road to Vienna. Austria was now compelled to HohelTHnden sue for pcacc. The Treaty of Luneville (lii-na-vel') (Febru- (Decembera, ary 9, 1801) was in the main a repetition of the Treaty of 1800) ^ . Campo rormio. As had been the case after Campo Formio, so now, after the break- up of this second coalition, France remained at war with only one nation, England. These two nations had been at war continuously for eight years. England had defeated the French navy and had En land and Conquered many of the colonies of France and of the allies or the Peace dependencies of France, that is, of Holland and Spain. She had miens j^^^ compelled the French in Egypt, the army left there by Bonaparte, to agree to evacuate that country. But her debt had grown enormously and there was widespread popular dislike of the war. A change in the ministry occurred, removing the great war leader, William Pitt. England agreed to discuss the question of peace. The discussion went on for five months and ended in the Peace of Amiens (a-me-an') (March, 1802). England recognized the existence of the French Republic. She restored all the French colonies and some of the Dutch and Spanish, retaining only Ceylon and Trinidad. She promised to evacuate Malta and Egypt, which the French had seized in 1798 and which she had taken from them. Nothing was said of the French conquest of Belgium and the left bank of the Rhine. This was virtual acquiescence in the new BONAPARTE'S POLITICAL OPINIONS 24T boundaries of France, which far exceeded those of the ancient monarchy. Thus Europe was at peace for the first time in ten years. Great was the enthusiasm in both France and England. The peace, how- ever, was most unstable. It lasted just one year. "BONAPARTE'S POLITICAL VIEWS Napoleon said on one occasion, "I am the Revolution." On another he said that he had "destroyed the Revolution." There was much error and some truth in both these statements. The Consulate, and the Empire which succeeded the Consulate, preserved much of the work of the Revolution and abolished much, in conformity with the ideas and also the personal interests of the ^^^ ^ inions new ruler. Bonaparte had very definite opinions concerning on the the Revolution, concerning the French people, and concerning ^^° " '*"* his own ambitions. These opinions constituted the most important single factor in the life of France after 1799. Bonaparte sympathized with, or at least tolerated, one of the ideas of the Revolution, Equal- ity. He detested the other leading idea, Liberty. In his youth he had fallen under the magnetic spell of Rousseau. But that had passed and thenceforth he dismissed Rousseau summarily as a "madman." He accepted the principle of equality because it alone made possible his own career and because he perceived the hold it had upon the minds of the people. He had no desire to restore the Bourbons and the feudal system, the incarnation of the principle of inequality and privilege. He stood right athwart the road to yesterday in this respect. It was he and his system that kept the Bourbons exiles from France fifteen years longer, so long indeed that when they did finally return it was largely without their ^j^ ^ ._ baggage of outworn ideas. Bonaparte thus prevented the tion to the restoration of the Old Regime. That was done for, for good egime and all. Privilege, abolished in 1789, remained abolished. The clergy, nobility, and third estate had been swept away. There remained only a vast mass of French citizens subject to the same laws, paying the same taxes, enjoying equal chances in life, as far as the state was concerned. The state showed no partiality, had no favorites. All shared in bearing the nation's burdens in proportion to their abilit}'. And no class levied taxes upon another — tithes 242 THE CONSULATE and feudal dues were not restored. No class could exercise a mo- nopoly of any craft or trade — the guilds with all their restrictions remained abolished. Moreover, all now had an equal chance at public employment in the state or in the army. Josephine at Malmaison From the painting by Prudhon. Bonaparte summed this policy up in the phrase "careers open to talent." This idea was not original with him, it was contained in the Declaration of the Rights of Man. But he held it. Under him BONAPARTE AND THE REVOLUTION 243 there were no artificial barriers, any one might rise as high as his ability, his industry, his service justified, always on condition of his loyalty to the sovereign. Every avenue was kept open to am- ., bition and energy. Napoleon's marshals, the men who at- open to tained the highest positions in his armies, were humbly born — *^'^°* Massena (ma-sa-na') .was the son of a saloon-keeper, Augereau (6zh-ro') of a mason, Ney (na) of a cooper, and Murat (mii-ra') of a country innkeeper. None of these men could have possibly become a marshal under the Old Regime, nor could Bonaparte himself have risen to a higher rank than that of colonel and then only when well along in life. Bonaparte did not think that all men are equal in natural gifts or in social position, but he maintained equality before the law, that priceless acquisition of the Revolution. He did not believe in liberty nor did he believe that, for that matter, the French believed in it. His career was one long denial or nega- tion of it. Neither liberty of speech, nor liberty of the press. The enemy neither intellectual nor political liberty received anything "^ liberty from him but blows and infringements. In this respect his rule meant reaction to the spirit and the practice of the Old Regime. It is quite true that the Convention and the Directory had also trampled ruthlessly upon this principle, but it is also quite true that neither he nor they could successfully defy what is plainly a dominant preoccupation, a deep-seated longing of the modern world. For the last hundred years the ground has been cumbered with those who thought they could silence this passion for freedom, and who found out, to their cost and the cost of others, that their efforts to imprison the human spirit were unavailing. There were still, after all these instructive hundred years, rulers who shared that opinion and acted upon it. They were able to preserve themselves and their methods of government in certain countries. But their day of reckoning came with the Great War as it came, a century earlier, for Napoleon himself. They were fighting for a losing cause, as the history of the modern world clearly proved. BONAPARTE'S POLICIES AS RULER The activities of Bonaparte as First Consul, after Marengo and during the brief interval of peace, were unremitting and far- as First reaching. It was then that he gave his full measure as a civil Consul ruler. He was concerned with binding up the wounds or open sores of 244 THE CONSULATE the nation, with determining the precise form of the national institu- tions, with fashioning the mold through which the national life was to go pulsing for a long future, with consolidating the foundations of his power. A brief examination of this phase of his activity is essential to a knowledge of the later history of France, and to our appreciation of his own matchless and varied ability, of the power of sheer intellect and will applied to the problems of a society in flux. First, the party passions which had run riot for ten years must be quieted. Bonaparte's policy toward the factions was conciliation, coupled with stem and even savage repression of such ele- conciUation Hients as refused to comply with this primary requirement. There was room enough in France for all, but on one con- dition, that all accept the present rulers and acquiesce in the existing institutions and laws of the land. Offices would be open freely to former royalists, Jacobins, Girondists, on equal terms, no questions asked save that of loyalty. As a matter of fact Bonaparte Treatment of .... . . • , • r ^ emigre's and exercised his vast appomtmg power in this sense for the pur- non-jurmg pQgg Qf effacing all distinctions, all unhappy reminders of a troubled past. The laws against the emigres and the recalci- trant priests were relaxed. Of over 100,000 emigrants, all but about 1,000 irreconcilables received, by successive decrees, the legal right to return and to recover their estates, if these had not been already sold. Only those who placed their devotion to the House of Bourbon above all other considerations found the door resolutely closed. Bonaparte soon perceived that the strength of the Bourbon cause lay not in the merits or talents of the royal family itself or its aristo- cratic supporters, but in its close identification with the authorities of the Roman Catholic Church. Through all the angry religious warfare of the Revolution the mass of the people had remained faithful to the priests and the priests were subject to the bishops. The bishops had refused to accept the various laws of the Revolution concerning them and had as a consequence been driven from the country. They were living mostly in England and in Germany, taking their cue from the Pope, who recognized Louis XVIII, brother of Louis XVI, as the legitimate ruler of France. Thus the religious dissension was fused with political opposition — royalists and bishops were in the same galley. Bonaparte deter- mined to sever this connection, thus leaving the extreme royalists BONAPARTE'S RELIGIOUS POLICY 245 high and dry, a staff of officers without an army. No sooner had he returned from Marengo than he took measures to show the Catholics that they had nothing to fear from him, that they could en- „ . . . joy their religion undisturbed if they did not use their liberty, undermine under cover of religion, to plot against him and against the * ^ '^°^ *^'^ Revolutionary settlement. He was in all this not actuated by any religious sentiment himself, but by a purely political sentiment — he was himself, as he said, "Mohammedan in Egypt, Catholic in France," not because he considered that either was in the exclusive or authentic possession of the truth, but because he was a man of sense who saw the futility of trying to dragoon by force men who were religious into any other camp than the one to which they naturally belonged. Bonaparte also saw that religion was an instrument which he might much better have on his side than allow to be on the side of his enemies. He looked on religion as a force in politics, nothing else. Purely political, not spiritual, considerations deter- mined his policy in now concluding with the Pope the famous considered treaty or Concordat, which reversed much of the work of the merely as a Revolutionary assemblies, and determined the relations of church and state in France for the whole nineteenth century. This important piece of legislation of the year 1802 lasted 103 years, being abrogated only under the present republic, in 1905. BONAPARTE AND THE CHURCH Bonaparte's thought was that by restoring the Roman Catholic Church to something like its former primacy he would weaken the royalists. The people must have a religion, he said, but the religion must be in the hands of the government. Many of his adherents did not agree at all with him in this attitude. They thought it far wiser to keep church and state divorced as they had been by the latest legislation of the Revolution. Bonaparte discussed the matter with the famous philosopher Volney (vol'-ni), whom he had just appointed a senator, saying to him, "France desires a religion." Volney ^^ ^^jj replied that France also desired the Bourbons. At this Bona- opposition to parte assaulted the philosopher and gave him such a kick '^ '''*" that he fell and lost consciousness. The army officers who were anti-clerical were bitter in their opposition and jibes, but Bonaparte went resolutely ahead. He knew the influence that priests exercise 246 THE CONSULATE over their flocks and he intended that they should exercise it in his behalf. He meant to control them as he controlled the army and the thousands of state officials. The control of religion ought to be vested in the ruler. "It is impossible to govern without it," he said. He therefore turned to the Pope and made the treaty. "If the Pope had not existed," he said, " I should have had to create him for this occasion." By the Concordat the Catholic religion was recognized by the Re- public to be that "of the great majority of the French people" and its ■free exercise was permitted. The Pope agreed to a reorganization involving a diminution in the number of bishoprics. He also recog- ^.. ^t. ,. nized the sale of the church property effected by the Revolution. The Church r- r- ^ . , , , „. controlled by Henceforth the bishops were to be appointed by the First the state Consul but werc to be actually invested by the Pope. The bishops in turn were to appoint the priests, with the consent of the government. The bishops must take the oath of fidelity to the head of the state. Both bishops and priests were to receive salaries from the state. They really became state officials. The Concordat gave great satisfaction to the mass of the population for two reasons — it gave them back the normal exercise of the reli- gion in which they believed, and it confirmed their titles to the lands of the Church which they had bought during the Revolution, titles which the Church now recognized as legal. The Church soon found that Bonaparte regarded it as merely another source of influence, an instrument of rule. The clergy now became his supporters and in large measure abandoned royalism. Moreover Bonaparte, by additional regulations to which he did not ask the Pope's assent, bound the clergy hand and foot to his own chariot. The Concordat was nevertheless a mistake. France had worked out a policy of complete separation of church and state which, had it Concordat been allowed to continue, would have brought the blessing of a mistake toleration into the habits of the country. But the Concordat cut this promising development short and by tying church and state together in a union which each shortly found disagreeable it left to the entire nineteenth century an irritating and a dangerous problem. Nor did it preserve, for long, happy relations between Napoleon and the Pope. Not many years later a quarrel arose be- tween them which grew and grew until the Pope excommunicated Napoleon and Napoleon seized the Pope and kept him prisoner. THE CIVIL CODE 247 Napoleon himself came to consider the Concordat as the worst blunder in his career. However, its immediate advantages were considerable. THE CODE NAPOLEON "My real glory," said Napoleon at St. Helena, "is not my having won forty battles. What will never be effaced, what will endure forever, is my Civil Code." He was undoubtedly mistaken as to the durability of this achievement, but he was correct in ^ systematic 1 • • 1 • 1 1 1 • • , • , statement placuig It higher than that activity which occupied far more of the of his time. The famous Code Napoleon was an orderly, sys- prlnce tematic, compact statement of the laws of France. Pre-revolu- tionary France had been governed by a perplexing number of systems of law of different historical origins. Then had come, with the Revolution, a flood of new legislation, inspired by different principles and greatly increasing the sum total of laws in force. It was desir- able to sift and harmonize all these statutes, and to present to the people of France a body of law, clear, rational, and logically arranged, so that henceforth all the doubt, uncertainty, and confusion which had hitherto characterized the administration of justice might be avoided and every Frenchman might easily know what his legal rights and relations were, with reference to the state and his fellow- citizens. The Constituent Assembly, the Convention, the Directory, had all appreciated the need of this codification and had had com- mittees at work upon it, but the work had been uncompleted. Bona- parte now lent the driving force of his personality to the accomplish- ment of this task, and in a comparatively brief time the lawyers and the Council of State to whom he intrusted the work had it finished. The code to which Napoleon attached his name preserved the prin- ciple of civil equality established by the Revolution. It was imme- diately put into force in France and was later introduced into coun- tries conquered or influenced by France, Belgium, the German territories west of the Rhine, and Italy. Bonaparte's own direct share in this monumental work was consid- erable and significant. Though no lawyer hiniself, and with little technical knowledge of law, his marvelous intellectual ^hrrTi^thl ability, the precision, penetration, and pertinence of many of making of , . . . . .^ . ^ , , -^ , the Code his criticisms, suggestions, questions, gave color and tone and character to the complete work. He presided over many of the 248 THE CONSULATE sessions of the Council of State devoted to the elaboration of this code. "He spoke," says a witness, "without embarrassment and without pretension. He was never inferior to any member of the Council ; he often equaled the ablest of them by the ease with which he seized the point of a question, by the justness of his ideas and the force of his reasoning ; he often surprised them by the turn of his phrases and the originality of his expression." Called a new Con- stantine by the clergy for having made the Concordat, Bonaparte was considered by the lawyers a new Justinian. He was as a matter of fact, in many respects, the superior of both. During these years of the Consulate Bonaparte The Bank achieved many other of France things than those which have been men- tioned. He improved the system of taxation greatlj', and brought order into the national finances. He founded the Bank of France which still exists — and an- other institution which has come down to our own day, the Legion of Honor, for the distribution of honors and emoluments to those who rendered distinguished service to the state. Opposed as undemocratic, as offensive to the principle of equality, it was nevertheless instituted. Though open to those who had rendered civil service as well as to those who had rendered military, as a matter of fact Napoleon conferred only 1,400 crosses out of 48,000 upon civilians. Nor did this exhaust the list of durable achievements of this crowded period of the Consulate. The system of national education National was in part reorganized, and industry and commerce received education ^^g interested attention of the ambitious ruler. Roads were improved, canals were cut, ports were dredged. The economic development of the country was so rapid as to occasion some uneasi- ness in England. The Three Consuls After the medal in bronze by Jeuffroy. The Legion of Honor BONAPARTE AND ROYALIST CONSPIRATORS 249 Thus was carried through an extensive and profound renovation of the national life. This period of the Consulate is that par.t of Bona- parte's career which was most useful to his fellow-men, most contrib- utory to the welfare of his country. His work was not accomplished without risk to himself. As his reputation and authority increased, the wrath of those who saw their way to power barred by his formida- ble person increased sonaparte" also. At first the and the royalists had looked "^* to him to imitate the Eng- lish General Monk who had used his position for the restoration of Charles II. But Bonaparte had no notion of acting any such graceful and altruistic part. When this became apparent certain reckless royalists commenced to plot against him, began considering that it was pos- sible to murder him. An attack upon him occurred shortly after Marengo. Many lives were lost, but he escaped with his by the narrowest margin. 1 A more serious plot was woven in London in the circle of the Count of Artois, younger brother of Louis XVI. The principal agents were Georges Cadoudal (ka-do-dal') and Pichegru (pesh-grii'). Bona- parte, through his police, knew of the plot. He hoped, in ^j^^ allowing it to develop, to get his hands on the Count of Artois. Cadoudai But the Count did not land in France. Cadoudal and his '=°'^^P"'3<=y accomplices were taken and shot. Pichegru was found strangled in prison. Bonaparte wished to make an example of the House of Bourbon which would be remembered. This led him to commit a monstrous crime. He ordered the seizure on German soil of the The Duke d'Enghien From an engraving after an original drawing by Count de Lely. 250 THE CONSULATE young Duke d'Enghien (on-gian'). the Prince of Conde, a member of a branch of the Bourbon family. The prince, who was innocent of any connection whatever with the conspiracy, was abducted, „ . , brought to Vincennes (vin-senz') at five o'clock on the evening the Duke of March 20, 1804, was sent before a court-martial at eleven nghien o'clock and at half past two in the night was taken out into the courtyard and shot. This was assassination pure and simple and it was Bonaparte's own act. It has remained ever since an odious blot upon his name, which the multitudinous seas cannot wash out. Its immediate object, however, was achieved. The royalists ceased plotting the murder of the Corsican. NAPOLEON I, EMPEROR OF THE FRENCH (1804) A few days after this Bonaparte took another step forward in the consolidation of his powers. In 1802, after the Treaty of Amiens had been made, he had astutely contrived to have his consulate for ten years transformed into a consulate for life, with the right to name his successor. The only remaining step was taken in 1804, when a servile Senate approved a new constitution, declaring him Emperor of the French, "this change being demanded by the in- terests of the French people." It was at any rate agreeable to the French people, who in a popular vote or plebiscite ratified it over- whelmingly. Henceforth he was designated by his first name, in the manner of monarchs. It happened to be a more musical and sonorous name than most monarchs have possessed. ( " I found the crown of France lying on the ground," Napoleon once said, "and I picked it up with my sword," a vivid summary of an important chapter in his biography. REFERENCES Napoleon's Personal Qualities : Taine, Modern Regime, Vol. I, pp. i-qo; Rose, J. H., The Personality of Napoleon. The Campaign of 1800: Ropes, The First Napoleon, pp. 49-58; Fournier, Napoleon I, pp. 188-208; Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. I, pp. 221-245. Bonaparte's Policies as First Consul : Fisher, Napoleon, Chap. IV ; Fournier, Chap. IX, pp. 221-241 ; Johnston, Napoleon, Chap. VII, pp. 88-102; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, pp. 148-187; Rose, J. H., pp. 11 2-147. Napoleon and the Revolution : Fisher, Bonapartism, pp. 7-24. CHAPTER XI THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE The Empire lasted ten years, from 1804 to 1814. It was a period of uninterrupted warfare in which a long series of amazing victories was swallowed up in final, overwhelming defeat. The central, over- mastering figure in this agitating story, dominating the decade so completely that it is known by his name, was this man whose The Napo- ambition vaulted so dizzily, ortly to o'erleap itself. Napoleon '^°°'^ ^^^ ranks with Alexander, Cssar, Charlemagne (char'-le-man), as one of the most powerful conquerors and rulers of history. It would be both interesting and instructive to compare these four. It is by no means certain that Napoleon would not be considered the greatest of them all. Certainly we have far more abundant information concerning him than we have concerning the others. PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS When he became emperor he was thirty-five years old and was in the full possession of all his magnificent powers. For he was marvel- ously gifted. His brain was a wonderful organ, swift in its processes, tenacious in its grip, lucid, precise, tireless, and it was served by an incredibly capacious and accurate memory. "He never blundered into victory," says Emerson, "but won his battles in his head, before he won them on the field." All his intellectual resources were avail- able at any moment. He said of himself, "Different matters are stowed away in my brain as in a chest of drawers. When I wish to interrupt a piece of work I close that drawer and open another. None of them ever get mixed, never does this inconvenience or fatigue me. When I feel sleepy I shut all the drawers and go to sleep." Napoleon possessed a varied and vivid imagination, was always, as he said, "living two years in advance," weaving plans and dreams and then considering coolly the necessary ways and means to realize them. 251 252 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE This union of the practical and the poetic, the reaUstic and the imagi- native, each raised to the highest pitch, was rendered potent by a will that recognized no obstacles, and by an almost superhuman activity. Napoleon loved work, and no man in Europe, and few in all history, have labored as did he. "Work is my element, for which I dinary ' was born and fitted," he said at St. Helena, at the end of his capacity }ifg "J have known the limits of the power of my arms and for work legs. I have never discovered those of my power of work." Working twelve or sixteen and, if necessary, twenty hours a day, rarely spending more than fifteen or twenty minutes at his meals, able to fall asleep at will, and to awaken with his mind instantly alert, he lost no time and drove his secretaries and subordinates at full speed. We gain some idea of the prodigious labor accomplished by him when we consider that his published correspondence, comprising 23,000 pieces, fills thirty-two volumes and that 50,000 additional letters dictated by him are known to be in existence but have not yet been printed. Here was no do-nothing king but the most industrious man in Europe. Happy, too, only in his work. The ordinary pleasures of men he found tedious, indulging in them only His bearing when his position rendered it necessary. He rarely smiled, in society ^g never laughed, his conversation was generally a monologue, but brilliant, animated, trenchant, rushing, frequently impertinent and rude. He had no scruples and he had no manners. He was ill-bred, as was shown in his relations with women, of whom he had a low opinion. His language, whether Italian or French, lacked distinction, finish, correctness, but never lacked saliency or interest. The Graces had not presided over his birth, but the Fates had. He had a magnificent talent as stage manager and actor, setting the scenes, playing the parts consummately in all the varied ceremonies in which he was necessarily involved, coronation, reviews, diplomatic audiences, interviews with other monarchs. His proclamations, his bulletins to his army were masterpieces. He could cajole in the silkiest tones, could threaten in the iciest, could shed tears or burst into violence, smashing furniture and bric-a-brac when he felt that such actions would produce the effect desired. The Pope, Pius VII, seeing him once in such a display of passion, observed, "tragedian," "comedian." He had no friends, he despised all theorists like those who had sowed the fructifying seeds of the Revolution broadcast, he harried all NAPOLEON'S PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS 253 opponents out of the country or into silence, he made his ministers mere hard-worked servants, but he won the admiration and devo- tion of his soldiers by the glamour of his victories, he held the His mastery peasantry in the hollow of his hand by constantly guaran- °^ others teeing them their lands, and their civil equality, the things which were, in their opinion, the only things in the Revolution that counted. He was as little as he was big. He would lie shamelessly, would cheat at cards, was superstitious in strange ways. He was a man of whom more evil and more good can be said and has been said than of many historical figures. He cannot be easily described, and certainly not in any brief compass. Now that Napoleon was emperor he proceeded to organize the state imperially. Offices with high-sounding, ancient titles were created and filled. There was a Grand Chamberlain, a Grand Marshal „ / Napoleon of the Palace, a Grand Master of Ceremonies, and so on. A establishes court was created, expensive, and as gay as it could be made ^ *^°"'^' to be at a soldier's orders. The Emperor's family, declared Princes of France, donned new titles and prepared for whatever honors and emoluments might flow from the bubbling fountain-head. The court resumed the manners and customs which had been in vogue before the Revolution. Republican simplicity gave way to imperial pretensions, attitudes, extravagances, pose. The constitu- crowned in tion was revised to meet the situation, and Napoleon was Notre Dame crowned in a memorable and sumptuous ceremony in Notre Dame, the Pope coming all the way from Rome to assist — but not to crown. At the critical point in the splendid ceremony Napoleon crowned himself and then crowned the Empress. But the Pope poured the holy oil upon Napoleon's head. This former lieutenant of artillery thus became the "anointed of the Lord," in good though irregular standing. He crowned himself a little later King of Italy, after he had changed the Cisalpine Republic into the Kingdom of Italy (1805). The history of the Empire is the history of ten j^ears of uninter- rupted war. Europe saw a universal menace to the independence and liberty of all states in the growing and arrogant ascendancy The period of France, an ascendancy and a threat all the more obvious °? *^^ ^■^; -^ pire one of and dangerous now that that country was absolutely in the uninterrupted hands of an autocrat, and that too an autocrat who had grown ^^^ great by war and whose military tastes and talents would now have 254 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE « 9 NAPOLEON AS EMPEROR 255 Napoleon i\ the Imperial Robes From an engraving after the picture by Gerard. free rein. Napoleon was evoking on every occasion, intentionally and ostentatiously, the imperial souvenirs of Julius Csesar and of Charlemagne. What could this mean except that he planned to rule not only France, but Europe, consequently the world ? Unless the 256 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE other nations were willing to accept subordinate positions, were willing to abdicate their rank as equals in the family of nations, they must fight the dictatorship which was manifestly impending. Fundamentally this is what the ten years' war meant, the right of other states to live and prosper, not on mere sufferance of Napoleon, but by their own right and because universal domination or the undue ascendancy of any single state would necessarily be dangerous to the other states and to whatever elements of civilization they represented. France already had that ascendancy in 1 804. Under Napoleon she En land the "^^^e a tremendous effort to convert it into absolute and constant universal domination. She almost succeeded. That she enemy failed was due primarily to the steadfast, unshakable oppo- sition of one power, England, which never acquiesced in her preten- sions, which fought them at every stage with all her might, through Sea- ower good report and through evil report, stirring up opposition versus land- whcrever she could, weaving coalition after coalition, using her power money and her navy untiringly in the effort. It was a war of the giants. A striking aspect of the matter was the struggle between sea-power, directed by England, and land-power, directed by Napoleon. THE THIRD COALITION AGAINST FRANCE While the Empire was being organized in 1 804 a new coalition was being formed against France, the third in the series we are studying. Reasons for England and France had made peace at Amiens in 1802. England's That pcacc lasted only a year, until May 17, 1803. Then °^ * ^ the two states flew to arms again. The reasons were vari- ous. England was jealous of the French expansion which had been secured by the treaties of Campo Formio and Luneville, French control of the left bank of the Rhine, French domination over con- siderable parts of the Italian peninsula, particularly French conquest of Belgium, including the fine port of Antwerp. England had always been opposed to French expansion, particularly northward along the Channel, which Englishmen considered and called the English Channel. The English did not wish any rival along those shores. However, despite this, they had finally consented to make the Peace of Amiens. The chief motive had been the condition of their in- dustries. The long war, since 1793, had damaged their trade enor- THE END OF THE PEACE OF AMIENS 257 mously. They hoped, by making peace with France, to find the markets of the Continent open to them once more, and thus to revive their trade. But they shortly saw that this was not at all the idea of France. Napoleon wished to develop the industries of ness of the France, wished to have French industries not only supply the ^^^."^^ °^ ' J r-r- J Amiens French market, but also win the markets of the other countries on the Continent. He therefore established high protective tariffs with this end in view. Thus English competition was excluded or at least greatly reduced. The English were extremely angry and did not at all propose to lie down supinely, beaten without a struggle. That had never been their custom. War would be less burdensome, said their business men. For England, commerce was the very breath of life. Without it she could not exist. This explains why, now that she entered upon a struggle in its defense, she did not lay down her arms again until she had her rival safely imprisoned on the island of St. Helena. There were other causes of friction between the two countries which rendered peace most unstable. With both nations ready for war, though not eager for it, causes for rupture were not hard to find. Renewal of War broke out between them in May, 1803. Napoleon imme- J|*^^^^ diately seized Hanover, a possession in Germany of the English France and king. He declared the long coast of Europe from Hanover England southward and eastward to Taranto in Italy blockaded, that is, closed to English commerce, and he began to prepare for an invasion of England itself. This was a difficult task, requiring much time, for France was inferior to England on the seas and yet, unless she could control the Channel for a while at least, she could not send an army of invasion. Napoleon established a vast camp of 150,000 men at Boulogne to be ready for the descent. He hastened the con- struction of hundreds of flatboats for transport. Whether all this was mere make-believe intended to alarm England, whether he knew that after all it was a hopeless undertaking, and was simply display- ing all this activity to compel England to think that peace would be wiser than running the risk of invasion, we do not positively know. At any rate England was not intimidated. She prepared for defense, and she also prepared for offense by seeking and buUds up a finding allies on the Continent, by building up a coalition °^^ '^°^^^- which might hold Napoleon in check, which might, it was hoped, even drive France back within her original boundaries, taking 258 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE away from her the recent acquisitions of Belgium, the left bank of the Rhine, and the Italian annexations and protectorates. England made a treaty to this effect with Russia, which had her own reasons for opposing Napoleon — her dread of his projects in the Eastern Medi- terranean at the expense of the Turkish Empire. For if any one was to carve up the Turkish Empire, Russia wished to do it herself. The English agreed to pay subsidies to the Czar, a certain amount for every 100,000 men she should furnish for the war. Finally in 1805 Austria entered the coalition, jealous of Napoleon's Austria aggressions in Italy, anxious to wipe out the memory of the joins the defeats of the two campaigns in which he had conquered her coaition ^^ j^^^ ^^^ 1800, eager, also, to recover the position she had once held as the dominant power in the Italian peninsula. NAPOLEON'S THIRD CAMPAIGN AGAIN3T AUSTRIA Such was the situation in 1805. When he was quite ready Na- poleon struck with tremendous effect, not against England, which he could not reach because of the silver streak of sea that lay between them, not against Russia, which was too remote for immediate attention, but against his old-time enemy, Austria, and he bowled her over more summarily and more humiliatingly than he had ever done before. The campaign of 1805 was another Napoleonic masterpiece. The Austrians, not waiting for their allies, the Russians, to come up, had sent an army of 80,000 men under General Mack up the Danube into Bavaria. Mack had taken his position at Ulm, expecting that Napoleon would come through the passes of the Black Forest, the most direct and the usual way for a French army invading southern Germany. But not at all. Napoleon had a very different plan. Napoleon Sending enough troops into the Black Forest region to confirm Mack at Mack in his opinion that this was the strategic point to hold, Ulm and thus keeping him rooted there. Napoleon transferred his Grand Army from Boulogne and the shores of the English Channel, where it had been training for the past two years, across Germany from north to south, a distance of 500 miles, in twenty-three days of forced marches, conducted in astonishing secrecy and with mathe- matical precision. He thus threw himself into the rear of Mack's army, between it and Vienna, cutting the line of communication, THE BATTLE OF AUSTERLITZ 259 and repeating the strategy of the Great Saint Bernard and Marengo campaign of 1800. Mack had expected Napoleon to come from the west through the Black Forest. Instead, when it was too late, he found him coming from the east, up the Danube, toward Ulm. Napoleon made short work of Mack, forcing him to capitulate at Ulm, October 20. "I have accomplished what I set out to do," he wrote Josephine. "I have destroyed the Austrian army by means of marches alone." It was a victory won by legs — 60,000 prisoners, 120 guns, more than thirty generals. It had cost him only 1,500 men. The way was now open down the Danube to Vienna. Thither, along poor roads and through rain and snow. Napoleon rushed, cover- ing the distance in three weeks. Vienna was entered in triumph and without resistance, as the Emperor Francis had retired in a north- easterly direction, desiring to effect a junction with the oncoming Russian army. Napoleon followed him and on December 2, xhe battle 1805, won perhaps his most famous victory, the battle of Aus- °/ Auster- terlitz, on the first anniversary of his coronation as Emperor. (Oecem- AU day long the battle raged. The sun breaking through the ^^'^ ^' ^^°^^ wintry fogs was considered a favorable omen by the French and hence- forth became the legendary symbol of success. The fighting was terrific. The bravery of the soldiers on both sides was boundless, but the generalship of Napoleon was as superior as that of the Austro- Russians was faulty. The result was decisive, overwhelming. The allies were routed and sent flying in every direction. They had lost a large number of men and nearly all of their artillery. Na- poleon, with originally inferior numbers, had not used all he had, had not thrown in his reserves. No wonder he addressed his xhe " Sun of troops in an exultant strain. "Soldiers, I am satisfied with Austeriitz " you. In the battle of Austeriitz you have justified all my expecta- tions by your intrepidity ; you have adorned your eagles with immortal glory." No wonder that he told them that they were marked men, that on returning to France all they would need to say in order to command admiration would be : "I was at the battle of Austeriitz." The results of this brief and brilliant campaign were various and striking. The Russians did not make peace but withdrew in The Treaty of great disorder as best they could to their own country. But fDecembfr Austria immediately signed a peace and a very costly one, too. 26, 1805 j By the Treaty of Pressburg, dictated by Napoleon, who now had 26o THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE beaten her disastrously for the third time, she suffered her greatest humihation, her severest losses. She ceded Venetia, a country she had held for eight years, since Campo Formio, to the Kingdom of Italy, whose king was Napoleon. I stria and Dalmatia also she ceded to Napoleon. Of all this coast line of the upper Adriatic she retained only the single port of Trieste. Not Austria but France was henceforth the chief Adriatic power. The German principal- ities, Bavaria and Baden, had sided with Napoleon in the late cam- paign and Austria was now compelled to cede to each of them some of her valuable possessions in South Germany. Shut out of the Adriatic, shut out of Italy, Austria lost 3,000,000 subjects. She became nearly a land-locked country. Moreover she was compelled to acquiesce in other changes that Napoleon had made or was about to make in various countries. NAPOLEON THE KING-MAKER Napoleon began now to play with zest the congenial role of Charle- magne, about which he was prone to talk enthusiastically and with rhetorical extravagance. Having magically made himself Emperor, he now made others kings. As he abased mountains so he exalted valleys. In the early months of 1806 he created four kings. He raised Bavaria and Wiirtemberg, hitherto duchies, to the rank of kingdoms, "in grateful recompense for the attachment they have shown the Emperor," he said. During the campaign the King of Naples had at a critical moment sided with his enemies. Napoleon therefore issued a simple decree, merely stating that "The House of Bourbon has ceased to rule in Naples." He gave the vacant throne to his brother Joseph, two years older than himself. Joseph, who had first studied to become a priest, then to become an army officer, and still later to become a lawyer, now found himself a king, not by the grace of God, but by the grace of a younger brother. The horn of plenty was not yet empty. Napoleon, after Auster- litz, forced the Batavian Republic, that is, Holland, to become a mon- Makes Hoi- ^^chy and to accept his brother Louis, thirty-two years of land a age, as its king. Louis, as mild as his brother was hard, thought monarc y ^-j^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^ consult the interests and win the affections of his subjects. As this was not Napoleon's idea, Louis was destined to a rough and unhappy, and also brief, experience as NAPOLEON THE KING-MAKER 261 king. "When men say of a king that he is a good man, it means that he is a failure," was the information that Napoleon sent Louis for his instruction. The number of kingdoms at Napoleon's disposal was limited, temporarily at least. But he had many other favors to bestow, which were -not The family to be despised. *="''=^® Nor were they de- spised. His sister Elise was made Prin- cess of Lucca and Carrara, his sister Pauline, a beautiful and luxurious young creature, married Prince Borghese (bor- ga'-se) and became Duchess of Guastalla (gwas-tal'-la), and his youngest sister, Caro- line, who resembled him in strength of character, married Murat, the dashing cavalry oflficer, who now became Duke of Berg, an artificial state which Napoleon created along the lower Rhine. Two brothers, Lucien and Jerome, were not provided for, and thereby hangs a tale. Each had Lucien and incurred Napoleon's displeasure, as each had married for love Jerome in and without asking his consent. He had other plans for them and was enraged at their independence. Both were expelled from the charmed circle, until they should put away their wives and marry others according to Napoleon's taste, not theirs. This Lucien stead- fastl}^ refused to do and so he who, by his presence of mind on the Joseph Bonaparte, KrNO of Naples After the painting by J. B. J. Wicar. 262 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE 19th of Brumaire, had saved the day and rendered all this story pos- sible, stood outside the imperial favor, counting no more in the history of the times. When Jerome, the youngest member of this astonishing family, and made of more pliable stuff, awoke from love's young dream, at the furious demands of Na- poleon, and put away his beautiful American bride, the •Baltimore belle, Elizabeth Patterson, then he too became a king. All who worshiped ]\Iammon in those exciting days received their appropri- ate reward. It would be pleasant to continue this catalogue of favors, scattered right and left by the man who had rapidly grown so great. Officials of the state, generals of the army, and more distant relatives re- ceived glittering prizes and went on their way rejoicing, anxious for more. Appetite is said to grow by that on which it feeds. Louis Bonaparte, King of Holiand After the painting by Wicar, engraved by Read. THE TRANSFORMATION OF GERMANY More important far than this flowering of family fortunes was another result of the Austerlitz campaign, the transformation of Germany, effected by the French with the eager and selfish coopera- tion of many German princes. That transformation, which greatly reduced the distracting number of German states, by allowing of German some to absorb others, had already been going on for several ^*d**^ d years. When France had acquired the German territory west of the river Rhine, it had been agreed, in the treaties of Campo Formio and Luneville, that the princes thus dispossessed should receive compensations east of the river Rhine. This obviously could not be done literally and for all, as every inch of territory east of the CHANGES IN THE iMAP OF GERMANY 263 Rhine already had its ruler. As a matter of fact the change was worked out by compensating only the hereditary rulers. There were, both on the left bank and on the right and all throughout Germany, many petty states whose rulers were not hereditary — ecclesiastical states, and free imperial cities. Now these were tossed to the princes who ruled by hereditary right, as compensation for the territories they had lost west of the river Rhine. This wholesale destruction of petty German states for the advantage of other lucky German states was accom- plished not by the Germans themselves, which would have been shameless Paris the , , ^ center for enough, but was ac- the brisk complished in Paris. t^a®<= "* Germaa In the antechambers of lands the First Consul, particularly in the parlors of Talleyrand (tal'-i-rand), the disgraceful begging for pelf went on. Talleyrand grew rapidly rich, so many were the "gifts" —one dreads to think what they would be called in a vulgar democracy — which German princes gave him for his support in despoiling their fellow-Germans. For months the dis- gusting traffic went on and, when it ended in the "Conclusion" of March, 1803, really dictated by Bonaparte, the number of German principalities had greatly decreased. All the ecclesiastical states of Germany, with one single exception, had disappeared and of the fifty free cities only six remained. All went to enlarge other states. At least the map of Germany was simpler, but the position of the Church and of the Empire was greatly altered. Of the 360 states which composed the Holy Roman or German Empire in 1792 only eighty-two remained in 1805. All this had occurred before Austerlitz. After Austerlitz the pace Elise Bonaparte, Princess of Lucca From an anonymous engraving, after the painting by Counis. 264 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE Austerlitz campaign was increased, ending in the complete destruction of the Empire. of th P^^'is again became the center of German politics and intrigues, as in 1803. The result was that in 1806 the new kings of Bavaria and Wiirtemberg and fourteen other German princes renounced their allegiance to the German Emperor, formed a new Confederation of the Rhine (July 12, 1806), recognized Napoleon as their "Protector," made an offensive and defensive alliance fhe confel with him which gave erationof ^q him the COntrol of the Rhine , . . . ,. their foreign pohcy, the settlement of questions of peace and war, and guaran- teed him 63,000 German troops for his wars. Fresh annexations to these states were made. Thus perished many more petty German states, eagerly absorbed by the fortunate sixteen. Perished also the Holy Roman Empire which had been in existence, real Destruction , , , of the Holy or shadowy, for a Roman thousand years. The Empire . ^ . secession of the sixteen princes and the formation of the Confederation of the Rhine killed it. It was only formal interment, therefore, when Napoleon demanded of the Emperor Francis, whom he had defeated at Austerlitz, that he renounce his title as Holy Roman Emperor. This Francis hastened to do (August 6, 1806), content- ing himself henceforth with the new title he had given himself two years earlier, when Napoleon had assumed the imperial title. Henceforth he who had been Francis II of the Holy Roman Empire was called Francis I, Hereditary Emperor of Austria. Napoleon, who could neither read nor speak a word of German, was now the real ruler of a large part of Germany, the strongest factor in German politics. To French domination of West Ger- Pauline Bonaparte, Princess Borghese After the painting by I.efevre. FRENCH INFLUENCE IN GERMANY 265 Cakoline Bonaparte, Duchess oi iitki., a.\u Marie AIlrat From the painting by Vigee le Bnm. many, annexed to France earlier, came an important increase of in- fluence. 1 1 was now that French ideas began in a modified form pjend, in- to remold the civil life of South Germany. Tithes were abol- fluence in ished, the inequality of social classes in the eyes of the law ^'''^^^y was reduced though not destroyed, religious liberty was established, 266 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE the position of the Jews was improved. The Germans lost in self- respect from this French domination, the patriotism of such as were patriotic was sorely wounded at the sight of this alien rule, but in the practical contrivances of a modernized social life, worked out. by the French Revolution, and now in a measure introduced among them, they had a salutary compensation. THE CONQUEST OF PRUSSIA While all this shifting of scenes was being effected Napoleon had kept a large army in South Germany. The relations with Prussia, which country had been neutral for the past ten years, since the Treaty of Basel of 1795, were becoming strained and grew rapidly more so. The policy of the Prussian King, Frederick WiUiam HI, was weak, ^■acillating, covetous. His diplomacy was playing fast and loose with his obligations as a neutral and with his desires for the territorial aggrandizement of Prussia. Napoleon's attitude was in- solent and contemptuous. Both sides made an unen- viable but characteristic record in double-dealing. The sordid details, highly discreditable to both, cannot be narrated here. Finally the war party in Berlin got the upper hand, led by the high-spirited and beautiful Queen Louise and by the military chiefs, relics of the glorious era of Frederick the Great, who thought they could do what Frederick had done, that is, defeat the French with ease. As if to give the world some intimation of the terrible significance of their displeasure they went to the French Embassy in Berlin and bravely Joachim Murat, Duke of Berg After the painting by Gros. THE WAR PARTY IN BERLIN 267 whetted their swords upon its steps of stone. The royahst officers at Versailles in the early days of the Revolution had shown no more inane folly in playing with fire than did^the Prussian military caste at this time. The one had learned its lesson. The other was now to go to the same pitiless school of experience. Jerome Bonaparte Engraved by I. G. Miiller, knight, and Frederich Miiller, son, engravers to his Majesty the King of Wiirtemberg, after a drawing by Madame Kinson. Hating France and having an insensate confidence in their own superiority, the Prussian war party forced the government to issue an ultimatum to Napoleon, Emperor of the French, France and demanding that he withdraw his French troops beyond the ?'^^^* Rhine. Napoleon knew better how to give ultimatums than how to receive them. He had wat"ched the machinations of the 268 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE Prussian ruling class with close attention. He was absolutely pre- pared when the rupture came. He now fell upon them like a cloud- burst and administered a crushing blow in the two battles of Jena Jena and ^.ud Auerstadt, fought on the same day at those two places, a Auerstadt fg^ miles apart (October 14, 1806), he himself in command of the former, Davout of the latter. The Prussians fought bravely, but their generalship was bad. Their whole army was disorganized, became panic-stricken, streamed from the field of battle as best it could, no longer receiving or obeying orders, many throwing away their arms, fleeing in every direction. Thousands of prisoners were taken and in succeeding days French officers scoured the country after the fugitives, taking thousands more. The collapse was complete. There was no longer any Prussian army. One after another all the fortresses fell. On the 25th of October Napoleon entered Berlin in triumph. He had previously visited the tomb of Frederick the Great at Potsdam in order to show his admiration for his genius. He had the ex- enters Ber- ecrable taste, however, to take the dead Frederick's sword and lin (October g^g]^ ^^d Send them to Paris as trophies. "The entire king- 25, 1806) ^ ° dom of Prussia is in my hands," he announced. He planned that the punishment should be proportionate to his rage. He drew up a decree deposing the House of Hohenzollern but did not issue it, waiting for a spectacular moment. He laid enormous war contribu- tions upon the unhappy victim. Napoleon postponed the announcement of the final doom until he should have finished with another enemy, Russia. Before leaving The Berlin Berlin for the new campaign he issued the famous Decrees agTiLtr which declared the British Isles in a state of blockade and England prohibited commerce with them on the part of his dominions and those of his allies. THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RUSSIA In the campaign of 1806 the Russians had been allied with the Prussians although they had taken no part, as the latter had not waited for them to come up. Napoleon now turned his attention to them. Going to Warsaw, the leading city of that part of Poland which Prussia had acquired in the partition of that country, he planned the new campaign, which was signalized by two chief battles. THE CAMPAIGN AGAINST RUSSIA 269 Eylau (i-lou) and Friedland. The former was one of the most bloody of his entire career. Fighting in the midst of a bhnding snow-storm on February 8, 1807, Napoleon narrowly escaped Eyiau and defeat. The slaughter was frightful — "sheer butchery," said Fnediand Napoleon later. "What carnage," said Ney, "and no results," thus accurately describing this encounter. Napoleon managed to keep the field and in his .usual way he represented the battle as a victory. But it was a drawn battle. For the first time in Europe he had failed to win. The Russian soldiers fought with reckless bravery — "it was necessary to kill them twice," was the way the French soldiers expressed it. Four months later, however, on June 14, 1807, on the anniversary of Marengo, Napoleon's star shone again unclouded. He won a victory at Friedland which, as he informed Josephine, "is the worthy The battle sister of Marengo, Austerlitz, and Jena." The victory was fj^^l^fl^^^ at any rate so decisive that the Czar, Alexander I, consented 1807) to make overtures for peace. The Peace of Tilsit was concluded by the two Emperors in person after many interviews, the first one of which was held on a raft in the middle of the river Niemen. Not only did they make peace but they went further and made a treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive. Napoleon gained a great diplomatic victory, which completely altered the previous dip- ^ ^ lomatic system of Europe, a fitting climax to three years of Russia be- remarkable achievement upon the field of battle. Exercising *^°™® *^**^ upon Alexander all his powers of fascination, of flattery, of imagina- tion, of quick and sympathetic understanding, he completely won him over. The two Emperors conversed in the most dulcet, raptur- ous way. "VVhy did not we two meet earlier?" exclaimed the enthusiastic Czar of All the Russias. With their two imperial heads bowed over a map of Europe they proceeded to divide it. Alexander was given to understand that he might take Finland, which he coveted, from Sweden, and attractive pickings from the vast Turkish Empire were dangled somewhat vaguely before him. On the other hand, he recognized the changes Napoleon had made or was about to make in western Europe, in Italy, and in Germany. Alexander, was to offer himself as a mediator between those bitter enemies, England and France, and, in case England declined to make peace, then Russia would join France in enforcing the conti- nental blockade, which was designed to bring England to terms. 270 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE Napoleon out of regard for his new friend and ally promised to allow Prussia still to exist. The decree dethroning the House of Prussia dis- Hohenzollern was never issued. But Napoleon's terms to membered Prussia were very severe. She must give up all her territory west of the river Elbe. Out of this and other German territories i3 '0^' .: - -' -'. L 1 '..- ,J| Napoleon Receiving Qiieen Louise of Prussia at Tilsit, July 6, 1807 After the painting by Gosse. Napoleon now made the Kingdom of Westphalia, which he gave to his brother Jerome, who had by this time divorced his American wife. Prussia's eastern possessions were also diminished. Most of what she had acquired in the partitions of Poland was taken from her NAPOLEON CREATES NEW STATES 271 and created into the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, to be ruled over by the sovereign of Saxony, whose title of Elector Napoleon at this juncture now changed into that of King. These three states, Westpha- lia, Saxony, and the Duchy of Warsaw now entered the Con- federation of federation of the Rhine, whose name thus became a misnomer, *^f Rhine enlarged as the Confederation included not only the Rhenish and South German states but stretched from France to the Vistula, including practically all Germany except Prussia, now reduced to half her former size, and except Austria. Naturally Napoleon was in high feather as he turned homeward. Naturally, also, he was pleased with the Czar. "He is a handsome, good young emperor, with more mind than he. is generally credited with" — such was Na- poleon's encomium. Next to being sole master of all Europe came the sharing of mastery with only one other. A few months later he wrote his new ally that "the work of Tilsit will regulate the destinies of the world." There only remained the English, "the active islanders," not yet charmed or conquered. In the same letter to the Czar Napoleon refers to them as "the enemies of the world" and told how they could be easily brought to book. He had forgotten, or rather he had wished to have the world forget, ^f Trafalgar that there was one monstrous flaw in the apparent perfection of (October 21, his prodigious success. Two years before, on the very day after the capitulation of Ulm, Admiral Nelson had completely de- LoRD Nelson From an engraving by S. Freeman, after the paint- ing by Abbott. 272 THE EARLY YEARS OF THE EMPIRE stroyed the French fleet in the battle of Trafalgar (October 21, 1805), giving his life that England might live and inspiring his own age and succeeding ages by the cry, "England expects every man to do his duty !" The French papers did not mention the battle of Trafalgar, but it nevertheless bulks large in history. This was Napoleon's second taste of sea-power, his first having been, as we have seen, in Egypt, several years before, also at the hands of Nelson. Napoleon returned to Paris in the pride of power and of supreme achievement. But, it is said, pride cometh before a fall. Was the race mistaken when it coined this cooling phrase of proverbial wisdom ? It remained to be seen. REFERENCES Napoleon Becomes Emperor : Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. I, Chap. XX, pp. 429-444; Fournier, Napoleon I, pp. 278-282; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, pp. 107-122. The Austerlitz Campaign: Fisher, Napoleon, pp. 125-142; Johnston, Napoleon, pp. 119-129; Ropes, The First Napoleon, pp. 108-117; Fournier, Chap. XI, pp. 282-324; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 1-46. Trafalgar : Mahan, Influence of Sea-Power upon the French Revolution and Napoleon, Vol. II, Chap. XVI; Mahan, Life of Nelson, Vol. I, Chap. X; Vol. II, Chaps. XVI and XXIII. CHAPTER XII THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT After Tilsit there remained England, always England, as the enemy of France. In 1805 Napoleon had defeated Austria, in 1806 Prussia, in 1807 Russia. Then the last-named power had shifted its policy completely, had changed partners, and, dis- carding its former allies, had become the ally of its former enemy. Napoleon was now in a position to turn his attention to England. As she was mistress of the seas, as she had at the battle of Trafal- gar in 1805 destroyed the French navy, the Emperor was compelled to find ^, -r ,1 Napoleon Other means, if there now free to were any, of humbling ^^^\ ^i'^* , . ^ England the elusive enemy. England must be beaten, but how? Napoleon now adopted a policy which the Convention and the Direc- tory had originated. Only he gave to it a gigantic application and development. This was the Continental System, or the Continental Blockade. If England could not be conquered directly by French fleets and armies, she might be conquered indirectly. 273 Queen Louise of Prussia From an engraving by Ruscheweyh. 274 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT ENGLAND AND THE CONTINENTAL BLOCKADE England's power lay in her wealth, and her wealth came from her factories and her commerce which carried their products to the „ markets of the world, which brought her the necessary raw Commerce " ■' vital to materials, and which kept open the fruitful connection with °^ *° her scattered colonies. Cut this artery, prevent this com- merce, close these markets, and her prosperity would be destroyed. Manufacturers would be compelled to shut down their factories. Their employees, thrown out of work, would face starvation. With that doom impending, the working classes and the industrial and commercial classes, threatened with ruin, would resort to terrific pressure upon the English government, to insurrections, if necessarj-, to compel it to sue for peace. Economic warfare was now to be tried on a colossal scale. By exhausting England's resources it was hoped and expected that England would be exhausted. By the Berlin Decrees (November, 1806), Napoleon declared a blockade of the British Isles, forbade all commerce with them, all The Berlin Correspondence, all trade in goods coming from England or her Decrees colonies, and ordered the confiscation and destruction of all English goods found in France or in any of the countries allied with her. No vessel coming from England or England's colonies should be admitted to their ports. To this England replied by severe Orders in Council, which Napoleon capped by additional decrees, issued from Milan. This novel form of warfare had very important consequences. This struggle with England dominates the whole period from 1807 Epochal to 1 8 14. It is the central thread that runs through all the theTtru'°e ^^'^g^^'^ ^^^d tumultuous history of those years. There were with Eng- plays withiu the play, complications and struggles with other '^"'^ nations which sometimes rose to such heights as momen- tarily to obscure the titanic contest between sea-power and land- power. But the fundamental, all-inclusive contest, to which ajl else was subsidiary or collateral, was the war to the knife between these two, England and France. Everywhere we see its influence, whether in Spain or Russia, in Rome or Copenhagen, along the Danube or along the Tagus. The Continental System had this peculiarity, that, to be successful in annihilating English prosperity and power, it must be applied NAPOLEONIC ANNEXATIONS 275 everywhere and constantly. The Continent must be sealed her- metically against English goods. Only then, with their necessary markets closed to them everywhere, would the English be forced to yield. Let there be a leak anywhere, let there be a nentai strip of coast, as in Portugal or Spain or Italy, where English Sy^^f".*'^ ships could touch and land their goods, and through that leak England could and would penetrate, could and would distribute her wares to eager customers, thus escaping the industrial strangu- lation intended by the Emperor of the French. This necessity Napoleon saw clearly. It was never absent from his mind. It inspired his conduct at every step. It involved him inevitably and, in the end, disastrously, in a policy of systematic and widespread aggressions upon other countries, consequently in a costly succession of wars. To close simply the ports of France and of French possessions to English commerce would not at all accomplish the object aimed at. Napoleon must have the support of every other seaboard country in Europe. This he sought to get. He was willing to get it peacefully if he could, prepared to get it forcibly if he must. He secured the ad- hesion of Russia by the Treaty of Tilsit. Austria and Prussia, having been so decisively beaten, had to consent to apply the system to their dominions. Little Denmark, perforce, did the same when .,, '^ Attempts to the demand came. Sweden, on the other hand, adhered to enforce the the English alliance. Consequently Russia was urged to lead^to*^^ take Finland, which belonged to Sweden, with its stretch of repeated acts coast line and its excellent harbors. Napoleon's brother ° aggression Louis, King of Holland, would not enforce the blockade, as to do so meant the ruin of Holland. Consequently he was in the end forced to abdicate and Holland was annexed to France (18 10). France also annexed the northern coasts of Germany up to Liibeck, including the fine ports of Bremen and Hamburg and the mouths of those rivers which led into central Germany (1810). In Italy the Pope wished to remain neutral but there must be no neutrals, in Napoleon's and also in England's opinion, if it could be prevented. In this case it could. Consequently Napoleon annexed part of the Papal States to the so-called Kingdom of Italy, of which he was him- Rupture !<• , T^- 1 , • , ,■ , , • , with the self the Kmg, and part he mcorporated directly and without pope ado into the French Empire (1809). Immediately the Pope excommunicated him and preached a holy war against the impious 276 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT conqueror. Napoleon in turn took the Pope prisoner and kept him such for several years. This was injecting the religious element again . into politics, as in the early days of the Revolution, to the profound embitterment of the times. Some of these events did not occur immediately after Tilsit but did occur in the years from 1809 to 181 1. WAR WITH PORTUGAL AND SPAIN What did occur immediately after Tilsit was a famous and fatal misadventure in Portugal and Spain. Portugal stood in close Attack u on economic and political relations with England and was reluctant Portugal to enforce the restrictions of the Continental Blockade. Her coast line was too important to be allowed as an open gap. Therefore Napoleon arranged with Spain for the conquest and parti- tion of that country. French and Spanish armies invaded Portugal, aiming at Lisbon. Before they arrived Napoleon had announced in his impressive and laconic fashion that "the fall of the House of Braganza furnishes one more proof that ruin is inevitable to whom- soever attaches himself to the English." The royal family escaped capture by sailing for the colony of Brazil and seeking safety be- yond the ocean. There they remained until the overthrow of Napoleon. This joint expedition had given Napoleon the opportunity to intro- duce large bodies of troops into the country of his ally, Spain. They now remained there, under Murat, no one knew for what purpose, Th ittia- — ^"^ ^^^' ^^*^^P^ Napoleon, in whose mind a dark and devious tion in plan was maturing. The French had dethroned the House of Spam Bourbon in France during the Revolution. Napoleon had himself after Austerlitz dethroned the House of Bourbon in Naples and had put his brother Joseph in its place. There remained a branch of that House in Spain, and that branch was in a particularly corrupt and decadent condition. The King, Charles IV, was utterly incompetent ; the Queen, grossly immoral and endowed with the tongue of a fishwife ; her favorite and paramour, Godoy, was the real power behind the throne. The whole unsavory group was immensely unpopular in Spain. On the other hand, the King's son, Ferdinand, was idolized by the Spanish people, not because of any' thing admirable in his personality, which was utterly despicable, but because he was opposed to his father, his mother, and Godoy. EUROPE IN 1811 277 278 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT Napoleon thought the situation favorable to his plan, which was to seize the throne thus occupied by a family rendered odious by its character and impotent by its dissensions. By a treacherous and hypocritical diplomacy he contrived to get Charles IV, the Queen, Godoy, and Ferdinand to come to Bayonne in southern France. No hungry spider ever viewed more coolly a more helpless prey entangled in his web. By a masterly use of the black arts of dis- simulation, vituperation, and intimidation he swept the whole royal crew aside. Charles abdicated his throne into the hands of Napoleon, who thereupon forced Ferdinand to renounce his rights under a thinly veiled threat that, if he did not, the Duke d'Enghien would ^ , hot be the only member of the House of Bourbon celebrated JNapoleon -' makes his for an untoward fate. Ferdinand and his brothers were sent Joseph' King ^^ prisoners to a chateau at Valengay. The vacant throne of Spain was then given by Napoleon to his brother Joseph, who there- upon abdicated the kingship of Naples, which now passed to Murat, Napoleon's brother-in-law. Napoleon later admitted that it was this Spanish business that de- stroyed him. "I embarked very badly on the Spanish affair, I confess ; the immorality of it was too patent, the injustice too cyn- ical." But this was the judgment of retrospect. He entered upon the venture with a light heart, confident that at most he would encounter only a feeble opposition. "Countries full of monks like yours," he told Ferdinand, "are easy to subdue. There may be some riots, but the Spaniards will quiet down when they see that I offer them the integrity of the boundaries of their kingdom, a liberal constitution, and the preservation of their religion and their national The Span- customs." Contrary to his expectation the conduct of the iards rise Spaniards was quite the reverse of this. He might offer them, in revo ^^ j^^ ^.^^ better government than they had ever had. They hated him as a thief and trickster, also as a heretic, as a man whose character and policies and ideas were anathema. Napoleon em- barked on a five years' war with them, which baffled him at every stage, drained his resources, in a contest that was inglorious, resources which should have been husbanded most carefully for more important purposes. "If it should cost me 80,000 men" to conquer Spain, "I would not attempt it," he said at the beginning, "but it will not take more than 12,000." A ghastly miscalculation, for it was to take 300,000 and to end in failure! THE COSTLY SPANISH ADVENTURE 279 He encountered in Spain an opposition very different in kind and quality from any he had met hitherto in Italy or Germany, baffling, elusive, wearing. Previously he had waged war with gov- ernments only and their armies, not with peoples rising as arouses the one man, resolved to die rather than suffer the loss of their sp''!'* °[. nationalism independence. The people of Italy, the people of Austria, the people of Germany, had not risen. Their governments had not appealed to them, but had relied upon their usual weapon, profes- sional armies. Defeating these, as Napoleon had done with com- parative ease, the governments had then sued for peace and endured his terms. No great wave of national feeling, daring all, risking all, had swept over the masses of those countries where he had hitherto appeared. France had herself undergone this very experience, and her armies had won their great successes because they were aglow with the spirit of nationality, which had been so aroused and intensified by the Revolution. Now other countries were to take a page out of her book, at the very time when she was showing a tendency to forget that page herself. The Spanish rising was the first of a series of popular, national, instinctive movements that were to end in Na- poleon's undoing. The kind of warfare that the Spaniards carried on was peculiar, determined by the physical features of the land and by the cir- cumstances in which they found themselves. Lacking the character of leadership of a government — their royal family being virtu- ^^'^ '" Spain ally imprisoned in France — poor, and without large armies, they fought as guerrillas, little bands, not very formidable in themselves individually, but appearing now here, now there, now everywhere, picking off small detachments, stragglers, then disappearing into their mountain fastnesses. They thus repeated the history of their long struggles with the Moors. Every peasant had his gun and every peasant was inspired by loj^alty to his country, and by religious zeal, as the Vendeans (ven-de'-anz) had been. The Catholic clergy entered again upon the scene, fanning the popular animosity against this despoiler of the Pope, and against these French free-thinkers. Napoleon had aroused two mighty forces which were to dog his footsteps henceforth, that of religious zeal, and that of the spirit of nationality, each with a fanaticism of its own. Even geography, which Napoleon had hitherto made minister to his successes, was now against him. The country was poor, the roads 28o THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT were execrable, the mountains ran in the wrong direction, right across his path, the rivers also. In between these successive moun- Geography tain ranges, in these passes and valleys, it was difficult for large against hiin armies, such as Napoleon's usually were, to operate. It was easy for mishaps to occur, for guerrilla bands or small armies to cut off lines of communication, for them to appear in front and in the rear at the same time. The country was admirable for the defensive, difficult for the offensive. This was shown early in the war when General Dupont (dii-pofi') was caught in a trap and obliged to capitulate with an army of 20,000 at Baylen (bl-len') (July, 1808). This capitulation produced a tremendous impression throughout Europe. It was the first time a French army corps had been The capitu- n , , • r n • %^ lation of Compelled to ground arms m full campaign. It was the ff^/^" o ON heaviest blow Napoleon had yet received in his career. It (July, 1808) ^ ■' encouraged the Spaniards, and other peoples also, who were only waiting to see the great conqueror trip and who were now fired with hope that the thing might be done again. Napoleon was enraged, stormed against the unfortunate army, declared that from the beginning of the world nothing "so stupid, so silly, so cowardly" had been seen. They had had a chance to distinguish themselves, "they might have died," he said. Instead they had surrendered. Joseph, the new King, who had been in his capital only a week, left it hurriedly and withdrew toward the Pyrenees, writing his brother King Joseph ^^^^ Spain was like no other country, that they must have an seeks safety army of 50,000 to do the fighting, another of 50,000 to keep '^ open the line of communications, and 100,000 gallows for traitors and scoundrels. There was another feature of this war in the Peninsula, England's participation. An army was sent out under Sir Arthur Wellesley, ^ ,. , later Duke of Wellington, to cooperate with the Portuguese The English ,„ . , ^ir i, , i , , , i ,• • • , ,, • join in the ^'^^ Spaniards. Wellesley, who had already distinguished him- famMrn ^^'^ "^^ India, now began to build up a European reputation as a careful, original, and resourceful commander. Landing at Lisbon, the expedition shortly forced the French commander Junot (zhii-no') to capitulate at Cintra (August, 1808), as Dupont had been forced to in the preceding month at Baylen. These were disasters which Napoleon could not allow to stand unanswered. His prestige, his reputation for invincibility, must remain undiminished or Europe generally would become restless THE ERFURT INTERVIEW 281 with what result no one could foretell. He resolved therefore to go to Spain himself and show the Spaniards and all other peoples how hopeless it was to oppose him, how minor and casual Napoleon defeats of his subordinates meant nothing, how his own mighty go^°o^spahi blows could no more be parried than before. But, before himself going, he wished to make quite sure of the general European situa- tion. TREATY BETWEEN NAPOLEON AND ALEXANDER OF RUSSIA He arranged, therefore, for an interview at Erfurt in the center of Germany with his ally, Alexander of Russia. The two emperors spent a fortnight discussing their plans, examining every phase of the international situation (September- October, 1808). This Erfurt fnterview was the most spectacular * episode in Napoleon's The Erfurt career as a diplomatist. He sought to dazzle Europe with his interview might, to impress the imaginations of men, and their fears, to show that the Franco- Russian alliance, concluded at Tilsit the year before, stood taut and firm and could not be shaken. All the kings and princes of Germany were summoned to give him, their "Protector," an appropriate and glittering setting. Napoleon brought with him the best theatrical troupe in Europe, the company of the Theatre Frangais, and they played, as the pretentious expression was, to "a parterre of kings." .On one occasion when Talma, the famous tragedian, recited the words, " The friendship of a great man Is a true gift of the gods," the Czar arose, seized Napoleon's hand, and gave the signal for applause. Day after day was filled with festivities, dinners, balls, hunts, reviews. The gods of German literature and learning, Goethe and Wieland, paid their respects. Meanwhile the two allies care- fully canvassed the situation. In general the Czar was cordial, for he saw his profit in the alliance. But now and then a little rift in the lute appeared. One day, as they were discussing, Napoleon became angry, threw his hat on the floor, and stamped upon it. Alexander merely observed, "You are angry, I am stubborn. With me anger gains nothing. Let's talk, let's reason together, or I shall leave." 282 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT NAPOLEON CONQUERS SPAIN The result of the interview was in the main satisfactory enough to both. The accord between the two seemed complete. The alliance was renewed, a new treaty was made, which was to be kept secret "for ten years at least," and now Napoleon felt free to direct his attention to the annoying Spanish problem, resolved to end it once for all. Assembling a splendid army of 200,000 men, he crossed the Enters Pyrenees and in a brief campaign of a month he swept aside all ^^ecember obstacles with comparative ease, and entered Madrid (Decem- 1808) ber, 1808). There he remained a few weeks sketching the institutions of the new Spain which he intended to create. It would certainly have been a far more rational and enlightened and pro- gressive state than it ever had been in the past. He declared the Inquisition, which still existed, abolished ; also the remains of the feudal system ; also the tariff boundaries which shut off province from province to the great detriment of commerce. He closed two- thirds of the monasteries, which were more than superabundant in the land. But, just as no individual cares to be reformed under the compulsion of a master, so the Spaniards would have nothing to do with these modern improvements in the social art, imposed by a heretic and a tyrant, who had wantonly filched their throne and invaded their country. Napoleon might perhaps have established his control over Spain so firmly that the new institutions would have struck root, despite this opposition. But time was necessary, and time was Napoleon ^'^ ^ hurries back something he could not command. In Madrid only a month, to Pans ]^g ^g^g compelled to hurry back to France because of alarming news that reached him. He never returned to Spain. AUSTRIA AND FRANCE AGAIN AT WAR Austria had thrown down the gantlet again. It was entirely natural for her to seek at the convenient opportunity to avenge the humiliations she had repeatedly endured at the hands of France, to recover the position she had lost. Moreover, the close alliance of Russia and France and Napoleon's seizure of the Spanish crown filled her with alarm. If Napoleon was capable of treating in this way a hitherto submissive ally, such as Spain had been, what might he not do to a chronic enemy and now a mere neutral like Austria, THE WAR OF 1809 WITH AUSTRIA 283 particularly as the latter had nowhere to look for support since Russia had deserted the cause. Moreover, Austria had learned something from her disastrous experiences ; among other ^1 • ^1 ^ 1 • •!• 1 r • • Reform in thmgs that her previous military system was defective m the mUitary that it made no appeal to the people, to national sentiment, system of 1 r- f » Austria After Austerlitz the army was reorganized and a great mihtia was created composed of all m.en between the ages of eighteen and twenty-five. A promising invigoration of the national consciousness began. What occasion could be more convenient for paying off old scores and regaining lost ground than this, with Napoleon weakened by the necessity of holding down a spirited and outraged nation like the Spanish, resolved to go to any lengths, and by the necessity of checking or crushing the English in Portugal ? Under the influence of such considerations the war party gained the ascendancy, and Austria, under the lead of Archduke Charles, brother of the Emperor and a very able commander, began a war in the spring of 1 809. This war, which Napoleon did not seek, from which he had nothing to gain, was another Austrian mistake. Austria should have allowed more time for the full development of her new military system before running perilous risks again. The Austrians paid for their precipitancy. Napoleon astonished them again by the rapidity of his movements. In April, 1809, he fought them in Bavaria, five battles in five days, throwing them Napoleon back. Then he advanced down the Danube, entered Vienna conquers Austria for without difficulty, and crossed the river to the northern bank, the fourth whither the army of the Archduke had withdrawn. There Na- *"°® poleon fought a two days' battle at Aspern and Essling (May 21-22)- The fighting was furious, the village of Essling changing hands nine times. Napoleon was seriously checked. He was obliged to take refuge for six weeks on the Island of Lobau in the Danube, until additional troops were brought up from Italy, and from Germany. Then, when his army was sufficiently reenforced, he crossed to the northern bank again and fought the great battle of Wagram (July 5-6). He . , . A 1 ■ The battle was victorious but m no superlative sense as at Austerlitz. of Wagram The Archduke's army retired from the field in good order. (J"iy 5-6, The losses had been heavy, but no part of the army had been captured, none of the flags taken. This was the last victorious cam- paign fought by Napoleon. Even in it he had won his victory with unaccustomed difficulty. His army was of inferior quality, many of ^ 284 THE EMPIRE AT ITS HEIGHT The Treaty of Vienna (October, 1809) his best troops being detained by the inglorious Spanish adventure, and the new soldiers proving inferior to the old veterans. Moreover, he was encountering an opposition that was stronger in numbers, because of the army reforms just alluded to, while opposing generals were learning lessons from a study of his methods and were turning them against him. Archduke Charles, for instance, revered Napoleon's genius but he now fought him tooth and nail and with ability. After Wagram, Austria again made peace with Napoleon, the Peace of Vienna or of Schonbrunn. Austria was obliged to relinquish extensive terri- tories. Galicia, which was the part of Poland she had acquired in the famous partitions, now went — apart of it to the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, a part of it to Russia. She was also forced to cede to France Trieste, Carniola, and part of Carinthia and Croatia. These were made into the lUyrian Provinces, which were declared imperial territory, although not formally annexed to France. Austria lost 4,000,000 subjects, nearly a sixth of all that she possessed. She lost her only port and became entirely land-locked. Empress Marie Louise From a picture by Prudhon. NAPOLEON MARRIES MARIE LOUISE OF AUSTRIA Having defeated Austria for the fourth time. Napoleon treated Europe to one of those swift transformation scenes of which he was fond as showing his easy and incalculable mastery of the situation. REFERENCES 285 He contracted a marriage alliance with the House of Hapsburg which he had so repeatedly humbled, one of the proudest royal houses in Europe. He had long considered the advisability of a divorce from Josephine, as she had given him no heir and as the stability of the system he had erected depended upon his having one. At his demand the Senate dissolved his marriage with Josephine, and the ecclesiastical court in Paris was even more accommodating, declaring that owing to some irregularity the marriage had never taken place at all. Free thus by action of the state and the church he asked the Emperor of Austria for the hand of his daughter, the Archduchess Marie Louise, and received it. This political marriage was con- sidered advantageous on both sides. It seemed likely to prevent any further trouble between the two countries, to serve as a protection to Austria, to raise Napoleon's prestige by his connection with one of the oldest and proudest reigning houses of Europe, and to insure the continuance of the regime he had established with such display of genius. Thus, only seventeen years after the execution of Marie Antoinette, another Austrian princess sat upon the throne of France. The marriage occurred in April, 18 10, and in the following year was born the son for whom the title "King of Rome" stood ready. REFERENCES Napoleonic Creations: Fisher, pp. 153-168; Fournier, Chap. XII, pp. 325-355; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 166-173. The Campaigns against Prussia and Russia : Johnston, Chap. X, pp. 130-140; Fournier, Chap. XIII, pp. 356-385 ; Rose, Vol. II, Chaps. XXV and XXVI ; Fyffe, Chap. VII ; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 46-54. Tilsit: Fyffe, Chap. VII; Fournier, pp. 385-390; Rose, Vol. II, Chap. XXVII, pp. 115-128. The Continental System : Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 5 20-537 ; Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. II, Chap. XXVI, pp. 95-99 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, pp. 361-389. The Attack upon Spain and the Erfurt Interview: Fisher, Napoleon, pp. 168-180; Johnston, iVa/'o/co», pp. 147-155; Yo\xxr\ier, Napoleon I , pp. 427- 453; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 146-173. The AusTRLf^N Campaign of 1809: Fisher, pp. 181-189; Ropes, The First iVa/»o/eoH, pp. 141-150; Johnston, pp. 157-174; Fournier, pp. 254-294; Rose, Vol. II, Chap. XXX, pp. 174-191- CHAPTER XIII THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON Napoleon was now at the zenith of his power. He ruled directly over an empire that was far larger than the former Kingdom of France. In 180Q he annexed what remained of the Papal States in Napoleon ^ . ^ at the zenith Italy, together with the incomparable city of Rome, thus of his power gj^^jj^g, for the time at least, the temporal power of the Pope. In 1 8 10 he forced his brother Louis to abdicate the kingship of Holland, which country was now incorporated in France. He also, as has already been stated, extended the Empire along the northern coasts of Germany from Holland to Liibeck, thus controlling Ham- burg, Bremen, and the mouths of the important German rivers. Each one of these annexations was in pursuance of his policy of the Continental Blockade, closing so much more of the coast line of Europe to the commerce of England, the remaining enemy which he „. now expected to humble. Napoleon was Emperor of a state that His power ^ c ir- outside of had 1 30 departments. He was also King of Italy, a state in the '^""^^ northeastern part of the peninsula. He was Protector of the Confederation of the Rhine, which included all Germany except Prussia and Austria, a confederation which had been enlarged since its formation by the addition of Westphalia and Saxony and the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, extending, therefore, clear up to Russia. His brother Joseph was King of Spain, his brother Jerome King of Westphalia, his brother-in-law Murat King of Naples. All were mere satellites of his, receiving and executing his orders. Russia was his willing ally. Prussia and Austria were also his allies, the former because forced to be, the latter at first for the same reason, and later because she saw an advantage in it. No ruler in history had ever dominated so much of Europe. This supreme, incomparable pre- eminence had been won by his sword, supplemented by his remarkable statesmanship and diplomacy. England alone remained outside the pale, England alone had not 286 • WEAKNESS OF THE NAPOLEONIC SYSTEM 287 been brought to bend the knee to the great conqueror. Even she was breathing heavily, because the Continental System was inflicting ter- rible damage upon her. Factories were being forced to shut ^^g,^j^^ down, multitudes of laborers were being thrown out of work shows signs or were receiving starvation wages, and riots and other evidences of unrest and even desperation seemed to indicate that even she must soon come to terms. ELEMENTS OF WEAKNESS OF THE NAPOLEONIC STRUCTURE But this vast and imposing fabric of power rested upon uncertain bases. Built up, story upon storj^ by a highly imaginative and able mind, the architect left out of reckoning or despised the strains and stresses to which it was increasingly subjected. The rapidity with which this colossal structure fell to pieces in a few years shows how poorly consolidated it was, how rickety and precarious its foun- dations. Erected b}^ the genius of a single man, it depended solely upon his life and fortunes — and fortune is notoriously based on fickle. Built up bv war, by conquest, it was necessarily en- ^""^^ ^!^'^ ^ -'■''■ ' ■' despotism vironed by the hatred of the conquered. With every advance, every annexation, it annexed additional sources of discontent. Based on force, it could only be maintained by force. There could be and there was in all this vast extent of empire no common loyalty to the Emperor. Despotism, and Napoleon's regime was one of pitiless despotism, evoked no loyalty, only obedience based on fear. Europe has always refused to be dominated by a single nation or by a single man. It has run the risk several times in its history of passing under such a yoke, but it always in the end succeeded in escaping it. Universal dominion is an anachronism. The secret of Great Britain's hold upon many of the component parts of her empire lies in the fact that she allows them liberty to develop their own life in their own way. But such a conception was utterly beyond Napoleon, contrary to all his instincts and convictions. His empire meant the negation of liberty in the various countries which he dominated, France included. Napoleon's conquests necessarily ranged against him this powerful and unconquerable spirit. The waits for the more conquests, the more enemies, only waiting intently for J^f""" °? /• , 1 • 1 , • 1 r liberation the moment of liberation, scanning the horizon everywhere for the first sign of weakness which to them would be the harbinger 288 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON of hope. This they found in Spain, and in the Austrian campaign of 1809 in which the machinery of miUtary conquest had creaked, had worked clumsily, had threatened at one moment to break down. There was a force in the world which ran directly counter to Napo- leon's projects, the principle of nationality. Napoleon despised this feeling, and in the end it was his undoing. He might have con^temp°for seen that it had been the strength of France a few years the spirit of earlier, that now this spirit had passed beyond the natural nationality , , . , ... ,., boundaries and was wakmg mto a new life, was nerving to a new vigor, countries like Spain, even Austria, and, most conspicuously, Prussia. REORGANIZATION OF PRUSSIA Prussia after Jena underwent the most serious humiliation a nation can be called to endure. For several years she was under the iron Prussia heel of Napoleon, who kept large armies quartered on her soil, after Jena ^^g drained her resources, who interfered peremptorily in the management of her government, who forbade her to have more than 42,000 soldiers in her army. But out of the very depths of this national degradation came Prussia's salvation. Her noblest spirits were aroused to seek the causes of this unexpected and immeasurable national calamity and to try to remedy them. From 1808 to 18 12 Prussians, under the very scrutiny of Napoleon, who had eyes but did not see, worked passionately upon the problem of national regen- eration. The . result surpassed belief. A tremendous national patriotism was aroused by the poets and thinkers, the philosophers and teachers, all bending their energies to the task of quickening among the youth the spirit of unselfish devotion to the fatherland. An electric current of enthusiasm, of idealism, swept through the educational centers and through large masses of the people. The University of Berlin, founded in 1809, in Prussia's darkest hour, was, from the beginning, a dynamic force. It and other universities became nurseries of patriotism. Prussia underwent regeneration in other ways. Particularly memorable was the work of two statesmen. Stein and Harden- serfdom in berg. Stein, in considering the causes of Prussia's unexampled Prussia woes. Came to the conclusion that they lay in her defective or harmful social and legal institutions. The masses of Prussia were serfs, bound to the soil, their personal liberty gravely re- STEIN'S REFORMS IN PRUSSIA stricted, and, as Stein said, "patriots cannot be made out of serfs." He persuaded the King to issue an edict of emancipation, abolishing serfdom. The Prussian king, he said, was no longer "the king of slaves, but of free men." Many other reforms were passed abolishing or reducing class distinctions and privileges. In all this Stein was largely imitating the French Revolutionists who by their epoch- stein's re- making reforms had forms show the influence released the ener- of the French gies of the French Revolution so that their power had been vastly augmented. The army, too, was re- organized, opportunity was opened to talent, as in France, with what magi- cal results we have seen. As Napoleon forbade that the Prussian army should number more than 42,000 men, the ingenious device was adopted of having men serve with the colors only a brief time, only long enough to learn the essentials of the soldier's life." Then they . -^ Army re- WOuld pass into the forms in reserve and others ^'■"^^'^ would be put rapidly through the same train- ing. By this method several times 42,000 men received a military training whose effec- tiveness was later to be proved. Thus Prussia's regeneration proceeded. The new national spirit, wonderfully invigorated, waited with impatience for its hour of probation. It should be noted, however, that these reforms, which resembled in many respects those accomplished in France by the Constituent Assembly and the Convention, and which were in fact suggested by them, rested, however, on very different principles. Baron vom Stein From an engraving by Liitzenkirchen. 290 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON There was in Prussia no assertion of the Rights of Man, no procla- mation of the people as sovereign. In Prussia it was the king j^ . ... who made the reforms, not the people. The theory of the by Prussia divine right of the monarch was not touched but was main- cratuTprin- tained as sacred as ever. There was reform in Prussia but no cipies of revolution. Prussia took no step toward democracy. This dis- governmen ^jnction colored the whole subsequent history of that kingdom. "Everything for the people, nothing by the people," was evidently the underlying principle in this work of national reorganization. Even these reforms were not carried out completely, owing to opposition from within the kingdom and from without. But, though incomplete, they were very vitalizing. THE CHURCH HOSTILE TO NAPOLEON Napoleon's policies had created other enmities in abundance which were mining the ground beneath him. His treatment of the Pope, whom he held as a prisoner and whose temporal power he had abol- ished by incorporating his states, a part in the French Empire and a part in the Kingdom of Italy, made the Catholic clergy everywhere hostile, and offended the faithful. Rome, hitherto the papal capital, was declared the second city of the Empire and served as a title for Napoleon's son. All rights of the Pope were thus cavalierly ignored. The vast and subtle influence of the Church was of course now directed to the debasement of the man it had previously conspicuously favored and exalted. In addition to combating the rising tide of nationality, Napoleon henceforth also had his quarrel with the Papacy. DISASTROUS EFFECTS OF THE CONTINENTAL BLOCKADE Into these entanglements he had been brought by the necessities of his conflict with England, by the Continental Blockade. For it was that system that drove him on from one aggression to another, from annexation to annexation. That system, too, created profound discontent in all the countries of the Continent, including France itself. By enormously raising the price of such necessaries, as cotton and sugar and cofifee and tea, products of Britain's colonies or of the tropical countries with which she traded, they introduced hardship and irritation into every home. The normal course of business was EFFECTS OF THE CONTINENTAL BLOCKADE 291 turned inside out and men suddenly found their livelihood gone and ruin threatening or already upon them. To get the commodities to which they were accustomed they smuggled on a large and des- perate scale. This led to new and severe regulations and harsher ^j^j^^ ^.^^^j punishments, and thus the tyrannical interference in their pri- economic vate lives made multitudes in every country hate the tyranny ^" ^"^"^^ and long for its overthrow. Widespread economic suffering was the inevitable result of the Continental System and did more to make Napoleon's rule un- popular throughout Europe than did any- thing else except the enormous waste of life occasioned by the incessant warfare. That system, too, was the chief cause of the rupture of the alli- ance between Russia and France, in 18 12, a rupture which led to appalling disaster for Napoleon and was the beginning of the end. The whole stu- pendous superstruc- ture of Napoleonic statecraft and diplo- macy fell like a house of cards in the three years 1812, 1813, and 1814. Pope Pius VII From an engraving by Oudaille, after the painting by David. THE FRANCO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE The Franco- Russian Alliance, concluded so hastily and un- expectedly at Tilsit in 1807, lasted nominally nearly five years. It was, however, unpopular from the beginning with certain influential classes in Russia and its inconveniences became increasingly apparent. 292 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON The aristocracy of Russia, a powerful body, hated this alliance with a country which had abolished its own nobility, leaving its mem- bers impoverished by the loss of their lands and privileges, larityin There could be no sympathy between the Russian nobility, Russia based upon the grinding serfdom of the masses, and the country which had swept all traces of feudalism aside and proclaimed the equality of men. Moreover, the Russian nobility hated the Continental System, as it nearly destroyed the commerce with England in wheat, flax, and timber, which was the chief source of their wealth. Furthermore, the Czar Alexander I, having ob- between^ tained some of the advantages he had expected from his Napoleon and alliance, was irritated, now that he did not obtain others for Alexander I which he had hoped. He had gained Finland from Sweden and the Danubian Principalities from Turkey, but the vague though alluring prospect of a division of the Turkish Empire still remained unfulfilled and was, indeed, receding into the limbo of the unlikely. He wanted Constantinople, and Napoleon made it clear he could never have it. Moreover, Alexander was alarmed by Napoleon's schemes with the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, a state made out of the Polish provinces which had been acquired by Prussia and Austria. Alexander had no objection to Prussia and Austria losing their Polish provinces, but he himself had Polish provinces and he dreaded any- thing that looked like a resurrection of the former Kingdom of Poland, any appeal to the Polish national feeling. But the main cause of Alexander's gradual alienation from his ally was the Continental Blockade. This was working great financial loss The alliance to Russia. Moreover its inconveniences were coming home undermmed ^q \^[p^ jj^ Other ways. To enforce the system more com- by the Con- -^ ^ tinentai plctcly in Germany Napoleon seized in 1811 the Grand Duchy System q£ Oldenburg, which belonged to Alexander's brother-in-law. Thus the alliance was being subjected to a strain it could not stand. In 1812 it snapped, and loud was the report. Napoleon would not The Franco- allow any breach of the Continental Blockade if he could Russian prevent it. He resolved to force Russia, as he had forced the alliance breaks down rest of the Continent, to do his bidding. He demanded that she m 1812 jj^g yp ^Q Y\er promises and exclude British commerce. The answers were evasive, unsatisfactory, and in June, 1812, Napoleon crossed the Niemen with the largest army he ever commanded, over half a million men, the "army of twenty nations," as the Russians THE RUSSIAN CAMPAIGN 293 called it. About one-half were French. The rest were a motley host of Italians, Danes, Croatians, Dalmatians, Poles, Dutchmen, Westphalians, Saxons, Bavarians, Wiirtembergers, and still „ , f ' ' ' o ) Napoleon others. For the first time in his military career Napoleon com- invades manded the cooperation of Austria and Prussia, both of which "^^'* were compelled to send contingents. There were 100,000 cavalry and a numerous and powerful artillery. He had around him a bril- liant staff of officers, Murat, Ney, Eugene Beauharnais, and others. It seemed as if no power on earth could resist such an engine of destruction. Napoleon himself spoke of the expedition as the "last act" of the play. THE RETREAT FROM MOSCOW It was not quite that, but it was a supremely important act, one full of surprises. From the very start it was seen that in numbers there is sometimes weakness, not strength. This vast machine speedily com- menced to give way be- Disorgan- neath its own weight, i^ation in r^i ^ the com- The army had not ad- missary vanced five days before department the commissary department began to break down and bread was lacking. Horses, improperly nourished, died by the thousands, thus still further demoralizing the commissariat and imperiling the artillery. The Russians adopted the policy of not fighting but constantly re- treating, luring the enemy farther and farther into a country which they took the pains to devastate as ti^uaUy ' retreat they retired, leaving no provisions or supplies for the invaders, no stations for the incapacitated, as they burned their villages on leav- ing them. Napoleon, seeking above everything a battle, in which he hoped to crush the enemy, was denied the opportunity. The Russians had studied the Duke of Wellington's methods in Portugal and profited by their study. It was 700 miles from the Niemen to Napoleon's Camp Bed Redrawn from a photograph. The Rus- sians con- 294 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON Moscow. Napoleon had had no intention of going so far, but the tactics of his enemy forced him steadily to proceed. The Czar had announced that he would retire into Asia if necessary, rather than sign a peace with his enemy on the sacred soil of Russia. Napoleon hoped for a battle at Smolensk but only succeeded in getting a rear- guard action and a city in flames. This policy of continual retreat, so irritating to the French Em- peror, was equally irritating to the Russian people, who did not understand the reason and who clamored for a change. The Rus- sians therefore took up a strong position at Borodino on the route to Moscow. There a battle occurred on September 7, 18 12, between The battle the French army of 125,000 men and the Russian of 100,000. of Borodino ^he battle was one of the bloodiest of the whole epoch. The French lost 30,000, the Russians 40,000 men. Napoleon's victory was not overwhelming, probably because he could not bring himself to throw in the Old Guard. The Russians retreated in good order, Napoleon leaving the road open to Moscow, which city Napoleon enters entered September 14. The army had experienced terrible Moscow, September hardships all the way, first over roads soaked by constant 14, 1812 rains, then later over roads intensely heated by July suns and giving forth suffocating clouds of dust. Terrible losses, thousands a day, had characterized the march of seven hundred miles from the Niemen to Moscow. Napoleon had resolved on the march to Moscow expecting that the Russians would consent to peace, once the ancient capital was in danger. But no one appeared for that purpose. He found Moscow The burning practically deserted, only 15,000 there, out of a population of of Moscow 250,000. Moreover the day after his entry fires broke out in various parts of the city, probably set by Russians. For four days the fearful conflagration raged, consuming a large part of the city. Still Napoleon stayed on, week after week, fearing the effect that the news of a retreat might produce, and hoping, against hope, that the Czar would sue for peace. Finally there was nothing to do, after wasting a month of precious time, but to order the retreat. This The retreat was a long-drawn-out agony, during which an army of 100,000 from Moscow jnen was reduced to a few paltry thousands, fretted all along the route by which they had come by Russian armies and by Cossack guerrilla bands, horrified by the sigK"t of thousands of their comrades • still unburied on the battlefield of Borodino, suffering indescribable THE RETREAT FROM MOSCOW 295 hardships of hunger and exhaustion and finally caught in all the horrors of a fierce Russian winter, clad, as many of them were, lightly for a summer campaign. The scenes that accompanied this flight and rout were of unutterable woe, culminating in the hideous „. ' ° The crossing tragedy of the crossing of the Beresina, the bridge breaking of the down under the wild confusion of men fighting to get across, ^''^sma horses frightened, the way blocked by carts and wagons, the pontoons raked by the fire of the Russian artillery. Thousands were left be- hind, many fell or threw themselves into the icy river and were Napoleon REXURNrNG to France, December, 181 2 Redrawn from a sketch by Faber du Faur. Not made on the spot but probably presenting approximately the kind of equipage in which Napoleon traveled. He was accompanied by five other persons only. frozen to death. In the river, says one writer, when the Russians came up later they saw "awful heaps of drowned soldiers, women, and children, emerging above the surface of the waters, and here and there rigid in death like statues on their ice-bound horses." A few thousand out of all the army finally got out of Russia and across the Niemen. Many could only crawl to the hospitals asking for "the rooms where people die." History has few ghastlier pages in all its annals. Napoleon himself left the army in December, and traveled rapidly incognito to Paris, which he reached on the i8th. 296 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON "I shall be back on the Niemen in the spring," was the state- „ , ment with which he tried to make men think that the lost Napoleon plans a new position would be soon recovered. campaign y^^ ^-^ ^^^ quite keep the promise. He did not get as far back again as the Niemen. But 1813 saw him battling for his supremacy in Germany, as 18 12 had seen him battling for it in Russia. The Russian disaster had sent a thrill of hope through the ranks of his enemies everywhere. The colossus might be, indeed appeared to be, falling. Had not the auspicious moment arrived for annihilating him ? Particularly violent was the hatred of the Prussians, who had, more than other peoples, felt the ruthlessness of his tyranny for the last six years. They trembled with eagerness to be let loose and when their King made a treaty of alliance with Russia and subse- _. ... quently made a more direct and personal appeal to his people Prussia joins ~i J tr r-r- r- r- Russia than any Prussian monarch had ever made before, they re- N^pofeon sponded enthusiastically. There was a significant feature (February, about this Treaty of Kalisch (ka'-lish) with Russia. Russia '^ was not to lay down her arms against Napoleon until Prussia had recovered an area equal to that which she had possessed before the battle of Jena. ,But the area was not to be the same, for Russia was to keep Prussia's Polish provinces, now included in the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, whose doom was decreed. Prussia should have compensation in northern Germany. Could Napoleon rely on the Confederation of the Rhine and on his ally Austria ? That remained to be seen. A reverse would almost -T , . surely cost him the support of the former and the neutrality of Napoleon s -^ '^^'^ ■' doubtful the latter. Their loyalty would be proportioned to his success. * '^^ There was with them not the same popular wrath as with the Prussians. On the other hand, their princes had a keen eye for the main chance. Austria surely would use Napoleon's necessities for her own advantage. The princes of the Rhenish Confederation wished to retain the advantages they had won largely through their complaisant cooperation with Napoleon during recent years. Austria wished to recover advantages she had lost, territory, prestige, badly tattered and torn by four unsuccessful campaigns. The cam Napoleon, working feverishly since the return from Russia, paign of i8i3 finally got an army of over 200,000 men together. But to do in ermany ^j^-^ -^^ j^^^ ^^ draw upon the youth of France, as never before, calling out recruits a year before their time for service was due, A NAPOLEON LOSES GERMANY 297- large part of them were untrained, and had to get their training on the march into Germany. The army was weak in cavalry, a decisive instrument in following up a victory and clinching it. DECISIVE "BATTLE OF THE NATIONS" AT LEIPSIC Napoleon was back in central Germany before the Russians and Prussians were fully prepared. He defeated them at Liitzen and at Bautzen in May, 181 3, but was unable to follow up his victories because of the lack of sufficient cavalry, and the campaign convinced him that he could accomplish nothing decisive without reen- forcements. He therefore agreed, in an unlucky moment, as it arm^sdce in later proved, to a six weeks' armistice. During that time he mid-cam- did get large reenforcements but his enemies got larger. And ^^*^° during that interval the diplomatic intriguing went against him so that when the armistice was over Austria had joined the alliance of Russia, Prussia, and England, against him. He defeated the Austrians at Dresden (August 26-27), his last great fh"e'amanc^^ victory. His subordinates were, however, beaten in various against subsidiary engagements and he was driven back upon Leipsic. ^^^ ^°° There occurred a decisive three days' battle, the "Battle of the Nations," as the Germans call it (October 16-18). In point of numbers involved this was the greatest battle of the Napoleonic era. Over half a million men took part, at most 200,000 under ^^ XT 1 11 1 r , ,,. The crash of JNapoieon, 300,000 under the commanders of the alhes. Na- the Napo- poleon was disastrously defeated and was sent flying back '^°"'*^ system across the Rhine with only a small remnant of his army. The whole political structure which he had built up in Germany collapsed. The members of the Confederation of the Rhine deserted the falling star, and entered the alliance against him, on the guarantee of their possessions by the allies. Jerome fled from Westphalia and his brief kingdom disappeared. Meanwhile Wellington, who for years had been aiding the Spaniards, had been successful and was crossing the Pyrenees into southern France. The coils were closing in upon the lion, who now stood at bay. The allies moved on after the retreating French toward the Rhine. It had been no part of their original purpose to demand to yield, or Napoleon's abdication. They now, in November, 1813, offered °°* *° yield? him peace on the basis of the natural frontiers of France, the Rhine- 298 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON the Alps, and the Pyrenees. He would not accept but procrastinated, and made counter-propositions. .Even in February, 1814, he could have retained ■ his throne and the historic boundaries of the old Bourbon monarchy, had he been willing to renounce the rest. He dallied with the suggestion, secretly hoping for some turn in luck that would spring the coalition apart and enable him to recover the ground he had lost. In thus refusing to recognize defeat, refusing to Napoleon's War Horse, "Marengo" accept an altered situation, he did great harm to France and completed his own downfall. His stiff, uncompromising, unyielding temper sealed his doom. He was no longer acting as the wise statesman, re- sponsible for the welfare of a great people who, by their unstinted sacrifices, had put him under heavy obligations. His was the spirit of the gambler, thinking to win all by a happy turn of the cards. He was also will incarnate. With will and luck all might yet be retrieved. THE ALLIES ENTER PARIS (MARCH 31, 1814) Napoleon had said on leaving Germany, "I shall be back in May with 250,000 men." He did not expect a winter campaign and he felt confident that by May he could have another army. The allies, how- ABDICATION OF NAPOLEON 299 ever, did not wait for May but at the close of December, 1813, streamed across the Rhine and invaded France from various direc- tions. France, victorious for eighteen years, now experienced „. what she had so often administered to others. The campaign paign in was brief, only two months, Februarj^ and March, 1814. ^'■^"'^^ (' '4) Napoleon was hopelessly outnumbered. Yet this has been called the most brilliant of his campaigns. Fighting on the defensive and on inner lines, he showed marvelous mastery of the art of war, striking here, striking there, with great precision and swiftness, undaunted, resourceful, tireless. The allies needed every bit of their over- whelming superiority in numbers to compass the end of their re- doubtable antagonist, with his back against the wall and his brain working with matchless lucidity and with lightning-like rapidity. They thought they could get to his capital in a week. It took them two months. However, there could be but one end to such a cam- paign, if the allies held together, as they did. On the 30th of March Paris capitulated and on the following day the Czar Alexander and Frederick William III, the King of Prussia, made their formal entry into the city which the Duke of Brunswick twenty-two years before had threatened with destruction if it laid sacrilegious hands upon the King or Queen. Since that day much water had flowed under the bridge, and France and Europe had had a strange, eventful history, signifying much. The victors would not longer tolerate Napoleon. He was forced to abdicate unconditionally. He was allowed to retain his title of Emperor but henceforth he was to rule only over Elba, an " Emperor of island nineteen miles long and six miles wide, lying off the ^^^^ " coast of Tuscany whence his Italian ancestors had sailed for Corsica two centuries and a half before he was born. Thither he repaired, having said farewell to the Old Guard in the courtyard of the palace of Fontainebleau (fori-tan-blo'), kissing the flag of France made lustrous on a hundred fields. "Nothing but sobbing was heard in all the ranks," wrote one of the soldiers who saw the scene, "and I can say that I too shed tears when I saw my Emperor depart." LOUIS XVIII BECOMES KING OF FRANCE On the day that Napoleon abdicated, the Senate, so-called guardian of the constitution, obsequious and servile to the Emperor in his days of fortune, turned to salute the rising sun, and in solemn session 300 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON proclaimed Louis XVIII King of France. The allies, who had conquered Napoleon and banished him to a petty island in the Mediterranean, thought they were done with him for good and all. But from this complacent self-assurance they were destined to a rude awakening. Their own errors and wranglings at the Congress of Vienna, whither they repaired in September, 1814, to divide the spoils and determine the future organization of Europe, and the mis- takes and indiscretions of the Bourbons whom they restored to rule in France, gave Napoleon the opportimity for the most audacious and wonderful adventure of his life. Louis XVIII, the new king, tried to adapt himself to the greatly altered circumstances of the country to which he now returned in the wake of foreign armies after an absence of twenty-two 5'ears. He saw that he could not be an absolute king as his ancestors had been, and he therefore granted a charter to the French, giving them a legislature and guaranteeing certain rights which they had won and which he saw could not safely be withdrawn. His regime assured much larger liberty than France had ever experienced under Napoleon. Nevertheless certain attitudes of his and ways of speaking, and the actions of the royalists who surrounded him, and several unwise measures of government, soon rendered him unpopular and irritated and alarmed the people. He spoke of himself as King by the grace The mis ^^ ^^^' t^^?> denying the sovereignty of the people ; he dated takes of the his first document, the Constitutional Charter, from "the our ons nineteenth year of my reign," as if there had never been a Republic and a Napoleonic Empire ; he restored the white flag and banished the glorious tricolor which had been carried in triumph throughout Europe. What was much more serious, he offended thousands of Napoleon's army officers by retiring or putting them on half pay, many thus being reduced to destitution, and all feeling themselves dishonored. Moreover, many former nobles who had early in the Revolution emigrated from France and then fought against her received honors and distinctions. Then, in addition, the Roman Catholic clergy and the nobles of the court talked loudly and unwisely about getting back their lands which had been confiscated and sold to the peasants, although both the Concordat of 1802 and the Charter of 18 14 distinctly recognized and ratified these changes and promised that they should not be disturbed. The peasants were far and away the most numerous class in France and THE RETURN FROM ELBA 301 they were thus early alienated from the Bourbons by these threats at their most vital interest, their property rights, which Napoleon had always stoutly maintained. Thus a few months after ^^^ Napoleon's abdication the evils of his reign were forgotten, peasantry the terrible cost in human life, the burdensome taxation, ^^'^^^ the tyranny of it all, and he was looked upon as a friend, as a hero to whom the soldiers had owed glory and repute and the peasants the secure possession of their farms. In this way a mental atmos- phere hostile to Louis XVIII, and favorable to Napoleon, was created by a few months of Bourbon rule. Napoleon, penned up in his little island, took note of all this. He also heard of the serious dissensions of the allies now that they were trying to divide the spoils at Vienna, of their jealousies and ,.,.-. „ 1 . , Dissension animosities, which, in January, 1815, rose to such a pitch among the that Austria, France, and England prepared to go to war with ^}^^^ ^* Prussia and Russia over the allotment of the booty. He also knew that they were intriguing at the Congress for his banishment to some place remote from Europe. NAPOLEON'S RETURN FROM ELBA For ten months he had been in his miniature kingdom. The psychological moment had come for the most dramatic action of his life. Leaving the island with twelve hundred guards, „ » » ' Napoleon and escaping the vigilance of the British cruisers, he landed resolves to at Cannes (k&n) on March i. That night he started on the ^^ ^^^"^ march to Paris and on March 20 entered the Tuileries, ruler of France once more. The return from Elba will always remain one of the most romantic episodes of histor^^ With a force so small that it could easily have been taken prisoner, Napoleon had no alternative and no other wish than to appeal directly to the confidence of the people. Never was there such a magnificent response. All along the route the peasants received him enthusiastically. But his appeal was particularly to the army, to which he issued one of his stirring bulle- tins. "Soldiers," it began, "we have not been conquered. We were betrayed. Soldiers ! Come and range yourselves under the banner of your chief : his existence depends wholly on yours : his interests, his honor, and his glory are your interests, your honor, your glor^^ Come ! Victory will march at double quick. The eagle 302 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON with the national colors shall fly from steeple to steeple to the towers of Notre Dame. Then you will be able to show your scars with honor : then you will be able to boast of what you have done : you will be the liberators of your country." Regiment after regiment went over to him. The royalists thought he would be arrested at Grenoble where there was a detachment of the army under a royalist commander. Napoleon went straight flock to up to them, threw open his gray coat and said, "Here I am : Napoleon's y^^ know me. standard If there is a soldier among you who wishes to shoot his Emperor, let him do it." The soldiers flocked over to him, tearing off the white cockades and putting on the tricolor, which they had secretly carried in their knap- sacks. Opposition melted away all along the route. 1 1 became a triumphant pro- cession. When lies would help. Napoleon told them — among others that it was not ambition that brought him back, that "the forty-five best heads of the government of Paris have called me from Elba and my return is supported by the three first powers of Europe." He admitted that he had made mistakes and Napoleon assured the people that henceforth he desired only to follow TuUeries^ ^^^ ^^^^^ °^ P^^*^^ ^^^ liberty. He had come back to protect (March 20, the threatened blessings of the Revolution. The last part of this intoxicating journey he made in a carriage attended by only half a dozen Polish lancers. On March 20, Louis XVIII fled from the Tuileries. That evening Napoleon entered it. After the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence. 1815) THE BATTLE OF WATERLOO 303 . "What was the happiest period of your Ufe as Emperor?" some one asked him at St. Helena. "The march from Cannes to Paris," was the quick reply. DEFEAT AT WATERLOO His happiness was limited to less than the "Hundred Days" which this period of his reign is called. Attempting to reassure The " Hun- France and Europe, he met from the former, tired of war, only ^'^^^ ^^y^ " half-hearted support, from the allies only remorseless opposi- tion. When the diplomats at the Congress of Vienna heard of his escape from Elba they immediately ceased their con- tentions and banded them- selves together against "this disturber of the peace of Europe." They declared him an outlaw and set their armies in motion. He saw that he must fight to maintain him- self. He resolved to attack before his enemies had „. Ine cam- time to effect their paign in union. The battlefield ^^^^'"^ was in' Belgium, as Welling- ton with an army of English, Dutch, Belgians, and Ger- mans, and, at some distance from them, Bliicher (bluch'-er) with a large army of Prus- sians, were there. If Napoleon could prevent their union, then by defeating each separately, he would be in a stronger position when the Russian and Austrian armies came on. Perhaps, indeed, they would think it wiser not to come on at all but to conclude peace. In Bel- gium consequently occurred a four days' campaign culminating on the famous field of Waterloo, twelve miles south of Brussels. The battle There, on a hot Sunday in June, Napoleon was disastrously of Waterloo defeated (June 18, 1815). The sun of Austerlitz set forever. The BlL'CHER After a miniature by Miiller. 304 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON NAPOLEON'S FLIGHT 305 battle began at half past eleven in the morning, was characterized by prodigies of valor, by tremendous charges of cavalry and infantry back and forth over a sodden lield. Wellington held his position hour after hour as wave after wave of French troops rushed up the hill, foaming in and about the solid unflinching British squares, then, unable to break them, foamed back again. Wellington held on, hoping, looking, for the Prussians under Bliicher, who, at the begin- ning of the battle, were eleven miles away. They had promised to join him, if he accepted battle there, and late in the afternoon they kept the promise. Their arrival was decisive, as Napoleon was now LoNGwooD, Napoleon's House at St. Helena greatly outnumbered. In the early evening, as the sun was setting, the last charge of the French was repulsed. Repulse soon turned into a rout and the demoralized army streamed from the field in utter panic, fiercely pursued by the Prussians. The Emperor, seeing the utter annihilation of his army, sought death, but sought in vain. " I ought to have died at Waterloo," he said later, "but the misfor- tune is that when a man seeks death most he cannot find it. Men were killed around me, before, behind — everywhere. But there was no bullet for me." He fled to Paris, then toward the west coast of France hoping to escape to the United States, but the English cruisers off the shore rendered that impossible. Making the best of necessity he threw himself upon the generosity of the British. "I have come," he announced, "like Themistocles, to seek the Napoleon banished to St. Helena 306 THE DECLINE AND FALL OF NAPOLEON hospitality of the British nation." Instead of receiving it, how- ever, he was sent to a rock in the South Atlantic, the island of St. Helena, where he was kept under a petty and ignoble sur- veillance. Six years later he died of cancer of the stomach at the age of fifty-two, leaving an extraordinary legend be- hind him to disturb the future. He was buried under a slab that bore neither name nor date and it was twenty years before he was Napoleon's Tomb in the Invalides, Paris borne to his final resting-place under the dome of the Invalides in Paris, although in his last will and testament he had said : "My wish is to be buried on the banks of the Seine in the midst of the French people whom I have loved so well." REFERENCES The Regeneration of Prussia : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, Chap. VII; Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 270-286; Rose, T^e Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era, pp. 184-193; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution of Prussia, Chap. VII, pp. 225-239; Schevill, The Making of Modern Germany, pp. 76-82; Prie§t, Germany Since 1740, pp. 55-65. REFERENCES 307 The Russian Campaign: Fisher, Napoleon, pp. 189-201; Ropes, The First Napoleon, pp. 158-195; Johnston, Napoleon, pp. 174-187; FouinieT, Napoleon I, Chap. XVII, pp. 536-579- The Campaign in Germany, 1813: Fisher, pp. 201-212; Johnston, pp. 189-197; Ropes, pp. 195-217; Fournier, Chap. XVIII, pp. 580-642; Rose, Life of Napoleon I, Vol. II, Chap. XXXV, pp. 303-338. The Campaign in France, 1814: Johnston, pp. 198-209; Fournier, Chap. XIX, pp. 643-680. The First Restoration and Elba: Johnston, Chap. XVI, pp. 210-221; Fournier, pp. 680-693 J Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, Chap. XVIII, pp, 555-575- Waterloo: Fisher, pp. 217-242; Johnston, pp. 222-237; Ropes, pp. 242- 295; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 417-471 ; Victor Hugo, Les Miserables, Part II, Book I ; Encyclo prndia Britannica, Article, Waterloo Campaign. Napoleon at St. Helena : Fournier, Chap. XXI, pp. 721-743; Rosebery, Napoleon, the Last Phase, Chaps. IV-VII, XII-XVI ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, Chap. XXIV, pp. 756-771- Tomb of N.\poleon at St. Helena CHAPTER XIV THE CONGRESSES THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA — A NEW MAP OF EUROPE The overthrow of Napoleon brought with it one of the most com- plicated and difficult problems ever presented to statesmen and the diplomatists. As all the nations of Europe had been pro- overthrow of foundly affected by his enterprises, so all were profoundly Napoleon affected by his fall. The destruction of the Napoleonic regime must be followed by the reconstruction of Europe. This work of reconstruction was undertaken by the Congress of Vienna, one of the most important diplomatic gatherings in the history of Europe (September, 1814-June, 1815). Never be- assembiage fore had there been seen such an assemblage of celebrities, lenna "The city of Vienna," wrote one of. the participants, "presents at this moment an overwhelming spectacle ; all the most illustrious personages in Europe are represented here in the most exalted fashion." There were the emperors of Austria and Russia, the kings of Prussia, Bavaria, Wiirtemberg, Denmark, a multitude of lesser princes, and all the diplomats of Europe, of whom Metternich and Talleyrand were the most conspicuous. All the powers were represented except Turkey. There were representatives of the great European banking houses too, "money-changers," Wellington called them, and a multitude of adventurers and hangers-on of every stripe. The main work of the Congress was the distribution of the terri- tories that France had been forced to relinquish. Certain arrange- The work of ments had been agreed upon by the allies before going to the Congress Vienna, in the First Treaty of Paris, May 30, 1814, 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 bordered France on the southeast might be the stronger to resist 308 THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA 309 310 THE CONGRESSES French aggression. Belgium, previously an Austrian possession, 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 Principle of that, in general, the doctrine of legitimacy should be followed legitimacy j^ determining the rearrangement of Europe, that is, the principle that princes deprived of their thrones and driven from their states by Napoleon 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. The allies, who had, after immense effort and sacrifice, overthrown Napoleon, felt that they should have their reward. The most Demands of powcrful monarch at Vienna was Alexander I, Emperor of Russia Russia, who, ever since Napoleon's disastrous invasion of Russia, had loomed large as a liberator of Europe. He now de- manded that the Grand Duchy of Warsaw, whose government fell with Napoleon, be given to him. This state had been created out of Polish territories which Prussia and Austria had seized in the parti- tions of that country at the close of the eighteenth century. Alex- ander wished to unite them with a part of Poland that had fallen to Russia, thus largely to restore the old Polish kingdom and nation- ality, to which he intended to give a parliament and a constitution. There was to be no incorporation of the restored kingdom in Russia, but the Russian Emperor was to be King of Poland. The union was to be merely personal. , Prussia was willing to give up her Polish provinces if only she could be indemnified elsewhere. She therefore fixed her attention upon the Demands rich Kingdom of Saxony to the south, with the important of Prussia 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, and his state was lawful prize. , Russia and Prussia supported each other's claims, but Austria and England and France opposed them stoutly, in the end even agreeing to go to war to prevent this aggrandizement of the two northern nations. It was this dissension among those who had conquered him that caused Napoleon to think that the opportunity was favor- able for his return from Elba. But, however jealous the allies were THE WORK OF THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA 311 V of each other, they, one and all, hated Napoleon and were firmly resolved to be rid of him. They had no desire for more war and consequently quickly compromised their differences. The final decision was that Russia should receive the lion's share of the Duchy of Warsaw, Prussia retaining only the province of Posen, and Cracow being erected into a free city ; that the King of Saxony should be restored to his throne ; that 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 re- ceive extensive territories on both banks of the Rhine. Prussia also acquired Pomerania from Sweden, thus rounding out her coast line on the Baltic. Russia emerged from the Congress with a goodly number cf addi- tions. She retained Finland, conquered from Sweden during the late wars, and Bessarabia, wrestM from the Turks ; also Turk- Russian ac- ish territories in the southeast. But, most important of all, quisitions she had now succeeded in gaining most of the Grand Duchy of Warsaw. Russia now extended farther westward into Europe than ever, and could henceforth speak with greater weight in European affairs. Austria recovered her Polish possessions and received, as compensa- tion for the Netherlands, northern Italy, to be henceforth known as the Lombardo- Venetian Kingdom, comprising the larger and Austrian ac- 1 richer p^rt of the Po valley. She also recovered the Illyrian quisitions provinces along the eastern coast of the Adriatic. Thus, after twenty years of war, almost 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 had ob- tained, in lieu of remote and unprofitable possessions, territories " which augmented her power in central Europe, the immediate an- nexation of a part of Italy, and indirect control over the other Italian states. England, the most persistent enemy of Napoleon, the builder of repeated coalitions, the pay-mistress of the allies for many years, found her compensation in additions to her colonial empire. English ac- She retained much that she had conquered from France or quisitions from the allies or dependencies of France, particularly Holland. She occupied Helgoland in the North Sea ; Malta and the Ionian Islands in the Mediterranean ; Cape Colony in South Africa ; Ceylon, and other 312 THE CONGRESSES islands. It was partially in view of her colonial losses that Holland was indemnified by the annexation of Belgium, as has been already stated. Another question of great importance, decided at Vienna, was the disposition of Italy. The general principle of action had already been The future agreed upon, that Austria should receive compensation here of Italy fQj- the Netherlands, and that the old dynasties should be restored. Austrian interests determined the territorial arrange- ments. 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, espe- cially as the Duchy of Parma was given to Marie Louise, wife of Na- poleon, and as princes connected with the Austrian imperial family were restored to their thrones in Modena and Tuscany. The Papal States were also reestablished. No union or federation of these states was effected. It was Met- ternich's desire that Italy should simply be a collection of independ- ent states, should be only a "geographical expression." The " geograph- doctrine of legitimacy, appealed to for the restoration of icai expres- dynasties, was ignored by this congress of princes in the case of republics. "Republics are no longer fashionable," said the Czar 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 Corin- thian horses which Napoleon had brought from St. Mark's 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 possessions, 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 can- tons in all. The frontiers of Spain and Portugal were left untouched. Such were the territorial readjustments decreed by the Congress of Vienna, which were destined to endure, with slight changes, for Criticism of nearly fifty years. It is impossible to discover in these nego- the Congress tiations the operation of any lofty principle. Self-interest is the key to this welter of bargains and agreements. Not that these ST. HELENA 313 Napoleon EmbarkiiNG on the "Bellerophon" Designed and engraved by Baugeau. The Island of St. Helena After the drawing by F. Clementson. 314 THE CONGRESSES 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 system of Eu- rope," a "durable peace based upon a just division of power" were used by the diplomats of Vienna in order to impress the peoples of Europe, and to lend an air of dignity and elevation to their august assemblage, but the peoples were not deceived. They witnessed the unedifying scramble of the conquerors for the spoils of victory. They saw the monarchs of Europe, who for years had been de- nouncing Napoleon for not respecting the rights of peoples, acting precisely in the same way, whenever it suited their pleasure. The Congress of Vienna was a congress of aristocrats, to whom the ideas of nationality and democracy as proclaimed by the French Ch t of Revolution were incomprehensible or loathsome. The rulers the Congress rearranged Europe according to their own desires, disposing of it as if it were their own personal property, ignoring the sentiment of nationality, which had lately been so wonderfully aroused, indifferent to the wishes of the people. The people were treated as children incapable of thought in such high matters as their own destiny, with no right, because of their inexperience and immaturity, to be heard. The world was to be held in tutelage as The principle '^^^ays hitherto by men who considered themselves appointed of national- to that end, the anointed of the Lord. They did not strive so to ity Ignored ^raw the boundaries of the different states as to satisfy the aspirations of the various peoples and thus to lay the foundations of a permanent peace. They aimed rather in their adjustments to create a so-called "balance of power." Theirs could be no "settlement" because they ignored the factors that alone would make the settlement permanent. The history of Europe from 1 8 1 5 to the present day has been the attempt to undo this cardinal error of the Congress of Vienna. THE HOLY ALLIANCE In addition to the Treaties of Vienna the allies signed in 1 8 1 5 two other documents of great significance in the future history of Europe, that establishing the so-called Holy Alliance, and that establishing the Quadruple Alliance. The former proceeded from the initiative . of Alexander I, of Russia, whose mood was now deeply religious West Ion gitrnle Oreenwich, HeislLpnffitiuie T 2 THE HOLY ALLIANCE 315 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 Savior. He now submitted a docu- ment 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. The document stated that it was the intention of the powers henceforth to be guided, in both their domestic and foreign policies, solely by the precepts of the Christian religion. The rulers announced that they would regard each other as brothers and their subjects as their children, and they promised to aid each other on all occasions and in all places. All those powers which might wish to make avowal of these "sacred principles shall be received into the Holy Alliance with as much cordiality as affection." The other powers, thus asked by the Emperor of Russia to express their approval of Christian principles, did so, preserving what dig- nity tiiey could in playing what most of them considered a farce of questionable taste. For, knowing the principles that had actually governed the Czar and the other rulers at the Congress of Vienna, they did not consider them particularly biblical or as likely to inaugurate a new and idyllic diplomacy in Europe. As a matter of fact no state ever made any attempt to act in accordance with the principles so highly approved. The only important thing about the Holy Alliance was its name, which was, in the opinion of all Liberals, too good to be lost, so ironically did it contrast with what was known of the characters and policies of the rulers of Russia, Prussia, and Austria, the " Holy Allies." THE QUADRUPLE ALLL\NCE AND METTERNTCH ^ The other document, signed November 20, 1815, by Russia, Prussia, Austria, and England, established a Quadruple Alliance providing that these powers should hold congresses from time to time for the purpose of considering their common interests and the needs of Europe. The congresses that were held during the next few years in accordance with this agreement were converted into engines of oppression everywhere largely through the influence of Prince 3i6 THE CONGRESSES Metternich, Chancellor of the Austrian Empire, whose influence upon their deliberations was decisive. Metternich appeared to the generation that lived between 1815 and 1848 as the most commanding personality of Europe, whose impor- Metternich, tance is shown 1773-1859 in the phrases, "Era of Metternich," "System of Metter- nich." He was the central figure not only in Austrian and Ger- man politics, but in European diplomacy. He was the most famous statesman Austria produced in the nineteenth cen- tury. A man of high rank, wealthy, pol- ished, blending social accomplishments with literary and scientific pretensions, his foible was omnis- cience. He was the prince of diploma- tists, thoroughly at ease amid all the in- triguing of European politics. His egotism was Olympian. He His spoke of him- self-esteem ggjf ^^ being born "to prop up the decaying structure" of European society. He felt the world resting on his shoulders. "My position has this peculiarity," he says, "that all eyes, all expectations are directed to precisely that point where I happen to be." He asks the question : "Why, among so many million men, must I be the one to think when others do not think, to act when others do not act, and to Metternich After the painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence. METTERNICH'S OPINIONS 317 write because others know not how?" He himself admitted at the end of a long career that he had "never strayed from the path of eternal law," that his mind had "never entertained error." He felt and said that he would leave a void when he disappeared. On analysis, however, his thinking appears singularly negative. It consisted of his execration of the French Revolution. His lifelong role was that of incessant opposition to everything compre- „ ... hended in the word. He denounced it in rabid and lurid historical phrases. It was "the disease which must be cured, the vol- '™P°''t*°"=* cano which must be extinguished, the gangrene which must be burned out with the hot iron, the hydra with jaws open to swallow up the social order." He believed in absolute monarchy, and considered himself "God's lieutenant" in supporting it. He hated parliaments and representative systems of government. All this talk of liberty, equality, constitutions, he regarded as pestilential, the odious chatter of revolutionary French minds. He defined himself as a man of the status quo. Keep things just as they are, all innovation is mad- ness, such was the constant burden of his song. He was the con- vinced and resourceful opponent of all struggles for national inde- pendence, of all aspirations for self-government. Democracy could only "change daylight into darkest night." Napoleon once said of Metternich that "he mistook intrigue for statesmanship." The acuteness of this characterization will be seen as we watch him at work upon his "system" in Austria, Germany, Ital}', and Spain in the decade following the overthrow of the French Emperor. REACTION IN EUROPE AFTER 181 5 "The battle of Waterloo," remarked Napoleon at St. Helena, "will be as dangerous to the liberties of Europe as the battle of Philippi was dangerous to the liberties of Rome." Napoleon was not exactly an authority on liberty, but he did know the difference between en- lightened despotism and unenlightened. His was, in the main, of the former sort. The kind that succeeded his in central Europe could not be so characterized. The style was set by unity in the Austria, the leading state on the Continent from 18 15 to 1848. Austrian Austria was not a single nation, like France, but was composed of many races. To the west were the Austrian duchies, chiefly 3i8 THE CONGRESSES THE METTERNICH SYSTEM 319 German, the ancient possessions of the House of Hapsburg ; to the north Bohemia, an ancient kingdom acquired by the Hapsburgs in 1526 ; to the east the Kingdom of Hungary, occupying the immense plain of the middle Danube ; to the south the Kingdom of Lombardy- Venetia, purely Italian. The two leading races in this Austrian Empire were the Germans, forming the body of the population in the duchies, and the Magyars (mo'-dyorz), originally an Asiatic folk, encamped in the Danube valley since the ninth centur}' and forming the dominant people in Hungary. There were many branches of the Slavic race in both Austria and Hungary. There were also Roumanians, a different people still, in eastern Hungary. To rule so conglomerate a realm of twenty-eight or twenty-nine million people was a difficult task. This was the first problem of Francis I (i 792-1 835) and Metternich. Their policy was to resist all demands for reform, and to keep things as they were, to make the world stand still. The people were sharply divided into classes, each resting on a different basis. Of these the nobility oc- . . . '^ •' Austria a cupied a highly privileged position. They enjoyed freedom land of the from compulsory military service, large exemptions from egime taxation, a monopoly of the best offices in the state. They pos- sessed a large part of the land, from which in man}^ cases they drew enormous revenues. On the other hand, the condition of the peas- ants, who formed the immense mass of the people, was deplorable in the extreme. They were even refused the right to purchase relief from the heaviest burdens. Absolutism in government, feudalism in society, special privileges for the favored few, oppression and misery for the masses, such was the condition of Austria in 181 5. It was the fixed purpose of the government to maintain things as they were and it succeeded largely for thirty-three years, during the reign of Francis I, till 1835, and of his successor Ferdinand I (1835- 1848). During all this period Metternich was the chief min- The police ister. His system, at war with human nature, at war with the system modern spirit, rested upon a meddlesome police, upon elaborate espio- nage, upon a vigilant censorship of ideas. Censorship was applied to theaters, newspapers, books. The frontiers were guarded that for- eign books of a liberal character might not slip in to corrupt. Politi- cal science and history practically disappeared as serious studies. Spies were everywhere, in government offices, in places of amusement, in educational institutions. Particularly did this government fear 320 THE CONGRESSES the universities, because it feared ideas. Professors and students were subjected to humiliating regulations. 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 prescribed. Students might not study abroad, nor might they have societies of their own. Austrians might not travel to foreign countries without the permission of the government, which was rarely given. Austria was sealed as nearly hermetically as possible against the liberal thought of Europe. Intellectual 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 extend it to other countries. Having firmly established Application of j|- ^^ home, Metternich labored with great skill and temporary nich system succcss to apply it in surrounding countries, in Germany countries through the Diet and the state governments, in Italy through interventions and treaties, binding Italian states not to follow policies opposed to the Austrian, and in general by bringing about a close accord of the Great Powers on this illiberal basis. We shall now trace the application of this conception of govern- ment in other countries. This will serve among other things to show the dominant position of the Austrian Empire in Europe from 1815 to 1848. Vienna, the seat of rigid conservatism, was now the center of European affairs, as Paris, the home of revolution, had been for so long. GERMANY One of the important problems presented to the Congress of Vienna concerned the future organization of Germany. The Holy Germany a Roman Empire had disappeared in 1 806 at the hands of Na- loose con- poleon. The Confederation of the Rhine, which he had era ion created to take its place, had disappeared with its creator. Something must evidently be put in its place. The outcome of the deliberations was the establishment of the German Confederation which was the government of Germany from 1815 to 1866. The Confederation consisted of thirty-eight states. The central organ of the government was to be a Diet, meeting at Frankfort. This was to consist, not 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 representatives, voting as THE GERMAN CONFEDERATION 321 their princes might direct. Austria was always to have the presi- dency of this body. The method of procedure within the Diet was comphcated and exceedingly cumbrous, making action difficult, delay and obstruction easy. The Confederation did not constitute a real nation but only a loose league of independent states. The states agreed not to make war upon each other and that was about the only serious obligation they assumed. The federal government was remarkable mainly for its defects. The legislature, or Diet of Frankfort, was most inefficient. In all important legislation each state had practically a veto. In addition there was really no execu- tive, and the judicial branch was extremely rudimentary. It was left to the rulers of the separate states to carry out the decisions of the Diet. As a matter of fact they executed them only when they wished to. The Confederation was a union of princes, not of peoples. It was created because each prince was jealous of every other prince, and was far more concerned with the preservation of his own power than with the prosperity of Germany. Now the spirit of e^ation^^^ nationality had been tremendously aroused by the struggles ^^}^° °* with Napoleon. . All the more progressive spirits felt that ^"""^^^ the first need of Germany was unity and a strong national govern- ment. But German unity was, according to Metternich, an "in- famous object" and Metternich was supported by the selfishness of the German rulers, not one of whom was willing to surrender any particle of his authority. Intense was the indignation of all Liberals at what they called this "great deception" of Vienna. The Liberals experienced another disappointment too. As they desired unity, they also desired liberty. They wished a constitution for each one of the thirty-eight states ; they wished a parlia- ^^ , "^ -^ ^ The demand ment m each; they wished to have the reign of absolutism forconsti- brought to a close. It had seemed at one moment as if this *"'*°'*^ might be achieved. In appealing to his people to rally around him in the war against Napoleon, 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 member of the Confederation to grant a representative constitution to his subjects within a year. Metternich, even more opposed to free political ^ . institutions than to a strong central government, succeeded in successful thwarting the reformers at this point also, by having this ex- "pp"^'***"* plicit and mandatory declaration made vague and lifeless. Thus the 322 THE CONGRESSES famous Article XIII of the Federal Act which established the Con- federation was made to read : "A constitution based upon the system of estates will be established in all the states of the union." The character of the promised constitution was not sketched ; and the time limit was omitted. A journalist was justified in saying that all that was guaranteed to the German people was an "unlimited right of expectation." The future was to show the vanity even of expectation, the hoUowness 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. A few of the princes, however, did, notably the Grand Duke of Saxe-Weimar, the patron of Goethe and Schiller. Metternich's program was to secure the prevalence in Germany of the same principles that prevailed in Austria. He believed that to -. . , allow the people to participate in government was to flood the plan for State with ignorance, passion, envy, and all uncharitableness : Germany ^j^^^ ^^^ concessions to democracy would lead straight to anarchy. His purpose was to instill this idea into the minds of those sovereigns who did not have it ; also to arouse timid rulers, like the King of Prussia, to such a pitch of fear that they would actively cooperate with him in his efforts to stamp out liberal ideas wherever they might appear. Certain incidents of the day gave him favorable occasions to apply the system of repression which in his opinion was the only sure cure for the ills of this world. The years immediately succeeding 1815 were years of restlessness and discontent. This disappointment of Liberals was intense, their _.. . ^ criticism bitter, when they saw their hopes turned to ashes. Disappoint- ' -' '^ ment of Ger- The chief seat of disaffection was found in the universities man Liberals ^^^ ^^ newspapers edited by university men. Student socie- ties kept alive the exalted feelings for unity aroused by the wars with Napoleon, and were ardently patriotic and democratic in sentiment. In the year 1817 a large number of delegates from these student socie- ties in the various universities held a patriotic festival at the Wart- burg, a castle famous in connection with the career of Martin Luther. Their festival was religious as well as patriotic and was a com- Wartburg memoration of the battle of Leipsic and of the Reformation. Festival j^^ members partook of the Lord's Supper together and listened to impassioned speeches commemorating the great moments WIDESPREAD DISCONTENT IN GERMANY 323 in German history. They showed their enthusiastic admiration of the Duke of Weimar. In the evening they built a bonfire and threw into it various symbols of the hated reaction, notably an illiberal pamphlet of which the King of Prussia had expressed his approval. Such was the Wartburg Festival, which Metternich described in gloomy language to the rulers of Germany. Somewhat later a stu- dent killed a journalist and playwright, Kotzebue (kot'-se-bo), who was hated in university circles as a Russian spy. 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. He secured the passage by the fright- ened princes of the Carlsbad Decrees (1819). These decrees were rushed through the Diet by illegal and violent methods. By xhe Carlsbad them Metternich became the conqueror of the Confederation. Decrees They were the work of Austria, seconded by Prussia. They signified in German history the suppression of liberty for a generation. They really determined the political system of Germany until 1848. They provided for a vigorous censorship of the press, and subjected the professors and students of the universities to a close government supervision. All teachers who should propagate "harmful doc- trines," that is, who should in any way criticize Metternich's ideas of government, should be removed from their positions and once so removed could not be appointed to any other positions in Germany. The student societies were suppressed. Any student expelled from one university was not to be admitted into any other. By these provisions it was expected that the entire academic community, professors and students, would be reduced to silence. Another provision was directed against the establishment of any further constitutions of a popular character. Thus free parliaments, free- dom of the press, freedom of teaching, and free speech were out- lawed. The Carlsbad Decrees represent an important turning point in the history of Central Europe. They signalized the dominance of Metternich in Germany as well as in Austria. Prussia now docilely followed Austrian leadership, abandoning all liberal the order policies. The King, Frederick William III, had, in his hour pf the day in Germany of need, promised a constitution to Prussia. He never kept this promise. On the other hand, he inaugurated a peculiarly odious persecution of all Liberals, which was marked by many acts as inane 324 THE CONGRESSES as they were cruel. Prussia entered upon a dull, drab period of oppression. Let us now see how the same ideas were applied in otlier countries. In 1 80S Napoleon had, as we have seen, seized the crown of Spain, and until 18 14 had kept the Spanish King, Ferdinand MI, virtually a Aco&stitn- prisoner m France, placing his own brother Joseph on tlie tionai vacant tlirone. The Spaniards rose against tlie usurper and monarchy ^^^ years carried on a vigorous guerrilla warfare, aided by the English, and ending rinally in success. As their King was in the hands of the enem}' the}' proceeded in his name to frame a govern- ment. Being liberal-minded tliey drew up a constitution, the famous Constitution of 181 2, which was closely modeled on tlie French Constitution of 1791. It asserted the sovereignty^ of the people, thus discarding the rival theory' of the monarchy bj' divine right Ferdinand which had hitlierto been the accepted basis of the Spanish vn 1814- state. This democratic document, however, did not have long ^^ to live, as Ferdinand, on his retuni to Spain after the o\-er- throw of Napoleon, immediately suppressed it and embarked upon a polic}' of angry reaction. The press was gagged. Books of a liberal character were destroj'ed wherever found, aiid particularh' all copies of the constitution. Thousands of political prisoners were severely punished. \^igorous and efficient in stamping out all liberal ideas, the govern- ment of Ferdinand was indolent and incompetent in otiier matters. Inefficiency Spain, a country of about eleven million people, was wretchedly of the gov- poor and ignorant. The government, however, made no emmen attempt to improve conditions. Moreover it failed to dis- charge the most fundamental duty of any government, that is, to preserve the mtegritj' of the empire. The Spanish colonies in America had been for several years in revolt against the mother countn,' and the government had made no serious efforts to put down tiie rebellion. Such conditions, of course, aroused great discontent. The army particularly was angn,' at the treatment it had received and became a Revolution breeding place of conspiracies. A military- uprising occurred of i8ao in 1820 which swept ever\-tliing before it and which forced the Iving to restore tiie Constitution of 1S12 and to promise hence- REACTION IN SPAIN AND ITALY 325 forth to govern in accordance with its provisions. The text of 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 monarch}', 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, like other countries, had been profoundly affected by the liberal ideas of the French Revolution, and particularly by the restless activity of Napoleon, who, from the beginning of his career ^^^ ^j ^^ to its close, had drawn her within the range of his policies awakens and manipulations. At first the Italians had hailed him as ^'^^^ the looked-for deliverer from oppression, a feeling that gave way to hatred when the youthful conqueror set up, in the place of the despotism overthrown, a despotism more severe, although at the same time more intelligent. For many years the fate of Italy was determined by his will. He did much to improve the laws, much to stimulate industry, much to break up musty old habits and conventions. New ideas, political and social, penetrated the peninsula with him. He shook the Italians out of their som- nolence and imparted to them an energy they had not known for centuries. But he offended them by his heavy exactions of men and money for his constant wars, by his shameless robbery of their works of art, and by his treatment of the Pope. Then he fell, and the Congress of Vienna restored most of the old states which had existed before he first came into Italy. There were henceforth ten of them : Piedmont, Lombardy-Venetia, ^j^^ ^^^ Parma, Modena, Lucca, Tuscany, the Papal States, Naples, Italian Monaco, and San Marino. Genoa and Venice, until re- ^***^^ cently independent republics, were not restored, as republics were not "fashionable." The one was given to Piedmont, the other to Austria. These states were too small to be self-sufficient, and as a result Italy was for nearly fifty years the sport of foreign powers, dependent, 326 THE CONGRESSES 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 after the fall of Napoleon. Austria was given outright the richest part of the nance of Po Valley as a Lombardo-Venetian kingdom. Austrian Austria in princes or princesses ruled over the duchies of 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 pygmies. Thus the restoration was accomplished. Italy became again a col- lection of small states, largely under the dominance of Austria. Each of the restored princes was an absolute monarch. In none of the states was there a parliament. Italy had neither unity nor constitutional forms, nor any semblance of popular participation in the government. The use which the restored princes made of their unfettered liberty of action was significant. Hating the French, they undertook to extinguish all reminders of that odious people. They abolished all constitutions and many laws and institutions of French origin. Vaccination and gas illu- reaction^ mination were forbidden for the simple reason that the French had introduced them. In Piedmont French plants in the Botanic Gardens of Turin were torn up, French furniture in the royal palace was destroyed in response to this vigorous and infantile emo- tion. In every one of the states there was distinct retrogression and the Italians lost ground all along the line — politically, industrially, socially. In general the Inquisition was restored. Education was handed over to the clergy. The course of studie.^ was carefully purged of everything that might be dangerous. The police paid particular attention to "the class called thinkers." Thus Italy was ruled by petty despots and in a petty spirit. More- over most of the princes took their cue from Austria, the nature of whose policies we have already examined. The natural result of REVOLUTION IN NAPLES 327 such conditions was deep and widespread discontent. All the pro- gressive elements of the population which believed in freedom in education, in religion, in business were disaffected, as were also widespread many who were dismissed from the army or from governmental discontent positions on the ground that they had been contaminated with the previous French regime. The discontented joined the Carbonari, a secret society, and bided their time. That time came when the news reached Italy of the successful and bloodless Spanish Revolution of 1820. In Naples a military insur- rection broke out. The revolutionists demanded the Spanish ^^^ ^^ ^^ Constitution of 1812, not because they knew much about it tionofiSio but because it was very democratic and possessed the advan- "* ^^ ^^ tage of being ready-made. The King immediately yielded and the constitution was proclaimed. THE 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 constitu- tions that were thoroughly saturated with the principles of Revolu- tionary France. There had likewise been a revolution against the established regime in Portugal. There was shortly to be one in Piedmont. Metternich, the most influential personage in Europe, who felt the world resting on his shoulders, had very clear views as to the require- ments of the situation that had arisen. Anything that The powers threatened the peace of Europe was a very proper thing for a prepare to European congress to discuss. A revolution in one country these revo- may encourage a revolution in another and thus the world, set •"*'°'*^ in order by the Congress of Vienna, may soon find itself in conflagra- tion once more, the established order everywhere threatened. Met- ternich recommended as a sure cure the doctrine of the "right ^j^^ .^^ of interventioiij" a doctrine new in international law but of which he succeeded in having applied for several 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 inter- vene 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 328 THE CONGRESSES Ptate, even against the will of the sovereign of that state, in the Mterests of the established monarchical order. A change of govern- ment within a given state was not a domestic but an international affair. . Metternich won the support of Russia, Prussia, and Austria for this doctrine, which virtually denied the independence of every nation, the . right of the people of any state to change their form of govern- and the Holy mcnt to any Other model than that of absolute monarchy. Alliance These were the original "Holy Allies," all absolute monarchs, and it was their steady, undeviating support of the ominous principle which made the Holy Alliance a synonym everywhere for tyranny, odious to all liberals in Europe and America. A Congress was held at Troppau in 1820 and at Laibach in 1821 to consider the question of Naples. It was participated in by the three powers mentioned and by France and England. The two grass of last named did not join in the declaration of the new doctrine, Troppau ^^^ ^-^^^ remained passive and the absolute powers, Austria, Prussia, and Russia, had their way. They commissioned Austria to send an army into the Kingdom of Naples, to abolish the consti- tution, and to restore absolutism. This was done. The results were for the Neapolitans most deplorable. The reaction that ensued was unrestrained. Hundreds were imprisoned, exiled, executed. Arbitrary government of the worst kind was meted out to this unfortunate people. Just as this Neapolitan revolution was being snuffed out a similar revolution blazed up at the opposite end of the peninsula, in Pied- mont, the revolutionists demanding the Spanish Constitu- The revo- ' a f lution in tion of i8i2, as the most liberal one they knew of, and war Pie mont against Austria as the great enemy of Piedmont and Italy. The King, Victor Emanuel I, rather than yield to the demand for a revolution, abdicated and was succeeded by his brother, Charles Felix (March 13, 182 1). The new King was a despot by nature and he now had the support of the same powers that had shown their intentions in regard to revolutions. Charles Felix, assisted by the Austrians, routed the revolutionists at Novara. The revolution was over. Once more the demand for constitutional freedom had been suppressed, once more Metternich had triumphed. Needless to say he was quite satisfied. " I see the dawn of a better day," he wrote. "Heaven seems to will it that the world shall not be lost." TRIUMPHS OF THE HOLY ALLIANCE 329 The two Italian revolutions had been suppressed. The doctrine of intervention was working satisfactorily to its authors. It was now applied again, this time to Spain, in which country, as we ^j^^ ^^^ have seen, the revolutionary movement of these years had gress of begun. The consideration of Spanish affairs had had to give way to the more immediate and pressing affairs of Italy. The principle there, however, was the same and the Allies now prepared to assert it. This was the work of the Congress of Verona (1822). Austria, Russia, and Prussia regarded a constitutional government in Spain as a menace to their own system of absolutism. They there- fore commissioned France, now a thoroughly reactionary country, to restore Ferdinand to his former power. England opposed this policy with high indignation, but in vain. The French sent an army of a hundred thousand men into the peninsula, which was easily victorious. The war was soon over and Ferdinand was back on his absolute throne, by act of France, supported by the Holy Alliance. There now began a period of odious reaction. All the acts passed by the Cortes since 1820 were annulled. An organization called the "Society of the Exterminating Angel" began a mad hunt Reaction in j for Liberals, throwing them into prison, shooting them down. ^p^'° The war of revenge knew no bounds. "Juntas of Purification" urged it on. Thousands were driven from the country, hundreds were executed. The French government, ashamed of its protege, endeavored to stop the savagerj^ but with slight success. It is an odious chapter in the history of Spain. The Holy Alliance, by these triumphs in Naples, Piedmont, and Spain, showed itself the dominant force in European politics. The system, named after Metternich, because his diplomacy had triumph of built it up and because he stood in the very center of it, seemed *J|^. ^^'y firmly established as the European system. But it had achieved its last notable triumph. It was now to receive a series of checks which were to limit it forever. Having restored absolutism in Spain the Holy Allies considered re- storing to Spain her revolted American colonies. In this purpose they encountered the pronounced opposition of England and the United States, both of which were willing that Spain herself Alliance and should try to recover them but not that the Holy Alliance ^^^ Monroe ■' -^ Doctrine should recover them for her. As England controlled the seas she could prevent the Alliance from sending troops to the scene of 9 330 THE CONGRESSES revolt. The President of the United States, James Monroe, in a message to Congress (December 2, 1823), destined to become one of the most famous documents ever written in the White House, an- nounced that we should consider any attempt on the part of these absolute monarchs to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety, as the "manifesta- tion of an unfriendly disposition toward the United States. "1/ This attitude of England and the United States produced its effect. After this no new laurels were added to the Holy Alliance. A few years later Russia was herself encouraging and supporting a revolu- tion on the part of the Greeks against the Turks, and in 1830 revolu- tions broke out in France and Belgium which demolished the system of Metternich beyond all possible repair. REFERENCES Congress of Vienna : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 380-387, 41 1- 418; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution of Prussia, pp. 256-276; Sybel, The Founding of the German Empire, Vol. I, Chap. Ill ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. IX, Chaps. XIX and XXI. Reaction in Germany after 1815 : Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, Chap. VIII, pp. 324-343 ; Marriott and Robertson, Chap. IX, pp. 277- 304 ; Schevill, The Making of Modern Germany, pp. 99-1 14 ; Fyffe, pp. 446-469 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XI, pp. 340-382. Reaction in Italy after 1815: Probyn, Italy, 1815 to 1870, pp. 1-27; Bolton King, A History of Italian Unity, Vol. I, Chaps. III-V; Thayer, Dawn of Italian Independence, Vol. I, pp. 139-31 1 ; Stillman, Unity of Italy, pp. 1-40; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. IV, pp. 104-130. Reaction in Spain after 181 5: Butler Clarke, Modern Spain, Chaps. II and III ; Hume, Modern Spain, Chap. V ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 205-230. The Congresses : Fyffe, pp. 478-524 ; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 57-134 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe since 1814, pp. 747-762 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. I, pp. 1-39. CHAPTER XV THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION While the tremendous changes from the institutions of the old regime to those of the modern were being accomplished amid the turbulence of the French Revolution and the Napoleonic wars, other changes of vast though incalculable significance were being accom- plished silently in the economic life of that country which was the one constant enemy of France and Napoleon, namely, England. Indeed England's ability to endure the strain of the long struggle with her enemy across the channel, and in the end to emerge victo- rious, was owing to this generally unnoticed but radical transformation in the conditions of English industry, in the methods used by English- men in earning their living, in creating wealth. These changes, first occurring in Great Britain and later adopted on the Continent, began in the last quarter of the eighteenth century and had been going on ever since. They constitute what has been appropriately called the Industrial Revolution. THE AGE OF STEAM The transformation of industry and commerce accomplished since George III came to the throne in 1760 is unique in the history of the world, a transformation so sweeping that in this respect the present age differs more from that of George III than did T^^ . . invention his from that of Rameses II. This transformation has been of the the result of a long series of discoveries and inventions. Among e^gj™ these one stands preeminent, 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. Steam engines had been in existence since early in the eighteenth century, the invention of a mechanic named Newcomen. But they were poorly constructed, wasteful in their use of fuel. 331 332 THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION The device of Newcomen was studied and so greatly improved by James Watt (1736-18 19) that he is generally considered the inventor of the steam engine. He made it a practical machine, and thereby inaugurated a new age, the age of steam. Consider for an instant the significance of the new agency. Up to the advent of the age of steam, industry and commerce were The dom ti essentially what they had been for many centuries. Pre- system of viously the only motive force had come from animal strength, pro uction ^^^ from wind and falling water exploited by windmills and water-wheels. Mankind had very few machines, but manufacture was literally, as the word indicates, production by hand and was carried on in small shops generally connected with the home of the manu- facturer. There, in the midst of a few workmen, the proprietor himself worked. The implements were few, the relation of master and journeyman and apprentice intimate and constant, the dif- ferences of their conditions comparatively slight. Industry was truly domestic. 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, bridges were woefully infrequent, so that traveler and cart were stopped by rivers, over which they were carried slowly, and often with danger, by boats and 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 1812, 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 thou- sand 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, commanding all the resources of his time, could do no better, of course the average traveler moved much more slowly and merchandise more slowly still. The transmission of information could not be more rapid than the means of locomotion. The postal service was primitive, postage THE TEXTILE INDUSTRIES 333 was high and very variable, and was paid by the receiver. In France, after 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 railroads, 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. VARIOUS APPLICATIONS OF THE STEAM ENGINE Into this world of small industries and limited commerce came the revolutionary steam engine, destined to effect an economic transformation unparalleled in the history of the race. It invention of was applied to industry, then to commerce. First employed machinery in mining, it was early adopted by the manufacturers of textUe^ cotton and woolen goods to give the force for the inventions "i^ustnes of Crompton and Arkwright and Hargreaves and Cartwright, in- ventions which succeeded each other rapidly after 1767, and which completely revolutionized one of the world's basic industries, textile manufacturing. The making of cloth consists of two main processes, first the spmning of the thread out of the raw material, cotton, wool, or flax, then the weaving of the thread into a solid fabric, cloth, spinning The art of spinning had been known for ages, but it had not ^^^ weaving greatly developed. By the distafif and spindle, or by the spinning wheel, a person could make a thread, but he could only make one thread at a time. In 1767 James Hargreaves, an English spinner, invented the so-called spinning jenny which enabled him to make eight or ten threads at once, thus doing the work of eight or ten men. In 1769 Richard Arkwright invented a "water frame" or a . , . ^ , Arkwright s machine which spun a stronger and firmer thread and which, • water moreover, was immensely more productive as it was run by aniTthe water power instead of by hand or foot. But Arkwright's factory machines were so heavy that they had to be installed in ^^^ ^™ special buildings or factories. Later inventions resulted in machines spinning two hundred threads at the same time. At this rate spin- ning outdistanced weaving and improvements must be made in the processes of weaving or this enormous increase in the output of thread could not be utilized. The crying need produced the man to solve it. Dr. Edmund Cartwright, a clergyman, constructed a 334 THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION self-acting loom, run by water power, and increasing greatly the rapidity with which weaving could be done. Since these revolutionary innovations of the eighteenth century in the arts of spinning and weaving, other inventions too numerous to mention have been made, perfecting and facilitating every part of the general process of textile manufacture. A single machine now does the work which formerly required the labor of a hundred or two hundred men. What was thus accomplished in the textile industries was later accomplished in others, particularly in the manufacture of iron. Machinery Wherever possible the machine was substituted for the human to fhelron being. A single individual could tend many machines and thus industry several other individuals were released for other work. The productive power of the race was greatly, in some lines fabulously, augmented. It was inevitable that these improved processes would be applied on a larger and larger scale and to more and more branches of activity and that the grand total of manufactured articles would exceed the wildest imaginations of men. But no sooner did machines become common than it was seen that a new motive force was necessary to run them. They were usually too heavy to be operated by human strength, by the The steam i i r -^ r • i i engine arm or by the foot. Moreover wmd and water power were fndustr *° restricted in amount and were precarious. The wind might cease, the river might run dry. The new industry that was developing needed a new motive force, always procurable, inexhaust- ible in amount, and capable of easy regulation. This new force was, as already indicated, at hand, — steam, now rendered available for the new and enormous work by the inventions of James Watt. The steam engine became the center of the modern factory system of production, the throbbing heart of every industry. The machine superseded the hand of man as the chief element in production, increasing the output ultimately in certain lines a hundred, even a thousand-fold. Domestic industry waned and disappeared. Manu- facturing became concentrated in large establishments employing hundreds of men, and ultimately thousands. And this concentration of industry caused the rapid growth of cities, one of the characteristic features of the nineteenth century. But there was a limit imposed upon the utility of the steam engine in industry. Production on the large scale involved necessarily two INVENTION OF THE STEAMBOAT 335 other factors — ■ larger sources of supply from which to draw the raw materials, larger markets for the finished products. Right here the inadequate means of communication called halt. The neces- ,. ^ , ^ . applied to sity for improvement was imperative. A single illustration is transporta- suiftcient evidence. The port of Liverpool and the great manu- *'°° facturing city of Manchester were separated by only about thirty miles. Three canals connected them, yet traffic on them was so congested that it sometimes took a month for cotton to reach the factories from the sea. The new machine industry was in danger of strangulation. IVIoreover the size of cities was conditioned upon the ability to procure food supplies, an ability strictly limited by the existing methods of transportation. The steam engine, applied to locomotion, came to the rescue of the steam engine applied to looms and spindles. And first to locomotion on water. Fulton's steamboat, the Clermont, leav- steam ing New York August 7, 1807, arrived at Albany, a hundred navigation and fifty miles distant, in thirty-two hours. The practicabiUty of steam navigation was thus, after much experimenting, definitely established. But steam navigation only slowl}^ eclipsed navigation by sail. In 18 14 there were only two steamers, with a tonnage of 426 tons, in the whole British Empire. In 1816 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 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. 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 ultimately constituting veritable fleets and serving all parts of the globe. But more important still was the application of steam to locomo- tion on land, the invention of the railroad. This, like most inven- tions, was a slow growth. In the mines and quarries of England carts 3J;6 THE IXDUSTRIAI. RK\ Ol.UTION had for sv^me time been d^aw^l on mils made at rin>t ot wxxxi. later of iron. It was found that horses cx>uld thus draw much heavier inv^ntioa l^^^ds. the ftiction of the wheel being reduced. The next step of the was to substitute the steam engine for the horse. Several men «iirv>*d ^,^^ stud\"ing this problem in the early nineteenth centur\ . William Heviley. chief engineer of a collier}* near Newcastle, con- structed in iSi3. a locomotive. Pumn^ Bi7/\. which worked fairly well. The sigiiiticance of George Stephenson lies in the f-act that by his inventions and impR^vements. extending tha^ugh many years, he made it "actually cheaper/" to use his o\\n\ woais. "for the poor man to go by steam than to walk." His first locomotive, con- structed in 1S14. proved capable of hauling cxxil at the rate of three miles an hour, but at such a rate was riot commercially \-aluable. He perfected his machine by increasing the power of the boiler so that the RiKir^i was able to make thirty miles an hour at the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester railway in 1S30. The experimental stage was over. The railway was a proved success. Construction began fortliwith and has continued ever sint>?. The development of the new means of loo>motion has pnx^eeded with the development of chemistn,-, metallurgy, mechanic?, engineering, electricity. Rails have been consrantly improved. kxx>motives augmented in drawing power, bridges flung over rivers and ravines, tunnels cut thaiugh mounrains. Navigation, too, has had its record of triumph. Steam- ships, phnng 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 d\ose in e^tistence during all the previous historv* of mankii\d. They represent not a difference of degree, but of kind. The Industrial Revolution, begun in the closing quarter of the eighteenth centun*. has been in progress ever since. It had pav greased far in England by the time of the overthrow of Napoleon and it had been one of tlie causes of England's tinal victory- beoiuse of the great increase in wealth which it had brought her. This union of machiner\- with steam power multiplied tremendously the resources of mankind. Gradually the new methods, the new system of pro- duction, have been introduced into other countries, first into France, after 1S15. cmd later into Germany. There were several important consequences of the new system, some of which have already been indicated. Till': CllAXC.HD STATUS OF LABOR 337 rili: FACTORY SYSTEM OF PRODUCTION The Industrial Revolution meant a chanf^e from home work to factory work. Freviously spinning, weaving, and other industries had been carried on in homes or in small shops and frequently ^^^^ all the members of the family, not only the men but the system women and the children, took part in the process. The head ^"pp'*°'«^ of the group himself owned the tools outright, bought the raw materials, and marketed the produce. It was truly a "domestic system" of manufacture, offering in general no great rewards, but insuring a sound and healthy life under conditions favorable for the development of mind and body. Under the new system, the work- ers must leave home for the day's labor, were gathered together in large numbers in factories which were at first poorly ventilated conditions and poorly lighted, and were frequently exposed to condi- of the tions that endangered health. They no longer owned their ^"[1,^^ own shops and tools, for the new factories were too large, the factory new machines too expensive, for any but the rich to own. ^^^ Thus the independent worker became a wage earner, selling his labor to another, and forced to sell it, if he would avoid starvation. Under the factory system women and children became competitors of the men, as they could tend the machines in most industries as well as the men, and would accept lower wages. This dislocation of the family from the home to the factory brought with it many evils and abuses, as did also the long hours of labor, and the frequent lack of employ- ment, owing to causes which the worker could not control, such as bad management of the business or glutting of the market. An entirely new set of problems arose out of the factory system, problems which will appear frequently in the course of this narrative, some of which have been solved more or less satisfactorily. Others await solution. Of course the great advantage of the factory system is that it has enabled men to produce in immensely greater quantities the necessities and comforts and even the luxuries of life. The xhe application of machinery to production, in agriculture, in manu- advantages facture, in transportation, has increased vastly the quantity factory and reduced the price of most commodities. Many products system 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, Ibut the higher standard begets a desire for a standard higher still. 338 THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION But while this was and is a feature of the new system of pro- duction, its disadvantages to all but a few were more apparent in Significant the eighteenth and early nineteenth century. By differentiat- efifects ing more sharply than they had been differentiated before the two classes engaged in the process of production, namely the wage earners and the capitalists, the factory system raised a large number of difficult, contentious questions concerning the relations of capital and labor, questions that have preoccupied and perplexed the world for a full century and whose solution is not yet in sight. By collecting together in large factories hundreds and even thousands of men, women, and children, who had previously worked in small shgps or at home, it created grave problems concerning the health and morals and mental development of the workers. By bringing the workers together it caused them to know each other better, to sympathize more with each other, and it inevitably led them to organize into unions for the protection and furtherance of their collective and individual interests. By bringing about a more and more minute subdivision of labor, eighty or a hundred persons, for instance, being employed in making the different parts of a shoe where formerly under the old system of hand labor the shoemaker made the entire shoe, the factory system has greatly multiplied the output by increasing the dexterity of the individual laborer, who, however, repeating the same motions over and over again finds his work less interesting, more tedious — which is one of the reasons why he demands a shorter working day. But by increasing the output it has reduced prices and brought many commodities within the reach of the laboring man which previously were quite beyond it. By building up large factory towns, by encouraging emigration from the country to the city, the factory system has affected municipal life profoundly, introducing new factors into politics, both local and national. Many were the good features of the new industrial regime, many the evil. That regime has gone on steadily developing ever since it was introduced in the eighteenth century for the reason that it offered more to humanity than the system it displaced. But on the other hand the undeniable evils which it brought in its train have aroused a more and more determined and more and more widespread discontent and opposition, and a prolonged, varied, and increasingly successful campaign against those evils has been, as we shall see, one of the conspicuous features of modern history. CHAPTER XVI AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND The French Revolution had set m motion a wave of salutary reform which swept away numberless abuses, and demolished or trans- formed outworn and harmful institutions, not only in France, but in other European states. To the credit of the Revolution influence of is therefore due a decided improvement in the conditions of *^^^ French life in many countries, notably in France, Germany, and Italy. But upon one country its effect was wholly unfortunate. England had long needed a thoroughgoing reorganization of her institutions and policies, if they were to conform to even an elementary concep- tion of, justice. The ablest writers and thinkers had long ago indicated in unambiguous language the changes that were influence required and that were feasible, and a statesman like William "pon Pitt had recognized the force of their criticisms and was dis- °^^° posed to undertake the work of quickening the national life by breath- ing a new spirit into it. Then came the Revolution, enthusiastically hailed at first by the more liberal-minded as the dawn of a new and happier era. But conservative Englishmen were outraged by the attacks of the French upon property rights and social discriminations and when the excesses of the Revolution came, the vast majority of them were frightened by the very idea of change. Would ^j^^ ^^^g not any reform lead to the same excesses in England ? This was conservatism the chord all English conservatives, led by the rhetorical ° °^ ^'^ Edmund Burke, continually harped upon. The result was that reform had no chance in England from 1793 to 181 5, that changes which would have been an unqualified blessing were delayed for a whole generation. Even after the long war with France was over and the battle of W'aterloo was won, the same unreasonable dread of any change continued and the same attitude of stiff, implacable opposition to all reform. This unbending, undeviating hostility to all change on the 339 340 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND part of the British ParUament, controlled during all this period by the Tory party, is easily understood when we come to examine land of^ the the Structure of English institutions and English public and Old Regime private life. The Revolution proclaimed the doctrine of equality and proceeded to abolish privilege. But England was con- spicuously a land of privilege, of glaring discriminations between social classes, a land emphatically of the Old Regime. Inequality, of a pronounced character, reigned in church and state and school. SOCIAL AND POLITICAL STATUS OF ENGLAND Power rested with the aristocracy, composed of the nobility and the gentry. The "local self-government" of England, so much praised and idealized abroad, as if it were government of the people Commanding ' ° t^ f position of by the people, did not exist. In the county governments t eno ity the local nobility filled most of the important offices; in the borough governments their influence was generally decisive. In the national government, that is, in Parliament, the aristocracy was solidly intrenched. The House of Lords was composed almost exclusively of large landed proprietors. This was the very bulwark of the dominant social class. But the House of Commons was another stronghold hardly less secure. This body, generally sup- posed to represent the commoners of England, conspicuously failed to do so. Its composition was truly extraordinary. The House of Commons in 1815 consisted of 658 members : 489 of these were returned by England, 100 by Ireland, 45 by Scotland, 24 by The House Wales. There were three kinds of constituencies, the counties, of Commons ^^g boroughs, and the 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 The system small county, a large borough and a small borough, had tation"^^^*" 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 re- tained 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 THE SUFFRAGE IN GREAT BRITAIN 341 increasing and was also shifting greatly from old centers to new. A growing 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 Cornwall. The Old Parliament Buildings. Burned in 1834 After an aquatint by R. Ha veil. The suffrage in the counties was uniform, and was enjoyed by those who owned land yielding them an income of forty shillings a year. But as this worked out it gave a very restricted suffrage. The The county county voters were chiefly the men who had large country suffrage estates, and their dependents. Counties in which there were so few voters could be easily controlled by the wealthy landowners. In all Scotland there were not three thousand county voters ; yet the population of Scotland was nearly two millions. Fife had 240 voters, Cromarty, 9. The climax was reached in Bute, where there were 21 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 342 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND election meeting of that county. He constituted himself chairman, nominated himself, called the list of voters, and declared himself elected to Parliament. Such was the situation in the counties of Great Britain, which re- turned 1 86 members to the House of Commons. But more important were the boroughs, which returned 467 members.^ In the boroughs. The suffrage too, the influence of the landowning and wealthy class was in boroughs even greater and more decisive than in the counties. The boroughs were of several kinds or types — nomination boroughs, rotten or close boroughs, boroughs in which there was a considerable body of voters, boroughs in which the suffrage was almost demo- cratic. It was the existence of the first two classes that contributed Nomination the most to the popular demand for the reform of the House, boroughs jj^ ^]^g 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, representation 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 Dunwich had long been submerged beneath the sea ; yet these places, entirely without inhabitants, still had two members each in the House of Commons, 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 by the corporation, that is, by the mayor and aldermen, or the suffrage was Rotten ill the hands of voters, who, however, were so few, from a boroughs dozen to fifty in many cases,^ 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. It has been stated that in 1793, 245 members were notori- ously returned by the influence of 128 peers. Thus peers, themselves 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, 1 The universities returned 5 members. 2 Ninety members represented places of less than 50 voters each. THE REPRESENTATIVE SYSTEM 343 four apiece. Some would sell their appointments to the highest bidder. Some of the most honorable and useful members bought their seats as the only way of getting into Parliament on an inde- pendent basis, though they utterly detested the system. Thus at that time a considerable majority of the members of the House of Commons was returned through the influence of a small body of men who at the same time controlled the other House. There were some boroughs with a fairly large or even democratic electorate. Here bribery was resorted to by the rich, which was easily possible and greatly encouraged by the fact that the polls were kept open for fifteen days. On the other hand there were large cities like Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds, Sheffield, which had no unrepre- representation at all in the House of Commons, although they sented cities had a population of seventy-five or a hundred thousand or more. Well might the younger Pitt exclaim : "This House is not the repre- sentation 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 government of England was not representative, but was oligarchical. Closely identified with the State, and, like the State, thoroughly permeated with the principle of special privileges, was another body, the Church of England. Though there was absolute reli- .^j^^ gious liberty in Great Britain, though men might worship as Established 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 dissented 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 and humiliating. He had to pay taxes for the ^. ^ ' -^ Dissenters 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 clergyman of that church, unless he were a Quaker or a Jew. There was no such thing as civil marriage, or marriage by dissenting clergymen. A Roman Catholic or a Dissenter could not graduate from Cambridge, 344 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND could not even enter Oxford, owing to the religious tests exacted, which only Anglicans could meet. The natural result of the suprem- acy of this church was that those entered it who were influenced by self-interest, who were ambitious for political preferment, for social advancement, or for an Oxford or Cambridge education for their sons. It was " ungentlemanlike " to be a Dissenter. The great institutions of England, therefore, were controlled by the rich, and in the interest of the rich. Legislation favored the powerful, the landed nobility, and the wealthy class of manufacturers that was growing up, whose interests were similar. The immense mass of The people the people received scant consideration. Their education was neglected woefuUy neglected. Probably three-fourths of the children of England did not receive the slightest instruction. Laborers were for- bidden 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 interest of the landowners. The reverse side of the picture of English greatness and power and prosperity was gloomy in the extreme. England was in need of sweeping and numerous reforms to meet the demands of modern liberalism, whether in politics or economics or in social institutions. The demand for reform, checked by the Revolution and by the long struggle with France, was resumed after the final victory over Napoleon at Waterloo. It drew its main strength from the distress'^* deep and widespread wretchedness of the people. For, con- ^'^^ trary to all expectations, peace did not bring happiness and prosperity, but rather intense suffering and hatred of class against class. Manufacturers were obliged to discharge thousands of workmen, because the demand for British goods fell off after the Lack of peace, owing to the resumption of manufacturing in the conti- empioyment ncntal countries. At the time when the number of laborers was greater than the demand, 200,000 or more men were added to the labor market by the reduction of the army and navy. Further- more, the next few years saw a series of bad harvests. By these and by the Corn Law of 1815, bread was made dearer. Add also the fact that the modem industrial or factory system was painfully sup- planting the old system of household industries and temporarily throwing multitudes out of employment, or employing them under hard, even inhuman conditions, and it is not difficult to understand the widespread, desperate discontent of the mass of the population. BEGINNINGS OF THE REFORM MOVEMENT 345 Parliament, an 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. AN ERA OF REFORMS The demand for reforms came primarily from the poor and dis- heartened masses, who possessed a remarkable leader in the person of William Cobbett, the son of an agricultural laborer. For wiiiiam some years Cobbett had published a liberal periodical called Cobbett " The Weekly Political Register,'' in which he had opposed the Govern- ment. In 1 8 16 he reduced the price of his paper from a shilling to twopence, made his appeal directl}^ to the laboring class, and became their guide and spokesman. The efifect 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 classes. He was a great democratic leader, a powerful popular editor, a pugnacious and venomous opponent of the existing regime, a champion of the cause of parliamentary reform. For Cobbett persuaded the working people that they must first get the right to Vote before they could get social arid economic reforms. Parliamentary reform must have precedence. Let the people Pariiamen- get political power, let them change Parliament from the organ '^""y reform of 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 leaders appeared, also, and a considerable fermentation of ideas among the unpropertied and working classes characterized these years. But against these demands of the disinherited the Tory part}^ hard- ened its heart. Scenting in every popular movement a new French Revolution it made no attempt to study or remove grievances but was resolved to go to any length to stamp out the troublesome spirit of unrest by force. This period of sorry reaction culminated in the 346 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act, a grave measure which only the direst necessity could justify ; also in the passage of so-called Gag _ . Laws which stringently restricted the freedom of speech, of the Suspension . . . f i of Habeas press, and of public meeting and discussion which had long °^^^ been the boast of England. This period of harsh government, of repressive legislation, which encroached gravely upon the traditional liberties of the British people, lasted for about five years after Waterloo. In 1820 George III died at the age of eighty-one. He had for Death of many years been insane, and the regency had been exercised by George III j^jg ggn, who now became George IV and who reigned from 1820 to 1830. After 1820 a change gradually came over the political life of Eng- land. The Tory party still maintained its great majority in Parlia- ment but 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, particularly by Canning, Peel, and Huskisson, who were able to make the Tory party an engine of partial reform. Canning, as Foreign Secretary, freed England's foreign policy from all connection with the Holy Alliance. He boldly Defiance of asserted the doctrine that each nation is free to determine the Holy its own form of government, which doctrine was the direct opposite of that of Metternich. Huskisson's reforms were economic and aimed at the liberation of commerce, by removing some of the restrictions which had been thrown around the carrying trade, by reducing tariff duties on many articles of import, and by greatly simplifying the administration of the tariff system. Sir Robert Peel undertook at this time the reform of the Penal Code. That code was a disgrace to England and placed her far The Penal behind France and other countries. The punishment of death Code re- could be legally inflicted for about two hundred offenses — °^^^ for picking pockets, 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. In 1823 the death penalty was abolished in about a hundred cases. Another reform of these years lay in the direction of greater reli- gious liberty. The disabilities from which Protestant dissenters suffered were removed in 1828 by the abrogation of the requirement that all office holders should take the sacrament according to the PARLIAMENTARY REFORM 347 rites of the Church of England and should make a declaration against the doctrine of transubstantiation. In the following year, after a long and bitter controversy which went to the very . , ... , verge of civil war, Parliament redressed the grievances of the religious Catholics by the passage of the Catholic Emancipation Act '^^^^^'^les which permitted Catholics henceforth to sit in either house of Parlia- ment and to hold, with a few exceptions, any municipal or national office. This act established real political equality be- emancipation tween Catholics and Protestants. The reforms that have just been described were carried through by the Tory party. There was one reform, however, more fundamental and important, which it was clear that that party would never Tory oppo- concede, the reform of Parliament itself. The significant reform*o/^^ features of the parliamentary system have already been de- Parliament scribed. 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 pos- sible the great reform. George IV died on June 26, 1830, and was succeeded by his brother William IV (1830- 1837). The death of the monarch necessitated a new election of Parliament. The election resulted in a Tory loss of fifty members in the House of Commons. The Duke of Wellington was shortly forced to resign and the Whigs came in. Thus was broken the control the Tory party had exercised, with one slight interruption, for forty-six years. THE FIRST REFORM BILL Earl Grey, who for forty years had demanded parliamentary re- form, now became prime minister. A ministry was formed with ease, and included many able men — Durham, Russell, Brougham, jntj-o^uced Palmerston, Stanley, Melbourne — and on March i, 1831, a by Lord John 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, decayed 348 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND Passing of the Reform Bill in the House of Lords From an engraving after the painting by Sir Joshua Reynolds THE FIRST REFORM BILL 349 boroughs and its bestowal upon large and wealthy towns hitherto without it. The bill amazed the House by its comprehensive character and encouraged the reformers. Neither side had expected so sweeping a change. The introduction of the bill precipitated a remarkable par- liamentary discussion, which continued with some intervals for over fifteen months, from March i, 1831, to June 5, 1832. Lord John Russell in his introduction of the measure, after stating that the theory of the British Constitution was no taxation without representation, and after showing that in former times Parliament had been truly representative, said that it was no longer so. "A stranger who was told that this country is unparalleled in wealth and in- dustry, and more civilized and more enlightened than any RusseU's country was before it — that it is a country that prides itself ^^^^'^^ on its freedom, and that once in every seven years it elects represent- atives 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 repre- sentatives, to whose faith and guardianship they intrust their free and liberal institutions. Such a person would be very much aston- ished if he were taken to a ruined mound and told that the mound sent two representatives 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 astonisVied 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." This speech inaugurated a resounding and a bitter debate. Oppo- nents of the measure flatly denied that the population of a town had ever had anything to do with its representation or that rep- Arguments resentation and taxation were in any way connected in the agafn'^st British Constitution. They said that some of the greatest the bui men in parliamentary annals had entered the House of Commons as the representatives of these nomination and rotten boroughs now 30 vigorously denounced, — which was true, as the cases of the younger Pitt, Burke, Canning, Fox, and others showed. To which 350 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND Macaulay retorted that "we must judge of the form of government by its general tendency, not by happy accidents," and that if "there were a law that the hundred tallest men in England should be mem- bers 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 partici- pating. But the bill did not have long to live. The Opposi- defea^ted, tion was persistent, and on April 19 the ministry was defeated Parliament qj-j ^j-j amendment. It resolved to appeal to the people. Par- dissolved ^ ^ x- r- liament was dissolved and a new election ordered. This elec- tion took place in the summer of 1831 amid the greatest excitement and was one of the most momentous 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 practiced 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. SECOND REFORM BILL On June 24, 1831, Lord John Russell introduced the 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- Defeated b seven times, Wetherell fifty-eight. However, the bill was the House of finally passed, September 22, by a majority of 106. It was then sent up to the House of Lords where it was quickly killed (October 8, 1831). It was the Lords who chiefly 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 of their privileges. Again riots broke out in London and other towns, expressive of the popular feeling. Newspapers appeared in mourn- PASSAGE OF THE REFORM BILL 351 ing. Bells were tolled. Threats of 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 on the brink of civil war. THIRD REFORM BILL Parliament was now prorogued. It reassembled December 6th, and on the 12th Lord John Russell rose again and introduced his third Reform Bill. Again the same tiresome tactics of the Opposition. But the bill finally passed the House of Commons, March 23, 1832, by a majority of 116. Again the bill was before the Lords, who showed the same disposi- tion 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, acrimo- nious and bitter denunciation, showed once more the temper of the people. There was one way only in which the measure could be carried.' The King might create enough new peers to give its sup- porters a majority in the House of Lords. This, however, 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, "The King grants permission to Earl Grey and to his Chancellor, Lord Brougham (bro'-am), to create such a number of peers as will be sufficient to insure the passing of the Reform Bill." These peers were never The bui created. The threat sufficed. The bill passed the Lords, June passed 4, 1832, about 100 of its opponents absenting 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 member each. The seats thus obtained were redis- tributed as follows : twenty- two large towns were given two Rejjstnbu. members each ; twenty other were given one each, and the tion of larger counties were given additional members, sixty-five in ^***^ all. There was no attempt to make equal electoral districts, but 352 AN ERA OF REFORIM IN ENGLAND only to remove more flagrant abuses. Constituencies still differed greatly in population. The Reform Bill also altered and widened the suffrage. Previously the county franchise had depended entirely upon the ownership of The county ^^T^d ; that is, was limited to those who owned outright land of franchise a,n annual value of forty shillings, the forty-shilling free-holders. The county suffrage was now extended to include, under certain conditions, those who leased land. Thus in the counties the suffrage was dependent still upon the tenure of land, but not upon outright ownership. In the boroughs a far greater change was made. The right to vote was given to all ten-pound householders, which meant all who owned .pjjg or rented a house or shop or other building of an annual rental borough value, with the land, of ten pounds. Thus the suffrage was practically given in boroughs to the wealthier middle class. There was henceforth a uniform suffrage in boroughs, and a diversified suffrage in counties. 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 considerably 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 Not a ^^^ about one to thirty. The measure, therefore, though democratic 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 intervening 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. OTHER REFORMS BY THE WHIG GOVERNMENT The reforming activity of the Whigs, which had achieved the notable triumph of the great change in the House of Commons, con- tinued unabated for several years. Several measures of great im- portance were passed by the reformed Parliament during the next few years. ABOLITION OF SLAVERY 353 One of the first of these was the aboUtion 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. But slavery itself existed in the West Indies, in Mau- ritius, and in South Africa. There were about 750,000 slaves slavery in - in these colonies. To free them was a difficult matter for it was *^® colonies considered an interference with the rights of property, and it might ruin the prosperity of the colonies. But there was a growing sensi- tiveness to the moral iniquity of the institution and it was this that ultimately insured the success of the anti-slavery agitation ably led by Wilberforce and Zachary IVIacaulay, father of the historian. A bill was passed in August, 1833, decreeing that slavery should cease August I, 1834, and appropriating a hundred million dollars as compensation to the slave owners for the loss of their property. The slave owners were not satisfied, considering the sum insufficient, but were obliged to acquiesce. Conscience was aroused at the same time by a cruel evil right at home, the employment, under barbarous conditions, of children in factories. The employment of child labor in British industries was one of the results of the rise of the modem factory system. It was early seen that much of the work done by machinery 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. Incredible 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. Falling 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 education or recreation or healthy development of any kind. The moral atmos- phere in which the children worked was harmful in the extreme. Physically, intellectually, morally, the result could only be stunted human beings. This monstrous system was defended by political economists, manufacturers, and statesmen in the name of individual liberty, in whose name, moreover, crimes have often been committed, the liberty 354 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND of the manufacturer to conduct his business without interference from outside, the hberty of the laborer to sell his labor under what- The system ever conditions he might be disposed or, as might more prop- defended gj-iy \yQ said, 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, Robert Owen, Thomas Sadler, Fielden, Lord Ashley, resulted in the passage of the Factory Act of 1833, which prohibited the employment in A^^ ^^*8°'^ 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. 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 con- duct his business entirely as he likes has no standing in modern English law. LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT The reform spirit, which rendered the decade from 1830 to 1840 so notable, achieved another vast improvement in the radical trans- The decay formation of municipal government. The local self-govern- seif°*^overn ^lent of England enjoyed great fame abroad but was actually ment in a very sorry condition at home. Not only was the Parlia- ment of 1830 the organ of an oligarchy, but so was the system of local government. Municipal government was in the hands of small groups. Thus in Cambridge, with a population of 20,000, there were only 118 voters ; in Portsmouth, with 46,000, only 102. In very nu- The neces- ' > -r > > -» .' sityfor merous cases the situation was even worse and local govern- reform ment was in the hands of the corporation, that is, the mayor and the common council. The mayor was chosen by the council and the councilors held office for life and had the right to fill all vacancies in their body. These governments were notoriously corrupt and notoriously inefficient. Generally speaking, those Englishmen who lived in boroughs were not only not self-governed but were wretchedly misgoverned. BEGINNING OF THE VICTORIAN ERA 355 In 1835 a law was passed which provided for the election of town councilors by all the inhabitants who had paid taxes during the preceding three years. The council was to elect the mayor. It is estimated that about two million people thus secured the of municipal municipal vote. This was not democracy, but it was a long government step toward it, and away from oligarchy. The suffrage has been widened since 1835. ACCESSION OF QUEEN VICTORIA In the midst of this period of reform occurred a change in the occu- pancy of the throne. King William IV died June 20, 1837, and was succeeded by his niece, Vic- toria. The young Queen was the daughter of the Duke of Kent, fourth son of George III. She was, at the time of her ac- cession, eighteen years of age. She had been carefully edu- cated, 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 unnec- essarily. ' ' 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 Qtxeen Victoria, at the Age of 20 After the painting by Sir Edwin Landseer at Windsor Castle. 356 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND impressed all who saw her with her dignity and poise. Her political education was conducted under the guidance, first of Leopold, King of „ Belgium, her uncle, and after her accession, of Lord Melbourne, political both of whom instilled in her mind the principles of constitu- e ucation tional monarchy. The question of her marriage was important and was decided by herself. Summoning 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. It 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 PEOPLE'S CHARTER As the Reform Bill of 1832 had given the suffrage only to the upper part of the middle classes, ^as it excluded the working classes whether in town or country from all political power, it was only natural further par- that the latter should refuse to consider it a finality and should liamentary agitate for the extension of the suffrage to themselves, par- reform o 7 j- ticularly as they had helped decidedly to pass the great meas- ure. Therefore the workingmen conducted a vehement agitation for several years to secure the rights to which they felt they were as entitled as were th6s'e who were fortunate enough to be richer than they. In a pamphlet entitled The Rotteti House of Commons (De- cember, 1836), Lovett, one of their leaders, proved from official returns that, out of 6,023,752 adult males living in the United King- dom, only 839,519 were voters. He also showed that despite the reform of 1832 there were great inequalities among the constituencies, that twenty members were chosen by 2,411 votes, twenty more by 86,072. The immediate demands of the Radicals were expressed in "The People's Charter," or program, a petition to Parliament 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 THE CHARTIST MOVEMENT 357 ballot rather than orally as was then the custom, so that every voter could be free from intimidation, and less exposed to bribery ; that property qualifications for membership in the House be abol- ished ; and that the members receive salaries so that poor men, chartists' laborers themselves and understanding the needs of labor- ^^^ ers, might be elected to Parliament if the voters wished. They also demanded 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 representatives from mis- representing them by proving faithless to their 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 repre- sentatives 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 agi- tation 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 impassioned orators, in numer- ous and unprecedentedly large petitions. One of these pe- the Chartist titions was presented in 1839. It was in the form of a large *s"**""^ cylinder of parchment about four feet in diameter, and was said to have been signed by 1,286,000 persons. It was summarily rejected. Notwithstanding 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 tnerefore cut up into several parts and deposited on the floor. This, too, was rejected. In 1848 another attempt was made. 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 accompany 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 intrusted the safety of 358 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND London to the Duke of Wellington, then seventy-nine years of age. His arrangements were made with his accustomed thoroughness. One hundred and seventy thousand special constables were enrolled, 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 signa- tures, as asserted, but less than two million. It was summarily rejected. The Chartist agitation finally 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 move- ment. Judged superficially and by immediate results the Chartists ^, . .^ failed completely. Yet most of the changes they advocated The signifi- , , , cance of the have since been brought about. There are now no property movement qualifications for members of the House of Commons, and the secret ballot has been secured ; the suffrage is now enjoyed by practically all men and by several million women ; members now receive salaries, and Parliaments are now elected for five years. It seems that some of the tremendous impetus of England toward democracy, which grew so marked toward the close of the nineteenth century, was derived from this movement of the Chartists. REPEAL OF THE CORN LAWS, — FREE TRADE 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 of a remarkable agitation that extended over forty years, though its most decisive phase was concentrated into a few years of intense activity. The change was complete from a policy which England in common with the rest of the world had followed for centuries and which other countries still follow. England had long believed in protection. Hundreds of articles were subject to duties as they entered the country, manufac- poiicy of tured articles, raw materials. The most important single in- protection tcrest among all those protected was agriculture. Com is a word used in England to describe wheat and breadstuffs generally. THE FREE TRADE MOVEMEIsTT 359 The laws imposing duties on corn were the keystone of the whole system of protection. The advocates of free trade necessarily, therefore, delivered their fiercest assaults upon the Corn Laws. If xhe Corn these could be overthrown it was believed that the whole ^^^^ system would fall. But for a long while the landlord class was so in- ■ trenched in political power that the law remained impregnable. The manufacturers and the merchants, however, were in favor of free trade, as the only way of enlarging the foreign market of England and thus keeping English factories running and English workingmen employed. But foreigners would buy English goods only if they might pay for them in their own com- modities, their grain, their lumber. Again, as the popu- lation was increasing, England needed cheaper food. In 1 839 there was founded in Man- chester, a great manufactur- ing center, the Anti-Corn- Law League whose leader was Richard Richard Cobden, a sue- Cobden and cessful and traveled Com-Law young business man. ^^^s"® He was soon joined by John Bright, like himself a manufacturer, unlike him one of the great popu- lar orators of the nineteenth century. The methods of the League were businesslike and thorough. Its campaign was one of per- suasion. It distributed a vast number of pamphlets, sent out a corps of speakers to deliver lectures, setting forth the leading arguments in favor of free trade. Year after year this process of argumentation went on. It was an earnest and sober attempt to convince Englishmen that they should completely reverse ^j^^ j^. their commercial policy in the interest of their own prosper- famine of ity. But it does not seem that this agitation would have sue- ' '^^ ceeded in securing the repeal of the Corn Laws had it not been for a great natural calamity, the Irish famine of 1845. The food of the vast Richard Cobden 36o AN "ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND majority of the Irish people was the potato. More than half of the eight million inhabitants of Ireland depended upon it alone for sus- tenance and with a large part of the rest it was the chief article of diet. Now this crop completely failed, owing to a disease that had _ , , set in. Famine came and tens of thousands perished from Repeal of ^ the Corn starvation. The only way to rescue the population was to *^^ repeal the Corn Laws and thus let in the food supplies of the Continent, to take the place of the bhghted potato. In 1846, under this tremendous pressure, Sir Robert Peel carried against bitter opposition the repeal of the Corn Laws. There still remained after Remaining this many duties in the English tariff, but the keystone of the protective whole systcm of protection was removed. One after another duties grad- , . , , .... uaUy durmg the next twenty years the remauimg duties were removed removed. England still has a tariff but it is for revenue only, not for the protection of English industries. Nearly all of the revenue from the present tariff comes from the duties on tobacco, tea, spirits, wine, and sugar, mostly commodities not produced in England. England is absolutely dependent upon other countries for her food supplies. LABOR LEGISLATION The twenty years succeeding the repeal of the Corn Laws were years of quiescence and transition. Comparatively few changes of importance were made in legislation. Those of greatest significance •concerned the regulation of employment in factories and mines. Such legislation, merciful in its immediate effects and momentous in the reach of the principles on which it rested, was enacted particu- larly during the decade from 1840 to 1850. The initial step in such legislation had been taken in the Factory Act of 1833, already de- scribed, a law that regulated somewhat the conditions under which children and women could be employed in the textile industries. But labor was unprotected 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 appointed to R lation investigate the conditions in mines. Published in 1842, its of labor amazing revelations revolted public opinion and led to quick inmmes action. It showcd that children of five, six, seven years of age were employed underground in coal mines, girls as well as boys ; FACTORY LAWS ^6 1 that women as well as men labored under conditions fatal to health and morals ; that the hours were long, twelve or fourteen a day, and the dangers great. They were veritable beasts of burden, dragging 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 of this report were so as- tounding and sickening that a law was passed in 1842 which forbade the employment of women and girls in mines, and which permitted the em- ployment of boys of ten for only three days a week. Once embarked on this policy of protecting the economically dependent classes. Parliament was forced to go farther and farther in the gov- Factory ernmental regula- ^*^^ tiori of private industry. It has enacted a long series of statutes which it is here impossible to John Bright describe, so extensive and minute are their provisions. The series is being constantly lengthened. In these various acts of legislation just described and in other ways England showed during these middle years of the century that she was outgrowing old forms of thought and organization and was evidently tending more and more toward democracy. Yet this general trend was not mirrored in her political life and institutions. Parlia-- ment remained what the Reform Bill of 1832 had made it. From 1832 to 1867 there was no alteration either in the franchise or in 362 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND suffrage the distribution of seats in the House of Commons. This was the era of middle class rule, as its predecessor had been one of aristo- cratic rule. EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE But during this period the demand was frequently made that the suffrage be extended. At that time not more than one man in six had Th d mand ^^^ right to vote — Only "the ten-pound householders." In for a wider 1 866, to meet the growing demand, Gladstone, leader of the House of Commons under the Earl Russell ministry, proposed a moderate extension of the suffrage. The very moderation sealed its doom, as it aroused no enthusiasm among the people. There was no sign that the people wanted this measure and therefore the Conservatives, joined by many Liberals, joyously killed it. The ministry thereupon re- signed and Lord Derby became prime minister, with Disraeli (diz-ra'-li) the leading member of the cabinet. The Conserva- tives were once more in power, and the opponents of reform thought that they had effec- tually stemmed the advance toward democracy. Never were politicians more completely de- ceived. The rejection of even this modest measure aroused the people to indignation. Gladstone lost all his timidity and became a fiery apostle of an extensive reform. "You cannot fight against the future; time is on our side" was a Glad- stonian phrase that now became a battle cry. John Bright, with ill-concealed menace, incited the people to renew the scenes of 1832. Great popular demonstrations 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 that, such Sir Robert Peel After painting by John Linnell. THE HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT 363 364 AN ERA OF REFORM IN ENGLAND being the case, the Conservative party might as well reap the advan- tages of granting it as to allow those advantages to accrue to others, Disraeli in the following year, 1867, introduced a Reform carried by Bill. This was remodeled almost entirely by the Liberals, ^8^^^'' "^ who, led by Gladstone, defeated the proposals of the ministry time after time, and succeeded in having their own prin- ciples 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 resourcefulness 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 rule of the middle class in England, and made England a democracy. The Provisions franchise in boroughs was given to all householders. Thus, of the bui instead of ten-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 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. So sweeping was the measure that the prime minister himself. Lord Derby, called it a "leap in the dark." Carlyle, forecasting a dismal future, called it "shooting Niagara." Robert Lowe, whose memo- rable 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 suf- frage to women. The House considered the proposition -highly humorous. Nevertheless this movement, then in its very beginning, was destined to persist and grow. REFERENCES 365 REFERENCES The Old Parliamentary System : Ilbert, Parliament (Home University Library), pp. 33-47 ; May, Constitutional History of England, Vol. I, Chap. VI; Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 538-548 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 10-18. Reform Bill of 1832 : McCarthy, Epoch of Reform, pp. 12-83 J Beard, pp. 549-565; Rose, Rise of Democracy, pp. 9-52; Cheyney, Readings in English History, pp. 679-690; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 239-245. Chartism : Rose, pp. 84-146 ; McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. I, Chaps. V and XVIII. Free Trade Movement : McCarthy, History of Our Oivn Times, Vol. I, Chaps. XIV-XVI; McCarthy, Life of Peel, Chaps. XII and XIII; Cheyney, pp. 708-715. Queen Victoria's Early Life : Lee, Life of Queen Victoria, pp. 1-98. The Youth of Disr.-veli : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. I, Chap. XVI. Reform Bill of 1867 : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. II, Chaps. .L-LII. CHAPTER XVII REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE THE REIGN OF LOUIS XVIII The House of Bourbon had been put back upon the throne of France by the AlUes who had conquered Napoleon in 1814. It was put back a second time in 18 15, after Waterloo. But the new The restora- ^ , ,-, , a,i- i i tionof the monarch, Louis XVIII, recognized, as did the Allies, that the not'a''°eTtora- restoration of the royal line did not at all mean the restoration tion of the of the Old Regime. He saw that the day of the absolute egime ^lonarchy had passed forever in France. The monarchy must be constitutional and must safeguard many of the acquisitions of the Revolution or its life would certainly be brief. The King, recognizing that he must compromise with the spirit of the age, issued in 18 14 the Constitutional Charter. This established stitutionai ^ parliament of two houses, a Chamber of Peers, appointed Charter of fQj- {[^q^ ^^d a Chamber of Deputies, elected for a term of five years, but by a restricted body of voters, for the suffrage was so limited by age and property qualifications that there were less than 100,000 voters out of a population of 29,000,000, and that not more than 12,000 were eligible to become deputies. The Charter proclaimed the equality of all Frenchmen, yet only a petty minority was given the right to participate in the government of the country. France was still in a political sense a land of privilege, only privilege was no 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 in Europe, outside of England. There was another set of provisions in this document of even greater importance than those determining the future form of govern- ment, namely, that in which the civil rights of Frenchmen were narrated. These provisions showed how much of the work of the 366 THE RESTORATION AND THE REVOLUTION '367 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 „ . . ° Provisions had become most precious to them. It was declared that all concerning Frenchmen were equal before the law, 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 Recognition the Revolution; that T^Ult no one should be ar- lution rested or prosecuted save by due process of law, that thus the day of arbitrary im- prisonment was not to re- turn ; that there should be complete religious freedom for all sects, although Roman Catholicism was declared to be the religion of the state ; that the press should be free. Those who had purchased the confiscated property of the crown, the church, and the nobles, during the Revo- lution, were assured that their titles were inviolable. The personality of Louis XVIII seemed admirably adapted to the situa- Louis xviii tion in which France (1814-1824) found itself. A man of moderate opinions, cold-blooded, skeptical, free from illusions, free from the passion of revenge, indolent by nature, Louis desired to avoid conflicts and to enjoy his power in peace. But there were difficulties in the way. He had been restored by foreign armies. His presence' on the throne was a constant reminder of the humiliation of France. But a more serious feature was the character of the persons with whom he was in constant contact. The court was now composed of the nobles who had suffered greatly from the Revolution, who had Loll-, X\ 111 From an engraving by P. Audouin, after the bust by A. Valois. 368- REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE been robbed of their property, who had seen many of their rela- tives 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 Louis XVIII. More eager to restore the former glory of the crown, the former rank of the nobility and the clergy, more bitter toward the new ideas than the King himself, 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 themselves. They bitterly as- The Ultras . , ^, i sailed Louis XVIII for grantmg the Charter, a dangerous con- cession to the Revolution, and they secretly wished to abolish it, meanwhile desiring to nullify its liberal provisions as far as possible. Their leader was the Count of Artois, brother of Louis XVIII, who, the King being childless, stood next in line of succession. For some years Louis XVIII was able to hold this extreme party in check and to follow a moderate policy. He was supported in this by , ^ the large majority of Liberals, moderate like himself, who until The work of a j j reorganiza- 1820 controlled Parliament. Much useful work was thus ac- ^"° complished. The enormous war indemnity which the Allies had imposed in 181 5 was paid off and this liberated the country from the anny of occupation also imposed by them. The military system of France was reorganized and provision was made for an army of about 240,000 men. Promotion was to be for service and merit alone, a principle that was violently opposed by the Ultras as it destroyed all chances of the nobility securing a monopoly of the best positions. The legislation enacted at this time concerning the press and the electoral system was also of a liberal character. The Ultras were indignant at the moderation of the King and Parliament and did their best to break it down. They were alert Activity of fo seize upon every incident that might discredit the party in the Ultras power. A number of radicals were elected to the Chamber of Deputies. The Ultras raged against them, painting a lurid future. The murder in 1820 of the Duke of Berry, who stood Death of ^^ ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ throne, gave them their chance. The King Louis xvra was so horrified by this crime, as were also many moderate (1824) members of Parliament, that he offered less and less resist- ance to the Ultras. The closing years of the reign were less REACTIONARY LEGISLATION 369 liberal than the earlier ones. Louis XVTII died in 1824 and was succeeded by his brother, the Count of Artois, who assumed the title of Charles X. THE REIGN OF CHARLES X The characteristics of the new King were well known. He was the convinced leader of the reactionaries in France from 18 14 to 1830. He had been the constant and bitter opponent of his brother's charies x liberalism, and had finally seen that liberalism forced to yield (1824-1830) 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. The coronation of the King revealed the temper of the new reign. France was treated to a spectacle of medieval mummery that amused and at the same time disgusted a people that had never been known to lack an appreciation of the ridiculous. Charles was anointed on seven parts of his person with sacred oil, miraculously preserved, it was asserted, from the time of Clovis. The -legislation urged by the King and largely enacted showed the belated political and social ideas of this government. Nearly a billion francs were voted as an indemnity to the nobles for ^^^ ^ their lands which had been confiscated and sold by the state indemnified during the Revolution. Many Frenchmen thought that confiscated" France had more urgent needs than to vote money to those during the who had deserted the country and had then fought against her. But the King had been leader of the emigres and was in entire sympathy with their point of view. Another law that cast discredit upon this reign, and helped under- mine it with the great mass of Frenchmen, was the law against sacri- lege. By this act burglaries committed in ecclesiastical build- ,^^^ j^^ ings and the profanation of holy vessels were, under certain against 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. These classes began to fear the clerical reaction more even than the 370 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE y a THE REIGN OF CHARLES X 371 political and social. Their apprehension was not decreased when a little later they saw the King himself, clad in the violet robe of a prelate and accompanied by the court, walking in a religious proces- sion and carrying a lighted candle through the streets of Paris. Was it the purpose of the aristocratic and clerical party to restore both the nobility and the church to the proud position they had occupied before the Revolution ? That it was was proclaimed by Polignac (p6-len-yak'), the most reactionary minister of this reign, who declared, on his accession to office in 1829, that his object was "to reorganize society, to restore to the clergy its former preponderance in the state, to Polignac create a powerful aristocracy and to surround it with privi- ™*^^*'y leges." The appointment of this ministry, indeed, aroused a remarkable exhibition of hostile feeling, vastly intensified by this declaration which was a direct challenge to Liberals of every shade, since it stated, as clearly as language could, that all the characteristic work of the French Revolution must be undone, that the pre-Revolutionary state and society should be restored, that the constitutional, political, social, and economic reorganization, the large installment of freedom, achieved during that momentous and fruitful period, should be swept aside, and that older ideas and ideals were to be enthroned once more. The appointment of the Polignac ministry and its audacious and alarming announcement precipitated a crisis, which shortly exploded in a revolution. The Chamber of Deputies practically de- co^flj^t manded the dismissal of the unpopular ministry. The King between replied by declaring that "his decisions' were unchangeable" and "the ^ and by dissolving the Chamber, hoping by means of new chamber oi elections to secure one subservient to his will. But the voters thought otherwise. The elections resulted in a crushing defeat for the King and his ministry. Charles would not yield. His own brother, Louis XVL had come to a tragic end, he said, because he had made concessions. Charles thought that he himself had learned something from history. In fact, he had learned the wrong lesson. Other methods of gaining his ends having failed, he now deter- mined upon coercion. On July 26, 1830, he issued several ordinances, suspending the liberty of the press, dissolving the Chamber of ordinances Deputies, changing the electoral system, reducing the number »* J"iy of voters from 100,000 to 25,000, and ordering new elections. In 372 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE other words, the King was the supreme lawgiver, not at all hampered by the Charter. If these ordinances were to stand the people would enjoy their liberties simply at the humor of the monarch. Not to have opposed them would have been to acquiesce quietly in the transformation of the government into the absolute monarchy of Louis XIV. THE JULY REVOLUTION But the people of Paris did not acquiesce. As the significance of the ordinances became apparent, popular anger began to manifest itselL Crowds assembled in the streets shouting, "Down with the Ministry"; "Long live the Charter." On Wednesday, July 28, 1830, civil war broke out. The insurgents were mainly old soldiers. Carbonari, and a group of republicans and workmen — men who hated the Bourbons, who followed the tricolor flag as the true national emblem, rather than the white flag of the royal house. This war lasted three days. It was the July Revolution — the Glorious Three Days. It was a street war and was limited to Paris. The insurgents were not very numerous, probably not more than ten thousand. But the government had itself probably not more than fourteen thousand troops in Paris. The insurrection was not difflcult to organize. The streets of Paris were narrow and crooked. Through such tortuous lanes it was impossible for the government to send artillery, a weapon which it alone pos- The char- scsscd. The Streets were paved with large stones. These acter of the '^ ° fighting could be torn up and piled in such a way as to make fortresses for the insurgents. In the night of July 27-28 the streets were cut up by hundreds 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 obstacles the soldiers could make but little progress. If they overthrew a barricade and passed on, it would immediately be built up again behind them more threatening than before because cutting their line of reenforcements and of possible retreat. Moreover, the soldiers had only the flint-lock gun, a weapon no better than that in the hands of the insurgents. Again, the officers had no knowledge of street fighting, whereas the insurgents had an intimate knowledge of the city, of its streets, and lanes. Moreover, the soldiers were reluctant to fight against the people. The fighting continued amid THE JULY REVOLUTION (1830) 373 374 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE the fierce heat of July. On July 31 Charles, seeing that all was lost, abdicated in favor of his nine-year-old grandson, the Duke of Bor- Abdication of deaux, son of the murdered Duke of Berry, and fled to England Charles X ^^^ his family. For two years he lived in Great Britain, keeping a melancholy court in Holyrood Palace, Edinburgh, of somber memory in the life of Mary, Queen of Scots. Removing later to Austria, he died in 1 836. What was the future government to be, now that triumphant revo- lution had for the second time swept a Bourbon monarch from his The House throne ? No serious consideration was given to the claims of Bourbon Qf ^^g little Duke of Bordeaux, unimpeachable from the point House of of view of monarchical theory and practice. He was the legit- Orieans? imate sovereign of France but he was quietly ignored by a people who were tired of the legitimate monarchy. Those who had done the actual fighting undoubtedly wanted a republic. But the journalists and deputies and the majority of the Parisians were opposed to such a solution, having vivid and unpleasant memories of the former republic, and believing that the proclamation of the republic would embroil France with monarchical Europe. They favored Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, who represented a younger branch of the royal family, a man who had always sympathized with liberal opinions. With such a man as king, it was said, there would be no more attempts to reenthrone the nobility and the clergy, but the government would be liberal, resting on the middle classes, and the Charter would be scrupujously observed. LOUIS PHILIPPE KING The final decision between monarchy and republic lay in the hands of Lafayette, the real leader of the Republicans. He finally threw his influence in favor of Louis Philippe, arguing that a monarchy under so liberal and democratic a prince would after all be " the best of republics." On August 7 the Chamber of Deputies called Louis Philippe to the throne, ignoring the claims of the legitimate ruler. Such was the July Revolution, an unexpected, impromptu affair. Not dreamed of July 25, it was over a week later. One king had been overthrown, another created, and the Charter had been slightly mod- ified. Parliamentary government had been preserved ; a return to aristocracy prevented. REVOLUTIONS BEYOND FRANCE 375 Thus ends the Restoration, and the reign of Louis Phihppe now begins. Those who brought about the final overthrow of the elder Bourbons received no adequate reward. They had the tricolor ^j^^ ^^^ flag once more, but the rich bourgeoisie had the government, of the The Republicans yielded, but without renouncing their prin- ^^^*°''^'*°° ciples or their hopes. Cavaignac (ka-van-yak'), 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 Revolu- tion, in fact, gave great impetus to the doctrine of the sovereignty of the people. INFLUENCE OF THE JULY REVOLUTION UPON EUROPE The influence of the Revolution of 1830 was felt all over Europe — in Poland, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, England, and the Nether- lands. It was the signal and encouragement for widespread popu- lar movements which for a short time seemed to threaten the whole structure erected in 1815 at Vienna. It created an immediate problem for the rulers of Europe. They had bound themselves in 1 8 15 to guard against the outbreak of "revolution," to watch over and assure the " general tranquillity" of Europe. They had adopted and applied since then, as we have seen, the doctrine of intervention in the affairs of countries infected by revolutionary fever, as the great preservative of public order. Would, this self-constituted inter- national police acquiesce in the overthrow jof the legitimate king of France 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 do so. Metternich's immediate impulse was to organize a coalition against Louis Philippe, " King of the Barricades." But when the time came this was seen to be impracticable, for Russia was occupied _ PowGrlsss- with a revolution in Poland, Austria with revolutions in ness of the Italy, Prussia with similar movements in Germany, and Eng- ^'^j^^.^ land was engrossed in the most absorbing discussion of domestic problems she had faced in many decades. Moreover, England approved the revolution. All the powers, therefore, recognized Louis Philippe, though with varying indications of annoyance. In one particular, consequently, the settlement of 18 15 was undone 376 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE forever. The elder branch of the House of Bourbon, put upon the throne of France by the AlUes of 1815, was now pushed from it, and the revolution, hated of the other powers, had done it. REVOLUTION IN THE NETHERLANDS Another part of the diplomatic structure of 18 15 was now over- thrown. The Congress of Vienna had created an essentially artificial state to the north of France, the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Khigdom It had done this explicitly for the purpose of having a barrier of the against France. The Belgian provinces, hitherto Austrian, were in 181 5 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. But it was easier to declare these two peoples formally united under one ruler than to make them in any real sense a single nation. Though it might seem by a glance at the map that the peoples of this A union of ° jo x- r- r- two dissimi- little comer of Europe must be essentially homogeneous, such lar peoples ^^^ ^^^ ^^ ^^l the case. There were many more points of difference than of similarity between them. They spoke different languages. They belonged to different religions, the Dutch being Protestant, the Belgians Catholic. They differed in their economic life and principles. The Dutch were an agricultural and commercial people and inclined toward free trade, the Belgians were a manu- facturing people and inclined toward protection. For the Belgians the union with the Dutch was an unhappy one from the start. They saw themselves added to and subjected to another people inferior in numbers to themselves, whereas the feeling of nationality had been aroused in them as in other peoples by the spirit and example of the French Revolution and they had hoped for a larger and more independent life than they had ever had before. A union so inharmoniously begun was never satisfactory to the Bel- gians. Friction was constant. The Belgians resented the fact that the officials in the state and army were nearly all Dutch. They between the objected to the King's attempts to force the Dutch language Belgians and j^to a position of undue privilege. The evident desire of the the Dutch ^. ^ . . . ' * King t6 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. ^^ THE BELGIANS DECLARE THEIR INDEPENDENCE 377 The Jul}" Revolution came as a spark in the midst of all this inflam- mable material. There was street fighting in Brussels as ^. „ . . " ° The Belgians there had been in Pans. The revolution spread rapidly. The declare their royal troops were driven out and on October 4, 1830, Belgium ii^^ependence declared itself independent. A congress was called to determine the future form of government. It decided in favor of a monarchy, adopted a liberal constitution, and elected as king Leopold of Coburg, who, in Juh', 1831, was crowned. Would the Great Powers which in 181 5 had added Belgium to Holland consent to the undoing of their work ? Would they recognize the new kingdom? They had sup- pressed revolution in Spain and Italy, as we have seen. Would they do it again in the interest of their handiwork, the treaties of Vienna ? Now, however, they were divided, and in this division lay the salvation of the new state. The Czar wished to intervene and Prussia seemed similarly inclined, but Louis Philippe, knowing that his own throne would be overthrown by the Parisians if he allowed these absolute monarchies to crush the new liberties of the Belgians, gave explicit warning that if they intervened France also would intervene "in order to hold the balance even." The Powers therefore made the best of the situation. At a conference in London, Russia, Prussia, Austria, France, and oA'he K*i^K- England recognized the independence of Belgium ; they went farther and formally promised to respect its neutrality forever. 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. Leopold Engraved by Levy, after the painting liy Winterhalter. dom of Belgium 378 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE The success of the Belgian revolution had to a considerable extent been rendered possible by a revolution in Poland, which ended in dis- astrous 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 concerning 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 Netherlands. The French Revolution of 1830 was followed by the rise of the Kingdom of Belgium ; but it was also followed by the disappearance of the Kingdom of Poland. REVOLUTION IN POLAND In the Middle Ages Poland had been a more powerful state than Russia and included territory which stretched from the Baltic to the Black Sea and from the Oder to the Dnieper. It had remained an independent state down to the last quarter of the eighteenth century. During that quarter its independence had been destroyed, as we have The destnic- ^een, and its territory seized by its three neighbors, Russia, tion of Prussia, and Austria, in the famous, or rather infamous, parti- tions of 1772, 1793, and 1795. Nothing was left of Poland on the map. The Poles made a brave and desperate resistance but " freedom shrieked when Kosciusko fell." The effects of this assassination of an independent state by the three absolute monarchies of eastern Europe were destined to be . momentous and far-reaching. The Polish question has been Polish a factor in all the subsequent history of Europe. The Poles, question naturally, like any freedom-loving people, refused to acquiesce in a fate so unmerited, so cruel. But they could only wait and hope. "No wise or honest man," wrote Edmund Burke at the time, "can approve of that partition, or can contemplate it without prog- nosticating great mischief from it to all countries at some future date." The particular effect of this odious act of the royal and titled The destruc- highwaymen was the extraordinary intensification it gave to tion of Poland what was to prove one of the most vital and troublesome spirit of na- tendencies of modern history, the principle of nationality, tionaiity ^he Polish people's passionate love of country was given an imperishable ideal, a pillar of cloud by day, a pillar of fire by night, POLAND AND THE CONGRESS OF VIENNA 379 riveting the attention of the nation so wantonly destroyed, inspiring a grim determination to recover what had been lost. The Poles had hoped that the French Revolution, and, later, that Napoleon might restore their nationality. In this they were disap- pointed. But in 1815 at the Congress of Vienna they found The unexpected aid, though it proved in the end illusory. Alex- restoraUon ander I, Czar of Russia, was at that time aglow with generous dom of Po- and romantic sentiments 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 restor- ing the old Kingdom of Poland. Poland should be a kingdom en- tirely separate from the Empire of Russia. He would be Emperor of Russia and King of Poland. The union of two states would be simply personal. Alexander had desired to restore Poland to the full extent of its pos- sessions in the eighteenth century. To render this possible Prussia and Austria must relinquish the prov- inces they had acquired in the three partitions. This, however, was not accomplished at the Con- gress of Vienna. Although Prussia and Austria did give back some of their Polish possessions, they retained some. The tragedy of Poland was that the Poles, in spirit a single people, were subjects of three nations and as such might be forced to fight each other, in that most dreadful of conflicts, that of brother against brother. The new Polish Kingdom, erected in 181 5, was simply a part, there- fore, of historic Poland, nor did it even include all of the Polish terri- tories that Russia had acquired. Of this new state Alexander , . . , , . , . Alexander I was to be king. To it he granted a constitution, establishing grants a a parliament of two chambers, with considerable powers. t°"p*'j*JJj'^°° Roman Catholicism was recognized as the state religion ; but a generous measure of toleration was given to other sects. Liberty Alexander I From an engraving by Allais. 38o REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE of the press was guaranteed, subject to laws designed to prevent its abuse. The Polish language was made the oflficial language. All positions in the government were to be filled by Poles, not by Rus- sians. No people in central Europe possessed such liberal institu- tions 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, encountered obstacles from the start. Friction The Russians were opposed to the idea of a restored Poland, and Poies^and^he particularly to a constitutional Poland, when they themselves Russians had no constitution. Why should their old enemy be so greatly favored when they, the real supporters of the Czar, 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. Independence The Poles Alexander would never grant. His purposes and the aspira- divided into . . , „ , - •, , , fr r r - two classes tions of the Poles were irreconcilable. After a few years fric- tion developed between the ruler and the ruled. The latter became more and more convinced that they must fight for their liberty, waiting only for a favorable moment. That moment seemed to have come in 1830. The Poles were 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 Czar summoned the Polish army to prepare for a campaign whose object was the suppression of the Belgian revolution, the determination of the Poles was quickly made. They rose in insurrection toward the end of 1830, declared that the House of Romanoff had ceased to rule in Poland, and pre- pared for a life and death struggle. Russia's military resources, however, were so great that Poland The Polish could not hope alone to achieve her national independence. The expectation Poles expected foreign intervention, but no intervention came. aid d^s'a^p° Enthusiasm for the Poles was widespread among the people in pointed France, in England, and in Germany. But the governments, none of which was controlled by public opinion, refused to move. Thus Poland was left to fight alone with Russia and of the outcome there could be no doubt. The Poles fought with great bravery, but DESTRUCTION OF THE POLISH KINGDOM 381 without good leadership, without careful organization, without a spirit of subordination to military authorities. The war went on from January, 1 83 1 , until September of that year, when Warsaw fell before the Russians. The results of this ill-advised and ill- of the insur- 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 insur- gents were savagely punished. Many were executed, many sent to Siberia. Thousands of Polish officers and soldiers escaped to the countries of western Europe and became a revolutionary element in Paris, Berlin, and Vienna, always ready to fight for liberty. They were the sworn foes of tyranny everywhere as they were its most conspicuous victims. Even the Polish language seemed doomed, so repressive was the policj^ 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. They had prevented the Holy Alliance from intervening to suppress the revolutions of 1830, as it had suppressed those of 1820. REVOLUTION IN ITALY Another country which felt the revolutionary wave of 1830 was Itah'. Revolutions broke out in the duchies of Modena and Parma, whose rulers were forced to flee, and in parts of the Papal Revolutions States. Hatred of Austria and dissatisfaction with local '° ^'^'y . easily sup- arbitrary and despotic governments were the causes. The pressed in revolutionists expected the hostility of Austria but they hoped '*^' for the support of France as well as of the people of other Italian states. But none was forthcoming, Louis Philippe feeling too inse- cure himself at home. The result was that Austrian troops appeared upon the scene and easily restored the exiled rulers. The Pope recovered his provinces. The episode was over. 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. Revolution The movement also affected Germany itself. In Brunswick. "* Germany Saxonv, Hesse-Cassel, and in two Sa.xon duchies revolutionary 382 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE movements broke out with the result that several new constitutions were added to those already granted. The new ones were chiefly in North German, whereas the earlier ones had been mainly in South German states. But the two great states, Austria and Prussia, passed unscathed and 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 previ- ously used the Wartburg Festival, Metternich succeeded in carrying reaction farther than he had been able to even in the Carlsbad Decrees of 1 8 19. Those decrees had been aimed chiefly at the universities and the press. New regulations were adopted, in 1832 and 1834, by which Metternich secured not only the renewal of these but the enactment of additional repressive measures, restricting the rights of such parlia- ments as existed in various states and still further muzzling the uni- versities and the press. Constitutional life in the few states where it existed was reduced to a minimum. The political history of Ger- many offers but little interest until the great mid-century uprising of 1848 shook this entire system of negation and repression to the ground. Only in France and in Belgium had the commotions of 1830 achieved success. France had a new king. Belgium had won her independence. THE REIGN OF LOUIS PHILIPPE Louis Philippe (16-e-fi-lep'), 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 of Loi^s^ the throne occupied by his cousin, Louis XVI, who had, as a PhUippe member of the Convention, voted for the latter's execution, and whohadhimself later perished miserably on the scaffold. In 1789 Louis Philippe was only sixteen years of age, too young to take part in politics, although he became a member of the Jacobin Club. Later he joined the army and fought valiantly for the Republic 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. Leaving Switzerland when his incognito was discovered he traveled as far north as the North Cape, and as far west as the United States. THE PERSONALITY OF LOUIS PHILIPPE 383 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 prop- erty, which, though confiscated during the Revolution, had not been actually sold. During the Restoration he lived in the famous Palais Royal in the very heart of Paris, cultivating relations that might some day prove useful, particu- larly appealing to Hberalism the solid, rich bourgeoisie by a display of liberal sentiments and by a good-humored, un- conventional mode of life. He walked the streets of Paris alone, talked and even drank with workmen with en- gaging informality, and sent his sons to the pub- lic schools to associate with the sons of the bourgeoisie — a delicate compliment fully ap- preciated by the latter. But beneath this ex- terior of republican sim- plicity there lay a strong ambition for personal power, a nature essen- tially autocratic. His legal title to his position was very weak. He had been invited to ascend the throne by only 219 members of the Chamber of Deputies out of 430, a bare majority. been authorized to choose a king was troubled. endure. As the people were never asked whether they wished Louis Philippe as their king, his rule always lacked any popular sanction, such as Napoleon's had always possessed. It had many enemies who Louis Philippe Engraving, bj' Pannier, after the painting by Winterhalter. Moreover, the Chamber had never „. , , ' His legal The first part of the reign title to the It was very doubtful whether it could long * ^°^^ 384 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE denied its right to exist, Legitimists, Bonapartists, and Republicans. The Legitimists defended the rights of Charles X and his descend- Q . . ants. They regarded Louis Philippe as a usurper, a thief who of the Legit- had treacherously and shamelessly stolen the crowu of the "°*^'^ young Duke of Bordeaux. This party was numerically small, so thoroughly had the reign of Charles X offended and alienated the nation. It gave Louis Philippe little trouble save through the biting sarcasms with which aristocratic society regaled itself at the expense of his honor and chivalry ; also at the expense of his personal appear- ance. It attempted only one insurrection, which was easily put down. OPPOSITION OF THE REPUBLICANS But Louis Philippe's struggle with the Republicans was far more severe. The latter had acquiesced in his rule at first on the assurance of Lafayette, in whom they reposed great confidence, that that rule would really constitute the best of republics, that the King was essentially democratic, that the popular throne would be surrounded by republican institutions. But both they and Lafayette were shortly undeceived. They had expected that the new government would adopt a broad, liberal, national policy, would consider the interests of all sections of the population, and would favor a demo- cratic evolution of the country. Instead, they saw rapidly set up a narrow class system, which opposed democracy as it opposed aris- tocracy. The July Monarchy early asserted that its policy would be that of the "golden mean," neither conservative nor radical, of the but moderate. At the beginning the suffrage was broadened, " golden \yy ^ reduction of age and property qualifications, so that the electorate was doubled and there were now about 200,000 voters, where there had formerly been 100,000. This might have been tolerable as a mere beginning in the right direction. But the government soon made it manifest that it was not only the begin- ning but the end, that there would be no further enlargement of the electorate. As a matter of fact this meant that it was the upper bour- geoisie who were henceforth to rule France, the wealthy or well-to-do The reign of bankers, manufacturers, merchants. The great mass of the the wealthy people were to have no power. The argument was put forth that the propertied and educated were the only people fit to rule, that legislation considered wise for them was for the best of all as its CHARACTER OF THE JULY MONARCHY 385 benefits were diffused naturally through all classes. It was virtually the argument of the employer that what is good for him is good for the employee. The July Monarchy was liberal, in one way. It was an assurance that there should be no return toward the Old Regime, no attempt to restore, more or less, directly or indirectly, the aristocracy ,, ■' . .' ' -'No return and the clergy to their former position. That much was to the oid definitely settled, once for all. On the other hand, it would ^sme have nothing to do with democracy, even as a remote ideal. Democ- racy meant anarchy, disorder, violence, as the Revolution had „ ^ -^ No progress shown. What was wanted was moderation, the golden toward mean. The July Monarchy was the reign of the upper middle ^^^o^^racy class, considered now, by itself, the only safe depository of power. No reversion to outworn, aristocratic ideals, no gradual progression toward democracy, but the steady maintenance, without further change, of the system established by the Charter as revised in 1830, such was the policy of the July Monarchy from which it never deviated. The Republicans did not share this opinion that all wisdom was limited to the bourgeoisie. The)'" wished to press forward from present liberties to larger liberties, to educate the people more and more in self-government, to legislate with a view to the interests of all the classes and conditions of men that are contained in a great nation. To them it seemed that the July Monarchy was making a grotesque simplification of what was in reality a very tangled and complex problem in identifj'ing the welfare of France with simply the welfare of a prosperous and educated class. The Republicans there- Republican fore became the enemies of the July Monarchy. They at- insurrections tempted insurrections which were serious, but which were put down. The Government adopted vigorous measures for their suppression, breaking up their societies, restricting the right of association, pros- ecuting their editors, crushing their newspapers under heavy fines, finally forbidding by law any argument for, or defense of, any other form of government than that of the existing monarchy, and forbid- ding any one to declare himself an adherent of any fallen royal house. These laws greatly weakened the moral position of the July ^j^^ Monarchy, as they made individual liberty only an empty September word. But they were successful in their immediate aim. ^^^' ^ ^^ They drove all rival parties, the Republicans included, to cover, and 386 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE France was governed for eighteen years by the propertied classes, by an aristocracy of wealth. The Republicans, duped, seeing that the July Monarchy promised no growth in liberty, were the bitter enemies of the regime, but were effectually silenced for many long years. Their enmity, however, was a factor in the ultimate overthrow of this system. , THE GUIZOT MINISTRY The parliamentary history of France during the ten years from 1830 to 1840 was marked by instability. There were ten ministries within ten years. But from 1 840 to 1848 there was only one, that of Guizot (ge- zo')- For several ^^ears after his accession to the throne Louis Philippe was careful to guard himself from all appearance of assuming personal power. But now that his enemies were overthrown and crushed he began to re- veal his real purpose of being monarch in fact as well as in name. He had no intention of following the English theor}^ that, in constitutional as dis- tinguished from absolute monarchies, the king reigns but does not gov- ern. He now found in Guizot a man who sj'm- pathized with his views of kingship, and who did not believe that the mon- arch should be simply an ornamental head of the state. Louis Philippe had in his chief minister a man after his own heart. Guizot, eminent as a professor, Guizot After a lithograph by Lassalle, from the portrait by Delaroche. THE GUIZOT MINISTRY 387 an historian, and an orator, held certain pohtical principles with the tenacity of a mathematician. He refused to recognize that France needed any alteration in her political institutions. He be- ^ . lieved in the Charter of 18 14, as revised in 1830. Any political further reform would be unnecessary and dangerous. Guizot's p"°"p ®® policy was one of stiff, unyielding conservatism. He opposed any extension of the suffrage, he opposed any legislation for the laboring classes, he opposed this, he opposed that. All discontent appeared to him frivolous, fictitious, merely the devious work of designing men bent on feathering their own nests. Year after year this negative polic}', this policy of mere inertia, was pursued, arousing more and more disgust. ' ' What have they done for the past seven years ? " exclaimed a deputy in 1847. " Nothing, ^^ j nothing, nothing." "France is becoming bored," said Lamar- icy of rigid tine. Yet this stagnant government was living in a world fer- *^'*®®'^* '^"^ menting with ideas, apparently oblivious of the fact. The July Mon- archy was a government of the bourgeoisie, of the well-to-do, of the capitalists. They alone possessed the suffrage. Consequently, the remainder of the population was, in a political sense, of no impor- tance. 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 widespread and deep and should have received the careful and sympathetic attention of the government. GROWTH OF SOCIALISM Their situation provoked discussion and many writers began to preach new doctrines concerning the organization of industry and the crucial question of the relations of capital and labor, doctrines g^j^^, henceforth called socialistic, and appealing with increasing force Simon's to the millions of laborers who believed that society weighed p''°^'^*™ with unjustifiable severity upon them, that their labor did not by any means receive its proportionate reward. Saint-Simon was the first to announce 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 indus- try on the principle of "Labor according to capacity and reward according to services." Saint-Simon was a speculative thinker, not a 388 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE practical man of affairs. His doctrine gained in direct importance when it was adopted by a man who was a pohtician, able to recruit and lead a party, and to make a program definite enough to appeal Louis Blanc to the masses. Such a man was Louis Blanc, who was destined (i8i 1-1882) j-Q 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 state must be organized on a thoroughly democratic basis. Louis Blanc proclaimed the right of every man to employment and the duty of the state to provide it. This it could do if it would organize industry. Let the state establish, with its own capital, national workshops. Let the workmen manage these and share the profits. The class of employers would thus disappear and the laborers would get the full result of their labor. Louis Blanc's theories, propounded in a style at once clear and vivid, were largely adopted by workingmen. A socialist party was thus created. It believed in a republic ; but it differed from the other republicans in that, while they desired simply a change in the form of government, it desired a far more sweeping change in society. The amount of discontent with the government of France was great and growing. Yet it could accomplish nothing because the ministry was steadily supported by the Chamber of Deputies and that Cham- ber was elected by the two hundred thousand voters. On examina- tion it was seen that Guizot obtained his never-failing majority ministry and by corrupt methods. The electoral assemblies which chose parUamentary ^-^g deputies were SO Small, frequently consisting of not more corruption '■ ^ -t. j o than two hundred members, many of them office-holders, that they could be bribed, in one way or another, to elect deputies pleas- ing to the ministry. Then within the Chamber the same methods would be used. About two hundred of the four hundred and thirty deputies were at the same time office-holders. The ministry con- trolled them, as all promotions or increases of salary were dependent upon its favor. It needed to gain only a few more votes to have a majority and this was easy, as it had so many favors to distribute. WIDESPREAD DEMAND FOR REFORM 389 DEM-\XD FOR ELECTOR-\L .\XD PARXL^MEXTARY REF0R:M A reform party thus gradually grew up which did not at all wish to overthrow the monarchy but which did demand a change in the composition of the Chamber of Deputies and in the manner of electing it, parliamentar}- reform and electoral reform. Deputies should be forbidden to be at the same time office-holders, and the number of voters should be so increased that it would be impossible to corrupt them. Against both these propositions, renewed year after year, during his entire ministry-, Guizot resolutely set his face. He asserted that the reform movement was only the work of a few, that the people as a whole were entirely indifferent to it. To prove the falsity of this assertion the Opposition instituted, in 1847, a series of "reform banquets" which were attended by the The reform people and addressed by the reformers. These banquets banquets " were instituted by those loyal to the monarchy, but hostile to its policy. Similar meetings, however, were instituted by the Republi- cans, who were opposed to the very existence of the monarchy. Great enthusiasm was aroused by these meetings all over the countn,'. It was conclusively shown that the people were behind this demand for reform. But the ministr}- refused to budge and the King denounced the agitation as pernicious. He even denied the legal right of the people to hold such meetings. To test this right before the courts of law the Opposition arranged a great banquet for Feb- ruary' 22, 1848, in Paris. Eighty-seven prominent deputies promised to attend. All were to meet in front of the church of the Madeleine (mad-Ian') 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 deputies who had agreed to attend yielded, though under protest. But a vast crowd congregated, of students, workingmen, and others. They had no leader, no definite purpose. The crowd committed slight acts of lawlessness, but nothing serious happened that da}'. But in the night barricades arose in the workingmen's quarters of the city. Some shots were fired. 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 !" "Down with Guizot!" The King, frightened at this alarming development, was willing to grant 'eform. Guizot would not consent and con- 390 REACTION AND REVOLUTION IN FRANCE sequently withdrew from office. This news was greeted with en- thusiasm by the crowds and, in the evening of February 23, Paris was Resignation illuminated and the trouble seemed ended. The contest thus of Guizot f a^j- j^a(j 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 Philippe himself and against the monarchy. They marched through the boulevards and made a hostile demonstration before Guizot's resi- dence. Some unknown person fired 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 occasion 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 every- where the angriest passions ; cries of "Vengeance ! " followed it along its course. From the towers the tocsin sounded its wild and sinister appeal. THE OVERTHROW OF LOUIS PHILIPPE Thus began a riot which grew in vehemence hourly, and which swept all before it. The cries of "Long live Reform ! " heard the day before, now gave way to the more ominous cries of "Long live the Republic !" Finally, on February 24, the King abdicated in favor of his grandson, the little Count of Paris, and, under the incognito of "Mr. Smith" finally reached England. Guizot followed, as did Metternich somewhat later, for reasons of his own. The King's life of exile was ended two years later by his death at Claremont. He had abdicated in favor of his grandson, but the Republicans and Socialists who had forced the abdication would not consent to the continuance of the monarchy. They were able to procure the Second the creation of a Provisional Government, composed of the Republic leaders of both parties, with Lamartine at its head and Louis Blanc as one of the members. The Provisional Government im- mediately proclaimed the Republic, subject to ratification by the people. PROCLAMATION OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC 391 REFERENCES The Constitutional Charter of 1814 : Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, No. 93, pp. 456-464. Reign of Louis XVIII : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 375-38°. 427- 447, 469-475; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 23-36, 81-86; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1S14, pp. 103-121. Reign OF Charles X : Fyffe, pp. 603-619 ; Seignobos, pp. 1 21-132; Cam- bridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 85-103. Rise of the Kingdom of Belgium : Ensor, Belgium (Home University Library), pp. 114-141 ; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 619-625; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 186-199; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XVI, PP- 517-544- Polish Insurrection: Phillips, Poland (Home University Library), Chap. VIII, pp. 101-125; Fyffe, pp. 625-630; Skrine, The Expansion of Russia, pp. 110-122 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 445-474. Revolutions in Italy : Fyffe, pp. 631-635 ; Thayer, Dawn of Italian Inde- pe>tdcnce. Vol. I, pp. 342-378. Revolutionary Movements in Germany : Sybel, The Founding of tile German Empire, Vol. I, pp. 342-378; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, pp. 374-376- The Government of Louis Philippe : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 699-703; Lebon, Modern France, pp. 1 71-196; Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 176-185, 255-261 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 132- 152 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XV; Vol. XI, Chap. II. Early French Socialism: Ely, French and German Socialism, pp. 66-71, 108-123; Kirkup, History of Socialism, pp. 22-40. The February Revolution: Seignobos, pp. 155-159; Andrews, C. M., The Historical Development of Modern Europe, Vol. I, pp. 336-345 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 96-105. CHAPTER XVIII CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT THE GREAT MID-CENTURY UPRISING OF THE PEOPLES Central Europe at the opening of 1848 was in a restless, disturbed, expectant state. Everywhere men were wearied with the old order and demanding change. A revolutionary spirit was at work, the public mind in Germany, Italy, and Austria was excited. Into a society so perturbed and so active came the news of the fall of Louis Pliilippe. It was the spark that set the world in conflagration. The French Revolution of 1 848 was the signal for the most wide-reaching disturbance of the century. Revolutions broke out from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, from France to the Russian frontier. The whole system of reaction, which had succeeded Waterloo and which had come to be personified in the imperturbable Metternich, crashed in unutterable confusion. The great mid-centur}^ uprising of the peoples had begun', the most widespread convulsion Europe was Vienna the destined to know until 1914. The storm center of this con- storm center yulsion was Vienna, hitherto the proud bulwark of the estab- lished order. Here in the Austrian Empire one of the most confused chapters in European history began. It seemed for a time as if Austria was doomed to complete disruption, as if she was about to disappear as a great state. LOUIS KOSSUTH AND THE HUNGARIANS The immediate impulse came from Hungary where for several years a nationalistic movement had been in progress. With this tendency toward a sharper assertion of the national spirit had been coupled an increasingh^ aggressive reform movement. The insti- tutions of Hungary were thoroughly medieval. The nobility alone possessed political power, at the same time being entirely exempt 39-^ LIBERAL MOVEMENT IN HUNGARY 393 from taxation. A liberal and democratic party, nourished on the ideas of western Europe, had grown up, led by Louis Kossuth, one of Hungary's greatest heroes, and Francis Deak (da'-ak), whose ^^^^.^ personality is less striking, but whose services to his coun- Kossuth try were to be more solid and enduring. Kossuth had first *' 02-1894) come into notice as the editor of a paper which described in vivid and liberal style the debates in the Hungarian 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 ap- plied himself to serious studies, particularly to that of the English lan- guage, with such success that he was able later to address large audiences in England and the United States with great effect. In 1840 he was released and obtained permission to edit a daily paper. Kossuth was the very incarnation of the great democratic ideas of the age. He wished to erase all distinctions between noble and non-noble, to fuse all into one common whole. He demanded democratic reforms in everj^ department of the national life ; aboli- tion 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 irnpassioned 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 opposition Louis Kossuth 394 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT ably led and full of fire, grew rapidly. In 1847 it published its program, drawn up by Deak. This demanded the taxation of the nobles, the control by the Diet of all national expendi- demands of tures, larger liberty for the press, and a complete right of the Hunga- public meeting and association ; it demanded also that Hungary rians in 1847 , , , , , i- a • i- 1 1 should not be subordmate to Austrian policy, and to the Austrian provinces. Such was the situation when the great reform wave of 1848 began to sweep over Europe. The effect of the news of the fall of Louis Philippe was electrifying. The passion of the hour was expressed in a flaming speech by Kossuth, who proved himself a consummate spokesman for a people in decisive in- Tcvolt. Of imprcssivc presence, and endowed with a wonder- tervention of f^j voice, he was revolutionary oratory incarnate. In a Hungary speech in the Diet, March 3, 1848, he voiced the feelings of the time, bitterly denouncing the whole system of Austrian government. The effect of this speech was immediate and profound, not only in Hungary but in Austria proper. 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 The over- invaded the hall in which the Diet was sitting, crying "Down throw of with Metternich !" Metternich, who for thirty-nine years ettermc ^^^ stood at the head of 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 onslaught 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 impregnable. THE MARCH LAWS 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 REVOLUTIONS IN AUSTRIA AND PRUSSIA 395 and national enthusiasm just unchained and constantly fanned by Kossuth, passed on ]\Iarch 15 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 finishing touch. These celebrated laws represented the demands of the Hungarian national party led by Kossuth. They swept away the old aristocratic political machinery and substituted a mod- ern democratic constitution. Feudal dues were abolished, and liberty of the press, religious liberty, trial by jury were established.. The March Laws also demanded a separate Hungarian ministry, composed exclusively of Hungarians. All this w^as conceded by Austria under the compulsion of dire necessity (March 31). The example of Hungary was speedily followed by Bohemia. Here there were two races : the Germans, wealthy, educated, but a minority, and the Czechs, a branch of the great Slavic race. Revolution poorer, but a majority, ambitious to make Bohemia a separate '"^ Bohemia state, subject only to the Emperor. The Bohemians demanded (March 19) practically the same things that the Hungarians had demanded. The Emperor conceded them. The Austrian provinces west of Vienna made somewhat similar demands. These too were granted, of course because of the help- lessness of the Government. That helplessness was due chiefly to the critical situation in Italy. For the Italians had seized in the" the propitious moment to attempt the overthrow of Austrian Austrian •n TiTii ITT- • , provinces influence in Italy. Lombardy and Venetia rose against the hated foreigner. Venice, under the inspiring leadership of Daniel Manin, restored the republic w^hich Napoleon had suppressed after his first campaign. Piedmont threw in its lot with these rebels and sent its army forward to aid in the war of liberation. So did other Italian states, under popular pressure, Tuscany, the Papal States, Naples. At the same time several of these states gained liberal constitutions. Italy had thus practically declared her independence. Meanwhile there were March Days in Germany, too. The King of Prussia promised a constitution, intimidated thereto by an uprising of the people of Berlin, which was marked by the erection of Revolution barricades, great turbulence, and some bloodshed. He also "> Germany promised to lead in the attempt to achieve unity for Germany. Preliminary steps were immediately taken to bring this about by a great German National Assembly or Parliament, popularly elected 396 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT for the purpose. This Assembly met two months later in Frankfort amid the high hopes of the people. Constitutions were granted by their princes to several German states. Thus by the end of March, 1848, revolution, universal in its range, was everjnvhere successful. The famous March Days had demol- ished the system of government which had held sway in The March ^ , ^ . ^, , ,..^-^. revolutions Europe for a generation. Throughout the Austrian Empire, everywhere [^ Germany, and in Italy the revolution was triumphant. triumphant j ^ . j t Hungary and Bohemia had obtained sweeping concessions ; a constitution had been promised the Austrian provinces ; several Italian states had obtained constitutions ; the Lombardo- Venetian kingdom had declared itself independent of Austria, and the rest of Italy was moving to support the rebels ; a constitution had been promised Prussia, and a convention was about to meet to give liberty and unity to Germany. RIVALRIES OF RACES IN AUSTRIA But the period of triumph was brief. At the moment of greatest humiliation Austria began to show remarkable powers of recovery. In the rivalries of her races, and in her army lay her salvation. The Government won its first victory, not in Italy, which was the Bohemia Critical point, but in Bohemia. There, in March, the Germans conquered ^j^j ^y^Q Czechs (cheks) had worked together for the acquisi- tion of the reforms described above. But shortly serious differences drove the two races apart. These racial animosities, vigorously fanned by designing individuals, resulted in a clash between Germans and Czechs in the streets of Prague. Windischgratz, commander of the imperial troops in Prague, seized this occasion to bombard the city (June, 1848). He subdued it and became 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. The Italians, after the first flush of enthusiasm, began to be torn by Jealousies and dissensions, jj^j The rulers of Tuscany, Naples, and the Papal States deserted partially the national cause, leaving Charles Albert of Piedmont, and conquered ^^^ Lombard rebels, alone confronting the Austrians under Radetzky, a man who had served with credit in every Austrian war for sixty years and who now, at the age of eighty-two, was to increase ILLIBERAL ATTITUDE OF THE MAGYARS 397 his reputation. Radetzky defeated Charles Albert at Custozza, on July 25, 1848, and then agreed to an armistice of several months, expecting to complete his work later. Thus by the middle of the summer of 1 848 the Austrian government was again in the saddle in Bohemia, and had partially recovered its power in Italy. It was only waiting for an opportunity to win back the ground it had lost in Hungary. The opportunity came with the outbreak of civil ^^^.^ dissension in that country. The racial and national rivalries dissension rose to the highest pitch. The Magyars, though a minority of *° angary 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 Roumanians. These peoples, 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 Hungary — that of the Mag- yars. 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 official language than their own. They, therefore, refused these demands point-blank. As a conse- quence, the bitterest race hatreds broke out in this Hungarian state, whose power had been so recently established and was so lightly grounded. The Magyars would not grant to others the fundamental right which they had long so stoutly asserted for themselves, and which after vigorous struggles they had won, the right of nationality. They began, indeed, forthwith a policy of oppression, a policy of Magyarization, of compressing all these various peoples into one common mold, of forcible assimilation. This has ever since been the open sore in Hungarian politics. The Magyars insisted that the Magyar language should be taught in all the schools in Croatia and should be used in all official com- munications between that province and the central govern- ^^^54^;^ ^^ ment in Budapest. The Croatians resented this uncompromis- pioits the ing and ungenerous policy and their resentment rapidly became ^'*"^**°° rebellion. The Austrian government saw in this dissension the chance to regain its lost control. By indirect and tortuous methods 398 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT it fanned this racial hatred, hoping to profit from the anger of the Magyars against the Slavs and of the Slavs against the Magyars. Needless to say the tension between Hungary and Austria increased daily. Finally in September, 1848, matters were precipitated when Jellachich, a man who hated the Hungarians with a deep and abiding hatred, and who had been appointed by the Austrian Emperor as governor of Croatia, began a civil war by leading an army of Croatians and Serbs against the Magyars. The Magyars, the dominant class * in Hungary, were resolved to maintain their position against the rebellious Slavs and, if Austria supported them, against Austria herself. On its side the reactionary party in Austria, emboldened by the partial successes of the army in Bohemia and Italy, resolved to tighten , its grip upon the state. First it forced the Emperor Ferdinand Accession of ^ ^^ '^^ '^ Francis to abdicate. He was succeeded December 2, 1848, by his Joseph I nephew Francis Joseph I, a lad of eighteen, destined to a long and eventful reign. The purpose of this manoeuvre was to permit by a show of legality the abrogation of the March Laws in Hungary. Promises made by Ferdinand, it was held, were not binding upon his successor, and the promises of March were henceforth to be repu- diated. Matters went rapidly from bad to worse. Austria prepared to subdue Hungary as she had subdued Bohemia. Hungary stif- fened for the conflict. Thus it came about that the year 1849 saw a great war in Hungary. The Hungarians, in a frenzy of excitement, led by Kossuth, took the Hungarian momentous Step of declaring that the House of Hapsburg, as Declaration false and perjured, had ceased to rule ; and that Hungary was ence (AprU " an independent nation. Kossuth was appointed President of 14, 1849) the indivisible state of Hungary. While the word republic was not uttered, such would probably be the future form of government if the Hungarians succeeded in achieving their independence. WAR IN HUNGARY But this was not to be. The ungenerous conduct of the Magyars toward the other races in Hungary now received its natural reward. Not only did the Hungarian armies have to face Austrian troops but they had to fight the Slavs of Hungary who, eager for revenge, aided the Austrians. The Hungarians achieved some victories THE WAR IN HUNGARY 399 Joseph I helped by Czar despite these odds, but their action in declaring their country inde- pendent complicated the situation disastrously. The matter be- came international. Foreign intervention brought this tur- Francis bulent chapter abruptly to a close. The young Francis Joseph I made an appeal for aid to the Czar of Russia. Nicho- las I showed the greatest alacrity in responding. The reasons °' Russia that determined him were various. He was both by temperament and conviction predisposed to aid his fellow-sovereigns against revolutionary move- ments, 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 rest- less Poland. Many Poles were fighting in the Hunga- rian armies. Russian troops, variously estimated at from 100,000 to 200,000, now poured Hungary into Hungary from the conquered east and north. The Austri- ans again advanced from the west. The Hungarians 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 overwhelm- ing numbers of their opponents rendered the struggle hopeless. Kos- suth resigned in favor of Gorgei (ger'-ge-i), 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. Nicholas proudly handed over to Francis Joseph his troublesome Hungary, which Francis Joseph I At the time of his accession. 400 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT 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 province of Austria, and was crushed beneath the iron heel. The catastrophe of 1849 seemed the com- plete annihilation of that country. Meanwhile Italy also had been reconquered by the revived military power of Austria. As we have seen, the Italian campaign of 1848 . against Austria had been led by Charles Albert, King of Sar- The conquest ^ r ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ i ^ of Italy dinia. He had not been successful and had been forced to completed ^-^^ ^^ armistice at Custozza in August. But there were many republicans in Italy who believed that Charles Albert had been only half-hearted, that Italy could never be saved by constitutional monarchists. These republicans now decided to carry out their own views. They effected revolutions in both Florence and Rome and declared both of those states republics. The Grand Duke of Tuscany fled to the Kingdom of Naples, as did the Pope. The temporal power of the Pope was abolished. The result of all these changes was that when the armistice was over and Charles Albert took the field in the spring of 1849 against Austria he took it alone. The republicans were neither able nor dis- posed to aid him. The Italians at this critical moment were divided among themselves. Had they been united they would have had difficulty enough in their struggle for independence. As it was, the case was hopeless. No help came to Charles Albert from the states to the south of Piedmont. At Novara, March 23, 1849, the Sardinian Abdication ^.rmy was utterly overthrown. The King himself sought of Charles 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 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 PARLIAMENT OF FRANKFORT 401 In the succeeding months the repubhcs of Florence, Rome, and Venice were, one after the other, overthrown. The radiant hopes of 1848 had withered fast. A cruel reaction soon held sway throughout most of the peninsula. The power of Austria of the was restored, greater apparently than ever. Piedmont alone '■^p"'''"^^ preserved a real independence, but was for the time being crushed beneath the burdens of a disastrous war and a humiliating peace. DEFEAT OF LIBERALISM IN GERMANY Meanwhile the victories of the Liberals in Germany were being suc- ceeded by defeats. Their hope had centered in the deliberations of the Parliament of Frankfort, consisting of nearly six hundred ^^ „ ,. ^ -' The Parha- representatives, elected by universal suffrage. The assembly ment of was composed of many able men, but it possessed only a moral '^ °^^ authority. Though its existence 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 support and played a waiting game, hoping to be able to prevent the execution of any decisions unfavorable to themselves. The Frankfort Parliament had been summoned in response to a popular demand for a real German nation, in place of the hollow mockery of the Confederation established in 181 5 at Vienna. It was expected to draw up a constitution and it was also expected that this constitu- tion would be democratic. Its aim was to achieve not only German unity but German political freedom, popular government in place of government by absolute monarchs or privileged classes. It was hoped that a great free German state would issue from its delibera- tions, unity resting upon a large measure of democracy. The task was very difficult for various reasons. The union must be federal because there were nearly forty states in Germany, each with its own history, its own traditions, its own dynasty, ■^^rhy the its own fears of the others. Moreover, a federation is difficult problem of even between states that are equal in political development, unity was so and the political development of the German states was unequal, difficult Some states possessed constitutions and parliaments and the people had had some experience in self-government. But the leading states, Prussia and Austria, had none of these things and were in their political development backward. Moreover these two states 402 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT were rivals and neither was willing to sacrifice its identity and power for any such thing as a common German fatherland. There can be no federation without a sacrifice of power by the states entering it. Moreover the governing classes of both of these states hated everything that savored of democracy. The Frankfort Parliament failed and the two streams of tendency, so characteristic of the century, the tendency toward unity and the tendency toward democracy, were dammed up for many decades in Germany. Indeed the tendency toward democracy remained dammed up until the disastrous outcome of the European War. The Parliament failed, to some extent because of the mistakes of its members, but chiefly because of the resolute opposition of the Hostility of princcs of Germany, and, in particular, of Prussia and Austria. the German jf however. Succeeded in drafting a constitution of many high princes to . . . unity and merits, a constitution nobly planned, which guaranteed civil democracy liberty to every German, equality before the law, responsible parliamentary control for the central government and for the gov- ernment of the separate states. It was decided that the new German nation should have the same boundaries as the old Confederation, a decision which displeased Austria as she wished to be included with all her territories, not with simply a part of them. A most impor- tant 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 heredi- tary, or for life, or for a term of years ? Should he be the monarch of Prussia or 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 she "would neither let herself be expelled from the German Confederation, nor let her 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 accept it? If he would, the new scheme to which twenty-eight minor states had already assented would go into force, though this might involve a war with Austria, by this time largely recovered from her various troubles. Frederick William IV had declared in 1847 that he was willing to settle the German ques- tion, "with Austria, without Austria, yes, if need be, against Austria." THE PARLIAMENT OF FRANKFORT 403 'a: S> '-- "^ H O 404 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT Now, however, he was in a very different mood. He declined the offer of the Frankfort Parhament. The reasons were 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 revolutionary 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, rejected the work of the Frankfort Parliament. Rebuffed in such high Rejection of quarters, that body was unable to impose its constitution upon ^yf' v°^^u^ Germany, and it finally ended its existence wretchedly. In fortPariia- session for ovcr a 3^ear it accomplished nothing. But the ™®°* responsibility for the failure of Germans to achieve a real unity in 1848 and 1849 rests primarily not with it, but with the rulers of Prussia and Austria. The collapse of the Frankfort Parliament was a bitter disappoint- ment. It drove a number of the more radical Germans to a bold and desperate attempt to establish a republic by force of arms, since these monarchs of Germany spurned the work of the Parliament. An insurrection broke out in southwest Germany, a section devoted to the cause of liberty. The regular troops of Baden joined the insur- A republican gen ts, and the movement spread down the Rhine. "Some rising Qf |-]^g noblest and most generous spirits in Germany were to be found in this last and most desperate venture to maintain the cause of liberal unity against the sinister opposition of the German crowns. It was all in vain. Democratic idealism fell, not for the first or last time, before the trained battalions of Prussia." ^ The republicans were shot down or dispersed by Prussian troops in May, 1849. The republican party in Germany never recovered from this blow. For men who held democratic and republican ideas and ideals in- tensely there was no hope in Germany. Many, not willing to aban- Emigration ^on their convictions, their belief in liberty, not wishing to of German Uye under a regime which denied the most elementary rights Liberals to .,..,,* , . , , , the United to individuals, moreover not safe m such states and not de- states sired, had only the sad resource of leaving the land of their birth, esteeming liberty more precious than subjection to absolute monarchs. One of these was Carl Schurz, a Prussian, whose part in the revolution of 1848 was most romantic and honorable. He, ' Fisher, The Republican Tradition in Europe, p. 265. RESULTS OF THE MOVEMENTS OF 1848 405 like many others, emigrated to the United States, with a heavy heart, because he believed that the cause of liberty was lost in Germany and in Europe, and that he had to make the poignant choice between liberty and his native land. Great was the gain of America. If these men could not have democratic institutions at home they could find them in the New World and could enjoy the opportunities they insure. The King of Prussia had refused the headship of a united Ger- many offered him by the Frankfort Parliament and had thus rendered its labors fruitless. But he now attempted to secure the leadership in another way, proposing a union of the purely German states under his own direction. This meant the exclusion of Austria, so largely non- German in her composition. Most of the smaller states joined this Prussian Union (1849). This action brought . Prussia into sharp conflict with Austria, which had no desire to be edged out of Germany and which naturally resented this attempt of Prussia to snatch the leadership away from her. Austria therefore, having finally set her Hungarian house in order, peremptorily ordered the King of Prussia to abandon his schemes, which he forthwith did. This was the famous "humiliation of Olmiitz" (ol'-miits). Austria then ^^ ,., The humil- demanded that the old German Confederation of 1815, which iation of had been suspended in 1848, be revived with its Diet at Frank- ^^"*^ fort. This was done in 1851. Austria was stronger than ever in the Diet. The short-lived Prussian Union was dissolved. The permanent results of this mid-century uprising of central Europe were very slight. EveryAvhere the old governments slipped back into the old grooves and resumed the old traditions. „ ,, , " . . Results of Two states, however, emerged with constitutions which they the revoiu- kept, Sardinia, whose Constitutional Statute granted by ''"'^^ "^ '^'^^ Charles Albert on March 4, 1848, established a real constitutional and parliamentary government, the onlj^ one in Italy ; and Prussia, whose Constitution issued by the King in its final form in 1850 was far less liberal, yet sufficed to range Prussia among the constitu- tional states of Europe. By it the old absolutism of the state was changed, at least in form. There was henceforth a parliament con- sisting of two chambers. In one respect this document was a bitter disappointment to all Liberals. In the March Days of 1848 the King had promised universal suffrage, but the Constitution as finally promulgated rendered it illusory. It established a system unique in 406 CENTRAL EUROPE IN REVOLT the world. Universal suffrage was not withdrawn, but was marvel- ously manipulated. The voters were divided in each electoral dis- trict throughout Prussia into three classes, according to wealth, three^^ia^ss The amount of taxes paid by the district was divided into system of 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 assembly 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, estab- lished by the Constitution of 1850, existed in Prussia down to the end of the Great War. Thus universal suffrage did not mean democracy : it meant plutocracy. REFERENCES Revolution in Austria : Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 707-718, 738- 770; Andrews, Historical Development of Modern Europe, Vol. I, pp. 363-373; Seignobos, The Political History of Europe Since 18 14, pp. 412-419; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 151-156.. Kossuth : Thayer, W. R., Throne-Makers. Revolution of 1848 in Prussia : Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 348-352; Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution of Prussia, pp. 305- 321; Fyffe, pp. 719-722, 785-789. The Parliament of Frankfort: Henderson, Vol. II, pp. 360-369; Mar- riott and Robertson, pp. 321-330; Fyffe, pp. 725-728, 781-783, 789-799; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 91-100. The Revolution of 1848 in Italy : Orsi, Modern Italy, pp. 160-215 ; Cesa- resco, Liberation of Italy, pp. 91-164; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 79-95- CHAPTER XIX THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC AND THE FOUNDING OF THE SECOND EMPIRE THE SECOND REPUBLIC The Second Republic lasted nominally nearly five years, from Feb- ruary 24, 1848, to December 2, 1852, when the Second Empire was proclaimed. Practically, however, as we shall see, it came to an end one year earlier, December 2, 1851. During this history of the period the state was administered successively by the Pro- l®'^"^^- visional Government, chosen on February 24, and remaining in power for about ten weeks, then for about a year by the National Constituent Assembly, which framed the Constitution of the Republic, and then by the President and Legislative Assembly, created by that constitution. The history of the Republic was to be a very troubled one. THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT AND THE SOCIALISTS The Provisional Government was from the first composed of two elements. The larger number, led by Lamartine, were simply Republicans, desirous of a republican form of government in place of the monarchical. The other element was represented ments in the particularly by Louis Blanc, who believed in a republic, but Provisional , , , , • , . Government as a means to an end, and that end a social, economic revo- lution ; who wished primarily to improve the condition of the labor- ing classes, to work out in actual laws and institutions the socialistic theories propounded with such effectiveness during the later years of the reign of Louis Philippe, and particularly the principle represented in the famous phrase, "the right to employment." What he most desired was not a mere political change, but a thoroughgoing recon- struction of society in the interest of the largest and weakest class, the poor, the wage-earners. 407 4o8 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC the flag The Provisional Government, divided as it was into Socialists and Anti-Socialists, ran the risk of all coalitions, that of being reduced ^j^g to impotence by internal dissensions. Conflicts between the question of two great Currents of opinion began on the very day of the proc- lamation of the Republic. Armed workmen came in immense numbers to the Hotel de Ville (5-ter de vel) and demanded that henceforth the banner of France should be the red flag, emblem of Socialism. Lamartine repelled this demand in a speech so brilliant and so persuasive that the workmen them- selves stamped upon the red flag. But the Government, achieving an oratorical victory, saw itself forced to yield to the Socialist party in two important respects. On motion of Louis Blanc, it recognized the so-called "right to employment." It prom- ised work to all citizens, and as a means to this end it established, against its own real wishes, the famous National Work- shops. 1 1 also established a Labor Commission, with Blanc at its head and with its place of meeting the Luxembourg Palace. This was a mere debating society, a body to investigate economic questions and report to the Government. It had no power of action, or of putting its opinions into execution. Moreover, by removing Louis Blanc from the Hotel de Ville to an- other part of Paris, the Government really reduced his influence and that of his party. Naturally this irritated the Socialists. Lamartine ix ii>j_ After a lithograph by Chasseriau. THE NATIONAL WORKSHOPS 409 The National Workshops, too, were a source of ultimate disappoint- ment to those who had looked to them to solve the complex labor problems of the modem industrial system. Conceded by the National Provisional Government against its will, and to gain time, that Workshops Government did not intend that they should succeed. Their crea- tion was intrusted to the Minister of Commerce, Marie, a personal enemy of Louis Blanc, who, according to his own admission, was willing to make this experiment in order to render the latter unpopular and to show workingmen the fallacy of his theories of production, and the dangers of such theories for themselves. The scheme was rep- resented as Louis Blanc's though it was denounced by him, was established especially to discredit him, and was a veritable travesty of his ideas. Blanc wished to have every man practice his own trade in real factories, started by state aid. They should be en- gaged in productive enterprises ; moreover, only men of good char- acter should be permitted to join these associations. Instead of this, the Government simply set men of the most varied sorts — cobblers, carpenters, metal workers, masons, to labor upon unpro- ductive tasks, such as making excavations for public works. They were organized in a military fashion, and the wages were uniform, two francs a day. It was properly no system of production that was being tried, but a system of relief for the unemployed, who were very numerous owing to the fact that many factories had had to close because of the Their rapid generally disturbed state of affairs. The number of men growth flocking to these National Workshops increased alarmingly : 25,000 in the middle of March ; 66,000 in the middle of April ; over 100,000 in May. As there was not work enough for all, the number of work- ing days was reduced for each man to two a week, and his total wage for the week fixed at eight francs. The result was that large num- bers of men were kept idle most of the time, were given wretched wages, and had plenty of time to discuss their grievances. They furnished excellent material for socialist agitators. This experiment wasted the public money, accomplished nothing useful, and led to a street war of the most appalling kind. The Provisional Government was, as the name signified, only a temporary organization whose duty was to administer the state until an assembly should be elected to frame a Constitution. The Pro- visional Government established universal suffrage and thus politi- 410 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC cal power passed suddenly from the hands of about two hundred thousand privileged wealthy persons to over nine million elec- Nationai tors. The elections were held on April 23, and the National Constituent Constituent Assembly met on May 4, 1848. The assembly consisted of nine hundred men, about eight hundred of them Moderate Republicans. The Socialists had almost disappeared. THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY The Assembly showed at once that it was bitterly opposed to the opinions of the Socialists of Paris. The Provisional Government now Assembly laid down its powers, and the Assembly chose five of its mem- to°the^ bers, all Anti-Socialists, with Lamartine as the head, as the Socialists new executive until the Constitution should be drawn up. All these men had been opposed to Louis Blanc. The Government, believing that the National Workshops were breeding-spots of Socialism and dangerous unrest, resolved to root them out. It an- nounced their immediate abolition, giving the workmen the of the alternative of enrolling in the army or going into the country to National labor on public works. If they did not leave voluntarily, they Workshops , , , r , i ^, i , i i -, . would be forced to leave. Fhe laborers, goaded to desperation, prepared to resist and to overthrow this Government which they had helped bring into existence, and which had proved so unsympathetic. Organized as a semi-military force, angered at the hostility of the bourgeoisie to all helpful social reform that could make their lives easier, they began a bitter fight. The Assembly saw the terrible The June nature of the conflict impending. General Cavaignac (ka-van- Days yak') was given dictatorial powers by the Assembly, the Execu- tive Commission of five resigning. During four June days (June 23-26, 1848) the most fearful street fighting Paris had ever known went on behind a baffling network of barricades. The issue was long doubtful, but finally the insurgents were put down. The cost was terrible. Ten thousand were killed or wounded. Eleven thousand prisoners were taken, and their deportation was imme- diately decreed by the Assembly. The June Days left among the poor an enduring legacy of hatred toward the bourgeoisie. A military The Moderate Republicans had definitely triumphed over dictatorship ^^g Socialistic Republicans. But so narrow had been their escape, so fearful were they for the future that the dictatorship of THE CONSTITUTION OF THE SECOND REPUBLIC 411 Cavaignac was continued until the end of October. Thus the Second Repubhc, proclaimed in February, 1848, after ten troubled weeks under a Provisional Government, passed under military- leadership for the next four months. One-man power was rapidly developing. The results of this socialist agitation and of the sanguinary Days of June were lamentable and far-reaching. The republic was immeas- urably weakened by this dreadful fratricidal strife. It was gravely wounded in the house of its friends. THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC After the suppression of the Socialists in June the Assembly pro- ceeded to frame the constitution, for which task it had been chosen. It proclaimed the Republic as the definitive government of ^, , T- Till- ^ rr ^^^ framing r ranee. It declared universal suffrage. It provided that of the con - there should be a legislature consisting of a single chamber, ^'^*"t'°'i composed of 750 members, chosen for three years, to be renewed in full a.t the end of that period. The executive was to be a president elected for four years and ineligible for reelection save after a four years' interval. He was given very considerable powers. It was felt that the danger in giving him these would be neutralized by the shortness of of the his term and by his inability to be immediately reelected. ^*®'="**^^ How he should be chosen was the most important question before the Constituent Assembly, and was long debated. The Assembly, dominated by its fundamental dogma of universal suffrage and popular sovereignty, was disposed to have the president chosen by all the voters. The danger in this procedure lay in the lack of political experience of the French electorate, and the concerning probability that they would be blinded by some distinguished *^® P'^^^i- or famous name in making their choice, not guided by an intelligent analysis of character and of fitness for the high office. It was, however, decided that the people should choose the president and should be entirely untrammeled in their choice. In thus leaving the choice of the president to universal suffrage, this republican assembly was playing directly into the hands of a pretender to a throne, of a man who believed he had the right to rule France by reason of his birth, Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, nephew of the Great 412 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC Napoleon and legitimate heir to his pretensions. At the time of the February Revolution this man was practically without influence or significance, but so swiftly did events move and opinion shift in that year 1848 that by the time the mode of choosing the president was decided upon, he was already known to be a leading candidate, a fact which stamped that decision as all the more foolhardy. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte had become chief of the house of Bona- parte in 1832 at the age of twenty-four, on the death of Napoleon's son, known as the "King of Rome." He was the son of Louis, the former King of Holland. He conceived his position with Napoleon utmost scriousness. He believed that he had a right to rule Bonaparte ^^^^ France, and that the day would come when he would. He adhered to this belief for sixteen years, though those years brought him no practical encouragement, but only the reverse. Gathering about him a few adventurers, he attempted in 1836, at Strasburg, and in 1840, at Boulogne, to seize power. Both attempts were puerile in their conception, and were bunglingly executed. Both ended in fiasco. He had gained the name of being ridiculous, a thing exceed- ingly difficult for Frenchmen to forgive or forget. As a result of the former attempt he had been exiled to the United States, from which country he shortly returned. As a result of the latter he was im- prisoned in the fortress of Ham in northern France, from which he escaped in 1846, disguised as an ordinary mason, named Badinguet. He then went to England and in 1848, at the time of the Chartist risings, he was a special constable stationed in Trafalgar Square. This was certainly no record of achievement. But the stars in their courses were fighting for him. The Revolution of 1848 created his opportunity, as that of 1789 had created that of the First Napoleon. Like his great prototype, whom he constantly sought to imitate, he offered his services to the Republic. He was elected a member of the Constituent Assembly, where the impression he created was that of a mediocre man, with few ideas of his own, who could prob- of aTe"^^"^ ably be controlled by others. His name, however, was a Constituent name to conjure with. This was his only capital, but it was ^^^™ sufficient. The word Napoleon was seen to be a marvelous vote-winner with the peasants, who, now that universal suffrage was the law of the land, formed the great majority. "How should I not vote for this gentleman," said a peasant to Montalembert, "I whose nose was frozen at Moscow?" Louis Napoleon was an ELECTION OF THE PRINCE PRESIDENT 413 avowed candidate for the presidency, and, as the most colorless, was the strongest. Cavaignac was the candidate of the democratic Republicans, who had governed France since February, but he was now hated by the workingmen for his part in the for the June Days. Thus when the presidential election was held in P''^s''*®''*=y December, 1848, Louis Napoleon was overwhelmingly chosen with over five million votes to Cavaignac's million and a half. The new President entered upon his duties December 20, 1848. On that day before the Assembly he swore "to remain faithful to the demo- cratic republic," and said: "My duty is clear. I will fulfill it as a man of honor. I shall regard as enemies of the country all those who endeavor to change by illegal means that which France has established." He kept his oath for nearly three years and then he broke it, because he wished to remain in power, having no desire to retire to private life ; yet the Constitution forbade the reelection of a president at the end of the four-year term. Louis Napoleon therefore took a leaf out of the biography of Napoleon I, and climbed to power by carrying through a coup d'etat, far more skillfully than his uncle had engineered that of the 19th of Brumaire. THE COUP D'ETAT The 2d of December, 1851, anniversary of the coronation of Napo- leon I and of the battle of Austerlitz, was chosen as the fateful day. During the early morning hours many of the military and civil leaders of France, republican and monarchist, were arrested in bed and taken to prison. A battalion of infantry was sent to occupy the Legislative Chamber. Placards were posted on all the walls of Paris, pretending to explain the President's purposes, which included a remodeling of the constitution in the direction of the system established by Napoleon I at the time of the Consulate. "This system, created by the First Consul at the beginning of the century, has already given to France repose and prosperity ; it will guarantee them to her again." The people were called upon to approve or disapprove these suggestions. The significance of all this was at first not apparent to those who read the placards. But signs of opposition began to show Events of themselves as their meaning became clearer. Some of the December 2 deputies, going to their hall of meeting, found entrance prevented by 414 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC The " massacre of the boulevards the military. Withdrawing to another place, and proceeding to impeach the President, they were attacked by the troops, who arrested a large number, and took them off to prison. Thus the leaders of France, civil and military, were in custody, and the Presi- dent saw no organized authority erect before him. This was the work of December 2. Would the people resent the high-handed acts of this usurper ? The President had not neglected to make unprecedented prepara- tions for this contingency. His police controlled all the printing establishments, whence usually in periods of crisis emerged flaming appeals to revolt ; also all the bell towers, whence in revolutionary times the tocsin was accustomed to ring out the appeal to in- surrection. Nevertheless, on the 3d, barricades were raised. On the 4th oc- curred the famous " mas- sacre of the boulevards." Over 1 50 were killed and a large number wounded. Paris was cowed. The coup d'etat was crowned with success. To prevent any possible rising of the provinces martial law was proclaimed in thirty-two departments, thousands of arbitrary arrests were made, and the work on which the Prince President entered on the night of Decem- ber 2d was thoroughly carried out. Probably a hundred thousand arrests were made throughout France. All who appeared danger- ous to Louis Napoleon were either transported, exiled, or im- prisoned. This vigorous policy was aimed particularly at the Republicans, who were for years completely silenced. Having thus abolished all opposing leadership, Louis Napoleon ap- Napoleon III THE PRINCE PRESIDENT BECOMES EMPEROR 415 pealed to the people for their opinion as to intrusting him with power to remodel the Constitution along the lines indicated in his proclama- tion. On December 20, 7,439,216 voted in favor of so doing. The and only 640,737 voted in the negative. While the election plebiscite was in no sense fair, while the issue presented was neither clear nor simple, while force and intimidation were resorted to, yet it was evident that a large majority of Frenchmen were willing to try again the experiment of a Napoleon. The Republic, though officially continuing another year, was now dead. Louis Napoleon, though still nominally President, was in fact an absolute sovereign. It was a mere detail when a year later „ , „. ^ •' JNapoleon 111. (November 21, 1852) the people of France were permitted to Emperor, vote on the question of reestablishing the imperial dignity, ^*^' ^' ' ^^ and of proclaiming Louis Napoleon Bonaparte emperor, under the name of Napoleon III. 7,824,189 Frenchmen voted yes; 253,145 voted no. On the anniversary of the coup d'etat, December 2, a day so fortunate for Bonapartes, Napoleon III was proclaimed Emperor of the French, and the Second Empire was established. THE SECOND EMPIRE The President who, by the endless witchery of a name, by a profit- able absence of scruples, and by favorable circumstances, had known how to become an Emperor, was destined to be the ruler of France and a leading figure in European politics for eighteen years. He an- nounced at the outset that what France needed, after so turbulent a history, was government by an enlightened and benevolent despot. Then when the necessary work of reorganization had been carried through and the national life was once more in a gram of healthy state, the autocratic would give way to a liberal form *?« "^w 1111- T- Emperor of government which the country would then be m a condition to manage and enjoy. As a matter of fact the history of the Second Empire falls into these two divisions — autocracy unlimited from 1852 to i860, and a growing liberalism from i860 to 1870, when the Empire collapsed, its program woefully unrealized. The political institutions of the Empire were largely based on those of the Consulate. The machinery was elaborate but was mainly designed to deceive the French people into thinking that they enjoyed self-government. The principle of universal suffrage 4i6 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC was preserved but was ingeniously rendered quite harmless to the autocrat. There was a Legislative Body and there was a Senate, but their powers were very slight. The important fact was not institution^ the activity of these various bodies but of the one man. France of the ^as no longer a land of freedom. Since 1 8 1 5 under the vari- "^"^^ ous regimes Parliament had been a serious factor in the life of the nation and men had had a training in political affairs. That promising development was now abruptly stopped. Repression was the order of the day. Particular ruthlessness was shown in the policy of crushing the Republicans, as Napoleon HI had a very clear instinct that they would never forgive him for overthrowing by violence the Republic which had honored him with its highest office and which he had solemnly sworn to protect from all enemies. In politics a despot and a reactionary, stamping out every possible spark of independence. Napoleon was, however, in many other ways progressive. Particularly did he seek to develop the wealth both^^reT- ^i the country and his reign was one of increasing economic sive and prosperity ; manufactures, commerce, banking, all were progressive , it. ■ ^ r , 1 • greatly encouraged. It was a period of great busmess enter- prises and fortunes were made quickly, and of a size hitherto unknown in France. Paris was modernized and beautified on a most elaborate scale and became the most attractive and comfortable capital in Europe. In 1853 Napoleon III married a young Spanish lady of remarkable beauty and of noble birth, Mile. Eugenie de Montijo, "a marriage of love" as the Emperor told the French people. The Tuileries immediately became the center of a court life the most brilliant and luxurious of the nineteenth century. In 1856 Napoleon III was at the zenith of his power. The Empire had been recognized by all the other states of Europe. The Emperor had, with England and Piedmont as allies, waged a sue- Xne Congress of cessful War against Russia in the Crimea. He was supposed Pans, 185 ^Q have the best army in Europe, and he was honored in the face of all the world by having Paris chosen as the seat of the con- gress which drew up the treaties at the end of that war. And now an heir was born to him, the Prince Imperial, as interesting in his day and as ill-fated as the King of Rome had been in his. Fortune seemed to have emptied her full horn of plenty upon the author of the coup d'etat. But the Empire had already reached its apogee, though this was THE EMPRESS 417 Empress Eugenie After the painting by Winterhalter. 4i8 THE SECOND FRENCH REPUBLIC not evident for some time. Had Napoleon limited his activity to the improvement and development of conditions at home his reign The forei n i^iight have Continued successful and advantageous. But he policy of adopted a showy and risky foreign policy, whose consequences apo eon j^^ ^-^ ^^^ foresee and which in the end entangled him in hopeless embarrassments and led directly to the violent and tragic overthrow of his Empire and the endless humiliation and suffering of France. The foreign policy reacted, after i860, upon the home policy in a decided manner. The beginning of Napoleon's serious troubles was his participation in the Italian war of 1859. To Ainderstand the course of the Second Empire from i860 to 1870 one must study the part played by Napoleon III in the making of modern Italy, the consequences of which were to be for him so unexpected, so far-reaching, and in the end so disastrous. And correctly to appraise that policy we must first trace the history of the rise of the Kingdom of Italy. REFERENCES The SECO^^D Republic : Fisher, The Republican Tradition in Europe, Chap. VIII, pp. 202-228; Lebon, Modern France, Chap. XI, pp. 261-290; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. V, pp. 96-141. The Napoleonic Legend : Fisher, Bonapartism, Chap. IV, pp. 64-79. Early Life of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte : Forbes, A., Life of Napoleon the Third, pp. 1-58. The Strasburg and Boulogne Incidents : Forbes, pp. 59-107. The Coupd'Etat: Murdock, Reconstruction of Europe, Chap. II, pp. 7-15; Forbes, Chap. VII, pp. 127-148; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 134- 141. The Early Years of the Empire : Fisher, pp. 80-99. CHAPTER XX THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY Italy, as we have seen, was a land of small states, of arbitrary gov- ernment, and of Austrian domination. The spirit of nationality, the spirit of freedom were nowhere recognized. Indeed, every effort was made to stamp them out whenever they appeared, in^^ify a'nl Thus far these efforts had been successful. They were now ^'■^^'^"™ about to break down utterly and a noble and stirring movement of reform was to sweep over the peninsula in triumph, completely transforming and immensely enriching a land which, greatly endowed by nature, had been sadly treated by man. MAZZINI THE FOUNDER OF "YOUNG ITALY" The deepest aspirations of the Italian people had finally found a voice, clear, bold, and altogether thrilling, in the person of Joseph INIazzini. Mazzini (mat-se'-ne) was the spiritual force of the T 1 • Ti • • • 1 • • , Joseph Italian Risorgimento or resurrection, as this national move- Mazzini ment was called, the prophet of a state that was not yet but (^8°5"i872) was to be, destined from youth to feel with extraordinary intensity a holy mission imposed upon him. He was born in 1805 in Genoa, his father being a physician and a professor in the universit}'. 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 autobiography, "somber and absorbed and appeared like one suddenly grown old. I childishly determined to dress always in black, fancying myself in mourning for my country." 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 agitation. He joined the Carbonari, not 419 420 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY because he approved even then of their methods, but because at least they were a revolutionary organization. As a member of it, he was arrested in 1830. The governor of Genoa told Mazzini's father that his son was "gifted with sonje talent," but was "too Hisimpris- fond of Walking by himself at night absorbed in thought. onment 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 ofSavona. 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 re- leased, 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 Switzerland, but chiefly in England, which became his second home. After his release from prison Mazzini founded in 1 83 1 a society, "Young Italy," destined to be an important factor in making the new Italy. The Carbo- nari had led two revolutions 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 be a secret organization ; otherwise it would be stamped out. But it must not be merely a body of conspirators ; it must be educative, proselyt- jn^, 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 par- Founder of " Young Italy " Joseph Mazzini GIUSEPPE MAZZINI 421 ticularly to the young. "Place youth at the head of the msurgent multitude," he said ; "you know not the secret of the power hidden in these j^outhful 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 Italy was indeed a new religion, appealing to the loftiest emotions, entailing complete self-sacrifice, complete ^j^^ absorption in the ideal, and the young were to be its apostles, methods of Theirs was to be a missionary life. He told them to travel, ^ society to bear from land to land, from village to village, the torch of liberty, to expound its advantage to the people, to establish and consecrate the "tult. 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, moreover, with a marvelous command of persuasive language and with burning enthusiasm in his heart. The response was overwhelming. By 1833 the- society reckoned 60,000 members. Branches were founded ever>^where. 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 more remarkable from the fact that its members were unknown 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 program of this society was clear and emphatic. First, Austria must be driven out. This was the condition precedent to all success. War must come — the sooner the better. Let not Italians rely The aims of on the aid of foreign governments, upon diplomacy, but upon ^^^ society their own unaided strength. Austria could not stand against a nation of twenty millions fighting for their rights. "The only thing wanting to twenty millions of Italians, desirous of emancipating themselves, is not power, hntfaiih,'' he said. 422 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY THE PROBLEM OF THE MAKING OF ITALY At a time when the obstacles seemed insuperable, when but few Italians dreamed of unity even as an ultimate ideal, Mazzini declared Unity a ^^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^ practicable ideal, that the seemingly impossible practicable was easily possible if only Italians would dare to show their power-; and his great significance in Italian history is that he suc- ceeded in imparting his burning faith to multitudes of others. Mazzini was a republican and he wished his country, when united, to be a re- public. That a solution of the Italian problem lay in combining the existing states into a federation he did not for a moment 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 worked at a great disadvantage as he was early expelled from his own country and was compelled to spend nearly all his life- time as an exile in London, hampered by paltry resources, and cut off from that intimate association with his own people which is so essential to effective leadership. Italy was not made as Mazzini wished it to be, as we shall see ; nevertheless is he one of the chief of the makers of Italy. He and the society 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. But to many serious students of the Italian problem Mazzini seemed far too radical ; seemed a mystic and a rhetorician full of resounding and thrilling phrases, but with little practical sense. Men of conservative temperament could not follow him. There was a considerable variety of opinion. Some believed in independence as A variety fervidly as did he but did not believe in the possibility of Italian of opinions unity, for Italy had been too long divided, the divisions were proposas ^^^ deep-seated. Some believed, not in a single state of Italy but in a federation of the various states, with the Pope as president or leader. Others criticized this as a preposterous idea and denounced the Pope's government of his own states in scathing terms. Still others held that Italy was not at all republican in sentiment but was thoroughly monarchical and that a monarchy would be the natural form of its government. Some argued that, as it was impossible to drive the Austrians out, they should be included in the federation ; and some thought that, though the Austrians could not be driven out, THE LEADERSHIP OF PIEDMONT 423 they might be bribed to leave by being offered fat pickings in the Balkan peninsula at the expense of the Turks. Austria might thus, for a consideration, make Italy a present of her independence, certainly a fanciful idea. Out of this fermentation of ideas grew a more vigorous spirit of unrest, of dissatisfaction, of aspiration. The events of 1848 and 1849 gave a decided twist to Italian evolu- tion. At one moment Italy had appeared to be on the very j^ action in point of achieving her independence and her unity. Then Italy after the reverses had come and she relapsed into her former condi- ' "^ tion. It seemed as if everything was to be as it had been, only worse because of all these blasted hopes and fruitless struggles. But things were not exactly as they had been. In one quarter there was a change, emphatically for the better. One state in the peninsula formed a brilliant exception to this sorry system of reaction — Pied- mont. Though badly defeated on the battlefield at Custozza in 1 848, and at Novara in 1 849, it had gained an important moral victory. An Italian prince had risked his throne twice for the cause of Italian inde- pendence, conduct which for multitudes marked the House of Savoy as the leader of the future. Moreover, the king who had done this, Charles Albert, had also granted his people a constitution. He had abdicated after the battle of Novara, and his son, Victor Emman- uel II, then twenty-nine years of age, had come to the throne. Austria offered V'ictor Emmanuel easy terms of peace if he would abrogate this constitution, Austria not liking constitutions anywhere and particularly^ in a state that was a neighbor, and prospects of aggrandizement were dangled before him. He absolutely Emmanuel refused. This was a turning point in his career, in the his- ^^ (1820- tory of Piedmont, and in that of Italy. It won him the pop- ular title of the Honest King. It made Piedmont the one hope of Italian Liberals. She was national and constitutional. „. . Piedmont a Henceforth her leadership was assured. For the next ten constitutional years her history is the history of the making of the Kingdom ^*^*^ of Italy. Thither Liberals who were driven out of the other states took refuge, and their number was large. Victor Emmanuel was a brave soldier, a man, not of brilliant mind, but of sound and independent judgment, of absolute loyalty to his word, of intense patriotism. And he had from 1850 on, in his leading minister, Count Camillo di Cavour, one of the greatest statesmen and diplomatists of the nineteenth century. 424 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY CAVOUR, PRIME MINISTER OF PIEDMONT Cavour was born in 1810. His family belonged to the nobility of Piedmont. He received a military education and joined the army as an engineer. But by his liberal opinions, freely expressed, Cavour he incurred the hostility of his superiors and was kept for a (1810-1861) ^-^g -j^ semi-imprisonment. He resigned his commission in 1 83 1, and for the next fifteen years lived the life of a country gentleman, developing his estates. During these years, to vary the monotony of existence, he visited France and England repeatedly, interested particularly in political and economic questions. He was anxious to play a part in politics himself, though he saw no chance in a country as yet without representative institutions. " Oh ! if I were an Englishman," he said, "by this time I should be something, and my name would not be wholly unknown." Meanwhile, he studied abroad the institutions he desired for his own country, particularly S'poiidcaT* the English parliamentary system. Night after night he and economic g^^ j^ ^^g gallery of the House of Commons, seeking to make himself thoroughly familiar with its modes of procedure. He welcomed with enthusiasm the creation in 1848 of a parliament for Piedmont and of a constitution, which he had, indeed, been one of the boldest to demand. "Italy," he said, "must make herself by means of liberty, or we must give up trying to make her." This belief in parliamentary institutions Cavour held tenaciously all through his life, even when at times they seemed to be a hindrance to his policies. He believed that in the end, sooner or later, the people reach the truth of a matter. He was elected to the first Piedmontese Parliament, was taken into the cabinet in 1850, and became prime minister in 1852. He held this position for the remainder of his life, with the exception of a few weeks, proving him- self a great statesman and an incomparable diplomat. Cavour's mind was the opposite of Mazzini's, practical, positive, not poetical and speculative. He desired the unity and the independ- Cavourand ^nce of Italy. He hated Austria as the oppressor of his coun- Mazzini ^j-y^ as an Oppressor everywhere. But, unlike Mazzini, he did not underestimate her power, nor did he overestimate the power of his own countrymen. Cavour believed, as did all the patriots, that Austria must be driven out of Italy before any Italian regeneration could be achieved. But he did not believe with Mazzini and others THE PERSONALITY OF CAVOUR 425 that the Itahans could accompUsh this feat alone. In his opinion the history of the last forty years had shown that plots and insur- rections would not avail. It was essential to win the aid of a great military power comparable in strength and discipline to Austria. Cavour considered that the only possible leader in the work of free- ing and unifying Italy was the House of Savoy and the Piedmontese monarchy, and he cavour seeks felt that the proper *°. °^^^^ , •^^ '■ Piedmont a government of the model state new state, if it should ever arise, would be a consti- tutional monarchy. He wished to make Piedmont a model state so that, when the time came, the Italians of other states would rec- ognize her leadership and join in her exaltation as best for them all. Pied- mont had a constitution and the other states had not. He saw to it that she had a free political life and received a genu- ine training in self-govern- ment. Also he bent every energy to the development of the economic resources of his kingdom, by encour- aging manufactures, by stimulating commerce, by modernizing agri- culture, by building railroads. In a word he sought to make and did make Piedmont a model small state, liberal and progressive, hoping thus to win for her the Italians of the other states and the interest and approval of the countries and rulers of western Europe. The fundamental purpose, the constant preoccupation of this man's life, determining every action, prompting every wish, was to gain a Great Power as an ally. In the pursuit of this elusive and supremely difficult object, year in, year out, Cavour displayed his measure as a diplomat, and stood forth finally without a peer. It CWOUR From a lithograph by Desmaisons. 426 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY is a marvelously absorbing story, from which we are precluded here because it cannot be properly presented except at length. The reader Cavour an niust go clscwhere for the details of this fascinating record, incomparable in which were combined, in rare harmony, sound judgment, ipoma practical sense, powers of clear, subtle, penetrating thought, unfailing attention to prosaic details, with imagination, audac- ity, courage, and iron nerve. A profound and accurate knowl- edge of the forces and personalities in the political life of Italy and of Europe, tact and sureness in appreciating the shifting scenes of the international stage, never-failing resourcefulness in the service of a steady purpose, such were some of the characteristics of this master in statecraft and diplomacy. Though the minister of a petty state of only five million people, his was the most dynamic person- ality in Europe. CAVOUR AND A FRENCH ALLIANCE Cavour was seeking an ally. He saw that the field was limited. It must be either England or France. The former country had no large army and was disposed to keep itself as free from European entanglements as possible. France, on the other hand, was supposed to have the best army in Europe and her ruler, Napoleon III, was an ambitious and adventurous person. "Whether we like it or not," said Cavour, " our destinies depend upon France." He sought to ingratiate himself with Napoleon. The Crimean War gave an Why Pied- Opportunity. Piedmont made an unconditional and very mont partici- risky alliance in 1855 with France and England, then at war the^Crimean with Russia, and rendered a distinct service to them. The}'' War ill turn rendered her the service of securing her admittance to the Congress of Paris which terminated that war, of thus securing her recognition as an equal among the powers of Europe. They also gave Cavour a chance to discuss the Italian question in an interna- tional gathering in which Austria sat. Two years later Cavour received his great reward. Napoleon III The inter- bade him come to Plombieres (plon-byar'), a watering place in view at the Vosgcs (vozh) mountains, where the Emperor was taking (July 21^^ ^^^ cure. And there in a famous carriage drive which these 1858) two took through the forests of the Vosges, Napoleon holding the reins, and in subsequent interviews, they plotted to bring THE ALLIANCE OF FRANCE AND SARDINIA 427 about a war which should result in driving Austria out of Italy. Italy was to be freed "from the Alps to the Adriatic." Piedmont should be given Lombardy and Venetia and a part of the Papal States. The Italian states should then be united in a confederation with the Pope as president. France should receive Savoy, and possibly Nice. Such was the understanding of Plombieres. The motives that in- fluenced Napoleon to take this step which was to be momentous for himself as well as for Italy were numerous. The principle of nationality which he held tenaciously, and which largely and the determined the foreign policy of his entire reign, prompted ^"^'^^^^^^^ him in this direction — the principle, namely, that people of the same race and language had the right to be united politically if they wished to be. 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 18 15, treaties that sealed the humiliation of the Napoleonic 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. Thus in 1 859 there came about a war between Austria on the one hand and Piedmont and France on the other. The latter were victorious in two great battles, that of Magenta (ma-jen'-ta) The war (June 4) and of Solferino (June 24). The Iktter was one of °^ ^^sp the greatest battles of the nineteenth century. It lasted eleven hours, more than 260,000 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 termination of Austrian rule in Italy efifected, and Napoleon's statement that he would free Italy "from the Alps to the Adriatic" accomplished. Suddenly Napoleon halted in the full tide of success, sought an interview with the Emperor of Austria at Villafranca, and there on J.^^. P""?" , Iiminaries of Jul}^ II, without consulting the wishes of his ally, concluded viiiafranca a famous armistice. The terms agreed upon by the two Emperors were : that Lombardy should pass to Piedmont, that Austria should retain Venetia, that the Italian states should form a 428 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY confederation, that the rulers of Tuscany and Modena should be restored to their states, whence they had just been driven by popular uprisings. Why had Napoleon stopped in the middle of a successful campaign, and before he had accomplished the object for which he had come into T3»oo«„o. f Italy? There were several reasons. He had been shocked Reasons for -^ Napoleon's by the horrors of the battlefield. He saw that the comple- tion of the conquest of Austria meant a far larger sacrifice of life. Prussia was preparing to intervene. Moreover Napoleon became apprehensive about the results of his policy. If it should end in the creation of a strong national kingdom, as seemed likely, would not this be dangerous to France? A somewhat enlarged Piedmont was one thing, but a kingdom of all Italy, neighbor to France, was something very different. The news of the peace came as a cruel disappointment to the Ital- ians, dashing their hopes just as they were apparently about to be realized. The Government of Victor Emmanuel had not even been consulted. In intense indignation 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^Cavour°'* of rage, threw up his office. The King by overruling Cavour showed himself wiser than his gifted minister. As 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 independence and common sense of Victor Emmanuel were of great and enduring service to his country. EXPANSION OF PIEDMONT Napoleon had not done all that he had planned for Italy, yet he had rendered a very important service. He had secured Lombardy Piedmont for Piedmont. It should also be noted that he himself acknowl- acquires edged that the failure to carry out the whole program had cm ar y canceled any claim he had upon the annexation of Savoy and Nice to France. But the future of Italy was not to be determined solely by the Em- -^■< 44 ^P5»!^^ S W I T Z E-R X. AK c fGothardPass '** J.ongtliuie £ast liO-om hu-i'a \ \ ptl£^i'*^5%;/o/,. / Grvtmle V \-^~^r ,-^ pH^/L, tiii ^.. o ^fi'ir//" o/" Gen oa (Panh vTu scan V/^x Sicna • 1 M . Corhna'i, - Orbelei -^/ «^/i7| MAP TO ILLUSTRATE THE UNIFICATION OF ITAL,^ Scale of English Miles p gg 60 60 so too REFERENCE I TT 1 ,4n/uiriUien t^Sardinm', roM bi/ ^ ^ PimscUes,^(ar. Jl.kl2, 1860. ' :j I TTT I Ann^atiofi to Sardinia, voted by ^^^^^PiaiscUes.Mv.4,&5,186a I TTT I AnneouUim ti> Sardinia, voted by LJJ^ PlJbiscHes, Oct. 21^.1. IS60 \ y \r 1 :4nnp,w/i/)n toKintjd^m orjtnly ** l-i— ' V"tedhyPli>l>iscites, Oct 2i,i:2?, 1366. i l -tTT I dnncmtion to Kinodom ofJtatr, » l-J^^ Voted by Plfbiscite, Oct. 2.ma ' P^dTI Ceded toFrance,Mmdt, 1860. fvBH Ceded to Frame, March J'^^O. *^a/UeU/i nwMi 14 'r'est ^> /-s '^Mmi ^ M P R "TBosna^enai /'■ «r «> <5^ Barl Cottars' Budiid ^ DiiraT.zoi ^laiaroM Sriruiisi ja^iilb. ^A^ oCaktwvUJ/iri 1"^ Msffiza )Ai'lonaf \Otranfo ^*^ -^J.?**/ ANNEXATIONS TO PIEDMONT 429 peror of France and the Emperor of Austria. The people of Italy had their own ideas and were resolved to make them heard. Du4-ing the war, so suddenly and unexpectedly closed, the rulers of Modena, Parma, Tuscany had been overthrown by popular uprisings and the Pope's authority in Romagna (ro-man'-ya), the northern part ^^^^ . , . of his dominions, had been destroyed. The people who had after accomplished this had no intention of restoring the princes ^ "^^""^^ they had expelled. They defied the two Emperors who had decided at Villafranca that those rulers should be restored. In this they were supported diplomatically by the English Government. This was England's great service to the Italians. "The people of tht 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 annexation of the duchies to Piedmont . ,. , Annexation of will be an unfathomable good to Italy." The people of these the duchies states voted almost unanimously in favor of annexation *° '® "^"^ (March 11-12, i860). Victor Emmanuel accepted the sovereignty thus offered him, and on April 2, 1S60, the first parliament of the enlarged kingdom met in Turin. A small state of less than 5,000,000 had g'rown 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 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 1 815, 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. Napoleon III acquiesced in all this, taking for himself Cession of Savoy and Nice in return for services rendered. The Peace N^ce^to^" of Villafranca was never enforced. France 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 King- 430 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY dom of Naples still stood outside. In the last, however, events now occurred which carried the process a long step forward. Early in 1 860 The sicUian the Sicilians rose in revolt against the despotism of their insurrection j^ew king, Francis II. This insurrection created an oppor- tunity for a man already famous but destined to an amazing achieve- ment and to a memorable service to his country, Giuseppe Garibaldi, already the most popular 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 Garibaldi by his parents for the priesthood he preferred the sea, and for (1807-1882) many years he lived a roving and adventurous sailor's life. He early joined "Young Italy." His military experience was chiefly in irregular, guerrilla fighting. He took part in the unsuccessful insurrection organized by Mazzini in Savoy in 1834, 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 uprising of 1848 he returned to Italy, though still under the The defense penalty of death, and immediately thousands flocked to the of Rome standard of the "hero of Montevideo" to fight under him against the Austrians. After the failure of that campaign he went, in 1849, to Rome to assume the military defense of the republic. When the city was about to fall he escaped with 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 forests 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. THE CONQUEST OF THE KINGDOM OF NAPLES 431 GARIBALDI'S EXPEDITION TO SICILY '' For several years Garibaldi was a wanderer, sailing the seas, com- mander of a Peruvian bark. For some months, indeed, he was a candle maker on Staten Island, but in 1854 he returned to T^ , , ^ Leader of Italy and set- -The Hunt- tied down as a ^" ^{^^^ farmer on the little island of Ca- prera. But the events of 1859 once more 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 adven- turous spirits from one end of Italy to the other. Mul- titudes were ready to follow in blind con- fidence wherever he might lead. His name was one to conjure with. There now oc- curred, in i860, the most brilliant episode of his career, the Si- cilian expedition and the campaign against the Kingdom of Naples. For Garibaldi, the most redoubtable warrior of Italy, whose very name was worth an army, now decided on his own account to go to the aid of the Sici- lians who had risen in revolt against their king, Francis II of Naples. Determines to go to Sicily (Jariealdi From a photograph. 432 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY On May 5, i860, the expedition of "The Thousand," the "Red Shirts," embarked from Genoa in two steamers. These were the volunteers, nearly 1,150 men, whom Garibaldi's fame had dUion^o^^ caused to rush into the new adventure, an adventure that " The ^^ seemed at the moment one of utter folly. The King of Naples had 24,000 troops in Sicily and 100,000 more on the mainland. The odds against success seemed overwhelming. But fortune favored the brave. After a campaign of a few weeks, in which he was several times in great danger, and was only saved by the most reck- less fighting. Garibaldi stood master of the island, helped by the Sicilian insurgents, by volunteers who had flocked from the mainland, and by the incompetency of the commanders of the Neapolitan troops. Audacity had won the victory. He assumed the position of Dictator in Sicily in the name of Victor Emmanuel II (August 5, i860). Garibaldi now crossed the straits to the mainland determined to conquer the entire Kingdom of Naples (August 19, i860). The King still had an army of 100,000 men, but it had not even the Conquest of * ., , ^, . n 11,11 the Kingdom strength of a frail reed. There was practically no bloodshed. of Naples r^Y^e Neapolitan Kingdom was not overthrown ; it collapsed. Treachery, desertion, corruption did the work. On September 6, Francis II left Naples for Gaeta (ga-a'-ta) and the next day Garibaldi entered it by rail with only a few attendants, and drove through the streets amid a pandemonium of enthusiasm. In less than five months he had conquered a kingdom of 1 1,000,000 people, an achieve- ment unique in modern history. Garibaldi now began to talk of pushing on to Rome. To Cavour the situation seemed full of danger. Rome was occupied by a French garrison. An attack upon it would almost necessarily Garibaldi ° ^ ^ i r i ■ i j >. plans to mean an attack upon France. Cavour therefore decided to attack Rome intervene, to take the direction of events out of the hands of Garibaldi, and to guide the future evolution himself. At his instance, therefore, Victor Emmanuel led an army into the Papal States. But he did not lead it to Rome as he knew that Napoleon III, because of the strong Catholic feeling in France, would not permit him to annex the Papal capital. Napoleon, however, was willing that he should annex the Marches (march'-ez) and Umbria, which were parts of the Pope's possessions. Only the city of Rome and the country round about it must not be touched. INVASION OF THE PAPAL STATES 433 VICTOR EMMANUEL PROCLAIMED KING OF ITALY Victor Emmanuel's army defeated the Papal troops at Castelfi- dardo (September i8, i860). It then entered the territory of Naples. On November 7, Victor Emmanuel and Garibaldi drove intervention together through the streets of Naples. The latter refused °^ Piedmont all rewards and honors and with only a little money and a bag of seed beans for the spring planting sailed away to his farm on the island of Caprera. Victor Emmanuel com- pleted the conquest which Garibaldi had alone xhe annexa- carried so far. The t'o» °* Naples, Um- people m the bria, and the Marches, Umbria, Marches and the Kingdom of Naples voted overwhelm- ingly in favor of annexa- tion to the new Kingdom of Italy, which had been created in this astonish- ing fashion. On the 1 8 th of Febru- ary, 1 86 1, a new Parlia- ment, representing The King- all Italy except Ve- dom of itaiy netia and Rome, ^'''''^"^^'' met in Turin. The King- dom of Sardinia now gave way to the Kingdom of Italy, proclaimed on March 17. Victor Emmanuel II was declared "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. But the Kingdom of Italy was Victor Emmanuel II From the engraving by Metzmacher. 434 THE MAKING OF THE KINGDOM OF ITALY still incomplete. Venetia was still Austrian and Rome was still subject to the Pope. The acquisition of these had to be postponed. Nevertheless, Cavour felt that "without Rome there was no Italy." He was working on a scheme which he hoped might reconcile the Pope and the Catholic world everywhere to the recognition of Rome as the capital of the new kingdom, when he suddenly fell ill. Overwork, the extraordinary pressure under which he had for months been laboring, brought on insomnia ; finally fever Cavour" developed and he died on the morning of June 6, 1861, in the very prime of life, for he was only fifty-one years of age. "Cavour," said Lord Palmerston, in the British House of Com- mons, "left a name 'to point a moral and adorn a tale.-' The moral was, that a man of transcendent talent, indomitable industry, in- extinguishable patriotism, could overcome 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 which 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." Throughout his life Cavour remained faithful to his fundamental political principle, government by parliament and by constitutional forms. Urged at various times to assume a dictatorship he replied that 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." REFERENCES Mazzini and Young Italy : Holland, Builders of United Italy, pp. 125-164; Marriott, Makers of Modern Italy; Thayer, Dawn of Italian Independence, Vol. I, pp. 379-403; Bolton King, Joseph Mazzini; Thayer, Italica. Cavour: Holland, pp. 165-222; Marnott, Makers of Modern Italy; Ce- saresco, Cavour; Thayer, Cavour. Garibaldi: Holland, pp. 223-282; Marriott, Makers of Modern Italy; Trevelyan, Garibaldi's Defence of the Roman Republic, pp. 7-41 ; Murdock, Reconstruction of Modern Europe, pp. 156-177; Cesaresco, Liberation of Italy, pp. 266-339 j Trevelyan, Garibaldi and the Thousand. CHAPTER XXI THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY In 1848 and 1849 the liberal elements of Germany had made an earnest effort to achieve national unity but the work of the Parliament of Frankfort had been rejected by the sovereigns of the leadins, „ . . , -^ ^ ^ Reaction in States and had been rendered null and void. The old Confed- Germany eration was restored, resuming its sessions in May, 1851. A ^^^^"^ ^^49 period of reaction in Germany began again, even more far-reaching in its scope than that which had followed the Congress of Vienna in 1 8 1 5. Austria and Prussia took the lead in the familiar work of oppression. One gain had been made in the turbulent year. The King of Prussia had granted a constitution and created a Parliament. Like the King of Piedmont he refused to abolish the constitution. „ Prussia Unlike the latter, however, he did not at all intend that the given a creation of a parliament should mean the introduction of <='"*^*'*"*'*'" the English parliamentary system, with parliament, representing the people, the dominant authority in the state. The constitutional de- velopment of Piedmont and Prussia, starting at the same time, was to be utterly different. In passing from Italy to Germany we enter another atmosphere. In Piedmont, as we hav^ seen, the constitution was honestly and vigorously applied and yielded its legitimate fruit in the political education of the people. Cavour believed that the free discussion of parliament was a safer and wiser guide than the auto- cratic determination of a monarch. Liberty was his ideal „ •^ Prussia not from which he never swerved, though it would often have a pariiamen- been convenient for him if he had. On the other hand, the '^"^^ ^ * ^ King of Prussia did not propose to divide his power with any as- sembly. The assembly had no control over the ministry. DEADLOCK BETWEEN WILLIAM I AND PARLIAMENT While Prussia preserved her constitution the ministers developed great skill in really nullifying it, though pretending to maintain it. The government of Prussia was, after 1848 as before, a scarcely 435 436 THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY veiled autocracy. Reaction of the old, classic style was the order of the day. The press was not free. Public meetings might be held only by those favorable to the government. The police were active and unscrupulous. A change came over Prussia, though not in the direction of free institutions and the development of a free public life, with the begin- ning of a reign, destined to prove most illustrious, that of William I. William became King of Prussia in 1861. He WiUiamI WaS the SOU of (1797-1888) ^he famous Queen Louise, was born in 1 797, and had served in the campaign against Na- poleon in 1814. He was now sixty-four years old. His mind was in no sense brilliant but was slow, solid, and sound. His entire lifetime had been spent in the army, which he loved passionately. In military matters his thorough knowledge and competence were recog- nized. He believed that Prussia's destinies were dependent upon her army. The army was necessary for his purpose, which was to put Prussia at the head of Germany. "Whoever wishes to rule Germany must conquer it," he wrote in 1849, "and that cannot be done by phrases." William believed that the Prussian army needed strengthening, and he brought forward a plan that would nearly double it. He de- Army reform n^^^ded the necessary appropriations of Parliament, which declined to grant them, A bitter and prolonged controversy arose between the Crown and the Chamber of Deputies, each side WlLLI.^M I From a photograph taken in 1S70. BISMARCK 437 growing stiffer as the contest proceeded. The King was absolutely resolved not to abate one jot or tittle from his demands. On the other hand, the Chamber persisted in asserting its control over the purse, as the fundamental power of any parliament that ^ osition intends to count for anything in the state. A deadlock of the ensued. The King was urged to abolish Parliament altogether. ^^ ^'^ This he would not do because he had sworn to support the constitu- tion which established 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 experiment a new man, known for his boldness, his independence, his devotion to sismarck- the monarchv, Otto von Bismarck. Bismarck was appointed Schonhausen (1815-1898) 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. 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 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 deter- mined the King to tear up the paper containing his abdication and to continue the struggle with the Chamber of Deputies. BISMARCK'S PREVIOUS CAREER The man who now entered upon the stage of European politics was one of the most original and remarkable characters of his century. Born in 181 5, he came of a noble family in Brandenburg and ^-^^^^ ^, was an aristocrat to his finger tips. Receiving a university previous education, he entered the civil service of Prussia, only to '^^'^^'^ leave it shortly, disgusted by its monotony. He then settled upon his father's estate as a country squire. Unlike Cavour in Italy, Bismarck was enraged when the King granted a constitution to Prussia in 1850. While Cavour saw in England the model of what he wished his own countrv to become, Bismarck said, "The _. ,, oismarcK s references to England are our misfortune." Bismarck's politi- political cal ideas centered in his ardent belief in the Prussian mon- "p""*"^^ archy. It had been the Prussian kings, not the Prussian people, 438 THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY 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. Bis- marck was the uncompromising foe of the attempts made in 1 848 to achieve German unity, because he thought that it should be the princes and not the people who should determine the institutions and destinies of Germany. He hated democracy as he hated parliaments and His hatred Constitutions. "I of democracy jook for Prussian honor in Prussia's absti- nence before all things from every shameful union with democracy," he said. In 1 85 1 Bismarck was ap- pointed Prussian delegate to the Diet in Frankfort, where for the next eight years he studied and prac- ticed the art of diplomacy, in which he was later to win many sweeping vic- tories. He made the ac- quaintance of all the important statesmen and politicians of Germany and studied their charac- ters and ambitions. He became strongly anti- Austrian in his senti- ments. As early as 1853 he told his government that there was not room in Germany for both Prussia and Austria, that one or the other must bend. His utterances and attitudes became more and more irritating to Austria. Consequently King William, wish- ing to continue on good relations with the latter power, appointed him in 1859 ambassador to St. Petersburg, or, as Bismarck put it, sent him "to cool off on the banks of the Neva." Later he was, for a short time, ambassador to France. Bismarck From a photograph. BISMARCK'S BLOOD AND IRON POLICY 439 Such was the man, who, in 1862 at the age of forty-seven, accepted the position of President of the Prussian Ministry at a time when King and Parliament confronted each other in angry deadlock, and when no other politician would accept the leadership. For four years, from 1862 to 1866, the conflict continued. The constitution was not abolished. Parliament was called repeatedly, the Lower House The period voted year after year against the budget, supported in this by °^ conflict 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 is a mere means to an end. The particular end that Bismarck had in view was the creation of German unity by means of Prussia and for Army the advantage of Prussia. There must be no absorption of carried Prussia in Germany, as there had been of Piedmont in Italy, through Piedmont as a separate state entirely disappearing. And in Bis- marck'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 progressiveness, as Piedmont had done, which would rally Germans 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 1 863 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. "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," in other words the army, not Parliament, would determine the future of Prussia. This "blood and iron" policy was bitterly denounced by Liberals, but Bismarck ignored their criticisms and shortly found a ■• Blood and chance to begin its application. "^"'^ " P°'**=y The German Empire was the result of the policy of blood and iron as carried out by Prussia in three wars which were crowded into Prussia's the brief period of six years, the war with Denmark in 1864, three wars with Austria in 1866, and with France in 1870, the last two of 440 THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY which were largely the result of Bismarck's will and his diplomatic ingenuity and unscrupulousness, and the first of which he exploited consummately for the advantage of Prussia. THE SCHLESWIG-HOLSTEIN QUESTION The first of these grew out of one of the most complicated ques- tions that have ever perplexed diplomatists and statesmen, the future of Schleswig (shlaz-vig) and Holstein. These were two duchies in the Danish peninsula, which is itself simply an extension of the great plain of northern Germany. Holstein was inhabited by a population of about 600,000, entirely German ; Schleswig by a population of from 250,000 to 300,000 Germans and 150000 Danes. These two duchies had for centuries 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 that a Duke of Schleswig and Holstein had become King of Denmark, just as an Elector of Hanover had become a King of England. Holstein was a member of the German Confederation, but Schleswig was not. The Germans in Schleswig wished to bring about its admission to the Confederation but the Danes objected and in 1863 declared Schleswig incorporated in Denmark. There are other elements in the tangle which it is unnecessary to explain as the question of Schleswig and Holstein was not decided at all on its merits, was not decided as either the Danish or the German people wished it to be. Bismarck saw in the situation a chance for a possible aggrandizement of Prussia and a chance for a quarrel with Austria, both things which he desired for the greater glory of his country. He induced Austria to cooperate with Prussia in settling the Schleswig-Holstein question. The two powers delivered an ultimatum to Denmark allowing that country only forty-eight Austria make hours in which to Comply with their demands. The Danes war on j^qI- complying, Prussia and Austria immediately declared war. Denmark « , ,, 111 A war between one small state and two large ones could not be doubtful. Sixty thousand Prussians and Austrians invaded Den- mark in February, 1864, and though their campaign was not brilliant, they easily won, and forced Denmark to cede the two duchies to them jointly (October, 1864). They might make whatever dis- position of them they chose to. THE SEVEN WEEKS' WAR 441 But they could not agree. Austria wished them admitted together as an additional state of the German Confederation and the people of Germany were overwhelmingly in favor of this arrangement. But Bismarck's ideas were very different. He did not care between for another German state. There were too many already, Prussia and . Austria 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 com- mercially. Thus the two powers were at variance over the disposition of their spoils. The situation was one that exactly suited Bismarck. Out of it he hoped to bring about the war with Austria which he had desired for the past ten years as being the only means whereby German unity could be achieved by Prussia and for Prussia's advan- tage. There was not room enough in Germany, he thought, for both powers. That being the case, he wished the room for Prussia. The only way to get it was to take it. As Austria had no inclination gracefully to yield, there would have to be a fight. Both began to arm THE AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR OF 1866 Finally war broke out in June, 1866. Bismarck had thus brought about his dream of a conflict between people of the same race to determine the question of control. It proved to be one of the shortest wars in history, one of the most decisive, and one whose consequences were most momentous. It is called the Seven Weeks' War. It began June 16, 1866, was virtually decided on July 3, was brought to a close before the end of that month by the pre- liminary Peace of Nikolsburg, July 26, which was followed a month later by the definitive Peace of Prague, August 23. Prussia had no German allies of any importance. Several of the North German states sided with her, but these were small and their armies were unimportant. On the other hand, Austria was supported by the four kingdoms, Bavaria, Wurtemberg, Saxony, and Hanover ; also by Hesse-Cassel, Hesse-Darmstadt, Nassau, and Baden. But Prussia had one important ally, Italy, without whose aid she might 442 THE UNIFICATION OF GERMANY Prussia conquers North Germany not have won the victory. Italy was to receive Venetia, which she coveted, if Austria were defeated. The Prussian army, however, was better prepared. For years the rulers of Prussia had been preparing for war, perfecting the army down to the minutest detail, and with scientific thoroughness, and when the war began it was absolutely ready. More- over, it was directed by a very able leader, General von Moltke. Prussia had many ene- mies. Being absolutely prepared, as her enemies were not, she could assume the offensive, and this was the cause of her first victories. War be- gan June i6. Within three days Prussian troops had occupied Hanover, Dresden, and Cassel, the capitals of her three North German enemies. A few days later the Hanoverian army was forced to ca- pitulate. The King of Hanover and the Elector of Hesse were taken pris- oners of war. All North Germany was now con- trolled by Prussia, and within two weeks of the opening of the war she was ready to attempt the great plan of Moltke, an invasion of Bohemia. The rapiditj^ of the cam- of Kbnig- paign struck Europe with amazement. Moltke sent three gratz, or armies by different routes into Bohemia, and on July 3, 1866, one of the great battles of history, that of Koniggratz, or Sadowa, was fought. Each army numbered over 200,000, the Prussians outnumbering the Austrians, though not at the beginning. w ^ TiA .1 kU . 1 * ..^^^ 7 x/ c m 1 ( (^ I f ]\IOLTKE From the painting by Lenbach. Sadowa PRUSSIAN ANNEXATIONS 443 Since the battle of Leipsic in 18 13, so many troops had not been engaged in a single conflict. King William, Bismarck, and Moltke took up their position on a hill, whence they could view the scene. The battle was long and doubtful. Beginning early in the morning, it continued for hours, fought with terrific fury, the Prussians making no advance against the Austrian artillery. Up to two o'clock it seemed an Austrian victory, but with the arrival of the Prussian Crown Prince with his army the issue was turned, and at half-past three the Austrians were beaten and their retreat began. They had lost over forty thousand men, while the Prussian loss was about ten thousand. The Prussian army during the next three weeks advanced to within sight of the spires of Vienna. On June 24 the Austrians had been victorious over the Italians at Custozza. Yet the Italians had helped Prussia by detaining eighty thousand Austrian troops, which, had they been at Koniggratz, would probably have turned the day. The Italian fleet was also defeated by the Austrian at Lissa, July 20. RESULTS OF AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR The results of the Seven Weeks' War were momentous. Fearing the intervention of Europe, and particularly that of France, which was threatened, and which might rob the victory of its fruits, Bis- marck wished to make peace at once, and consequently offered lenient terms to Austria. She was to cede Venetia to Italy but was to lose no other territory. She was to withdraw from the German Confederation, which, indeed, was to cease to exist. She was to allow Prussia to organize and lead a new confederation, composed of those states which were north of the river Main. The South German states were left free to act as they chose. Thus Germany, north of the Main, was to be united. Having accomplished this, Prussia proceeded to make important annexations to her own territory. The Kingdom of Hanover, the Duchies of Nassau and Hesse-Cassel, and the free city of Frankfort, as well as the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein, were incorporated in the Prussian kingdom. Its population was thereby increased by over four and a half million new subjects, and thus was Annexations about twenty-four million. There was no thought of having *° Prussia the people of these states vote on the question of annexation, as 444 THE UxNIFICATION OF GERMANY had been done in Italy, and in Savoy and Nice. They were annexed forthwith by right of mihtary conquest. Reigning houses ceased to rule on order from Berlin. Unwisely for themselves European nations allowed the swift consummation of these changes, which altered the balance of power and the map of Europe — a mistake which France in particular was to repent most bitterly. "I do not like this dethronement of dynasties," said the Czar, but he failed to express his dislike in action. The North German Confederation, which was now created, in- cluded all of Germany north of the river Main, twenty- two states in all. The constitution was the work of Bismarck. There The North , . , r i ^ r , • i i t^- German Con- was to be a president of the Confederation, namely the King usr-'is'^i) °^ Prussia. There was to be a Federal Council (Bundesrath), composed of delegates sent by the sovereigns of the different states, to be recalled at their pleasure, to vote as they dictated. Prussia was always to have seventeen votes out of the total forty- three. In order to have a majority she would have to gain only a few adherents from the other states, which she could easily do. There was also to be a Reichstag, elected by the people. This was Bismarck's concession to the Liberals. Of the two bodies the Reichstag was much the less important. The people were given a place in the new system, but a subordinate one. The new constitution went into force July i, 1867. This North German Confederation remained in existence only four years when it gave way to the German Empire, one of the results of the Franco- Prussian War of 1870. REFERENCES Bismarck's Early Life : Munroe Smith, Bismarck and German Unity, pp. 1-18 ; Headlam, Bismarck and the Foundation of the German Empire, pp. 1-33. The Seven Weeks' War : Murdock, Reconstruction of Modern Europe, Chaps. XVI-XVIII, pp. 211-248; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 936- 958; Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 393-410; Headlam, pp. 240-290; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 107-113. Establishment of the North German Confederation : Headlam, Chap. XII, pp. 291-314; Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. I, pp. 237-242 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1S14, pp. 472- 481 ; Robertson, C. G., Bismarck, Chap. V. CHAPTER XXII THE SECOND EMPIRE AND THE FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR The year 1866 is a turning point in the history of Prussia, of Austria, of France, of modern Europe. It profoundly altered the historic bal- ance of power. By the decisiveness of the campaign, and by the momentous character of its consequences, Prussia, hitherto ^gL^^^'^ regarded as the least important of the great powers, had turning point astounded Europe by the evidence of her strength. She J^gtory^'^" possessed a remarkable army and a remarkable statesman. That both were the most 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 repu- tation of Napoleon III was seriously compromised. He had entirely misjudged the situation, had played a feeble and mistaken part, when he might have played one highly advantageous to his country. He had rather welcomed the war between Prussia and Austria. In his opinion, it 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 Prussia might be willing to relinquish in return 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 Napoleon's have played a commanding part in determining the terms of hls"*^^ ^° "^* peace had he threatened to come to the aid of Austria, as opportunity Austria desired. Had he refused to recognize the annexations of Prussia unless compensated, he could have secured important additions to France. But his policy was weak and vacillating. 445 446 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR NAPOLEON'S ATTACK UPON MEXICO 447 Accomplishing nothing for France, he yet irritated Prussia by a half-measure of insisting that the new confederation should not extend south of the river Main. NAPOLEON'S MEXICAN EXPEDITION Another serious mistake of Napoleon was culminating at this very time, his Mexican policy, a most unnecessary, reckless, and disastrous enterprise. This ill-starred adventure began in an intervention of France, England, and Spain, whose .citizens had loaned money to Mexico, the interest on which Mexico now refused to pay. A joint expedition was sent out in December, 1861, to compel the discharge of the financial obligations incurred by that country under treaty arrangements. But by April, 1862, it became clear to Spain and England that France had distinctly other purposes in this affair than those stated in the treaty of alliance. Napoleon's real inten- tions, shortly apparent, were the overthrow 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 expedition 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 dishon- orable, as it was one of the most costly and disastrous, for the Second Empire. Napoleon was a man of ideas, a man of imagination. Unfortu- nately his ideas were frequently vast yet vague, his imagination frequently unsound, deceptive. He evidently dreamed of Napoleon's building up a Latin Empire in the New World, under his pro- purposes tection, a sort of bulwark and outpost of the Latin element, designed to hem in the overflowing Anglo-Saxon element. Thus his favorite theory of nationalities would win another victory ; also the colonies of Spain and France would be more secure, French commerce would find new outlets, the materials for French industries would be more easily procured. "And," said Napoleon, "we shall have established our beneficent influence in the center of America." Mexico wasa republic but there was a faction among the Mexicans which wished to overthrow it. This faction, under French inspiration 448 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR and direction, held an assembly which decreed that Mexico should henceforth be an Empire and that the imperial crown should be offered to Archduke Maximilian of Austria, brother of Francis overthrows Joscph, the Emperor of Austria. This assembly represented, the Mexican perhaps, 350,000 pcoplc out of about 7,000,000. It offered Republic ^ \ .^^ „, . . ... a fatal gift. This young prince of thirty-one was of attractive and popular manners, and of liberal ideas. Young, handsome, versatile, half poet, half scientist, he was living in a superb palace, Miramar, overlooking the Adriatic, amid his collections, his ob- jects of art, and with the sea which was his passion always before him. From out of this enchanting retreat he now emerged to be- come 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 sup- port until 1867, he accepted the imperial crown and arrived in Mexico in May, 1864. This entire project, born in the brain of Napoleon III, was to prove hopeless from the start, disastrous to all who participated in it, to the new Emperor and Empress, and to Napoleon. The difficulties outcome of Confronting the new monarch were insuperable. A guerrilla this ad- warfare was carried on successfully by Juarez, using up the French soldiers and putting 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 Appomattox. The United States of the had looked from the first with disapprobation upon Napoleon's st^t^^ project. Now that the Civil War was over, she threatened intervention. Napoleon was unwilling to risk a conflict with this country, and consequently promised to withdraw his troops speedily from Mexico. Maximilian could not remain long an Emperor without Napoleon's support. His wife, Carlotta, returning 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 con- templation of the impending doom of her husband became insane. BITTER ATTACKS UPON NAPOLEON III 449 Maximilian was taken by the Mexicans and shot June 19, 1867. The phantom Empire vanished. A most expensive enterprise for the French Emperor. It had eaten into the financial resources of his country, already badly disorganized. It had prevented his playing a part in decisive events occurring in central Europe in 1864- 1866, in the Danish war, and the Austro- Prussian war, the outcome of which was to alter so seriously the im- portance of France in Europe by the exaltation of an ambitious. Discomfiture aggressive, and powerful military state, Prussia. It had of Napo- damaged him morally before Europe by the desertion of his ^°^ proteges to an appalling fate before the threats of the United States. He had squandered uselessly his military resources and had increased the national debt. It has been asserted that the INIexican war was as disastrous for Napoleon III as the Spanish war had been for Napoleon I. CONCESSIONS TO THE LIBERALS Feeling that his popularity was waning Napoleon decided to win over the Liberals, who had hitherto been his enemies, by granting in 1868 certain reforms which they had constantly demanded, larger rights to the Legislative Chamber, greater freedom of the press, the right, under certain conditions, to hold public meetings. The Empire 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 freedom of speech characterized the last two years of Napoleon's reign. A movement to erect a monument to a republi- can 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 sub- scription. 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 pohtics, a founder of the Third Republic. Gambetta conducted himself not as a lawyer defending his client, but as an avenger of the wrongs of France for the past seventeen years, impeaching bitterly the entire emergence reign of Napoleon III. Particularly did he dwell upon the q^^^° date of December 2. The coup d'etat, he said, was carried through by a crowd of unknown men "without talent, without honor, 450 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR and hopelessly involved in debts and crimes." "These men pretend to have saved society. Do you save a country when you lay par- icidal 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 characterizes 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 anniversary 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." This address had a prodigious effect. Nothing so defiant, so con- temptuous of the Government, had been heard in France since 1851. gjj^ Though Gambetta's client lost his case, it was generally felt attacks upon that the Empire emerged from that court-room soundly apoeon 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 departments. Thus clouds were gathering, thicker and ever darker, around the throne of the Third Napoleon. There were domestic troubles, but, in the main, it was the foreign relations that inspired alarm and should have inspired caution. Over these years hung the German peril, the unmistakable challenge that lay in the astonishing success and the ag- gressive elation of Prussia. That was the sore point. 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 exclu- sively between Prussia and Austria, France being no party to the war. The instinct was largely right. At least the Peace of Prague involved and indicated the diminution of the authority and importance of France. For a reorganization so sweeping in central Europe as the overthrow of Austria, her expulsion from Germany, and the consoli- " Revenge dation and aggrandizement of Prussia, a powerful military for state, upset the balance of power. A feeling of alarm spread owa through France. "Revenge for Sadowa," was a cry often heard henceforth. Its meaning was that if one state like Prussia THE HOHENZOLLERX CANDIDACY 451 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. 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 suc- cessful wars, and intensely conscious of their new position in Europe. The newspapers of both countries during the next four years were full of crimination and recrimination, of abuse and taunt, the Gov- ernment 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 gards^rwar" believed such a war inevitable, and, in his opinion, it was ^^*^ France desirable as the only way of completing the unification of Ger- many, since Napoleon would never willingly consent 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 defending herself against a wanton aggressor. \\' ith responsible statesmen in such a temper it was not difficult to bring about a war. And yet the Franco-Prussian war broke most unexpectedly, like a thunderstorm, over Europe. Undreamed of July I, 1870, it began July 15. It came in a roundabout way. The Spanish throne was vacant, as a revolution had driven the monarch, Queen Isabella, out of that country. On July 2, news reached Paris that Leopold of Hohenzollern, a relative of the King of Prussia, had accepted the Spanish crown. Bismarck was behind this Hohen- zollern candidacy, zealously furthering it, despite the fact ^j^^ Hohen- that he knew Napoleon's feeling of hostility to it. Great was zoUern the indignation of the French papers and Parliament and a '^^^ ' ^^^ most dangerous crisis developed rapidly. Other powers intervened, laboring in the interests of peace. On July 12, it was announced that the Hohenzollern candidacy was withdrawn. 452 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR FRANCE DECLARES WAR AGAINST PRUSSIA The tension was immediately relieved ; the war scare was over. Two men, however, were not pleased by this outcome, Bismarck, whose intrigue was now foiled and whose humiliation was so great that he thought he must resign and retire into private life, and Gra- mont, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, a reckless, blustering politician who was not satisfied with the diplomatic victory he had won but wished to win another which would increase the discomfiture of Prussia. The French ministry now made an additional demand that the King of Prussia should promise that this HohenzoUern can- didacy should never be renewed. The King declined to do so and The Ems authorized Bismarck to publish an account of the incident, despatch Here was Bismarck's opportunity which he used ruthlessly and joyously to provoke the French to declare war. His account, as he himself says, was intended to be " a red flag for the Gallic bull." The effect of its publication was instantaneous. It aroused the indignation of both countries to fever heat. The Prussians thought that their King, the French that their ambassador had been insulted. As if this were not sufficient the newspapers of both countries teemed with false, abusive, and inflammatory accounts. The voice of the advocates of peace was drowned in the general clamor. The head of the French ministry declared that he accepted this war "with a light heart." This war declared by France on July 15 grew The Franco- directly out of mere diplomatic fencing. The French people War of 1870 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 immediate 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 South Ger- Country. In every respect it was begun under singularly man states inauspicious circumstances. France declared war upon Prus- join russia ^j^ alone, but in a manner that threw the South German states, upon whose support she had counted, directly into the camp of Bismarck. They regarded the French demand, that the King of FALL OF THE SECOxND EMPIRE 453 Prussia should pledge himself for all time to forbid the Prince of Hohenzollern's candidature, as unnecessary and insulting. At once Bavaria and Baden and Wiirtemberg joined the campaign on the side of Prussia. The French military authorities made the serious mistake of grossly underestimating the difficulty of the task before them. Incredible lack of preparation was revealed at once. The French army was poorly equipped, and was far inferior in numbers and in the ability of its commanders to the Prussian army. With the exception jh g m n of a few ineffectual successes the war was a long series of re- invade verses for the French. The Germans crossed the Rhine into '^*°*^^ Alsace and Lorraine, and succeeded, after several days of very heavy fighting, in shutting up Bazaine, with the principal French army, in Metz, a strong fortress which the Germans then besieged. THE FALL OF THE EMPIRE . On September i, another French army, with which was the Em- peror, was defeated at Sedan and was obliged on the following day to surrender to the Germans. Napoleon himself became a ofSedln* prisoner of war. The French lost, on these two days, in killed, wounded, or taken prisoners, nearly one hundred and twenty thou- sand men. 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 an- nounced in Paris by the Government as victories. The deception could no longer be maintained. On September 3 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 4, the Legislative Body was convened. But it had no time to deliberate. The mob invaded the hall shouting, "Down with the Empire ! Long live the Republic!" Gambetta, Jules Favre, and Jules Ferry, followed by the crowd, proceeded to the Hotel de Ville and there proclaimed the Republic. The Empress f^ed. A Government of National Defense was organized, with General Trochu at its head, which was the actual government of France during the rest of the war. 454 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR The Franco-German war lasted about six months, from the first of August, 1870, when fighting began, to about the first of February, 1 87 1. 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 Germany. The second period lasted five months. France, under the Government of National De- fense, made a remarkably courageous and spirited de- fense under the most dis- couraging conditions. THE SIEGE OF PARIS The Germans, leaving a sufficient army to carry on the siege of Metz, advanced to- ward Paris. Then began the siege of that city on Septem- ber 19. This siege, one of the most famous in history, lasted four months, and astonished Europe. Immense stores had been collected in the city, the citizens were armed, and the defense was energetic. The Leon Gambetta From a photograph. Parisians hoped to hold out long enough to enable new armies to be organized and diplomacy possibly to intervene. To accom- plish 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. Gambetta, by his immense energy, his eloquence, his patriotism, was able to raise new armies, whose resistance aston- ished 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 THE SIEGE OF PARIS 455 war was reduced to the siege of Paris, and the attempts of these im- provised armies to break that siege. These attempts were rendered all the more hopeless by the fall of Metz (October 27, 1870). Six thou- sand officers and 173,000 men were forced by impending starva- jhe fail of tion to surrender, with hundreds of cannon and immense war ^^^^ supplies, the greatest capitulation "recorded in the history of civil- ized nations." A month earlier, on September 27, Strasburg had surrendered and 19,000 soldiers had become prisoners of war. The capitulation of Metz was particularly disastrous' because it made possible the sending of more German armies to reenforce the siege of Paris, and to attack the forces which Gambetta was, by prodi- gies 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 in January. Certain sections suffered terribly, and were ravaged by fires. Famine stared the Parisians in the face. After November 20 there was no more beef or lamb to be had ; after December 1 5 only thirty grams of horse meat a day per person, which, moreover, cost about xhe siege two dollars and a half a pound ; after January 15 the amount of °^ P^"s bread, a wretched stuff, was reduced to three hundred grams. People 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. Additional suffering arose from the fact that the winter was one of the coldest on record. Coal and firewood were exhausted. Trees in the Champs Elysees (shon' za-le-za') and the Bois de Boulogne (bua de bo-l6n') were cut down, and fires built in the public squares for the poor. Wine froze in casks. On January 28, with famine almost upon her, Paris capitulated after an heroic resistance. NOTABLE RESULTS OF THE WAR The terms of peace granted to Bismarck were extraordinarily severe. They were laid down in the Treaty of Frankfort, signed • May 10, 1 87 1. France was forced to cede Alsace and a large xhe Treaty part of Lorraine, including the important fortress of Metz. °^ Frankfort She must pay an absolutely unprecedented war indemnitj^ of five thousand million francs (a billion dollars) within three years. She 456 SECOND EMPIRE AND FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR was to support a German army of occupation, which should be gradually withdrawn as the installments of the indemnity were paid. The Treaty of Frankfort remained the open sore of Europe after 1 87 1 . France could never forget or forgive the deep humiliation of it. The enormous fine could, with the lapse of time, have been overlooked, but never the seizure of the two provinces by mere force The Proclamation of William I as German Emperor, Versailles, January 18, 1871 From the painting by Anton von Werner. and against the unanimous and passionate protest of the people of Alsace and Lorraine. Moreover the eastern frontier of France was thus seriously weakened. Meanwhile other events had occurred as a result of this war. Fall of the Italy had completed her unification by seizing the city of Rome, temporal thus terminating the temporal rule of the Pope. The Pope had ^°'"^^ been supported there by a French garrison. This was with- drawn as a result of the battle of Sedan, and the troops of Victor Em- THE GERMAN EMPIRE PROCLAIMED 457 manuel attacked the Pope's own troops, defeated them after a shght resistance, and entered Rome on the 20th of September, _ , ^. ' '^ ' Completion 1870. The unity of Italy was now consummated and Rome of Italian became the capital of the kingdom. unification A more important consequence of the war was the completion of the unification of Germany, and the creation of the German Em- pire. Bismarck had desired a war with France as necessary _, . .^^ to bring about the unity of Germany. Whether necessary of German or not, at least that end was now secured. During the war " negotiations were carried on between Prussia and the South German states. Treaties were drawn up and the confederation was widened to include all the German states. On January 18, 1871, in the royal palace of Versailles, King William I was proclaimed German Emperor, The war of 1866 had resulted in the expulsion of Austria from Ger- many 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. REFERENCES The Mexican Expedition : Forbes, Life of Napoleon the Third, Chap. XI, pp. 214-237; Andrews, Historical Development of Modern Europe, Vol. II, pp. I73~i77 ; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, pp. 968-971. The Liberal Empire: Fisher, Bonapartism, pp. 100-123; Lebon, Modern France, Chap. XIII, pp. 313-337; Forbes, Chap. XII, pp. 238-260; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 467-493. HoHENzoLLERN CANDIDACY AND THE Ems DESPATCH : Munroe Smith, Bismarck, pp. 49-57 ; Headlam, Bismarck, Chap. XIII, pp. 315-345 ; Fyffe, pp. 978-984; Rose, Development of European Nations, Vol. I, pp. 45-57 ; Anderson, Constitutions and Documents, No. 121, pp. 593-594; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 158-159. The Franco-German War : Murdock, Reconstruction of Europe, Chaps. XXIV-XXX; Rose, Vol. I, Chaps. II and III, pp. 58-108; Fyffe, pp. 984- 1019; Henderson, Short History of Germany, Vol. II, pp. 422-450; Wright, C. H. C, A History of the Third French Republic, Chaps. I and II, pp. 1-30; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. XXI, pp. 576-612. Proclamation of the German Empire : Rose, Vol. I, pp. 153-163 ; Robin- son and Beard, Vol. II, pp. 163-165. CHAPTER XXIII THE GERMAN EMPIRE CONSTITUTION OF THE NEW GERMAN EMPIRE The Franco-German war completed the unification of Germany. The Empire was proclaimed January i8, 1 871, in the old capital of the French monarchy. The constitution of the new state was adopted immediately after the close of the war and went into force April 16, .1871. In most respects it was simply the constitution of the North German Confederation of 1867. The name of Confederation gave way to that of Empire and the name of Emperor was substituted for that of President. But the Empire was a confederation, consisting of twenty-five states and one Imperial Territory, Alsace-Lorraine. "l^^ The King of Prussia was tpso facto German Emperor. The legislative power was vested in the Bundesrath, or Federal Council, and the Reichstag. The Emperor had the right to declare war with the consent of the Bundesrath, he was to be commander- in-chief of the army and navy, to have charge of foreign affairs and make treaties, subject to the limitation that certain kinds of treaties must be ratified by Parliament. He was to be assisted by a Chancel- lor, whom he was to appoint, and whom he might remove, who was not to be responsible to Parliament but to him alone. Under the Chancellor were various secretaries of state, who simply administered departments, but who did not form a cabinet responsible to Parlia- ment. Laws were to be made by the Bundesrath and the Reichstag. The Bundesrath was the most powerful body in the Empire. It possessed legislative, executive, and judicial functions and was a sort of Bundesrath, diplomatic assembly. It represented the states, that is, the or Federal rulers of the twenty-five states of which the Empire consisted. It was to be composed of delegates appointed by the rulers. Unlike the Senate of the United States, the states of Germany were not to be represented equally in the Bundesrath but most unequally. 458 THE POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS OF GERMANY 459 There were to be fifty-eight members. Of these Prussia was to have seventeen, Bavaria six, Saxony and Wiirtemberg four each ; others three or two, and seventeen of the states were to have only one apiece. The Bundesrath was really the old Diet of Frankfort of 1815, carried over into the new system, with certain changes rendered necessary by the intervening history. The members were to be really diplomats, representing the numerous sovereigns of Ger- many. They were not to vote individually but each state was to vote as a unit and as the ruler might instruct. Thus the seven- teen votes of Prussia were to be cast always as a unit, on one side or the other, and as the King of Prussia should direct. The The Bundes- Bundesrath was not to be a deliberative body because its mem- i^^^ "^"^ ? -^ dehberative bers were to vote accordmg to mstructions from the home gov- body emments. I ts members were not to be free to vote as they might see fit. It was in reality an assembly of the sovereigns of Germany. Its powers were very extensive. It was the most important element of the legislature as most legislation began in it, its consent was necessary to all legislation, and every law passed by the Reichstag must after that be submitted to it for ratification or rejection. It was therefore the chief source of legislation. Representing the princes of Germany, it was a thoroughly monarchical institution, a bulwark of the monarchical spirit. As a matter of fact it has generally been controlled by Prussia, although there have been a few cases since 1871 in which the will of Prussia has been overridden. Its proceedings were secret. The Reichstag was the only popular element in the Empire. It consisted of 397 members, elected for a term of five years by the voters, that is, by men twenty-five years of age or older. The xhe powers of the Reichstag were inferior to those of most of the Reichstag other popular chambers of Europe. It neither made nor unmade ministries. While it, in conjunction with the Bundesrath, voted the appropriations, certain ones, notably those for the army, were voted for a period of years. Its consent was required for new taxes, whereas taxes previously levied continued to be collected without the consent of Parliament being secured -again. The matters on which Parlia- ment might legislate were those concerning army, navy, commerce, tariffs, railways, postal system, telegraphs, civil and criminal law. On matters not within the jurisdiction of the Empire each state might legislate as it chose. In reality the Reichstag was little 46o THE GERMAN EMPIRE more than an advisory body, with the power of veto of new legisla- tion. The mainspring of power was elsewhere — in the Bundesrath and in the Kingdom of Prussia. The German Empire was unique among federal governments in that it was a confederation of monarchical states, which, moreover, were very unequal in size and population, ranging from Prussia with tion of a population of 40,000,000, and covering two-thirds of the monarchical territory, down to Schaumburg-Lippe, with a population of 45,000. Three members of the Empire were republics : Liibeck, Bremen, and Hamburg. The rest were monarchies. All had constitutions and legislatures, more or less liberal. This confedera- tion differed from other governments of its class in that the states were of unequal voting power in both houses, one state largely pre- ponderating, Prussia, a fact explained by its great size, its population, and the importance of its historic role. The chief representative of the Emperor was the Chancellor. The Chancellor was not like the Prime Minister of England, simply one of The the ministers. He stood distinct from and above all federal ChanceUor officials. There was no imperial cabinet in the German Empire, and cabinet, or what is correctly called responsible, governrrient did not exist. The Chancellor was appointed by the Emperor, was re- movable by the Emperor, was responsible to the Emperor, and was not responsible to either Bundesrath or Reichstag. Either or both assemblies might vote down his proposals, might even vote lack of confidence. It would make no difference to him. He would not resign. The only support he needed was that of the Emperor. There were other so-called ministers, such as those of foreign affairs, of the interior, of education. But these were not like the members of the cabinet of the United States or of England. They were subordinates of the Chancellor, carrying out his will, and not for a moment thinking of resigning because of any adverse vote in the popular house, the Reichstag. The powers of the Chancellor were great, but as his tenure was absolutely dependent upon the favor of the Emperor this really meant that the power of the Emperor was great and was irresponsible. The Chancellor might be an imposing figure in the state, as Bismarck was ; he might be a mere agent of the Emperor, as Bismarck's successors were — for the reason that William II, unlike William I, intended to rule and really to be the Chancellor himself. IMPORTANCE OF THE MONARCH 461 This was the most important characteristic of the German Empire. Unlike England, France, Italy, Belgium, Holland, the Scandinavian states, the cabinet system of government did not exist in Germany. The executive was not subject to the legislative power ; ministers might not be turned out of office by adverse majorities. Germany was a constitutional state, in the sense that it ];iad a written con- ^j^^ parHa- stitution. It was not a parliamentary state. Parliament did mentary sys- not have the controlling voice in the state. The monarchs, and exist in °° particularly the monarch of Prussia, had that. This was Bis- Germany marck's great achievement. His victory over the Prussian Parlia- ment had this effect, that it checked the growth of responsible gov- ernment in Prussia. So far as insuring self-government, or a large measure of it, to the people of Germany was concerned, the consti- tution, largely the work of Bismarck, was much inferior to the con- stitution framed by the Parliament of Frankfort in 1848. The Emperor gained his great power from the fact that he was King of Prussia. He was Emperor because he was King. As King he had very extensive functions. His functions as Emperor and King were ,so connected that it was not easy to distinguish them, powers^of As a matter of fact the King of Prussia was very nearly an ^^^ ^f°e °f absolute monarch. The Prussian Parliament was far less likely to oppose his will than was the Imperial Parliament which, itself, was to show only slight independence after 1871. There was no parliamentary government in Prussia any more than there was in the Empire. Since 1871, Germany has had three Emperors, William I (1871- 1888), Frederick III (March 9-June 15, 1888), and William II, from 1888 to 1918. The history since 1871 naturally falls into two periods, which are in many respects well defined, the reign of William I and the reign of William II. During the former the real ruler was Prince Bismarck, the Chancellor, whose position was one of immense prestige „ . and authority. Having in nine years made the King, whom Emperor he found upon the point of abdicating, the most powerful ^™ ^ ruler in Europe, and having given Germans unity, he remained the chief figure in the state twenty years longer until his resignation in 1890. During the latter period, the reign of William II, the Emperor was the real head of the government. 462 THE GERMAN EMPIRE THE KULTURKAMPF No sooner was the new Empire established than it was torn by a fierce rehgious conflict that lasted many years, the so-called Kultur- kampf, "war in defense of civilization," a contest between the State and the Roman Cath5)lic Church. The wars with Austria and A religious France engendered animosity in the field of religion as they conflict ^gj-e victories of a Protestant state over two strongly Catholic states. The loss of the Pope's temporal power in 1870 embittered many Catholics still further and a party was formed in Germany, the Center, to work for the restoration of the temporal power and for the general interests of the Church. In the first elections to the Reichs- tag this party won sixty-three votes. Bismarck did not like this appearance of a clerical party in the political arena. He was of the opinion that the Church should keep out of politics. Moreover, he decidedly objected to what he understood to be the claims of the Church that in certain matters, which he regarded as belonging exclusively to the State, the Church was superior to the secular authority and had the primary right to the allegiance of Catholics. The immediate cause of the Kulturkampf was a quarrel among Catholics themselves. The proclamation by the Vatican Council in 1870 of the new dogma of papal infallibility had been opposed of the in the Council by the German bishops. But they and the Kulturkampf pj-jgg^-g Qf Germany were now required to subscribe to it. The large majority did, but some refused. The latter called them- selves Old Catholics, proclaiming their adherence to the Church as hitherto defined, but rejecting this addition to their creed as false. The bishops who accepted it demanded that the Old Catholics should be removed from their positions in the universities and schools. The Government of Prussia refused to remove them. A religious war was shortly in progress which grew more bitter each year. First the Imperial Parliament forbade the religious orders to engage TheFaik "^ teaching; then, in 1872, it expelled the Jesuits from Ger- Laws many. Of all legislation enacted during this struggle the Falk or May Laws of the Prussian legislature were the most important (passed in May of three successive, years, 1873, 1874, 1875). Bis- marck supported them on the ground that the contest was political, not religious, that there must be no state within the state, no power considering itself superior to the established authorities. He also CONFLICT OF CHURCH AND STATE 463 believed that the whole movement was conducted by those opposed to German unity. Anything that imperiled that unity must be crushed. These May Laws gave the state large powers over the education and appointment of the clergy. They forbade the Roman Catholic Church to intervene in any way in civil affairs, or to coerce citizens or ofifidals ; they required that all clergymen should pass the regular state examinations of the gymnasium, and should study theol- ogy for three years at a state university ; that all Catholic seminaries should be subject to state inspection. They also established control over the appointment and dismissal of priests. A law was passed making civil marriage compulsory. This was to reduce the power that priests could exercise by refusing to marry a Catholic and a Protestant, and now even Old Catholics. Religious orders were suppressed. Against these laws the Catholics indignantly protested. The Pope declared them null and void ; the clergy refused to obey them, and the faithful rallied to the support of the clergy. To enforce Conflict of them the Government resorted to fines, imprisonment, dep- Church and rivation of salary, expulsion from the country. The conflict '^*^ spread everywhere, into little villages, as well as into the cities, into the universities and schools. It dominated politics for several years. The national life was much disturbed, yet the end was not ac- complished. In the elections of 1877 the Center succeeded in return- ing ninety-two members, and was the largest party in the Reichstag. It was evident that the policy was a failure. Other questions were becoming prominent, of an economic and social character, and Bismarck wished to be free to handle them. Particularly requiring attention, in his opinion, and that of Bismarck's William I, was a new and most menacing party, the Socialist, retreat Bismarck therefore prepared to retreat. The death of Pius IX in 1878, and the election of Leo XIII, a more conciliatory and dip- lomatic Pope, facilitated the change of policy. The anti-clerical legislation was gradually repealed, except that concerning civil marriage. In return for the measures surrendered Bismarck gained the support of the Center for laws which he now had more at heart. The only permanent result of this religious conflict was the strengthening of the Center or Catholic party, which has been, during most of the time since, the strongest party in this Protestant country. 464 THE GERMAN EMPIRE BISMARCK AND SOCIALISM It was in 1878 that Bismarck turned his attention to the Socialist party which had for some time been growing, and now seemed menac- The growth ^^S- That party was founded by Ferdinand Lassalle, a Sociahst of Socialism of 1 848, much influenced by the French school of that day. The party, originally appearing in 1848, was shortly broken up by persecution and did not reappear until 1863. In 1863 Lassalle founded a journal called the Social Democrat. In opposition to this party a somewhat different Socialist group was led by Karl Marx. These two were rivals until 1875, when a fusion was effected and the party platform was adopted at Gotha. This platform denounced the existing organization of the economic system, the ownership of the means of production solely by the capitalist class and in its interest ; it demanded that the state should own them and should conduct industries in the interest of society, the largest part of which consists of laborers, and that the products of labor should be justly ^ . distributed ; it aimed at a free state and a socialistic society. Demands -^ of the Needless to say Germany was neither at that time. That ocia ists Germany might be a free state the Socialists demanded uni- versal suffrage for all over twenty years of age, women as well as men, secret ballot, freedom of the press, freedom of association, and indeed the greatest extension of political rights in a democratic direction, free and compulsory education, and certain immediate eco- nomic and social reforms, such as a progressive income tax, a normal working day, and a free Sunday, prohibition of child labor and of all forms of labor by women which were dangerous to health or morality, laws for the protection of the life and health of workingmen and for the inspection of mines and factories. In 1 87 1 the Socialists elected two members to the Reichstag, three years later their representation increased to nine, and in 1877 to twelve. Their popular votes were : in 1871, 124,655 ; in 1874, 351,952 ; and in 1877, 493,288. The steady growth of this party aroused the alarm of the ruling classes of Germany, which stood for monarchy, aristocracy, the existing , economic system, while its aims were destructive of all these. Alarm of -' the ruling Bismarck had long hated the Socialists, as was natural con- ciasses sidering his training and environment, and considering also the declarations of the Socialists themselves. Their leaders, Liebknecht and Bebel, had opposed the North German Confederation, the war BISMARCK AND THE SOCIALISTS 465 with France, the annexation of Alsace and Lorraine. The Socialists expressed openly and freely their entire opposition to the existing order in Germany. It was only a question of time when they must clash violently with the man who had helped so powerfully to create that order, and whose life work henceforth was to consolidate it. Again, the Socialist party was radically democratic, and Bismarck hated democracy. A conflict between men representing the very opposite poles of opinion was inevitable. Bismarck determined to crush the Socialists once for all. He would use two methods ; one stern repression of Socialist agitation, the other amelioration of the conditions of the working class, conditions which alone, he believed, caused them to listen to the false and deceptive doctrines of the Socialist leaders. First came repression. In October, 1878, a law of great severity, intended to stamp out completely all Socialist propaganda, was passed by the Imperial Parliament. It forbade all associations. Severe meetings, and publications having for their object "the sub- ™alnst^the version of the social order," or in which "socialistic tendencies " Socialists should appear. It gave the police large powers of interference, arrest, and expulsion from the country. Martial law might be proclaimed where desirable, which meant that, as far as Socialists were con- cerned, the ordinary courts would cease to protect individual liberties. Practically a mere decree of a police official would suffice to expel from Germany any one suspected or accused of being a Socialist. This law was enacted for a period of four years. It was later twice renewed and remained in force until 1890. It ^as vigorously applied. According to statistics furnished by the Socialists themselves, 1400 publications were suppressed, 1500 persons were imprisoned, 900 banished, during these twelve years. One might not read the works of Lassalle, for instance, even in a public library. This law, says a biographer of Bismarck, is very disappointing. "We find the Government again having recourse to the same means for checking and guarding opinion which Metternich had used Their fifty years before." ^ It was, moreover, an egregious failure, failure For twelve years the Socialists carried on their propaganda in secret. It became evident that their power lay in their ideas and in the economic conditions of the working classes, rather than in formal organizations, which might be broken up. A paper was published for ^ Headlam, Bismarck, 409. 466 THE GERMAN EMPIRE them in Switzerland and every week thousands of copies found their way into the hands of workingmen in Germany, despite the utmost vigilance of the police. Persecution in their case, as in that of the Roman Catholics, only rendered the party more resolute and active. At first it seemed that the law would realize the aims of its sponsors, for in the elections of 1881, the first after its passage, the Socialist vote fell from about 493,000 to about 312,000. But in 1884 it Continued , • oo ^ ^ • n u. growth of rose to 549,000; m 1887 to 763,000; m 1890 to 1,427,000, the Socialist resulting in the election of thirty-five members to the Reichstag. In that year the law was not renewed. The Socialists came out of their contest with Bismarck with a popular and par- liamentary vote increased threefold. Bismarck, true to his funda- mental belief that difficult opponents are best put down by force, not won by persuasion, had attempted here, as in the Kulturkampf, to settle an annoying question by arbitrary and despotic measures enforced ruthlessly by the police and sacrificing what were regarded in many other countries as the most precious rights of the indi- vidual. But he had at no time intended to rest content with merely repres- sive measures. He had also intended to win the working classes away from the Socialist party by enacting certain laws favoring them, by trying to convince them that the state was their real benefactor and was deeply interested in their welfare. The method by which Bismarck proposed to improve the condition of the working class was by an elaborate and comprehensive system of State insurance against the misfortunes and vicissitudes of life, Sociahsm against sickness, accident, old age, and incapacity. It was his desire that any workingman incapacitated in any of these ways should not be exposed to the possibility of becoming a pauper, but should receive a pension from the state. His policy was called State Socialism. His proposals met with vehement opposition, both in the Reichstag and among influential classes outside. It was only slowly that he carried them through, the Sickness Insurance Law in 1883, the Accident Insurance Laws in 1884 and 1885, and the Old Age Insurance Law in 1889. These laws are very complicated and cannot be described here at length. Bismarck a Such was Bismarck's contribution to the solution of the pioneer social question, which grew to such commanding importance as the nineteenth century wore on. In this legislation Bismarck was GERMANY ADOPTS PRINCIPLE OF PROTECTION 467 a pioneer. His ideas have been studied widely in other countries, and his example followed in some. The Socialists did not cooperate with him in the passage of these laws, which they denounced as entirely inadequate to solve the social evils, as only a slight step in the right direction. Nor did Bismarck wish their support. They were Social Democrats. Democracy he hated. Socialism of the State, controlled by a powerful mon- ^^^ arch, was one thing. Socialism carried through by the people ported by u 1- • • 1 ^- i. J J- i-i. • i-- the Socialists believmg m a democratic government, opposed to the existing order in government and society, a very different thing. At the very moment that Bismarck secured the passage of the Accident Insurance Bill he also demanded the renewal of the law against the Socialists. His prophecy, that if these laws were passed the Socialists would sound their bird call in vain, has not been fulfilled. That party has grown greatly and almost uninterruptedly ever since he began his war upon it. BISMARCK AND THE POLICY OF PROTECTION In 1879, Bismarck brought about a profound change in the financial and industrial policy of Germany by inducing Parliament to abandon the policy of a low tariff, and comparative free trade, and to Bismarck adopt a system of high tariff and pronounced protection. poi°^*^(,^ His purposes were twofold. He wished to increase the protection revenue of the Empire and to encourage native industries. In adopting the principle of protection he was not influenced, he asserted, by the theories of economists, but by his own observation of facts. He observed that, while England was the only nation following a policy of free trade, France and Austria and Russia and the United States were pronounced believers in protection and that it was too much to ask that Germany should permanently remain the dupe of an amiable error. He said that owing to her low tariff Germany had been the dumping ground for the overproduction of other countries. Now industries must be protected that they might flourish and that they might have at least the home market. As this policy had proved successful in other countries, notably in the United States, he urged that Germans follow their example. Bismarck won the day, though not without difficulty. Germany entered upon a period of protection, which, growing higher and 468 THE GERMAN EMPIRE applied to more and more industries, has continued ever since. Bismarck believed that Germany must become rich in order to ^. be strong ; that she could only become rich by manufactures ; gradually and that she could have manufactures only by giving them app le protection. The system was worked out gradually and piece- meal, as he could not carry his whole plan at once. By means of the tariff Bismarck wished to assure Germans the home market. Not only was this largely accomplished, but by its means the foreign market also was widened. By offering concessions to foreign na- tions for concessions from them, Germany gained for her manu- factured products an entrance into many other countries, which had been denied them before. The prodigious expansion of German industry after 1880 is generally regarded in Germany as a vindication of this policy. ACQUISITION OF COLONIES One of the important features of the closing years of Bismarck's political career was the beginning of a German colonial empire. In his earlier years Bismarck did not believe in Germany's at- ^Mi^gof tempting the acquisition of colonies. In 1871 he refused a colonial ^ demand as prize of war any of the French colonial pos- empire sessions. He believed that Germany should consolidate, and should not risk incurring the hostility of other nations by entering upon the path of colonial rivalry. But colonies, nevertheless, were being founded under the spirit of private initiative. Energetic merchants from Hamburg and Bremen established trading stations in Africa, and the islands of the Pacific, for the purpose of selling their goods and acquiring tropical products, such as cocoa, coffee, rubber, spices. The aid of the Government was invoked at various times, but Bismarck held aloof. The interest aroused in the exploits of these private companies gave rise towards 1880 to a definite colonial party and the formation of a Colonial Society, which later became im- portant. The change in the policy of the Government, however, from one of aloofness to one of energetic participation and acquisition of colonies A result of was largely a result of the adoption of the policy of protection of ^the policy ^^^ activc governmental encouragement of manufactures of protection and commerce. In the debate on the tariff bill of 1879 Bis- marck said that it was desirable to protect manufactures, that COLONIAL POLICIES 469 thus a greater demand for labor would arise, that more people could live in Germany, and that therefore the emigration which had for years drawn tens of thousands from the country, particularly to the United States, would be decreased. But to develop manu- factures to the utmost, Germany must have new markets for her products ; and here colonies would be useful. In 1884 he adopted a vigorous colonial policy, supporting and expanding the work of the private merchants and travelers. In that year Germany seized a number of points in Africa, in the southwest, the west, and the xhe Gennan east. A period of diplomatic activity began, leading in the next colonies few years to treaties with England and other powers, resulting in the fixing of the boundaries of the various claimants to African territory. 1 This is the partition of Africa described elsewhere.^ Germany thus | acquired a scattered African empire of great size, consisting of, Kamerun, Togoland, German Southwest Africa, German East Africa ; also a part of New Guinea. Later some of the Samoan Islands came into her possession, and in 1899 she purchased the Caroline and the Ladrone Islands, excepting Guam, from Spain for about four million dollars. THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE While domestic affairs formed the chief concern of Bismarck after the war with France, yet he followed the course of foreign affairs with the same closeness of attention that he had shown before, and manipu- lated them with the same display of subtlety and audacity that had characterized his previous diplomatic career. His great achieve- ment in diplomacy in these years was the formation of the „. Bismarck s Triple Alliance, an achievement directed, like all the actions of diplomatic his career, toward the consolidation and exaltation of his ^<^^»®'^™e'»t country. The origin of this alliance is really to be found in the Treaty of Frankfort, which sealed the humiliation of France. The wresting from France of Alsace and Lorraine inevitably rendered that country desirous of a war of revenge, of a war for their recovery. This remained the open sore of Europe after 1871, occasioning numerous, incontestable, and widespread evils. Firmly resolved to keep what he had won, Bismarck's chief consideration was to render such a war hopeless, therefore, perhaps, impossible. France » See Chapter XXIX. 470 THE GERMAN EMPIRE must be isolated so completely that she would not dare to move. This was accomplished, first by the friendly understanding brought Isolation of about by Bismarck between the three rulers of eastern Europe, France ^hg Empcrors of Germany, Russia, and Austria. But this understanding was shattered by events in the Balkan peninsula during the years from 1876 to 1878. In the Balkans, Russia and Austria were rivals, and their rivalry was thrown into high relief at the Congress of Berlin, over which Bismarck presided. Russia, unaided, had carried on a war with Turkey, and had imposed the Treaty of San Stefano upon her conquered enerhy, only to find that Europe would not recognize that treaty, but insisted upon its revision at an international congress, and at that congress she found Bismarck, to whom she had rendered inestimable services in the years so critical for Prussia, from 1863 to 1870, now acting as the friend of Austria, a power which had taken no part in the conflict, but was now intent upon drawing chestnuts from the fire with the aid of the Iron Chancellor. The Treaty of Berlin was a humiliation for Russia and a striking success for Austria, her rival, which was now empowered to "occupy" Bosnia and Herzegovina (hert-se-go- ve'-na). No wonder that the Russian Chancellor, Gortchakoff (gor-cha-kof), pronounced the Congress of Berlin "the darkest episode in his career," and that Alexander II declared that "Bis- marck had forgotten his promises of 1870." By favoring one of his allies Bismarck had alienated the other. In this fact lay the germ of the two great international combinations of the future, the Triple and Dual Alliances, factors of profound significance in the recent history of Europe. Of these the first in order of creation and in importance was the Triple Alliance. Realizing that Russia was mortally offended at his conduct, and that the friendly understanding with her was German over, Bismarck turned for compensation to a closer union Treaty of y^[^^ Austria, and concluded a treaty with her October 7, 1879. This treaty provided that if either Germany or Austria were attacked by Russia the two should be bound "to lend each other reciprocal aid with the whole of their military power, and, sub- sequently, to conclude no peace except conjointly and in agree- ment" ; that if either Germany or Austria should be attacked by another power — as, for instance, France — the ally should remain neutral, but that if this enemy should be aided by Russia, then THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE 471 Germany and Austria should act together with their full military force, and should make peace in common. Thus this Austro- German Treaty of 1879 established a defensive alliance aimed par- ticularly against Russia, to a lesser degree against France. The treaty was secret and was not published until 1887. Meanwhile, in 1882, Italy joined the alliance, irritated at France because „ , - ■' Entrance of of her seizure the year before of Tunis, a country which Italy Italy into herself had coveted as a seat for colonial expansion but which *^^ alliance Bismarck had encouraged France to take, wishing to make one more enemy for France, and thus to force that enemy, Italy, into the alliance, highly unnatural in many ways, with Austria, her old- time enemy, and with Germany. Thus was formed the Triple Alliance. The text of that alliance has never been published, but its purpose and character may probably be derived from that of the Austro-German Alliance, which was now expanded to include another power. The alliance was made for a period of years, but was constantly renewed and remained in force until 191 5. It was a defensive alliance, designed to assure its territory to each of the contracting parties. Thus was created a combination of powers which dominated central Europe, from the Baltic to the Mediterranean, and which rested on a military force of over two million men. At its head stood Germany. Europe entered upon a period of German leadership in international affairs which was later to be challenged by the rise of a new alliance, that of Russia and France, which for various reasons, however, was slow in forming. THE REIGN OF WILLIAM II On the 9th of March, 1888, Emperor William I died at the age of ninety-one. He was succeeded by his' son, Frederick III, in his fifty-seventh year. The new Emperor was a man of moderation, of liberalism in politics, an admirer of the Eng- lish constitution. It is supposed that, had he lived, the autocracy of the ruler would have given way to a genuine parliamentar}- system like that of England, and that an era of greater liberty would have been inaugurated. But he was already a dying man, ill of cancer of the throat. His reign was one of physical agony patiently borne. Unable to use his voice, he could only indicate his wishes by writing 472 THE GERMAN EMPIRE Character- istics of William II or by signs. The reign was soon over, before the era of liberalism had time to dawn. Frederick was King and Emperor only from March 9 to June 15, 1888. He was succeeded by his son, William II. The new ruler was twenty-nine years of age, a young man of very active mind, of fer- tile imagination, versa- tile, ambitious, self-con- fident, a man of unusual vigor. In his earliest ut- terances, the new sovereign showed his enthusiasm for the army and for religious ortho- doxy. He held the doctrine of the divine origin of his power with medieval fervor, expressing it with frequency and in dramatic fashion. It was evident that a man of such a character would wish to govern, and not simply reign. He would not be will- ing long to efface himself be- hind the imposing figure of the great Chancellor. Bis- marck had prophesied that the Emperor would be his own Chancellor, yet he did not have the wisdom to re- sign when the old Emperor _ , J died, and to deparjt with The forced ^ resignation of dignity. He clung tO power. From the be- ginning friction developed between the two. They thought differ- ently, felt differently. The fundamental question was, who should rule in Germany? The struggle was for supremacy since there was no way in which two persons so self-willed and autocratic could divide power. As Bismarck stayed on when he saw that his presence was no longer desired, the Emperor, not willing to be over- shadowed by so commanding and illustrious a minister, finally Bismarck Dropping the Pilot Cartoon by Sir John Tenniel in Punch, March 2g, i8go. THE ANTI-SOCIALIST POLICY ABANDONED 473 demanded his resignation in 1890. Thus in bitterness and humilia- tion ended the political career of a man who, according to Bismarck himself, had "cut a figure in the history of Germany and Prussia." He lived several years longer, dying in 1898 at the age of eighty- three, leaving as his epitaph, "A faithful servant of Emperor Wil- liam I." Thus vanished from view a man who will rank in history as a great statesman and diplomatist. After 1 890 the personality of William 1 1 was the decisive factor in the state. His Chancellors were, in fact as well as in theory, his servants, carrying out the master's wish. Down to the outbreak of the Great War there were four: Caprivi, 1890- 1894; Hohenlohe, 1894-1900; von Billow, 1900-1909, and Bethmann-HoUweg, from July, 1909. That war was to add three others to the list, whose terms were to prove exceedingly brief, Michaelis, Hertling, and Prince Maximilian of Baden. The extreme political tension was at first somewhat relieved by the removal of Bismarck from the scene, by this "dropping of the pilot," after thirty-eight years of continuous service. The ^j^^ Emperor early measures under the new regime showed a liberal tend- and the ency . The Anti-Socialist laws, expiring in 1 890, were not renewed. This had been one of the causes of friction between the Emperor and the Chancellor. Bismarck wished them renewed, and their stringency increased. The Emperor wished to try milder methods, hoping to undermine the Socialists completely by further measures of social and economic amelioration, to kill them with kindness. The repressive laws lapsing, the Socialists reorganized openly, and have conducted an aggressive campaign ever since. The Emperor, soon recognizing the futility of anodynes, became their bitter enemy, and began to denounce them vehemently, but no new legislation has been passed against them, although this has been several times attempted. The reign of William II was notable for the remarkable expansion of industry and commerce, which rendered Germany the redoubtable rival of England and the United States. In colonial and _ '^ Expansion foreign affairs an aggressive policy was followed. German of industry colonies proved of little importance, entailed great expense, ^° '* ^ and yielded only small returns. But the desire for a great colonial empire became a settled policy of the Government, and seized the popular imagination. 474 THE GERMAN EMPIRE Connected with the growing interest of Germany in commercial and colonial affairs went an increasing interest in the navy. Strong The German on land for fifty years, William II desired that Germany °*^ should be strong on the sea, that she might act with decision in any part of the world, that her diplomacy, which was permeated with the idea that nothing great should be done in world politics anywhere, in Europe, in Asia, in Africa, without her consent, might be supported by a formidable navy. To make that fleet powerful was a constant and a growing preoccupation of the Emperor. THE RISE OF SOCIAL DEMOCRACY In the political world the rise of the Social Democratic party was the most important phenomenon. It represented not merely a desire for a revolution in the economic sphere, it also represented a protest against the autocratic government of the ruler, a demand for democratic institutions. While Germany had a Constitution and a Parliament, the monarch was invested with vast power. Parlia- ment did not control the Government, as the ministers were not responsible to it. There was freedom of speech in Parliament, but practically during most of this reign it did not exist outside. Hun- dreds of men have, during the past twenty years, been imprisoned for such criticisms of the Government as in other countries are the current coin of discussion. This is the crime of lese-majeste, which, as long as it exists, prevents a free political life. The growth of the Social Democratic party to some extent represented mere liberal- Growth of ism, not adherence to the economic theory of the Socialists. DeimKratic ^^ ^^^ ^^ great reform and opposition party of Germany. It party had, in 1907, the largest popular vote of any party, 3,260,000.^ Yet the Conservatives with less than 1,500,000 votes elected in 1907 eighty-three members to the Reichstag to the forty-three of the Socialists. The reason was this : the electoral districts had not been altered since they were originally laid out in 1 869-1 871, though popu- lation had vastly shifted from country to city. The cities have grown rapidly since then, and it is in industrial centers that the Socialists are strongest. Berlin with a population in 1871 of 600,000 had six members in the Reichstag. It still had only that number in ' In igi2 the Socialists cast 4,250,000 votes and elected no members to the Reichs- tag, thus displacing the Center as the largest party in that body. THE POWER OF PRUSSIA IN GERMANY 475 1907, although its population was over 2,000,000, and although it would have been entitled to twenty members had equal electoral districts existed. These the Socialists demanded, but for this very reason the Government refused the demand. The extreme oppo- nents of the Social Democrats even urged that universal suffrage, guaranteed by the Constitution, be abolished, as the only way to crush the party. To this extreme the Government did not dare to go. In the closing years of the reign of William II several questions were much discussed ; the question of the electoral reform in Prussia ; of the redistribution of seats, both in the Prussian Landtag and xwo leading the Imperial Reichstag ; and of ministerial responsibility. demands Prussia was the state that in practice ruled the German Empire. This was what was intended by Bismarck when he drew up the Constitution of the Empire, it was precisely the object of his entire policy. The Constitution was based on the two chief ascendancy articles of Bismarck's creed, the power of the monarch and the ° Prussia ascendancy of Prussia. This was the accepted idea of the governing classes down to the outbreak of the war. As was said in 1914 by Prince von Billow, the most important Chancellor of the Empire since Bismarck, "Prussia attained her greatness as a country of soldiers and officials, and as such she was able to accomplish the work of German union ; to this day she is still, in all essentials, a state of soldiers and officials." The governing classes were, in Prussia, which, in turn, governed Germany, the monarchy, the aristocracy, and a bureaucracy of military and civil officials, respon- sible to the King alone. The determining factor in the state was the personality of the King. GERMANY'S ELECTORAL SYSTEM Neither the Empire, nor the Kingdom of Prussia, was governed by democratic institutions. The Kingdom lagged far behind the Empire, and, so great was its power, impeded the develop- ment of liberty in the Empire. Prussia in 1914 was a country of 40,000,000 people. It had had a legislature of two chambers since 1850, and the lower house of the legislature was chosen by universal suffrage. Every Prussian man who had attained his twenty-fifth year had the vote. Was Prussia, therefore, a democracy? Not ex- actly, for this universal suffrage was most marvelously manipu- 476 THE GERMAN EMPIRE lated. The exercise of the right to vote was so arranged that the ballot of the poor man was practicall}^ annihilated. Universal suffrage Prussia's was rendered illusory. The way in which this was done has lystem of^ already been described. The voters were divided in each electo- eiection ral district into three classes according to wealth. The amount of taxes, paid by the district, was divided into three equal parts. Those taxpayers 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 re- mainder, into ■ still an- other class. The result was that a very few rich men were set apart by themselves, the less rich by themselves, and the poor by themseh'es. Each of these groups, voting separately, elected an equal number of dele- gates to a convention, which convention chose the representatives of that constituency to the lower house of the Prus- sian Parliament. Thus in every electo- ral convention two- thirds of the members belonged to the wealthy or well-to-do class. There „ ^ was no chance in such a system for the poor, for the masses, democratic This System gave an enormous preponderance of political power system ^^ ^j^^ ^-^^ yj^^ ^^^^ class consisted of very few men, in some districts of only one ; the second was sometimes twenty times as numerous, the third sometimes a hundred, or even a thousand times. Thus, though every man had the suffrage the vote of a single rich man might have as great weight as the votes of a thousand working- \VlLLiA.M 11 From a photograph taken in 1914. THE ELECTORAL SYSTEM 477 men. Universal suffrage was thus manipulated in such a way as to defeat democracy decisively and to consolidate a privileged class in power in the only branch of the government that had even the appearance of being of popular origin. Bismarck, no friend of lib- eralism, once characterized this electoral system as the worst ever created. Its shrieking injustice was shown by the fact that in 1900 the Social Democrats, who actually cast a majority of the votes, got only seven seats out of nearly 400. It was one of the most undemo- cratic systems in existence. In 1908 there were 293,000 voters in the first class, 1,065,240 in the second, 6,324,079 in the third. The first class represented Relative 4 per cent, the second 14 per cent, the third 82 per cent of the importance population. In Cologne the first class comprised 370 electors, classes the second 2,584, while the third had 22,324. The first class of voters chose the same number of electors as the third. Thus 370 rich men had the same voting capacity as 22,324 proletarians. In Saar- briicken the Baron von Stumm formed the first class all by himself and announced complacently that he did not suffer from his isolation. In one of the Berlin districts Herr Heffte, a manufacturer of sausages, formed the first class. This system would seem to be outrageous enough by reason of its monstrous plutocratic caste. But this was not all. This reaction- arjr edifice was appropriately crowned by another device — oral voting. Neither in the primary nor the secondary vot- ing was a secret ballot used. Voting was not even by a written or printed ballot, but by the spoken word. Thus every one exercised his right publicly in the presence of his superior or his patron or employer or his equals or the official representative of the King. In such a country as Prussia, where the police were notoriously ubiquitous, what a weapon for absolutism ! The great landowners, the great manufacturers, the State, could easily bring all the pressure they desired to bear upon the voter, exercising his wretched rudiment of political power. Needless to say, under such a system as this the working classes were almost entirely unrepresented in the Prussian legislature. Again, with the exception of a thoroughly insignificant measure passed in 1906, no changes were made in the electoral districts of Prussia after 1858. No account was taken of the changes in the population and there were consequently great disparities between 478 THE GERMAN EMPIRE the various districts. Thus, in a recent election in the Province of East Prussia, the actual ratio of inhabitants to each deputy was 63,000, while in Berlin it was 170,000. In one election, districts un- 3,000,000 inhabitants of four large Prussian districts returned changed since q representatives, while three other millions, divided among forty smaller districts, returned 66. Naturally, the demand grew constantly louder that many districts should be partially or wholly disfranchised or merged with others, and that other districts should receive a larger representation. No attempt, however, was made to meet this demand. In the Empire, also, a similar problem became yearly more acute. In 1 87 1, Germany was divided into 397 constituencies for the Reichs- tag. The number remained the same from that time down to Representa- ° tion in the the war and, indeed, until the Reichstag disappeared in the Reichstag convulsions of the closing months of 191 8. Not a single district gained or lost in representation. Yet from 1871 to 19 14 the population of the Empire increased from about forty-one millions to over sixty-five millions, and there was a great shifting in popula- tion from the country to the cities. One of the divisions of Berlin, with a population of 697,000, elected one representative, whereas the petty principality of Waldeck, with a population of 59,000, elected one. The 851,000 voters of Greater Berlin returned eight members ; the same number of voters in fifty of the smaller con- stituencies returned forty-eight. A reform of these gross inequalities was widely demanded, but the demand passed unheeded. Another subject much discussed during the later j^ears of the Empire was that concerning ministerial responsibility. The in- Ministeriai discretions of Emperor William II made this from time to responsibii- time a burning question. An interview with him, in which ^^ he spoke with great freedom of the strained relations between Germany and Great Britain, was published in the London Telegraph on October 28, 1908. At once was seen a phenomenon not witnessed in Germany since the founding of the Empire. There was a violent protest against the irresponsible actions of the Emperor, actions subject to no control, and yet easily capable of bringing about a war. Newspapers of all shades of party affiliation displayed a freedom of utterance and of censure unparalleled in Germany. All parties in the Reichstag expressed their emphatic disapproval. The inci- dent, however, was not sufficient to bring about the introduction of POWER OF THE SOVEREIGNS OF GERMANY 479 the system of the responsibihty of ministers for all the acts of the monarch, and the control of the ministry by the majority of the Reichstag, in short, the parliamentary system in its essential feature. IMPOTENCE OF THE REICHSTAG Neither in the Empire, nor in the Kingdom of Prussia, nor in any of the other states that composed the Empire, did the elected chamber control the Government. In every case the Prince ^, ^j .had an absolute veto. Where there were second chambers, veto as in many of the states, they were not elected by the voters, *^^°'"*® but were either based on heredity or on appointment by the ruler or by certain narrow organizations. In any case the second chambers were a bulwark of a privileged class. And in Prussia, as we have seen, even the so-called popular house was merely another name for a privileged class. Neither in the Empire nor in the individual states were the ministers controlled by the popular assemblies. The assemblies might vote a lack of confidence as often as they felt like it. The ministers would go right on as long as the Emperor, King, Grand Duke, or Prince desired. In none of the German states could the constitution be amended without the consent of the sovereign of that state. The constitution of the Empire could not be amended without the consent of one man, William II, for a constitutional amendment must be passed not only by the Reichstag but by the Bundesrath, and the constitution provided that no amendment could pass the Bundesrath if fourteen votes were cast against it. In that body Prussia had seventeen votes and those votes were cast as the King of Prussia directed. If ever}' individual in Germany except this one, and including the other Kings and Dukes, had desired a change in the constitution they could not have secured it if William II said "No" ! The power of the Prussian crown was virtually absolute — "ab- solutism under constitutional forms," as Rudolph Gneist, once considered in Germany a great authority on public law, said years ago. In the economic sphere Germany was enterprising, progres- sive, successful, highly modern ; in the intellectual sphere she was active and productive ; but in the political sphere she was in a state of arrested development. And it had been the amazing triumphs of Bismarck, based on force, that had caused the arrest. German 48o THE GERMAN EMPIRE legislatures were impotent and ineffective. For all practical pur- poses the Reichstag was merely a debating club, and a de- The Reichstag bating club that had no power of seeing that its will was a hall of carried out. As late as January, 1914, Dr. Friedrich Nau- 6clioes mann, of "Middle Europe" fame, described the humiliating position of the body of which he was a member in the following words : "We on the Left are altogether in favor of the parliamentary' regime, by which we mean that the Reichstag cannot forever remain in a position of subordination. Why does the Reichstag sit at all, why does it pass resolutions, if behind it is a waste paper basket into which these resolutions are thrown ? The problem is to change the impotence of the Reichstag into some sort of power. . . . The man who compared this House to a hall of echoes was not far wrong. . . . When one asks the question, 'What part has the Reichstag in German history as a whole ? ' it will be seen that the part is a very limited one." The effective seat of political power in Germany was, as it had always been, in the monarchs. Germans might have the right to vote, but of what value was it if the vote led nowhere, if the body elected by the voters was carefully and completely nullified by other bodies, princes and aristocratic hereditary upper chambers, over which the voters had no control ? Prussia was the strongest obstacle the democratic movement of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries encountered. Germany Prussia the i^i IQH was less liberal than in 1848. The most serious blow obstacle to that the principle of representative government received emocracy dyj-ing that century was the one she received at the hands of Bismarck. We have expert testimony of the highest and most official sort that the effects of that blow were not outlived. Prince von Billow, writing in 1914, said : "Liberalism, in spite of its change of attitude in national questions, has to this day not recovered from the catastrophic defeat which Prince Bismarck inflicted nearly half a century ago on the party of progress which still clings to the ideals and principles of 1848." The situation was still further defined by the utterance of Pro- fessor Delbriick, successor to Treitschke in the chair of modern history in the University of Berlin, who wrote in 19 14 to the effect that "Anyone who has any familiarity with our officers and THE GERMAN PARLIAMENT AND THE ARMY 481 generals knows that it would take another Sedan, inflicted on us in- stead of by us, before they would acquiesce in the control of the Army by the German Parliament." Here was a very clear in- dication as to where real power lay in Germany. One has only not^conTroUed to recall the great chapters in English history which tell of the ^^ . -^ Parliament Struggle for liberty to know that it has been obtained solely by the recognition of the supremacy of Parliament over royal pre- rogative, over military power. The German state was the most autocratic in Western Europe ; it was also the most militaristic. Fundamental individual liberties, regarded as absolutely vital in England, France, America, and Ge^njany many other states, had never been possessed by Germans, nor a mUitary were they possessed in 19 14. Germany was rich, vigorous, ™°'^*'''^ ^ powerful, instructed. It was not free. A military monarchy is the very opposite of a democratic state. Prince von Billow says, in his recent book. Imperial Germany, "Despite the abundance of merits and the great qualities with which the German nation is endowed, political talent has been denied it." Any citizen of a free country knows that that talent grows only where an opportunity has been given it to grow. It need occasion no surprise that Momm- sen, the historian of Rome, writing in 1903, should say of his own country, "There are no longer free citizens." Instead there were industrious, energetic, educated, ambitious, and submissive subjects. REFERENCES The Government of the German Empire : Ogg, Governments of Europe, pp. 210-228; Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. I, pp. 240-285; Fife, The German Empire between Two Wars, pp. 101-138. The Kulturkampf : Headlam, Bismarck, pp. 394-404 ; Seignobos, The Political History of Europe Since .1814, pp. 491-496; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 178-185 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 145-152. Measures against the Socialists : Dawson, German Socialism and Ferdinand Lassalle, pp. 247-278; Headlam, pp. 407-411 ; Fife, pp. 177-183. Bismarck and Social Reform : Ogg, Social Progress in Contemporary Europe, pp. 154-263; Dawson, Bismarck and State Socialism, pp. 23-36, 72- 127; Robinson and Beard, Vol. II, pp. 185-192. Industrial Development of Germany : Ogg, Social Progress in Contem- porary Europe, pp. 11 7-1 19, 123-124; Dawson, Evolution of Modern Germany; Fife, Chap. VIII. 482 THE GERMAN EMPIRE Bismarck's Foreign and Colonial Policies : Marriott and Robertson, The Evolution of Prussia, pp. 399-408, 416-423; Headlam, pp. 405-408, 423- 427 ; Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, pp. 1-37. Dismissal and Death of Bismarck : Headlam, pp. 440-463 ; Robinson and Beard, Vol. II, pp. 200-203. ' Reign of William II: Marriott and Robertson, pp. 424-446; Gooch, History of Our Time (Home University Library), pp. 82-97; Priest, Germany Since 1740, pp. 146-184; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 165-173; Seymour, Chaps. IV-V; Fife, passim; Tower, C, Germany of To-day (Home University Library) ; Schmitt, England and Germany, Chaps. Ill, IV, VIII-XI ; Prothero, German Policy before the War. Consult also on German history under the Empire two books recently pub- lished : Robertson, Bismarck, and Dawson, The German Empire, 1867 -igi4, and the Unity Movement. CHAPTER XXIV FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC The Third Republic was proclaimed, as we have seen, by the Parisians on September 4, 1870, after the news of the disaster of Sedan had reached the capital. A Provisional Government of National Defense was immediately installed. This government gave way in February, 1871, to a National Assembly of 750 members elected by universal suffrage for a single purpose, to make peace with Germany. A majority of the members of this National As- sembly, which met first at Bordeaux, were Monarchists. The xhe National reason was that the monarchical candidates favored the mak- Assembly ing of a peace, whereas many republican leaders, with Gambetta at their head, wished to continue the war. The mass of the peasants desiring peace therefore voted for the peace candidates. There is nothing to show that thereby they expressed a wish for monarchy. The Assembly of Bordeaux made the peace, ceding Alsace and Lorraine, and assuming the enormous war indemnity. But peace did not return to France as a result of the Treaty of Frankfort. The "Terrible Year," as the French call it, of 1 870-1 871, had more horrors in store. Civil war followed the war with the Germans, xhe "Tern- shorter but exceeding it in ferocity, a war between those in ^'® ^^^^ " control of the city of Paris and the Government of France as repre- sented by the Assembly of Bordeaux. That Assembly had chosen Thiers as "Chief of the Executive Power," pending "the nation's decision as to the definitive form of government." Thus the fun- damental question was postponed. Thiers was chosen for no definite term ; he was the servant of the Assembly to carry out its wishes, and might be dismissed by it at any moment. THE COMMUNE Between the Government and the people of Paris serious disagree- ments immediately arose, which led quickly to the war of the Commune. Paris had proclaimed the Republic. But the Republic was not yet 483 484 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC sanctioned by France, and existed only de facto. On the other hand, the National Assembly was controlled by Monarchists, and it had postponed the determination of the permanent institutions of mune and the the country. Did not this simply mean that it would abolish National ^^ Republic and proclaim the Monarchy, when it should judge the moment propitious? This fear, only too well justified, that the Assembly was hostile to the Republic, was the fundamental cause of the Commune. Paris lived in daily dread of this event. Paris was ardently Republican. For ten years under the Empire it had been returning Republicans to the Chamber of Deputies. These men did not propose to let a coup d'etat like that of Louis Napoleon in 1851 occur again. Various acts of the Assembly were well adapted to deepen and intensify the feeling of dread uncer- tainty. The Assembly showed its distrust of Paris by voting Assembly in March, 1871, that it would henceforth sit in Versailles. removed to jj^ other words, a small and sleepy town, and one associated Versailles with the history of monarchy, was to be the capital of France instead of the great city which had sustained the tremendous siege and by her self-sacrifice and suffering had done her best to hold high the honor of the land. Not only was Paris wounded in her pride by this act, which showed such unmistakable suspicion of her, but she suffered also in her material interests at a time of great financial distress. The Government did nothing to relieve this distress, but greatly accentuated it by several unwise measures. There was in Paris a considerable population having diverse revolutionary tendencies, anarchists, Jacobins, Socialists — whose leaders worked with marked success among the restless, poverty- stricken masses of the great city. Out of this unrest it was easy for an insurrection to grow. The insurrectionary spirit spread with great rapidity until it developed into a war between Paris and the Versailles Government. Attempts at solving the difficulties by conciliation having failed, the Government undertook to subdue the . city. This necessitated a regular siege of Paris, the second of siege of that Unhappy city within a year. This time, however, the siege ^^^^^ was conducted by Frenchmen, the Germans, who controlled the forts to the north of Paris, looking on. It lasted nearly two months, from April 2 to May 21, when the Versailles troops forced their entrance into the city. Then followed seven days' ferocious fighting in the streets, the Communists more and more desperate THE LIBERATION OF THE TERRITORY 485 and frenzied, the Versailles army more and more revengeful and sanguinary. This was the "Bloody Week," during, which Paris suffered much more than she had from the bombardment of the Germans — a week of fearful destruction of life and property. The horrors of incendiarism were added to those of slaughter. Finally the awful agony was brought to a close. The revenge taken by the Government was heavy. It punished right and left summarily. Many were shot on the spot without any form of trial. Arrests and trials went on for years. Thousands were sent to tropical penal colonies. Other thousands were sentenced to hard labor. The rage of this monarchical assembly was slow in subsiding. THE GOVERNMENT OF THIERS Having put down the insurrection of Paris and signed the hard treaty with Germany, France was at peace. The Republicans thought that the Assembly ought now to dissolve, arguing that France at it had been elected to make peace, and nothing else. The p®^<=^ Assembly decided, however, that it had full powers of legislation on all subjects, including the right to make the Constitution. The Assembly remained in power for nearly five years, refusing to dissolve. But before taking up the difficult work of making a Constitution it cooperated for two years with Thiers (tyar) in the necessary work of reorganization. The most imperative task was that of ., .^j^^ getting the Germans out of the country. Under the skillful Liberator of leadership of Thiers, the payment of the enormous war in- ^ ^"' °'^^ demnity, five billion francs, was undertaken with energy and carried out with celerity. In September, 1873, the last installment was paid and the last German soldiers went home. The soil of France was freed nearly six months earlier than was provided by the treaty. For his great services in this initial work of reconstruction the National Assembly voted that Thiers had "deserved well of the country" and the people spontaneously acclaimed him as "The Liberator of the Territory." The reconstruction of the army was also urgent and was under- taken in the same spirit of patriotism, entailing heavy personal sacrifices. A law was passed in 1872 instituting compulsory Army re- military service. Five years of service in the active army construction were henceforth to be required in most cases. The law really 486 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC established in France the Prussian military system, so successful in crushing all opponents. We now see the beginning of that op- pressive militarism which became the most characteristic feature of contemporary Europe. Other nations considered that they were forced to imitate Prussia in order to assure their own safety in the future. In the case of France the necessity was entirely obvious. In this work of recon- struction the Assembly „.. and Thiers were Thiers and the able to work to- Republic gg^^gj. ^^ ^^^ ^j^^jg harmoniously. Now that this was accomplished the Monarchists of the As- sembly resolved to abolish the Republic and restore the Monarchy. They soon found that they had in Thiers a man who would not abet them in their project. Thiers was originally a believer in constitutional monarchy, but he was not afraid of a republican government, and during the years after 1870 he came to believe that a Republic was, for France, at the close of a turbulent century, the only possible form of government. "There is," he said, "only one throne, and there are three claimants for a seat on it." He discovered a happy formula in favor of the Republic, "It is the form of government which divides us least." And again, "Those parties who want a monarchy, do not want the same monarchy." By which phrases The he accurately described a curious situation. The Monarchists, Monarchists while they constituted a majority of the Assembly, were divided into three parties, no one of which was in the majority. There Thiers After the portrait by L. Bonnat, 1876. THIERS AND THE MONARCHISTS 487 were Legitimists, Orleanists, and Bonapartists. The Legitimists up- held the right of the grandson of Charles X, the Count of Chambord ; the Orleanists, the right of the grandson of Louis Philippe, the Count of Paris ; the Bonapartists, of Napoleon III, or his son. The Mon- archist parties could unite to prevent a definite legal establishment of the Republic ; they could not unite to establish the monarchy, as each wing wished a different monarch. Out of this division arose the only chance the Third Republic had to live. As the months v/ent by, the Monarchists felt that Thiers was becoming constantly iHore of a republican, which was true.* If a monarchical restoration was to be attempted, therefore, Thiers must be gotten out of the way. Consequently, in May, 1873, the Assembly forced him to resign and immediately elected Marshal MacMahon (mak-ma-6h') president to prepare the way for the coming monarch. THE FRAMING OF THE CONSTITUTION Earnest attempts were made forthwith to bring about a restoration of the monarchy. This could be done by a fusion of the Legitimists and the Orleanists. Circumstances were particularly favorable xhe Count for the accomplishment of such a union. The Count of Cham- °* chambord bord (shofi-bor') had no direct descendants. The inheritance would, therefore, upon his death, pass to the House of Orleans, represented by the Count of Paris. The elder branch would in the course of nature be succeeded by the younger. This fusion seemed accom- plished when the Count of Paris visited the; Count of Chambord, recognizing him as head of the family. A committee of nine members of the Assembly, representing the Monarchist parties, the Imperial- ists holding aloof, negotiated during the summer of 1873 with the " King" concerning the terms of restoration. The negotiations were successful on most points, and it seemed as if by the close of the year the existence of the Republic would be terminated and Henry V would be reigning in France. The Republic was saved by the devotion of the Count of Chambord to a symbol. He stated that he would never renounce the ancient Bourbon banner. "Henry V could never abandon the white flag of Henry IV," he had already declared, and from that resolution he never swerved. The tricolor represented the Revolution. If he was to be King of France it must be with his principles and his flag ; King of the Revolution he 488 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC would never consent to be. The Orleanists, on the other hand, ad- hered to the tricolor, knowing its popularity with the people, knowing that no regime that repudiated the glorious symbol could long endure. Against this barrier the attempted fusion of the two branches of the Bourbon family was shattered. The immediate danger to the Republic was over. But the Monarchists did not renounce their hope of restoring the monarchy. The Count of Chambord might, perhaps, change his mind ; if not, as he had no son, the Count of Paris would lishment succeed him after his death as the lawful claimant to the of the throne ; and the Count of Paris, defender of the tricolor, could ^^ ^ then be proclaimed. The Monarchists, therefore, planned merely to gain time. Marshal MacMahon had been chosen execu- tive, as had Thiers, for no definite term. He was to serve during the pleasure of the Assembly itself. Believing that MacMahon would resign as soon as the King really appeared, they voted that his term should be for seven years, expecting that a period of that length would see a clearing up of the situation, either the change of mind or the death of the Count of Chambord. Thus was estab- lished the Septennate, or seven-year term, of the President, which still exists. The presidency was thus given a fixe'd term by the Monarchists, as they supposed, in their own interests. If they could not restore the monarchy in 1873 they could at least control the presidency for a considerable period, and thus prepare an easy transition to the new system at the opportune moment. But France showed unmistakably that she desired the establish- ment of a definitive system, that she wished to be through with these provisional arrangements, which only kept party feeling feverish and handicapped France in her foreign relations. reiuctoMo France had as yet no constitution, and yet this Assembly, frame a con- choscn to make peace, had asserted that it was also chosen to stitution . . . , . , , . . , . . . frame a constitution, and it was by this assertion that it justi- fied its continuance in power long after peace was made. Yet month after month, and year after year, went by and the constitution was not made, nor even seriously discussed. If the Assembly could not, or would not, make a constitution, it should relinquish its power and let the people elect a body that would. But this it steadily refused to do. This inability of the Monarchists to act owing to their own internal CONSTITUTION OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC 489 divisions was of advantage to only one party, the Republican. More and more people who had hitherto been Monarchists, now finally convinced that a restoration of the monarchy was im- ^ practicable, joined the Republican party, and thus it came Constitution about finally in 1875 that the Assembly decided to make the °^ '^'^^ constitution. It did not, as previous assemblies had done, draw up a single document, defining the organization, and narrating the rights of the citizens. It passed three separate laws which taken together were to serve as a constitution. By these laws a legislature was established consisting of two houses, a Senate, consisting of 300 members, at least forty years of age and chosen for nine years, and a Chamber of Deputies, to be elected by universal suffrage for a term of four years. These two houses meeting together as a National Assembly elect the President of the Republic. There is no xhe vice-president, no succession provided by law. In case of a President vacancy in the presidency the National Assembly meets immediately, generally within forty-eight hours, and elects a new President. The President has the right to initiate legislation, as have the members of the two houses, the duty to promulgate all laws and to superintend their execution, the pardoning power, the direction of the army and navy, and the appointment to all civil and military positions. He may, with the consen of the Senate, dissolve the Chamber of Depu- ties before the expiration of its legal term and order a new election. But these powers are merely nominal, for the reason that every act of the President must be countersigned by a minister, who thereby becomes responsible for the act, the President being irre- sponsible, except in the case of high treason. The fundamental feature of the Third Republic, differentiating it greatly from two preceding republics of France and from the republic of the United States, is its adoption of the parliamentary ^ ^^ system as worked out in England. The President's position parliamentary resembles that of a constitutional monarch. All his acts must ^^^^ '*^ be countersigned by his ministers who become thereby responsible for them. The ministers in turn are responsible to the chambers, particularly to the Chamber of Deputies. The Chamber thus controls the executive, makes and unmakes ministries as it chooses. The legislature controls the executive. The legislative and executive branches are thus fused as in England, not sharply separated as in the United States. The essential feature, therefore, of this republic 490 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC The policy of MacMahon is that it has adopted the governmental machinery first elaborated in a monarchy. The Constitution of 1875 was a compromise between opposing forces, neither of which could win an unalloyed victory. The monarchical assembly that established the parliamentary republic in 1875 thought that it had introduced sufficient monarchical elements into it to curb the aggressiveness of democracy and to facilitate a restoration of the monarchy at some convenient season. The Senate, it thought, would be a monarchical stronghold and the President and Senate could probably keep the Chamber of Deputies in check by their power of dissolving it. It was some years before the Re- publicans secured unmistakable control of the Republic in all its branches. In the first elections under the new constitution, which were held at the beginning of 1876, the Monar- chists secured a slight majority in the Senate, the Republicans a large ma- jority in the Chamber of Deputies. It was generally supposed that the Presi- dent, MacMahon, was a Monarchist in his sympathies. This was shown to be the case when MacMahon in May, 1877, dismissed the Simon ministry, which was Republican and which had the support of the Chamber, and appointed a new ministry, com- posed largely of Monarchists under the Duke of Broglie (bro-ly')- Thereupon, the Senate, representing the same views, consented to the dissolution of the Chamber of Deputies, and new elections were ordered. The Monarchists carried on a vigorous campaign against the Republicans. They were powerfully supported by the clerical The Republic P^^'^y'' which, ever since 1871, had been extremely active. The Republicans resented this intrusion of the Catholic party, and their opinion of it had been vividly expressed some time before by Gambetta in the phrase — "Clericalism, that is our enemy," meaning that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous opponent of the Republic. The struggle was embittered. The Marshal MacMahon From a photograph. and the Church VICTORY OF THE REPUBLICANS 491 Broglie ministry used every effort to influence the votes against Gambetta and the RepubUcans. The clergy took an active part in the campaign, supporting the Broglie candidates and preaching against the Republicans, conduct which in the end was to cost them dear. The Republicans were, however, overwhelming!)'' victorious. In the following year, 1878, they also gained control of the Senate, and in 1879 they , 1^1 , ,1 Republicans brought about the victorious resignation of Mac- "^ *^f elections Mahon. The Na- tional Assembly immedi- ately met and elected Jules Grevy president, a man whose devotion to Republican principles had been known to France for thirty years. For the first time since 1871 the Re- publicans controlled the Chamber of Deputies, the Senate, and the Presi- dency. Since that time the Republic has been entirely in the hands of the Republicans. The Republicans, now completely victorious, sought by construe- Republican five legislation to legislation consolidate the Republic. Two personalities stood out with particular prominence : Gambetta, as president of the Chamber of Deputies, and Jules Ferry, as member of several ministries and as twice prime minister. The legislation enacted during this period aimed to clinch the victor}^ over the Monarchists and Clericals by making the institutions of France thoroughly republican and secular. The seat of government was transferred from Versailles, where it had been since 1871, to Paris (1880), and July 14, the day of the storming of the Bastille, symbol Jules Grew From an engraving by Lalauze, after the painting by L. Bonnat. 492 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC National system of education of the triumph of the people over the monarchy, was declared the national holiday, and was celebrated for the first time in 1880 amid great enthusiasm. The right of citizens freely to hold public meet- ings as they might wish, and without any preliminary permission of the Government, was secured, as was also a practically unlimited freedom of the press (1881). Workingmen were permitted, for the first time, freely to form trades unions (1884). The Republicans were particularly solicitous about education. As universal suffrage was the basis of the state, it was considered fundamental that the voters should be intelli- gent. Education was regarded as the strongest bul- wark of the Republic. Several laws were passed, concerning all grades of education, but the most important were those concerning primary schools. A law of 1 88 1 made primary education gratuitous ; one of 1882 made it compulsory be- tween the ages of six and thirteen, and later laws made it entirely secular. No re- ligious instruction is given in these schools. All teachers are appointed from the lait3^ This system of popular educa- tion is one of the great creative achievements of the Republic, and one of the most fruitful. Under the masterful influence of Jules Ferry, prime minister in 1881, and again from 1883 to 1885, the Republic embarked upon France's ^^ aggressive colonial policy. She established a protectorate colonial over Tunis ; sent expeditions to Tonkin, to Madagascar ; founded the French Congo. This policy aroused bitter criticism from the beginning, and entailed large expenditures, but Ferry, regardless of growing opposition, forced it through, in the end to his own undoing. His motives in throwing France into these ventures were various. One reason was economic. France was feeling the Jules Ferry policy COLONIAL EXPANSION 493 rivalry of Germany and Italy, and Ferry believed that she must win new markets as compensation for those she was gradually losing. Again, France would gain in prestige abroad, and in her own feeling of contentment, if she turned her attention to empire-building and ceased to think morbidly of her losses in the German war. Her outlook would be broader. Moreover, she could not afford to be passive when other nations about her were reaching out for Africa and Asia. The era of im- perialism had begun. France must participate in the move- ment or be left hopelessly be- hind in the rivalry of nations. Under Ferry's resolute leader- ship the policy of expansion was carried out, and the colonial possessions of France were greatly increased, but owing to one or two slight re- verses, grossly magnified by his enemies, Ferry himself became unpopular and his notable ministry was over- thrown (1885). During the next few years the political situation was troubled and uncertain. Political There was no command- t"rmoii ing personality in politics to give elevation and sweep to men's ideas. Gambetta had died in 1882 at the age of forty-four and Ferry, the em- pire-builder, was most unjustly the victim of unpopularity from which he never recovered. Ministries succeeded each other rapidly. Politics seemed a game of office seeking, pettily personal, not an arena in which men of large ideas could live and act. The educa- tional and anti-clerical and colonial policies all aroused enmities. President Grevy even was forced to resign because of a scandal which did not compromise him personally, but did smirch his son-in-law. Sadi-Carnot From a photograph by London Stereoscopic Co. 494 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC Carnot (kar-no'), a moderate Republican, was chosen to succeed him (December 3, 1887). This state of discontent and disillusionment created a real crisis for the Republic, as it encouraged its enemies to renewed activity. These elements now found a leader or a tool in General Boulanger (bo-loh-zha'), a dashing figure on horseback and an attractive speaker, who sought to use the popular discontent for his own Boulanger advancement. Made Minister of War in 1886, he showed ^f w''**^*^'^ much activity, seeking the favor of the soldiers by improving- the conditions of life in the barracks, and by advocating the reduction of the required term of service. He controlled several newspapers, which began to insinuate that under his leadership France could take her revenge upon Germany by a successful war upon that country. He posed as the rescuer of the Republic, demanding a total revision of the Constitution. His program, as announced, was vague, but probably aimed at the diminution of the importance of Parliament, the conferring of great powers upon the President, and his election directly by the people, which he hoped would be favorable to himself. For three years his personality was a storm center. Discontented people of the most varied shades flocked to his support — Monarchists, Imperialists, Clericals, hoping to use him to overturn the Republic. These parties contributed money to the support of his campaign, which was ably managed with the view to focusing popular attention upon him. To show the popular enthusiasm Boulanger now became a candidate for Elected to Parliament in many districts where vacancies occurred. In Parliament f^yg nionths (1888) he was elected deput}^ six times. A seventh election in Paris itself, in January, 1889, resulted in a brilliant triumph. He was elected by over 80,000 majority. Would he dare take the final step and attempt to seize power, as two Bonapartes had done before him ? He did not have the requisite audacity to try. In the face of this imminent danger the Republicans ceased their dissensions and stood together. They assumed the offensive. The ministry summoned Boulanger to appear before the Senate, sitting as a High Court of Justice, to meet the charge of conspiring against His flight the safety of the state. His boldness vanished. He fled from from France (-^g country to Belgium. He was condemned by the court in his absence. His party fell to pieces, its leader proving so little valorous. Two years later he committed suicide. The Republic THE FRANCO-RUSSIAN ALLIANCE 495 had weathered a serious crisis. It came out of it stronger rather than weaker. Its opponents were discredited. In 1892 a very important diplomatic achievement still further strengthened the Republic. An alliance was made with Russia which ended the long period of isolation in which France had The Dual been made to feel her powerlessness during the twenty years Alliance since the Franco- Prussian war. This Dual Alliance henceforth served as a coun- terweight to the Triple Alli- ance of Germany, Austria, and Italy, and satisfied the French people, as well as in- creased their sense of safety and their confidence in the future. In 1894 President Carnot was assassinated. Casimir- Perier was chosen to succeed him, but resigned after six months. Felix Faure was elected in his place, who, however, died in office in 1899, having seen the strengthening of the alliance with Russia and the be- ginning of the Dreyfus case, Emile Loubet a scandal which eclipsed that of Boulanger and created a new crisis for the Republic. Faure was succeeded in the presidency by Emile Loubet (lo-ba')- THE DREYFUS CASE In October, 1894, Dreyfus (dra-fiis'), a Jewish officer in the army, was arrested amid circumstances of unusual secrecy, was Dreyfus brought before a court-martial and was condemned as guilty of condemned . and treason, of transmitting important documents to a foreign degraded power, presumably Germany. The trial was secret and the P"^^<='y condemnation rested on merely circumstantial evidence, involving 496 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC the identity of handwriting, declared to be his. He was condemned to expulsion from the army and to imprisonment for life. In Jan- uary, 1895, he was publicly degraded in a most dramatic manner in the courtyard of the Military School, before a large detachment of the army. His stripes were torn from his uniform, his sword was broken. Throughout this agonizing scene he was defiant, asserted his innocence, and shouted " Vhe la France !" He was then deported A prisoner ^° ^ Small, barren, and unhealthy island off French Guiana, on Devil's in South America, appropriately called Devil's Island, and was there kept in solitary confinement. A life imprisonment under such conditions would probably not be long, though it would certainly be horrible. The friends of Dreyfus protested that a monstrous wrong had been done, but their protests passed unheeded. But in 1896 Colonel „ . . , Picquart, head of the detective bureau of the General Staff, Evidence of ^ ' ... . Dreyfus' discovered that the incriminating document was not in the innocence handwriting of Dreyfus but of a certain Major Esterhazy, who was shortly shown to be one of the most abandoned characters in the army. Picquart's superior officers were not grateful for his efforts, fearing apparently that the honor of the army would be smirched if the verdict of the court-martial was shown to be wrong. They, therefore, removed him from his position and appointed Colonel Henry in his place. In January, 1898, Emile Zola, the well-known novelist, published a letter of great boldness and brilliancy, in which he made most „ , . scathing charges against the judges of the court-martial, not reopen the Only for injustice but for dishonesty. Many men of repu- *^^^® tation in literature and scholarship joined in the discussion, on the side of Dreyfus. Zola hoped to force a reopening of the whole question. Instead he was himself condemned by a court to imprisonment and fine. Shortly Henry committed suicide, having been charged with forging one of the important documents in the case. His suicide was considered a confession of guilt. So greatly disturbed were the people by these scandalous events that public opinion forced the reopening of the whole case. Dreyfus, pre- maturely old as a result of fearful physical and mental suffering, was brought from Devil's Island and given a new trial before a court- martial at Rennes in August, 1899. This new trial was conducted in the midst of the most excited THE DREYFUS CASE 497 state of the public mind in France, and of intense interest abroad. Party passions were inflamed as they had not been in France since the Commune. The supporters of Dreyfus were denounced second trial frantically as slanderers of the honor of the army, the very °^ Dreyfus bulwark of the safety of the country, as traitors to France. At the Rennes tribunal, Dreyfus encountered the violent hostility of the high army officers, who had been his accusers five years before. These men were desperately resolved that he should again be found guilty. The trial was of an extraordinary character. It was the evident purpose of the judges not to allow the matter to be thoroughly probed. Tes- timony, which in England or America would have been con- sidered absolutely vital, was barred out. The universal opinion outside France was, as was stated in the London Times, "that the whole case against Captain Dreyfus, as set forth by the heads of the French army, in plain com- bination against him, was foul with forgeries, lies, contradic- tions, and puerilities, and that nothing to justify his con- demnation had been shown." Nevertheless, the court, by a vote of five to two, declared him guilty, "with extenuating circumstances," an amazing verdict. It is notgenerally held that treason to one's country can plead extenu- Again de- ating circumstances. The court condemned him to ten years' blared guilty imprisonment, from which the years spent at Devil's Island might be deducted. Thus the "honor" of the army had been maintained. President Loubet immediately pardoned Dreyfus, and he was released, broken in health. This solution was satisfactory to neither side. The anti-Dreyfusites vented their rage on Loubet. Pardoned by On the other hand, Dreyfus demanded exoneration, a recog- nition of his innocence, not pardon. Alfred Dreyfus Loubet 498 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC But the Government was resolved that this discussion, which had so frightfully torn French society, should cease. Against the opposi- tion of the Dreyfusites, it passed, in 1900, an amnesty for all those implicated in the notorious case, which meant that no legal actions could be brought against any of the participants on either side. The friends of Dreyfus, Zola, and Picquart protested vigorously against the erection of a barrier against their vindication. The bill, nevertheless, passed. Six years later, however, the Dreyfus party attained its vindica- tion. The revision of the whole case was submitted to the Court Dreyfus of Cassation. On July 12, 1906, that body quashed the verdict vindicated Qf j-j^g Rennes court-martial. It declared that the charges which had been brought against Dreyfus had no foundation, and that the Rennes court-martial had been guilty of gross injustice in refusing to hear testimony that would have established the innocence of the accused. The case was not to be submitted to another military tribunal, but was closed. The Government now restored Captain Dreyfus to his rank in the army, or rather, gave him the rank of major, allowing him to restored to count to that end the whole time in which he had been unjustly rank in the deprived of his standing. On July 21, 1906, he was invested with a decoration of the Legion of Honor in the very court- yard of the Military School, where, eleven years before, he had- been so dramatically degraded. Colonel Picquart was promoted brig- adier-general, and shortly became Minister of War. Zola had died in 1903, but in 1908 his body was transferred to the Pantheon, as symbolizing a kind of civic canonization. Thus ended the "Affair." The Dreyfus case, originally simply involving the fate of an alleged traitor, had soon acquired a far greater significance. Party Th i nifi ^^*^ personal ambitions and interests sought to use it for pur- cance of poses of their own and thus the question of legal right and the case wrong was woefully distorted and obscured. Those.who hated the Jews used it to inflame people against that race, as Dreyfus was a Jew. The Clericals joined them. Monarchists seized the occa- sion to declare that the Republic was an egregious failure, breeding treason, and ought to be abolished. 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 THE GROWTH OF RELIGIOUS ORDERS 499 and should not regard itself as above the law as these army officers were doing, those who believed that the whole episode was merely a hidden and dangerous attack upon the Republic, and all who believed that the clergy should keep out of politics. The chief result of this memorable struggle in the domain of politics was to unite more closely Republicans of every shade in a common program, to make them resolve to reduce the political tion of the importance of the army and of the Church. The former was ^^P^^^'cans easily done by removals of monarchist officers. The attempt to solve the latter much more subtle and elusive problem led to the next great struggle in the recent history of France, the struggle with the Church. THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE This new controversy assumed prominence under the premiership of Waldeck- Rousseau, a leader of the Parisian bar, a former follower of Gambetta. In October, 1900, he made a speech at Toulouse ^^ which resounded throughout France. The real peril confront- of Church ing the country, he said, arose from the growing power of ^^ *^*® religious orders — orders of monks and nuns — and from the char- acter of the teaching given by them in the religious schools they were conducting. He pointed out that here was a power within the State which was a rival of the State and fundamentally hostile to the State. These orders, moreover, although not authorized under the laws of France, were growing rapidly in wealth and numbers. Between 1877 and 1900 the number of nun^ had increased from 14,000 to 75,000, in orders not authorized. The monks of The "^^"^ numbered about 190,000. The property of these orders, held religious 1 r- I- y orders m mortmam, 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. Here was a vast amount of wealth, withdrawn from ordinary processes of business, an economic danger of the first importance. But the most serious feature was the activity of these orders in teaching and preaching, for that teaching was declared to be hostile to the Republic and to the principles of liberty and equality on which the Republicans of France have in- sisted ever since the French Revolution. In other words, these church schools were doing their best to make their pupils hostile to the Republic and to republican ideals. Here was a danger to 500 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC the State which Parliament must face. To preserve the Republic defensive measures must be taken. Holding this opinion, the The Law of Waldeck-Rousseau ministry secured the passage, July i, 1901, Associations Qf ^^g L^^ Qf Associations, which provided, among other things, that no religious orders should exist in France without defi- nite 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 the enemy was the clerical party. "Clericalism," said Combes, who succeeded Waldeck-Rousseau in 1902, "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. Combes enforced the Associations Law with rigor in 1902 and 1903. Many orders refused to ask The Law ^o^" authorization from Parliament ; many which asked were enforced refused. Tens of thousands of monks and nuns were forced to leave their institutions, which were closed. By a law of 1904 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 their children educated 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 complete separation of Church and State. The relations of the Roman Catholic Church and the State down to 1905 were determined by the Concordat, concluded between Napoleon I and Pius VII in 1801 and promulgated in the fol- Concordat lowing year. The system then established remained undis- of 1801 turbed throughout the nineteenth century, under the various regimes, but after the advent of the Third Republic there was ceaseless and increasing friction between the Church and the State. ABROGATION OF THE CONCORDAT 501 The opposition of the Repubhcans was augmented by the activity of the clergy in the Dreyfus affair. Consequently a law was finally passed, December 9, 1905, which abrogated the Concordat. The State was henceforth not to pay the salaries of the clergy ; on the other hand, it relinquished all rights over their appointment. It :.i-'>< '■)::■ - 't -^- Sit ■'-,■' ■'■■' ""■ f' '.■ ■■ ^" 'f " ili'iITi ^ 1! ■i« mm ^gi^iiiii^iisi^m. ^ ^^^^-^iKiiS^Ti 1 :■'• ;) ■ -•- lf"| 1 Siiils 1 ' 11^ ■ . v-;-:! '';£: Jl mil 1 4'* ^i^^ 1 :iKll 1 _j^,,,,.. n 'liiii J^vh,'i)ff Ht^""":^^^!!^.^^:!!^^ '■■'"J? ' i L - ) ^.-'t j'-j^if .sii". ^^^R^^ylpl^^ !iSiirP=? '■^.':.: ^P^-^mi — .£-— -^ - '« mm »M f^^'^ta" %??;?Te l!»«K«-'SF»Stem.?!.a ■;^'-;|;:-:"^^;-'J^f=^ "^fi'/jl ^ "^ y . ■ -VV ! i>.«.L.Mi*^.i<.«»'-. ™._-a-:a ^^■^HRB^n ib^' fi ?L^^ ^^^^^^^ SP' ^ri ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^"^^ ^^^ m- Interior of the Chamber of Deputies undertook to pay pensions to clergymen who had served many years, and were already well advanced in age ; also to pay certain ., p^^^^^:^ _ amounts to those who had been in the priesthood for a few tions of years only. In regard to the property, which since 1789 had °^^ '^ been declared to be owned by the nation, the cathedrals, churches, chapels, it was provided that these should still be at the free dis- posal of the Roman Catholic Church, but that they should be held and managed by so-called "Associations of Worship," which were to vary in size according to the population of the community. This law was condemned unreservedly by the Pope, Pius X, who declared that the fundamental principle of separation of Church and 502 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC State is "an absolutely false thesis, a very pernicious error," and who denounced the Associations of Worship as giving the adminis- PooePiusX trative control, not "to the divinely instituted hierarchy, rejects the but to an association of laymen." The Pope's decision was aw o 1905 f^nal and conclusive for all Catholics as it was based on fundamentals and flatly rejected the law of 1905. Parliament, therefore, passed a new law, early in 1907, supple- mentary to the law of 1905. By it most of the privileges guaranteed _. the Roman Catholic Church by the law of 190s were abro- The sup- -' ■' ^ piementary gated. The Critical point in the new law was the method of aw 1907 keeping the churches open for religious exercises and so avoiding all the appearance of persecution and all the scandal and uproar that would certainly result if the churches of France were closed. 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 buildings, but worship would go on in them as before. This system is at present in force. The result of this series of events and measures is that Church and State are now definitely separated. The people have ap- g . . parently approved in recent elections the policy followed by Church and 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 rights of assembly and freedom from government participation in appoint- ments. The faithful must henceforth support their priests and bear the expenses of the Church by private contributions. The church buildings, however, have been left to their use by the irrational but practical device just described. ACQUISITION OF COLONIES IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY France, in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, had pos- sessed an extensive colonial empire. This she had lost to England , ^ , as a result of the wars of the reign of Louis XV, the Revolution, The French . .,,■„, , , colonial and the Napoleonic period, and m 181 5 her possessions had empire shrunk to a few small points, Guadeloupe and Martinique in the West Indies, St. Pierre and Miquelon, off Newfoundland, five towns on the coast of India, of which Pondicherry was the best COLONIAL EXPANSION 503 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 inferior Building a to that. The interest in conquests revived but slowly after •^^'^ empire 1815. France had conquered so much in Europe from 1792 to 1812 only to lose it as she had lost her colonies, that conquest in any form seemed but a futile and costly display of misdirected enterprise. Nevertheless, in time the process began anew, and each of the various^ regimes which have succeeded one another since 1 8 1 5 has contributed to the building of the new empire. The beginning was made in Algeria, on the northern coast of Africa, directly opposite France, and reached now in less than twenty-four hours from Marseilles. Down to the opening of the nineteenth century, Algeria, Tunis, and Tripoli, nominall}^ parts of the Turkish Empire, were in reality independent and constituted the Barbary States, whose main business was piracy. But Europe was no longer disposed to see her wealth seized and her citizens enslaved until she paid their ransom. In 18 16 an English fleet bombarded Algiers, released no less than 3,000 Christian captives, and destroyed piracy. The French conquest of Algeria grew out of a gross insult admin- istered by the Dey to a French consul in 1830. France replied by sending a fleet to seize the capital, Algiers. She did not at that time intend the conquest of the whole country, but merely the punishment of an insolent Dey, but attacks being made upon her from time to time which she felt she must crush, she was led on, step by step, until she had everywhere established her power. All through the reign of Louis Philippe this process was going on. Its chief feature was an intermittent struggle of fourteen years with a native leader, Abd-el-Kader, who proclaimed and fought a Holy War against the intruder. In the end (1847) he was forced to surrender, and France had secured an important territory. Under Napoleon III, the beginning of conquest in another part of Africa was made. France had possessed,- since the time of Louis XIII and Richelieu (resh'-lo), one or two miserable ports on 504 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC the western coast, St. Louis the most important. Under Napoleon III, the annexation of the Senegal valley was largely carried other African through by the efforts of the governor, Faidherbe, who later conquests distinguished himself in the Franco-German War. Under Napoleon III also, a beginning was made in another part of the world, in Asia. The persecution of Christian natives, and the murder of certain French missionaries gave Napoleon the pretext to attack the king of Annam, whose kingdom was in the peninsula ^ ^. ^, • that juts out from southeastern Asia. After eight years of inter- Cocliin-China mittent fighting France acquired from the king the whole of Cochin-China (i 858-1 867), and also established a protectorate over the Kingdom of Cambodia, directly north. Thus, by 1870, France had staked out an empire of about 700,000 square kilometers, containing a population of about six million. Under the present Republic the work of expansion and underThe" Consolidation has been carried much farther than under all Third Qf ^-^g preceding regimes. There have been extensive annexa- tions in northern Africa, western Africa, the Indian Ocean, and in Indo-China. In northern Africa, Tunis has passed under the control of France. This was one of the Barbary States, and was nominally a part of the Turkish Empire, with a Bey as sovereign. After establish- ing herself in Algeria, France desired to extend her influence eastward, over this neighboring state. But Italy, now united, began about 1870 to entertain a similar ambition. France, there- fore, 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 prac- tically obliged to follow. In western Africa, France has made extensive annexations in the Senegal, Guinea, Dahomey, the Ivory Coast, and the region of the Western Niger, and north of the Congo. By occupying the oases in Africa ^^g 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 Mediter- ranean, to the Congo River. This region south of Algeria is called COLONIAL ACQUISITIONS 505 Madagascar 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 the Indian Ocean, she has conquered Madagascar, an island larger than France herself, with a population of two and a half million. A pro- tectorate 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 colonial empire of France is eleven times larger than France itself, has an area of six million square kilometers, a popula- tion of about fifty millions, and a rapidly growing com- merce. Most of this empire is located in the tropics and is ill adapted to the settle- ment of Europeans. Algeria and Tunis, however, ofTer conditions favorable for such settlements. They constitute the most valuable French possessions. Algeria is not considered a colony, but an integral part of France. It is divided into three departments, each one of which sends one senator and two deputies to the chambers of the French Parliament. On March 30, 1912, France established a protectorate over Mo- rocco. For several j^ears the status of that country had been one of the contentious problems of international politics. France had TilEOl'IULK UeLCASSE 5o6 FRANCE UNDER THE THIRD REPUBLIC desired to gain control of it in order to round out her empire in northwestern Africa. In 1904 she had made an agreement with Eng- land whereby a far-reaching diplomatic revolution in Europe was inaugurated. This was largely the work of Theophile Delcasse, Minister of Foreign Affairs for seven years, from 1898 to 1905, one of the ablest statesmen the Third Republic has produced. Delcasse believed that France would be able to follow a more inde- pendent and self-respecting foreign policy, one freer from German domination and intimidation, if her relations with Italy and England, severely strained for many years, largely owing to colonial rivalries and jealousies, could be made cordial and friendly. This he was able to accomplish by arranging a treaty of commerce favorable to Italy and by promising Italy a free hand in Tripoli and receiving from her the assurance that she would do nothing to hamper French policy in Morocco, a country of special significance to France because of her possession of Algeria. More important was the reconciliation with England. The relations of these two neighbors had long been difficult and, at times, TheFashoda full of danger. Indeed, in 1898 they had stood upon the very the Entente brink of war when a French expedition under Marchand Cordiaie (mar-shan') had crossed Africa and had seized Fashoda (fa-sho'-da) on the Upper Nile in the sphere of influence which Great Britain considered emphatically hers. The Fashoda incident ended in the withdrawal of the French before the resolute attitude of England. The lesson of this incident was not lost upon either power, and six years later, on April 8, 1904, they signed an agreement which not only removed the sources of friction between them once for all, but which established what came to be known as the Entente Cordiaie, destined to great significance in the future. By this agree- ment France recognized England's special interests in Egypt and abandoned her long-standing demand that England should set a date for the cessation of her "occupation" of that country. On the other hand, England recognized the special interests of France in Morocco and promised not to impede their development. One power emphatically objected to the determination of cha^iienges the fate of an independent country by these two powers alone. the Entente Germany challenged this agreement and asserted that she must herself be consulted in such matters ; that her rivals had no right by themselves to preempt those regions of the world _which ACQUISITION OF MOROCCO 507 might still be considered fields for European colonization or control. German interests must be considered quite as much as French or English. Germany's peremptory attitude precipitated an international crisis and led to the international Conference of Algeciras in p - . 1906, which was, however, on the whole a victory for France, Algeciras, acknowledging the primacy of her interests in Morocco. As ^^° France proceeded to strengthen her position there in the succeeding years, Germany issued another challenge in 191 1 by sending a gun- boat to Agadir, thus creating another crisis, which for a time threat- ened a European war. In the end, however, Germany recognized the position of France, but only after the latter had ceded to her extensive territories in Kamerun and the French Congo. For several years, therefore, Morocco was a danger spot in international politics, exerting a disturbing influence upon the relations of European powers to each other, particularly those of France and Germany. Finally, however, the independence of Morocco disappeared and the country was practically incorporated in the colonial empire of France. REFERENCES The Founding of the Third Republic : Wright, The History of the Third French Republic, pp. 31-67; Fisher, The Republican Tradition in Europe, pp. 280-301 ; Seignobos, The Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 187-207; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 91-113. The Government of France: Ogg, Governments of Europe, pp. 304-324; Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. I, pp. 1-68. Boulanger: Wright, pp. 93-103. Dreyfus Case: Wright, pp. 115-145, 162-163. Dual Alliance : Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, pp. 38-60. Colonial Policy of the Third Republic : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 128-133; Wright, pp. 77-92, 155-160, 168-175. Church and State in France :. Wright, pp. 141-156, 163-165; Gooch, History of Our Time (Home University Library), pp. 34-56; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 114-122; Bodley, The Church in France, pp. 13-114; Galton, Church and State in France, pp. 201-268 ; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 223-232. Political Evolution of France in the Nlneteenth Centuhy : Seignobos, pp. 221-227. CHAPTER XXV THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 The Kingdom of Italy, as we have seen, was established in 1856 and i860. Venetia was acquired in 1866, and Rome in 1870. In _. these cases, as in the preceding, the people were allowed to Kingdom of express their wishes by a vote, which, in both instances, was ** ^ practically unanimous in favor of the annexation. The Constitution of the new kingdom was the old Constitution of Piedmont, slightly altered. It provided for a parliament of The two chambers, a Senate and a Chamber of Deputies. The full Constitution parliamentary system was introduced, ministers representing the will of the Lower Chamber. The first capital was Turin, then Florence in 1865, and finally Rome since 1871. THE KINGDOM AND THE PAPACY The most perplexing question confronting the new kingdom concerned its relations to the Papacy. The Italian Kingdom had Kin dom s^^^^^> ^y violence, the city of Rome, over which the Popes and the had ruled in uncontested right for a thousand years. Rome Papacy j^^^ ^j^-^ 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 faithful, already clamorous, and might cause an inter- vention 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 unique and extremely delicate. It was considered necessary to determine their relations before the government was transferred 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 508 RELATIONS OF CHURCH AND STATE IN ITALY 509 to his own rights in Rome. Parliament, therefore, assumed to settle the matter alone and passed, May 13, 1871, the Law of Papal Guarantees, a remarkable act defining the relations of Church and State in Italy. The object of this law was to carry out Cavour's principle of a "free Church in a free State," to reassure Catholics that the new kingdom had no intention of controlling in any way the spiritual activities of the Pope, though taking from him Papal his temporal powers. Any attacks upon him are, by this ^"^'■^'^tees law, to be punished exactly as are similar attacks upon the King. He has his own diplomatic corps, and receives diplomatic representatives from other countries. Certain places are set apart as entirely under his sovereignty : the Vatican, the Lateran, Castel Gandolfo, and their gardens. Here no Italian ofificial may enter, in his ofificial capacity, for Italian law and administration stop outside these limits. 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 gov- ernment, but it has never been accepted by the Pope, nor has the Kingdom of Italy been recognized by him. He considers himself the "prisoner of the Vatican," and since 1870 has not left it to go into the streets of Rome, as he would thereby be tacitly recognizing the existence of another ruler there, the "usurper." Another difficult problem for the Kingdom was its financial status. The debts of the former Italian states were assumed by it and The were large. The nation was also obliged to make large expen- financial ditures on the army and the navy, on fortifications, and on j|**"^ °* public works, particularly on the building of railways, 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 successive 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 5IO THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 his son, Humbert I, then thirty-four years of age. A month later Pius IX died, and was succeeded by Leo XIII, at the time of his Death of t election sixty-eight years of age. But nothing was changed Victor " by this change of personalities. Each maintained the system Emmanuel u ^^ ^^^ predecessor. Leo XIII, Pope from 1878 to 1903, fol- lowing 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." ILLITERACY 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 pre- ceding governments had grossly neglected this duty. In 1861 over seventy-five per cent of 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 Lombardy, the most advanced sections, one-third of the men and more than half of the women could neither read nor write. In 1877 a compulsory educa- tion law was finally passed, but it has not, owing to the expense, been practically enforced. Though Italy has done much during the last thirty years, much remains to be done. Illiteracy, though diminishing, is still widely prevalent. Recent statistics show that forty per cent of the recruits in the army are illiterate. THE SUFFRAGE In 1882 the suffrage was greatly extended. Hitherto limited to those who were twenty-five years of age or over and paid about Extension of eight dollars a year in direct taxes, it was now thrown open to all the suffrage Qygr twenty-one years of age, and the tax qualification was reduced by half ; also all men of twenty-one who had had a primary education were given the vote, whether they could meet the tax qualification or not. The result was that the number of voters was tripled at once, rising from about 600,000 to more than 2,000,000. In 191 2 Italy took a long step toward democracy bj^ making COLONIAL EXPANSION 511 the suffrage almost universal for men, only denying the franchise to those younger than thirty who have neither performed their military service nor learned to read and write. Thus all extension men over twenty-one, even if illiterate, have the vote if they °^ ^^^ have served in the army. The number of voters was thus increased from somewhat over three million to more than eight and a half million. THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE In foreign affairs Italy made an important decision which in- fluenced her course down to 1914. In 1882 she entered into alli- ance with Germany, and with Austria, her former enemy, and ^ , -^ -^ Italy an ally in many respects still her rival. This made the famous Triple of Germany Alliance, which has dominated Europe most of the time *°*^ Austria since it was created. The reasons why Italy entered this combina- tion, highly unnatural for her, considering her ancient hatred of Austria, were various : pique at France for the seizure of Tunis, which Italy herself coveted, dread of French 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 upon her navy, thus dis- turbing her finances once more. ACQUISITION OF COLONIES Italy now embarked upon another expensive and hazardous enterprise, the acquisition of colonies, influenced in this direction by the prevalent fashion, and by a desire to rank among the .^^j .^ world powers. Shut out of Tunis, her natural field, by France, colonial she, in 1885, seized positions on the Red Sea, particularly the ^™ '*'°° port of IMassawa. 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, who 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 512 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 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 anew of a deficit in the state's The outcome finances, which increased alarmingly. The deficits of four of Italy's years amounted to the enormous sum of over seventy-five military •,!• i ■ i • and colonial million dollars, which occasioned heavy new taxes and wide- pohcy spread discontent, which was put down ruthlessly by despotic methods. This policy of aggrandizement led to a war with Abys- sinia and to a disaster in 1896 in the battle of Adowa, so crushing as to end the political life of Crispi and to force Italy into more moderate courses. Popular discontent continued. Itscause was the wretched- ness of the people, which in turn was largely occasioned by the heavy taxation resulting from these unwise attempts to play an international role hopelessly out of proportion to the country's resources. In the south and center the movement took the form of "bread riots," but in the north it was distinctly revolutionary. " Down with the dynasty," was a cry heard there. All these movements were suppressed by the Government, but only after much bloodshed. They indicated wide- spread distress and dissatisfaction with existing conditions. In 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. The new King had been carefully educated and soon showed that he was a man of intelligence, of energy, and of firmness of will. He Victor won the favor of his subjects by the simplicity of his mode of Emmanuel m \[(q^ ^y hjg evident sense of duty, and by his sincere interest in the welfare of the people, shown in many spontaneous and uncon- ventional ways. He became forthwith a more decisive factor in the government than his father had been. He was a democratic monarch, indifferent 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 for 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 preparing and which was now witnessed on all sides. The worst was evidently over. THE REIGN OF VICTOR EMMANUEL III 513 INDUSTRY AND EMIGRATION Italy was becoming an indutrial nation. Silk and cotton and chemical and iron manufactures were advancing rapidly. The merchant marine was being greatly increased. This trans- Expansion of formation into a great industrial state was not only possible industry and but was necessary, owing to her rapidly increasing population, which grew from 1870 to 1914 from about 25,000,000 to over 35,000,000. The birth rate was higher than that of any other country of Europe. But during the same period the emigration from Italy was large and was steadily increasing. Official statistics show that, between 1876 and 1905, over eight million persons Problem of emigrated, of whom over four million went to various South emigration 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 was of a temporary character. Emi- gration 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 experienced that revival the emigration has not been large. Only by an extensive growth of industries can this emigration be stopped or at least rendered normal. Italy finds herself in the position in which Germany was for many years, losing hundreds of thousands of her citizens each year. With thp 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 employment to all. This increasing population and this constant loss by emigration have served in recent years to concentrate Italian thought more and more upon the necessity of new and more advantageous colonies, that her surplus population may not be drained away to other countries. The desire for expansion has increased and with it the determination to use whatever opportunities are offered by the politics of Europe for that purpose. The result was the Acquisition of acquisition in 191 2 of the extensive territory of Tripoli and of Tripoli a dozen /Egean islands, spoils of a war with Turkey which will be more fully treated later. With this desire for expansion went 514 THE KINGDOM OF ITALY SINCE 1870 also a tendency to scrutinize more carefully the nature of her rela- tions with her allies, Germany and Austria. The advantages of the Triple Alliance became, in the minds of many, more and more doubtful. One obvious and positive disadvantage in an alliance with Austria was the necessary abandonment of a policy of Italia annexation of those territories north and northeast of Italy, Irredenta which are inhabited by Italians but which were not included within the boundaries of the kingdom at the time of its creation. These were the so-called Trentino, the region around the town of Trent ; Trieste, and Istria. These territories were subject to Austria, and as long as Italy was allied with Austria she was kept from any attempt to gain this Italia Irredenta or Unredeemed Italy, and thus so round out her boundaries as to include within them people who are Italian in race, in language, and, probably, in sympathy. On May 4, 19 15, Italy denounced her treaty of alliance with Austria. The famous Triple Alliance, which had been the dominant ^ , , . factor in European diplomacy since 1882, thus came to an end. Italy breaks ' ' with Austria- On May 23, Italy declared war against Austria-Hungary and Hungary entered the European conflict on the side of the Entente Allies in the hope of realizing her "national aspirations." REFERENCES Italy Since 1870: Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 213-242; Gooch, History of Our Time, pp. 57-65 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 359-372- Government of Italy : Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. I, pp. 146-188; Ogg, Governments of Europe, pp. 362-390. History of Political Parties: Lowell, Vol. I, pp. 189-231; Ogg, pp. 391-403. Present Conditions : King and Okey,/to/>' To-day; Underwood, United Italy. CHAPTER XXVI AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 AUSTRIA TO THE COMPROMISE OF 1867 Austria, perilously near dissolution in 1848, torn by revolutions in Bohemia, Hungary, the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom, with her influence in Germany temporarily paralyzed, had emerged triumphant from the storm and by 1850 was in a position to oppression of impose her will once more upon her motley group of states. ^^^ subjects o, 1 1 1 r , r r , - • 1 , , • , after 1849 She learned no lesson from the fearful crisis through which she had passed 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, Hungary felt the full weight of Austrian dis- pleasure. Hungary, indeed, was considered to have forfeited by her rebellion the old historic rights she had possessed for centuries. Her Diet was abolished, the kingdom was cut up into five sections, and each was ruled largely by Germans. Indeed the policy was to crush out all traces of separate nationality. Francis Joseph, how- ever, found it in the end impossible to break the spirit of Magyars* who bent beneath the autocrat but did not abdte their claims. For ten years this arbitrary and "despotic system continued. Then came the disaster in Italy in 1859, the defeats of Magenta and Solferino and the loss of Lombardy. One reason for the j. j, defeat was the attitude of the Hungarians, many of whom the war in joined the Italian armies against Austria. Moreover, it ^**'y "^ '^59 seemed as if rebellion might break out at any moment in Hungary itself. AUSTRIA BECOMES A CONSTITUTIONAL MONARCHY This time the Austrian government profited by experience. In order to gain the support of his various peoples Francis Joseph resolved to break with the previous policy of his reign, to sweep 515 5i6 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 away abuses, redress grievances, and introduce liberal reforms. But the problem was exceedingly complicated, and was only slowly Joseph re- Worked out after several experiments had been tried which verses his j^g^^ resulted in failure. The chief difficulty lay in the adjust- ment of the claims of the different races over which he ruled. In 1 86 1 the Emperor decided that there should be a Parliament for the whole Empire, divided into two chambers, meeting annually. The members of the House of Representatives were to be chosen by the local diets, on a basis of population. The local legislatures were to continue for local affairs, but with reduced powers. By this constitution, granted by the Emperor, Austria became a constitu- tional monarchy. Absolutism as a form of government was aban- doned. HUNGARY'S REFUSAL TO COOPERATE 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 arrangement 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 arrange- ment that seemed both liberal and fair ? It must be constantly remembered that Hungary consisted of several races, and that of these races the Magyars had 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 independence. These men, however, were not 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 Hungarian statesman of the nineteenth century. These men were willing to R asons for compromise with Austria on the question of giving the requi- Hungary's site Strength to the government of the whole Empire to enable refusal -^ ^^ pl^y -^^ ^.-j^ ^^ ^ great European power, but they were absolutely firm in their opposition to the constitution just granted RESISTANCE OF HUNGARY 517 by Francis Joseph, and immovable in their determination to se- cure the legal rights of Hungar}'. Their reasons for opposing the new constitution, which promised so vast an improvement upon the old 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 nation, united with Austria simply in the person of the monarch, who was king in Hungary as he xhe was emperor in his own Hungarians , ,., , assert their hereditary states ; that " historic he was king in Hungary "s^*^ " only after he had taken an oath to support the funda- mental laws of Hungary, and had been crowned in Hungary with the iron crown of St. Stephen; that these funda- mental laws and institutions were centuries old ; that they were still the law of the land ; that the new constitution was one "granted" by Francis Joseph, and, if granted, might be withdrawn ; that, what- ever its abstract merits were, it was unacceptable by reason of its origin ; that, moreover, its effect was to make Hun- gary a mere province of Austria ; that what was wanted was not a constitution, but the constitution of Hungary, which had, since 1848, been illegally suspended. Francis Joseph must formally recognize the historic rights of Hungary. After that the Hungarians were willing to consider means of giving him powers sufficient to enable him to play the role of a great monarch in European affairs. But first and foremost Hungary was determined to preserve her his- toric personality and not to fuse herself at all with the other peoples subject to the House of Hapsburg who were in her opinion merely "foreigners." Francis Deak 5i8 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 The Hungarians had their way. The new experiment of a single imperial Parliament finally broke down beneath the impact of their persistent refusal to accept it. For four years, from 1861 to 1865, there was a deadlock, neither side yielding. Then came the Austrian defeats of 1866, Austria's expulsion from Ger- many and from Italy. It was necessary for the monarchy to in- crease its strength at home, now that its influence was so reduced elsewhere. THE DUAL MONARCHY Accordingly there was concluded in 1867 between Austria and Hungary a Compromise, or Ausgleich, as the Germans call it, which The Com- ^^^ ^^^ basis of the Empire down to the collapse of 191 8. This promise of created a curious kind of state, defying classification, and ' absolutely unique. The Empire was henceforth to be called Austria-Hungary, and was to be a dual monarchy. Austria- Hungary consisted of two distinct, independent states, which stood in law upon a plane of complete equality. Each had its own capital, the one Vienna, the other Budapest. Both had the same ruler, who in Austria bore the title of Emperor, in Hungary that of King. Each had its own Parliament, its own ministry, its own adminis- tration. Each governed itself in all internal affairs absolutely with- out interference from the other. But the two were united not simply in the person of the monarch. They were united for certain affairs regarded as common to both. The dele- There was a joint ministry composed of three departments : gations Foreign Affairs, War, and Finance. Each state had its own Parliament, but there was no parliament in common. In order then to have a body that should supervise the work of the three joint ministries there was established the system of "delegations." Each Parlia- ment chose a delegation of sixty of its members. These delegations met alternately in Vienna and Budapest. They were really com- mittees of the two Parliaments. They sat and debated separately, each using its own language, and they communicated with each other in writing. If after three communications no decision had been reached a joint session was held in which the question was settled with- out debate by a mere majority vote. Other affairs, which in most countries are considered common to all parts, such as tariff and currency systems, did not fall within the THE DUAL MONARCHY 519 competence of the joint ministry or the delegations. They were to be regulated by agreements concluded between the two Parliaments for periods of ten years, exactly as between any two independent states, an awkward arrangement creating an intense strain every decade, for the securing of these agreements has been most difficult. Each state had its own constitution, each had its own Parliament, consisting of two chambers. In neither was there in 1867 universal suffrage. A demand for this was repeatedly made in both coun- tries with results that will appear later. Neither of the two states, thus recognized as forming the Dual Monarchy, had a homogeneous population. In each there was a dominant race, the Germans in Austria, the Magyars in Hun- gary. The Compromise of 1 867 was satisfactory to these alone, possessed a ^ In each country there were subordinate and rival races, jealous homogeneous r 1 r ^ ■ r ■ ■ -, r POpulation of the supremacy of these two, anxious for recognition and for power, and rendered more insistent by the sight of the remarkable suc- cess of the Magyars in asserting their individuality. In Hungary there were Croatia, Slavonia, and Transylvania ; in Austria there were seven- teen provinces, each with its own Diet, representing almost always a variety of races. Some of these, notably Bohemia, had in former cen- turies had a separate statehood, which they wished to recover ; others were gaining an increasing self-consciousness, and desired a future con- trolled by themselves and in their own interests. The struggles of these races were destined to form the most im- portant feature of Austrian history during the next fifty years. It should be noted that the principle of nationality, so effective in bringing about the unification of Italy and. Germany, has resuftsof tended in Austria in precisely the opposite direction, the split- principle of r 1 . ^ ,. , ,. , , nationality ting up of a single state into many. Dualism was established in 1867, but these subordinate races refused to acquiesce in it as a final form, as dualism favored only two races, the Germans and the Magyars. They wished to change the dual into a federal state, which should give free play to the several nationalities. The funda- mental conflict during the subsequent period was between these two principles — dualisni and federalism. These racial and nationalistic struggles have been most confusing. 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. 520 . AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 THE EMPIRE OF AUSTRIA AFTER 1867 No sooner had Austria made the Compromise with Hungary than she was confronted with the demand that she proceed further in the path thus entered upon. Various nationahties, or would-be nationahties, demanded that they should now receive as liberal treatment as Hungary had received in the Compromise of 1867. The claims The leaders in this movement were the Czechs of Bohemia, who, of Bohemia i^ 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 with 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 agitation grew to such an extent that the Emperor decided to yield to the Bohemians. On September 14, 1 87 1, 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 purposes. 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 Em%ror's population, the Slavs being in the majority, feared the loss of plans their supremacy, feared the rise of the Slavs, whom they by'the hated. They were bitterly opposed, also, by the Magyars Germans and Qf Hungary, who declared that this was undoing the Com- Magyars o j ' » promise of 1867, and who feared particularly that the rise of the Slavic state of Bohemia 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 opposition to the Emperor's plans was consequently most emphatic and formidable. It was also pointed out that the management of foreign affairs would be much more difficult with three nations direct- ing rather than with two. The Emperor yielded to the opposition. The decree that was to place Bohemia on an equality with Austria RACIAL STRUGGLES IN BOHEMIA 521 and Hungary never came. Dualism had triumphed over federahsm, to the immense indignation of those who saw the prize snatched from them. The Compromise of 1867 remained unchanged. The House of Hapsburg continued to rule over a dual, not over a federal state. The racial problem, however, could not be conjured away so easily. It still persisted. For several years after this triumph the German element controlled the Austrian Parliament. But, _, ' The persist- breaking up finally into three groups and incurring the ani- ent racial mosity of the Emperor by constantly blocking some of the ^'^° *" measures he desired, the Emperor threw his influence against them. There ensued a ministry which lasted longer than any other ministry has lasted and whose policies were in some respects of much sig- nificance. This was the Taaffe ministry which was in office .^j^^ xaaffe fourteen years, from 1879 to 1893. Its policies favored the ministry development of the Czechs and the Poles, two branches of the ^^~^ '^ Slavic race. The two races of Bohemia are the Germans and the Czechs. The latter were favored in various ways by the Taaffe ministry, which was angry with the Germans. They se- concessions cured an electoral law which assured them a majority in the *° Bohemia Bohemian Diet and in the Bohemian delegation to the Reichsrath or Austrian Parliament ; they obtained a university, by the division into two institutions of that of Prague, the oldest German university, founded in 1356. Thus there was a German University of Prague and a Czech University (1882). By various ordinances German was dethroned from its position as sole official language. After 1886 officeholders were required to answer the demands of the public in the language in which they were presented, either German or Czech. This rule operated unfavorably for German officials, who were usually unable to speak Czech, 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 xhe Slavs oppress the Ruthenians, who, while Slavs, like the Poles favored themselves, belonged to the Little Russian or Ukrainian branch of that race ; in Carniola the Slovenes proceeded to Slavicize the province. Thus the Slavs were favored during the long ministry of Taaffe, an4 the evolution of the Slavic nationalities and peoples progressed at the expense of the Germans. This was the most striking 522 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 difference between the recent development of Austria and the recent development of Hungary. In Austria the German domination of the Slavs largely broke down and was not persisted in, but racial hatreds continued, particularly between the Czechs and Germans of Bohemia. The Slavic peoples, in Austria, had some chances to develop. Racial tyranny, on the other hand, became, as we shall see, the settled policy of the dominant race of Hungary. The result was that racial tension, though by no means absent from Austria, was for a while considerably relieved, whereas in Hungary it steadily increased until it quite reached the snapping point. A movement toward democracy also went on under the Taaffe ministry and continued after its fall. The agitation for universal Universal Suffrage was finally successful. By the law of January 26, suffrage 1907, all men in Austria over twenty-four years of age were in ustna given the right to vote. The most noteworthy result of the first elections on this popular basis (May, 1907), was the return of 87 Socialists, who polled over a million votes, nearly a third of those cast. This party had previously had only about a dozen representatives. It was noticed at the same elections that the racial parties lost heavily. Whether this meant that the period of ex- treme racial rivalry was over and the struggle of social classes was to succeed it, remained to be seen. THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY AFTER 1867 • Hungary, a country larger than Austria, larger than Great Britam, found her historic individuality definitely recognized and guaranteed Hungar a ^^ ^^^ Compromise of 1867. She had successfully resisted all separate attempts to merge her with the other countries subject to the ing om House of Hapsburg. She was an independent kingdom under the crown of St. Stephen. The sole official language was Magyar, which was neither Slavic nor Teutonic, but Turanian in origin. The political history of Hungary since the Compromise has been Race and Hiuch more simple than that of Austria. Race and language language questions have been fundamental, but they have been de- questions cided in a summary manner. The ruling race in 1867 was the Magyar, and it remained the ruling race. Though numerically in the minority in 1867, comprising only about six millions out of fifteen millions, it was a strong race, accustomed to rule and deter- RACIAL STRUGGLES IN HUNGARY 523 mined to rule. This minority was steadily, after 1 867, attempting the impossible — the assimilation of the majority. There were four leading races in Hungary — the Magyar, the Slav, the Roumanian, the German. The Roumanians were the oldest, calling themselves Latins and claiming descent from Roman colonists of ancient times. They lived particularly in the eastern part of the kingdom, which is called Transylvania. They do not constitute a solid block of peoples, for there were among them many German or Saxon settlements, and between them and the independent Kingdom of Roumania, in- habited by people of the same race, were many Magyars. The Slavs of Hungary fell into separate groups. In the northern part of Hungary were the Slovaks, of the same race and language as the Czechs of Bohemia. In the southern and particularly the south- western part, were Serbs and Croatians, related to the Serbs of the Kingdom of Serbia. Of these the Croatians were the only ones who had a separate and distinct personality. They had never xhe been entirely absorbed in Hungary, they had had their own his- Croatians tory, and their own institutions. In 1868 the Magyars made a compromise with Croatia, similar to the compromise they had them- selves concluded with Austria in the year preceding. In regard to all the other races, however, the Magyars resolved to Magyarize them early and thoroughly. This policy they steadily per- sisted in. They insisted upon the use of the Magyar seek f/^^*^^ language in public offices, courts, schools, and in the railway Magyarize • , . / ■ -, , T • , other races service — wherever, m fact, it was possible. It is stated that there was not a single inscription in any post-office or railway station in all Hungary except in the Magyar language. The Mag- yars, in fact, refused to make any concessions to the various peoples who lived with them within the boundaries of Hungary, They, indeed, tried in every way to stamp* out all peculiarities. For nearly fifty years this policy was carried out and it did not succeed. Hungary was not Magyarized because the power of The Slavs resistance of Slovaks, Croatians, Slavonians, Roumanians ■■^^*^* proved too strong. But in the attempt, which grew sharper and shriller than ever in the last decade, the Magyar minority stopped at nothing. It committed innumerable tricks, acts of arbitrary power, breaches of the law, in order to crush out all opposition. Political institutions were distorted into engines of ruthless oppres- sion, political life steadily deteriorated in character and purpose, 524 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 under the influence of this overmastering purpose which recognized no bounds. Hungary, which boasted itself a land of freedom, insured freedom only to the dominant race, the Magyars. But for the other races Hungary was a land of unbridled despotism. Every imaginable instrument was used to crush the Slavs or convert them into Magyars — corruption and gross illegalities in the administrative service, in the control of elections, persecution of all independent news- The Magyar . r \ ^ i /- , • • regime one of papers, suppression of schools, the firm determmation to ruthless prevent these subject peoples, for that they virtually were oppression "^ j r- r- > j j though theoretically fellow-citizens, from developing their own languages, literatures, arts, economic life, ideals. The situation was galling to the Slavs and other peoples. Magyar misrule steadily increased in intensity, seriously vitiated and corrupted the national life and made Hungary a tinder box, where disaffec- tion was bound to blaze up at the first opportune moment. It was an odious history of oppression. Had the Magyars recognized that the other races living within Hungary had the same rights as they, had they adopted a policy of fair play and justice, instead of amalgamation by force, Hungary might have been in a healthy condition. Hungary was not Magyarized. But racial animosities were raised to the highest pitch and the time of reckoning came with the Great War. Any detailed study of the relations of the dominant Magyars with the Croatians, the Serbs, the Slovaks, the Roumanians would amply prove the statements made. The reply to these assertions, constantly given by the apologists of the Magyars, is that Hungarian law expressly and carefully The Law of recognized t"he absolute equality of all the various elements 1868 a dead and they point to the Law of 1868, which guaranteed the "Equal Rights of Nationalities." This law was admirable and enlightened and was composed in the finely liberal spirit of Francis Deak, who indeed was its chief author. But this law was a dead letter, and it had \)een a dead letter almost from the time of its passage. It was not repealed, as the advantage of having so liberal an enactment to point to for the purpose of silencing critics and throw- ing dust in foreign eyes was apparent to the Magyar tyrants. But the spirit of Francis Deak long ago passed out of the governing circles of Hungary. That many Roumanians in Transylvania desired separation from Hungary and incorporation in the Kingdom of Roumania, that many THE POLICY OF THE MAGYARS 525 of the Serbs or Slavs of southern Hungary desired annexation to the Kingdom of Serbia, need occasion no surprise. Had the Slavs of Hungary received justice, which they never did receive, they would not have become an element of danger to the state. There is no evidence even yet to show that the Magyars have learned this lesson. DEMAND FOR HUNGARIAN INDEPENDENCE Toward the close of the nineteenth century there grew up among the Magyars themselves a new party, which still further complicated an already complex situation. It was called the Independence Party and was under the leadership of Francis Kossuth, son of pendence Louis Kossuth of 1848. This party was opposed to the Com- '^^''^ promise of 1867, and wished to have Hungary more independent than she was. It demanded that Hungary should have her own diplomatic corps, control her relations with foreign countries inde- pendently of Austria, and possess the right to have her own tariff. Particularly did it demand the use of Magyar in the Hungarian part of the army of the dual monarchy — a demand pressed language passionately, but always resisted with unshaken firmness by i"^^*'°° the Emperor, Francis Joseph, who considered that the safety of the state was dependent upon having one language in use in the army, that there might not be confusion and disaster on the battlefield. Scenes of great violence arose over this question, both in Parliament and outside of it, but the Emperor would not yield. Government was brought to a deadlock, and, indeed, for several years the Aus- gleich could not be removed, save by the arbitrary act of the Emperor, for a year at a time. Francis Joseph finally threatened, if forced to concede the recognition of the Hungarian language, to couple with it the introduction of universal suffrage into Hungary, for which there was a growing popular demand. This the Magyars did not wish, fearing that it would rob them of their dominant position by giving a powerful weapon to the politically inferior but more numer- ous races, and that they would, therefore, ultimately be submerged by the Slavs about them. In 1914 less than twenty-five per cent of the adult male population of Hungary possessed the vote. The normal operation of political institutions had for some time been seriously interrupted by the violent character of the discussions arising out of these extreme demands for racial monopoly and 526 AUSTRIA-HUNGARY SINCE 1848 national independence. Parliamentary freedom had practically disappeared and at the outbreak of the war Hungary was being ruled quite despotically. The House of Hapsburg lost during the nineteenth century the rich Lombardo- Venetian kingdom (i 859-1 866). It gained, however, Territorial Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a result of the Russo-Turkish losses and War of 1 877 these Turkish provinces were handed over by the gams Congress of Berlin of 1878 to Austria-Hungary to "occupy" and "administer." The Magyars at the time opposed the assump- tion of these provinces, wishing no more Slavs within the monarchy, but despite their opposition they were taken over, so strongly was the Emperor in favor of it. This acquisition of these Balkan coun- tries rendered Austria-Hungary a more important and aggressive factor in all Balkan politics, and in the discussions of the so-called Eastern Question, the future of European Turkey. In October, 1908, Austria-Hungary declared these provinces formally annexed. The great significance of this act will be discussed later in connection with the very recent history of southeastern Europe and the causes of the European War. On November 21, 19 16, Francis Joseph died after a reign of nearly sixty-eight years. He was succeeded by his grand-nephew, who assumed the title of Charles I. REFERENCES Governments of Austria-Hxjngary : Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. II, pp. 70-94, 137-152, 162-179; Oggi Governments of Europe, pp. 453-516. Political and Constitutional Development: Lowell, Vol. II, pp. 95- 136, 153-161 ; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 518-553; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 174-212. CHAPTER XXVII ENGLAND SINCE 1868 We have already traced the history of England down to the Reform Bill of 1867/ that is, during the first half of the famous Victorian era. We have seen that it was a period of numerous and important changes in the national life. Parliament had been made more representative of the people, the suffrage had been greatly extended, and much economic legislation had been passed, designed to improve the condition of the laboring classes. 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 disappointment, for the elections of 1 868 resulted in giving the Liberals a majority of a hundred and twenty in the House of Commons. Gladstone became the head of what was to prove a very notable ministry. GLADSTONE'S FIRST MINISTRY Gladstone possessed a more commanding majority than any prime minister had had since 1832. As the enlargement of the franchise in 1 832 had been succeeded by a period of bold and sweeping xhe Great reforms, so was that of 1867 to be. Gladstone was a perfect Ministry representative of the prevailing national mood. The recent cam- paign had shown that the people were ready for a period of reform, of important constructive legislation. Supported by such a majority, and by a public opinion so vigorous and enthusiastic, Gladstone stood forth master of the situation. No statesman could hope to have more favorable conditions attend his entrance into power. He was the head of a strong, united, and resolute party and several men of great ability were members of his cabinet. 1 See Chapter XV. 527 528 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 William Ewart Gladstone 1809-1898 Entrance into Parliament The man who thus became prime minister at the age of fifty-nine was one of the notable figures of modern Enghsh 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 \\'illiam Ewart Gladstone re- ceived " the best education then going" at Eton College and Oxford University, in both of which institutions he stood out among his fellows. At Eton his most intimate friend was Arthur Hallam, the man whose splendid eu- logy is Tennyson's In Memoriam. His* career at Oxford was crowned by brilliant scholarly successes, and here he also dis- tinguished himself as a speaker in the Union, the university debating club. Be- fore leaving the uni- versity 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 William E. Gladstone From engraving by T. O. Barlow, after the painting by J. E. Millais. THE COMPLEX PROBLEM OF IRELAND 529 leading member. Before attaining the premiership, therefore, in 1866, he had had a long political career and a varied training, had held many offices, culminating in the Chancellorship 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 Stem and unbending Tories"), he came under the influence of Sir kobert Peel, a man who, conservative by instinct, was gifted with fmusual prescience and adaptability, and who possessed the courage equired to be inconsistent, the wisdom to change as the world changed. Gladstone had, after a long period of transition, landed in the opposite camp, and was now the leader of the Liberal Party. By reason of his business ability, shown in the manage- Leader of ment of the nation's finances, his knowledge of parliamentary party 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 to 1874, is called pkst^ the Great Ministry. The key to his policy is found in his Ministry, f ■ 1 1 1 r , ^ 1868-1874 remark to a friend when the summons came from the Queen for him to form a ministry: "My mission is to pacify Ireland." The Irish question, in fact, was to be the most absorbing interest of Mr. Gladstone's later political career, dominating all four of his ministries. It has been a very lively and at times a decisive factor in English politics for the last fifty years. IRELAND'S GRIEVANCES To understand this 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 population, and her misery increased. Ireland was inhabited 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 lay in the fact that 530 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 Ireland was a conquered country, that the Irish were a subject race. As early as the twelfth century the English began to invade the Ireland a island. Attempts made by the Irish at .various times during conquered six hundred years to repel and drive out the invaders only re- country suited 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 resources of England during all this time. The result of this turbulent history was that 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 situation. It was a hate-laden atmosphere which they breathed. The marks of subjection were various. The Irish did not own the land of Ireland, which had once belonged to their ancestors. The The agrarian various conqucsts by English rulers had been followed by ex- question tensive confiscations of the land. Particularly extensive was that of Cromwell. These lands were given in large estates to English- men. 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 desired to re- cover possession for themselves. Hence there has arisen the agrarian question, a part of the general Irish problem. Again, the Irish had long been the victims of religious intolerance. At the time of the Reformation they remained Catholic, while the English separated from Rome. Attempts to force the Anglican Church upon them only stiffened their opposition. Neverthe- reiigious less, at the opening of the nineteenth century they were paying question 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 they hated, and one to which they were devoted. Thus a part of the Irish problem was the religious question. Again, the Irish did not make the laws which governed them. In 1800 their separate Parliament in Dublin was abolished, and from 1 80 1 there was only one Parliament in Great Britain, that in London. CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION 531 While Ireland henceforth had its quota of representatives in the House of Commons, it was always a hopeless minority. Moreover, the Irish members did not really represent the large majority ,^^^ of the Irish, as no Catholic could sit in the House of Commons, political There was this strange anomaly that, while the majority of """^^ ""* the Irish could vote for members of Parliament, 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, when Catholic Emancipation was carried, which henceforth permitted Catholics to sit in the House of Commons. The English statesmen catholic granted this concession only when forced to do so by the Emancipation imminent danger of civil war. The Irish consequently felt no gratitude. Shortly after Catholic Emancipation had been achieved, the Irish, under the matchless leadership of O'Connell, endeavored by much the same methods to obtain the repeal of the Union between xhe repeal England and Ireland, effected in 1801, and to win back a sep- movement arate parliament 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 hope- lessness of such a contest. This movement came to an end in 1843. However, a number of the younger followers of O'Connell, chagrined at his peaceful methods, formed a society called "Young Ireland," the aim of which was Irish independence and a republic. 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 1845-1847, to which reference has already been made, was a The Irish tragic calamity, far-reaching in its effects. The repeal of the famine 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, 1847, 532 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 over 700,000 people were receiving government support. 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. Mul- titudes fled to England or crowded the emigrant ships to America, Decline of ^ying by the thousand of fever or exhaustion. It was a long- the popuia- drawn-out horror, and when it was over it was found that the ^'""^ population had decreased from about 8,300,000 in 1845 to less than 6,600,000 in 1851. Since then the decrease 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. Year after year the emigration to the United States continued. When Gladstone came into power in 1 868 he was resolved to pacify the Irish by removing some of their more pronounced grievances. The question of the Irish Church, that is, of the Anglican Church in Ireland, the church of not more than one-eighth of the population, yet The Irish ^° which all Irishmen, Catholic or Protestant, paid tithes, Church dis- was the first grievance attacked. In 1869 Gladstone pro- estabhshed ^ured the passage of a law disestablishing and partly disendow- ing this 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 and was permitted to retain a large part of its property as an endowment. 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 i, 1871. THE SYSTEM OF LAND TENURE Gladstone now approached a far more serious and perplexing prob- lem, the system of land tenure. Ireland was almost 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. Many of these were Englishmen, The situation absentees, who rarely or never came to Ireland, and who in Ireland regarded their estates simply as so many sources of revenue. The business relations with their tenants were carried on by agents or THE PROBLEM OF THE LAND 533 bailiffs, whose treatment of the tenants was frequently harsh and exasperating. If the peasant failed to pay his rent he could be evicted forthwith. As he was obliged to have land on which to raise his potatoes, almost his sole sustenance, he frequently agreed to pay a larger rent than the value of the land justified. Then in time he would be evicted and faced starvation. Moreover, when a landlord evicted his tenant he was not obliged to pay for any buildings , . , , , T T No compen- or improvements erected or carried out by the tenant. He sation for simply appropriated so much property created by the tenant. improve- Naturally there was no inducement to the peasant to develop his farm, for to do so meant a higher rent, or eviction and confiscation of his improvements. It would be hard to conceive a more unwise or unjust system. It encouraged indolence and slothfulness. 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, xhe with a dirt floor. The census of 184 1 established the fact that peasantry 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 injustice of the laws which protected the landlord and gave them only two hard al- ternatives, surrender to the landlord or starvation, believing Deeds of that when evicted they were also robbed, and goaded by the violence 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 law from the English Parliament which only aggravated the evil. In the Land Act now passed to remedy the evils of this system (1870) it was provided that, if evicted for any other reason than the non-payment of rent, the tenant could claim compensation, xhe Land He was also to receive compensation for any permanent im- ^^^ °* ^870 provements he had made on the land whenever he should give up his holding for any reason whatever. There were certain other clauses in the bill designed to enable the peasants to buy the land outright, thus ceasing to be tenants of other people and becoming landowners themselves. This could be done only by purchasing the estates of the 534 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 landlords, and this obviously the peasants were unable to do. It was provided, therefore, that the state should help the peasant up to a certain amount, he in turn repaying the state by easy installments for the money loaned. This Land Act of 1870 did not achieve what was hoped from it, did not bring peace to Ireland. Landlords found ways of evading it and evictions became more numerous than ever. Nor did the land purchase clauses prove effective. Only seven sales were made up to 1877. But the bill was important because of the prin- ciples it involved, and was to exercise a profound influence upon later legislation. For the time being nothing further was done for Ireland. EDUCATIONAL REFORMS Another measure of this active ministry was the Forster Education Act of 1870, designed to provide England with a national system of elementary education. England possessed no such system, it being the accepted opinion that education was no part of the duty of the state. The result was that the educational facilities were deplorably inadequate and inferior to those of many other countries. The Church work that the state neglected was discharged in a measure by schools schools which were maintained by the various religious de- nominations, particularly the Anglican, also the Catholic and the Methodist. But 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 very inferior schools, and only 1,300,000 in schools that were fairly efficient. The Gladstone ministry carried, in 1870, a bill designed to provide England for the first time in her history with a really national system The Forster °^ elementary education. The system then established re- Education mained without essential change until 1902. It marked a Act of 1870 great progress in the educational facilities of England. The bill did not establish an entirely new educational machinery, to be paid for by the state and managed by the state. It adopted the church schools on condition that they submit to state inspection to see if they were maintaining a certain standard. In that case they would receive financial aid from the state. But where there were not enough such schools, local school boards were to be elected in each such district with power to establish new schools, and to levy local taxes for the purpose. Under this system, which provided an A SERIES OF REFORMS 535 adequate number of schools of respectable quality, popular education made great advances. In twenty years the number of schools more than doubled, and were capable of accommodating all those of school age. The law of 1870 did not establish either free or com- pulsory or secular education, but, in 1880, attendance was made compulsory and in 1891 education was made free. DEMOCRATIC REFORMS A number of other far-reaching reforms, democratic in their tend- ency, were carried through by this ministry. The army was reformed somewhat along Prussian lines, though the principle Army of corripulsory military service was not adopted. Officers' reform positions, which had previously been acquired by purchase and wliich were therefore monopolized by the rich, by the aristocracy, were now thrown open to merit. The Civil Service was put on the civil serv- basis of standing in open competitive examinations. The uni- i<=® reform versifies of Oxford and Cambridge were rendered thoroughly national by the abolition of the religious tests which had previously university made them a monopoly of the Church of England. Hence- reform forth men of any religious faith or no religious faith could enter them, could graduate from them. The universities henceforth belonged to all Englishmen. The Australian ballot was introduced, thus giving to each voter his independence. Previously intimidation or bribery had been very easy as voting had been oral and public ; now the voting secret voting was secret. Another feature of Gladstone's ministry, which introduced cost him much of his popularity at home, but was an act of high statesmanship and an indisputable contribution to the cause of peace among nations, was its adoption of the principle of arbitration in the controversy with the United States over the Alabama affair. The grievances of the United States against England because of her conduct during our Civil War were a dangerous source of friction between the two countries for many years. Gladstone agreed .^j^^ to submit them to arbitration, but as the decision of the Alabama Geneva Commission was against England (1872), his ministry ^^^"^ suffered in popularity. Nevertheless, Gladstone had established a valuable precedent. This was the greatest victory yet attained for the principle of settling international difficulties by arbitration 536 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 rather than by war. In this sphere also this ministry advanced the interest of humanity, though it drew only disadvantage for itself from its service. THE DISRAELI MINISTRY Gladstone fell from power in 1874 and the Conservatives came in, with Disraeli as prime minister. Disraeli's administration lasted from 1874 to 1880. It differed as strikingly from Gladstone's as his character differed from that of his predecessor. As Gladstone had busied himself with Irish and domestic prob- lems, Disraeli displayed his greatest interest in colonial and foreign affairs. He found the situation favorable and the moment opportune for impressing upon England the political ideal, long germi- nating in his mind, succinctly The policy of Called imperialism, that Imperialism jg^ ^hc transcendant im- portance of breadth of view and vigor of assertion of England's position 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 is Disraeli's Benjamin Disraeli, Lord Beaconsfield From a photograph. DISRAELI AND IMPERIALISM 537 historic significance in the annals of British politics. He greatly stimulated interest in the British colonies. He invoked " the sublime instinct of an ancient people." THE SUEZ CANAL His first conspicuous achievement in foreign affairs was the pur- chase of the Suez Canal shares. The Suez Canal had been built by the French against ill-concealed English opposition. Dis- raeli had himself declared that the undertaking would inevit- the Suez ably be a failure. Now that the canal was built its success was ^^^^^ . . shares 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 of Good Hope. Some went by the Red Sea route, but that involved transshipment at Alexandria. Now it could all pass through the canal. About three-fourths of the ton- nage passing through the canal was English. 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 of these, and the Khedive was nearly bankrupt. Disraeli bought, in 1875, 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 highroad to India was now 'secure. 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 Disraeli's chief ambition and which was the most notable characteristic of his administration. At the same time Disraeli resolved to emphasize the importance of India, England's leading colon}^ in another way. He proposed a new and sounding title for the British sovereign. She was to be Empress of India. The Opposition denounced this as "cheap" and ,, ,,, , . r • TTT 1^-ii The Queen tawdry, a vulgar piece of pretension. Was not the title proclaimed of King or Oueen borne bv the sovereigns of England for Empress of India a thousand years glorious enough? But Disraeli urged it as showing " the unanimous determination of the people of the 538 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 country to retain our connection with the Indian Empire. And it will be an answer to those mere economists and those diplomatists 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 unmis- takable, that they look upon India as one of the most precious pos- sessions 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 great satisfaction to the Queen, and it was enacted into law. On January i, 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 of the Eastern Question, or the question of the integrity of Turkey, in 1876. oAhe"*''^ For two years this problem absorbed the interest and atten- Eastern ^-Jq^ of rulcrs and diplomatists, and England had much to Question '^ ^ 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. ^ 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 genera- tion, and upon the later history of England. Imperial and colonial have vied with Irish questions in dominating the political discussions of England during the last thirty years. GLADSTONE'S SECOND MINISTRY In 1880 the Liberals were restored to power and Gladstone became prime minister for the second time. Gladstone's greatest ability lay in internal reform, as his previous ministry had shown. This was the field of his inclination, and, as he thought, of the national welfare. Peace, retrenchment, and Gladstone reform, the watchwords of his party, now represented the ?*i^®*''L program he wished to follow. But this was not to be. ( 1 880— 1 085) ^ . - . While certam great measures of mternal improvement were passed during the next five years, those years on the whole were characterized by the dominance of imperial and colonial questions, 1 See Chapter XXXI. NEW LAND LEGISLATION 539 with attendant wars. Gladstone was forced to busy himself with foreign policy far more than in his previous administration. Serious questions confronted him in Asia and Africa. These may best be studied, however, in the chapter on the British Empire.^ Two pieces of domestic legislation of great importance enacted during this ministry merit description, the Irish Land Act of 1881, and the Reform Bills of 1884- 1885. THE LAND ACT OF 1 881 The legislation of Gladstone's preceding ministry had not pacified Ireland. Indeed, the Land Act of 1870 had proved no final settle- ment, but a great disappointment. It had established the p^^^ ^^ principle that the tenant was to be compensated if deprived of Land Act of his farm except for non-payment of rent, and was to be compen- ^ ^° sated, 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 did not prevent the landlord from raising the rent. Then if the peasant would not pay this increased rent he must give up his holding. He therefore had no stable tenure. In the new Land Act of 1881 Gladstone sought to give the peasant, in addition to the compensation for improvement previously _. secured, a fair rent, a fixed rent, one that was not constantly and the 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 was to be determined by a court, established for the purpose. Rents, once judicially determined, were to be unchangeable for fifteen 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 passed though it was opposed with unusual bitterness. 1 Chapter XXVIII. 540 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 Landowners, believing that it meant a reduction of rents, determined not by themselves but by a court, called it confiscation of property. It was attacked because it established the principle that rents as confisca- wcre not to be determined, like the price of other things, tion of ]3y j-j^g la^^ Qf supply and demand ; were not to be what property the landlord might demand 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 ownership. EXTENSION OF THE SUFFRAGE Gladstone carried through at this time the third of those great reform acts of the nineteenth century by which England has been The Reform transformed from an oligarchy into a democracy. The Biu of 1884 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 practically giving the vote to the lower middle class and the bulk of the laboring class in the boroughs but it did not greatly benefit those living in the country districts. The franchise in the boroughs was wider than in the counties. The result was that laborers in boroughs had the vote, but agricultural laborers did not. There was apparently no reason for maintaining this difference. Gladstone's bill of 1884 aimed at the abolition of this inequality between the two classes of constitu- The county encics, by extending the borough franchise to the counties franchise SO that the mass of workingmen would have the right to vote ^* ^°® whether they lived in town or country. The county fran- chise, previously higher, was to be exactly assimilated to the borough franchise. The bill as passed doubled the number of county voters, and increased the total number of the electorate from over three to over five millions. Gladstone's chief argument was that this measure 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." From 1884 to 191 8 there was no further extension of the suffrage. THE REFORM BILL OF 1884 541 There were many men who had no vote because they were unable to meet any one of the various property quahfications that gave the vote ; for it must be remembered that there was no such thine as „ ,.„ '^ Quahfica- universal manhood suffrage in England. Only those voted who tions for had some one of the kinds of property indicated in the various '"^"'^ laws of 1832, 1867, and 1884. The condition of the franchise was historical, not rational. Many men possessed several votes ; others none at all. There was, during this period, a demand for the en- franchisement of all adult males ; there was also a vigorous agitation for woman's suffrage ; and the Liberal party was pledged to the abolition of the practice of plural voting. There was no redistribu- tion of parliamentary seats from 1885 to 1918. There is in England no periodical adjustment according to population, as in the United States after each census. During this period some electoral districts were ten, or even fifteen times as large as others. Constituencies ranged from about 13,000 to over 217,000. Gladstone's second ministry fell in 1885. There followed a few months of Conservative control under Lord Salisbury. But in 1886 new elections were held and Gladstone came back into power again, prime minister for the third time. THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT He was confronted by the Irish problem in a more acute form than ever before. For the Irish were now demanding a far-reaching change in government. They were demanding Home Rule : _, ° ^ - & I Demand for that is, an Irish Parliament for the management of the in- an Irish ternal affairs of Ireland. They 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 did not wish the separation of Ireland from England but they did wish a separate parliament for Irish affairs on the ground that the Parlia- ment at Westminster had neither the time nor the understanding necessar}' for the proper consideration of measures affecting the Irish. 542 ENGLAND SINCE il The Home Rulers hold the balance of power tion. The Home Rule party had been slowly growing for several years when, in 1879, it came under the leadership of Charles Stewart Parnell, who, unlike the other great leaders of Irish history, such as Grattan and O'Connell, was no orator and was of a cold, haughty, distant nature, but of an inflexible will. Under his able leadership the party increased in numbers, in co- hesion, in grim determination. Parnell's object was to make it so large that it could hold the balance of power in the House of Commons. In the Parliament which met in 1886 the Home Rulers were in this posi- If they united with the Conservatives the two com- bined would have exactly the same number of votes as the Liberals. As the Conserva- tives would not help them Charles Stewart Parnell they sided with the Liberals. After the painting by Sydney p. Hall. GLADSTONE'S THIRD MINISTRY Gladstone entered upon his third administration February i, 1886. It was his shortest ministry, lasting less than six months. It was wholly devoted to the question of Ireland. The Irish had The Irish plainly indicated their wishes in the recent elections in returning question a solid body of 85 Home Rulers out of the 103 members to which Ireland was entitled. Gladstone was enormously im- pressed by this fact, the outcome of the first election held on prac- tically a democratic franchise. He 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 dominant THE HOME RULE MOVEMENT 543 English arrogance, hatred, and uninteUigence. ReconciUation 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. Glad- stone would have nothing more to do with the latter method. He, therefore, resolved to endeavor to give to Ireland the Home Rule she plainly desired. On the 8th of April, 1886, he introduced jhe Home the Irish Government Bill, announcing that it would be Rule Bill 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 Parliament 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 a legislature of their own for their own affairs, ought they still to sit in the Parliament in London, irjsh sit^ with power there to mix in English and Scotch affairs? On in.West- 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 remained, 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 should it establish or endow any religion, 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, not yet Land Pur- solved to the satisfaction of the Irish. He introduced imme- '^^^^^ ^'^ diately a Land Bill, which was to effect a vast transfer of land to the peasants by purchase from the landlords, and which might perhaps involve an expenditure 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. They were urged as neces- opposition sary to settle the question once for all on a solid basis, as *° ^^^ *>iiis 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. 544 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 On the other hand, the strongest opposition arose out of the belief that these bills imperiled the very existence of the Union. The exclusion of the Irish members from Parliament seemed to many to be the snapping of the cords that held the countries together. Did not this bill really dismember the British Empire? Needless to say, no British statesman could urge any measure of that char- acter. Gladstone 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 The Union executive, their own judiciary, their own police, must lead in danger ! inevitably to separation. You exclude them from all partici- pation 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 opin- ion widely held in England of Irishmen, that they were thoroughly _ .. . disloyal to the Empire, that they would delight to use their dislike of new autonomy to pay off old scores by aiding the enemies of the Irish 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 confiscation of property would be in- augurated by this new agency of a parliament of their own. The introduction of the Home Rule Bill aroused an amount of bitterness unknown in recent English history. The Conservative . party opposed it to a man, and it badly disrupted the Liberal of the Lib- party. Nearly a hundred Liberals withdrew and joined the erai party Conservatives. These men called themselves Liberal- Union- ists, Liberals, but not men who were prepared to jeopardize the Union DISRUPTION OF THE LIBERAL PARTY 545 as they held that this measure would do. The result was that the bill was beaten by 343 votes to 313. Gladstone dissolved Parliament and appealed to the people. The question was vehemently discussed before the voters. The The Con- result was disastrous to the Gladstonian Home Rulers. A jg'yrnedlo majority of over a hundred was rolled up against Gladstone's power policy. The consequences of this introduction of the Home Rule proposi- tion into British politics were momentous. One was the impotence, for most of the next twenty years, of the Liberal party. A consider- able fraction of it, on the whole the least democratic, went over to the Conservatives and the result was the creation of the Unionist Coali- tion which for the next twenty years, with a single interruption, was to rule England. The Unionists had a new policy, that of Imperial- ism. They had preserved the Union, they thought, by defeating Home Rule. They now went farther and became the champions of imperial expansion. On the other hand, the Liberal party, now that its more aristocratic elements had left it, became more pronouncedly democratic. The line of division between the two parties became sharper. But for the present the Liberal party was in the hopeless minority. SALISBURY'S LAND PURCHASE ACT On the fall of Gladstone, Lord Salisbury came into power, head of a Conservative or Unionist Government. The Irish question con- fronted it as it had confronted Gladstone"s ministry. As The Second it would not for a moment consider any measure granting Ministry^ self-government to the Irish, it was compelled to govern them (1886-1892) in the old way, by coercion, by force, by relentless suppression of liberties freely enjoyed in England. But the policy of this ministry was not simply negative. Holding that the only serious Irish xhe policy grievance was the land problem and that, if this were once com- °^ coercion pletely solved, then this new-fangled demand for a political reform would drop away, the Conservatives adopted boldly the policy of purchase that had been timidly applied in Gladstone's Land Acts of ifSyo and 1881. The idea was that if only the Irish could get full ownership of their land, could get the absentee and oppressive land- lords out of the way, then they would be happy and prosperous and would no longer care for such political nostrums as Home Rule. 546 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 The land purchase clauses of Gladstone's acts had had no great effect as the state had offered to advance only two-thirds of the pur- chase price. The Conservatives now provided that the state should advance the whole of it, the peasants repaying the state by install- ments covering a long number of years. The Government buys the land, sells it to the peasant, who that instant becomes its legal owner, j^ , and who pays for it gradually. He actually pays less in this Purchase way cach year then 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, which set aside a practically unlimited amount of money for the purpose. From 1903 to 1908 there were about 160,000 pur- chasers. Under this act, which simply increased the inducements to the landlords to sell, Ireland is becoming a country of small freeholders. The earlier principle of dual ownership recognized in Gladstone's land legislation of 1881 has given way completely to this new principle of individual ownership, but no longer individual owner- ship by the great landowners but now by the peasants, the inhab- itants of Ireland. The economic prosperity of Ireland has steadily increased in recent years. This ministry passed other bills of a distinctly liberal character ; among them an act absolutely prohibiting the employment of children under ten, an act designed to reduce the oppression of the sweat-shop Social by limiting the labor of women to twelve hours a day, with legislation ^.n hour and a half for meals, an act making education free, and a small allotment act intended to create a class of peasant pro- prietors in England. 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 Conserva- tive 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 Salisbury ministry took a stand which has been decisive ever since. In 1 889 it secured an Increase of immense increase of the navy. Seventy ships were to be the navy added at an expense of 21,500,000 pounds during the next seven years. Lord Salisbury laid it down as a principle that the THE SECOND HOME RULE BILL 547 British navy ought to be equal to any other two navies of the world combined. In foreign affairs the most important work of this ministry lay in its share in the partition of Africa, which will be described elsewhere.^ DEFEAT OF THE HOME RULE BILL The general elections of 1892 resulted in the return to power of the Liberals, supported by the Irish Home Rulers, and Gladstone, at the age of eighty-two, became for the fourth time prime min- ister, a record unparalleled in English history. As he him- Gladstone self said, the one single tie that still bound him to public life Ministry * "^ (1892-1894) was his interest m securing Home Rule for Ireland before his end. It followed necessarily from the nature of the case that public attention was immediately concentrated anew on that question. Early in 1893 Gladstone introduced his Second Home Rule j^e Second Bill. The opposition to it was exceedingly bitter and pro- Home Rule longed. Very few new arguments were brought forward on either side. Party spirit ran riot. Gladstone expressed 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 conviction that it was the duty of England to atone for six centuries of misrule. After eighty-two days of discussion, marked by scenes of great dis- order, members on one occasion coming to blows to the great damage of decorous parliamentary traditions, the bill was carried by a Passed by majority of 34 (301 to 267). A week later it was defeated in ^^^ Com- , . mons, the House of Lords by 419 to 41, or a majority of more than defeated by ten to one. The bill was dead. ^^^ ^^'^^ Gladstone's fourth ministry was balked successfully at every turn by the House of Lords, which, under the able leadership of Lord Salis- bury, recovered an actual power it had not possessed since Resignation 1832. In 1894 Gladstone resigned his office, thus bringing to a °^ Gladstone 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 1 Chapter XXIX. / 548 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 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 Westminster Abbey (1898). In the elections of 1895 the Unionists secured a majority of a hun- dred and fifty. They were to remain uninterruptedly in power until December, 1905. THE THIRD SALISBURY MINISTRY Lord Salisbury became prime minister for the third time. He re- mained such until 1902, when he withdrew from public life, being suc- ceeded by his nephew, Arthur James Balfour. There was, however, no change of party. Lord Salisbury had an immense majority in the House of Commons. His ministry contained several very able men. He himself assumed the Foreign Office, Joseph Chamberlain the Colonial Office, Balfour the leadership of the House of Commons. The withdrawal of Gladstone and the divisions in the Liberal party reduced that party to a position of ineffective opposition. The Irish question sank into the background as the Unionists, resolutely opposed to the policy of an independent parliament in Ireland, refused absolutely to consider Home Rule. They did, on the other hand, pass certain acts beneficial to Ireland, land purchase acts on a vast scale and measures extending somewhat the strictly local self- government in Ireland. Much social and labor legislation was also enacted. The commanding question of this period was to be that of imperial- ism, and the central figure was Joseph Chamberlain, a man remark- able for vigor and audacity, and the most popular member of Chamberlain, the Cabinet. Chamberlain, who had made his reputation as Colonial an advanced Liberal, an advocate of radical social and economic ecre ary 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. The sixtieth anniversary of Queen Victoria's accession occurring in 1897 was the occasion of a remarkable demonstration of the loyalty of the colonies to the Empire, as well as of the universal respect and END OF THE VICTORIAN ERA 549 affection in which the sovereign was held. This diamond jubilee was an imposing demonstration of the strength of the sentiment of union tha.t bound the various sections of the Empire to- gether, of the advantages accruing to each from the connection vic^j^ria's with the others, of the pride of power. Advantage was taken, diamond too, of the presence of the prime mmisters of the various colonies in London to discuss methods of drawing the various parts of the Empire more closely to- gether. All these cir- cumstances gave expression to that "imperialism " which was becoming an in- creasing factor in British politics. A period of great activity in foreign and colonial affairs began almost im- mediately after the inauguration of the new Unionist minis- try. It was „r • -' War in shown in the South recovery of the ^"^^ Soudan by Lord Kitchener, but the most important chap- ter 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.^ This war, lasting from 1899 to 1902, pg^jjj ^,f much longer than had been anticipated, absorbed the attention Queen of England until its successful termination. Internal legislation ''^tona was of slight importance. During the war Queen Victoria died, 'See pp. 575-581. Queen Victoria, at the Age of Seventy-eight From the painting by Baron von Angeli, at Windsor Castle. 550 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 January 22, 1901, after a reign of over sixty-three years, the longest in British history, and then exceeded elsewhere only 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 ministrj^ and Parliament. "She passed away," -„ . , said Balfour in the House of Commons, "without an enemy in Reign of ' -' Edward vn, the world, for even those who loved not England loved her." 1901-1910 -pj^g reign of Edward VII (1901-1910), then in his sixty- second year, began. When the South African war was over Parliament turned its atten- tion to domestic affairs. In 1902 it passed an Education Act which superseded that of Gladstone's first ministry, the Forster Act of 1870, Education already described. It abolished the school boards estab- -Actof 1902 lished by that law. It admitted the principle of the support of denominational schools out of taxes. In such schools the head teacher must belong to the denomination concerned and a majority of the managers of those schools would also be members of the denomination. The bill gave great offense to Dissenters and believers in secular education. It authorized taxation for the advantage of a denomina- tion of which multitudes of taxpayers were not members. It was held to be a measure for increasing the power of the Church of England, considered one of the bulwarks of Conservatism. The opposition to this law was intense. Thousands refused 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 remained the law of England until 19 18, the Liberals having failed in 1906 in an attempt to pass an education bill of their own to supersede it. The educational system continued one of the contentious problems of English politics. The popularity of the Unionist ministry began to wane after the close of the South African war. Much of its legislation was de- „ .„ nounced as class legislation designed to bolster up the Conserva- Tariff re- o o r- form pro- tive party, not to serve the interest of all England. More- posed Q^^gj. ^ ^g^ issue was now injected into British politics which divided the Unionists, as Home Rule had divided the Liberals. TARIFF REFORM 551 Chamberlain came forward with a proposition for tariff reform as a means of binding the Empire more closely together. He urged that England impose certain tariff duties against the outside world, at the same time exempting her colonies from their operation. He called this policy "colonial preference." It would be that but it would also be the abandonment of the free trade policy of Great Britain and the adoption of the protective system. As the discussion of this proposal developed it became apparent that Englishmen had not yet lost their faith in free trade as still greatly to their advantage, if not absolutely essential to their welfare. The new controversy disrupted the Unionist party and reunited the Liberals. The result of this increasing disaffection was shown in the crushing defeat of the Unionists and the inauguration of a very different policy under the Liberals. Since December, 1905, the Liberal party has been in power, first under the premiership of Sir Henry Campbell- Bannerman, and then, after his death early in 1908, under that of Herbert Asquith, who gave way, in December, 19 16, to Lloyd George, a Liberal, but whose ministry was a coalition ministry, composed of members of both parties. This party won in the General Elections of 1906 the largest majority ever obtained since 1832. OLD-AGE PENSIONS An important achievement of this administration was the passage in 1908 of the Old- Age Pensions Act, which marks a long step forward in the extension of state activity. It grants, under certain slight restrictions, pensions to all persons of a certain age and of a small income. Denounced as paternalistic, as socialistic, as sure to under- mine 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 administra- tion. The act provides that persons seventy years of age 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 receive no pensions. It was estimated by the 552 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 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 on January i, 1909. On that day over half a million men and women went to the nearest post office and drew their first pensions of from one to five 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 statistics 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. The Unionist party had been in control from 1895 to 1905. Its „ ... . chief emphasis had been put upon problems of imperialism, party from Social legislation had slipped into the background. But the I 95 to 1905 conduct and course of the Boer War, the great adventure in imperialism, had not increased the reputation for statesmanship or the popularity of the Conservatives, and their domestic legislation aiming, as was held, at the strengthening of the Established Church and the liquor trade, two stout and constant defenders of the party, exposed them to severe attack as aristocratic, as believers in privileged and vested interests, as hostile to the development of the democratic forces in the national life. Now that the Liberals were in power they turned energetically to undo the class legislation of the previous ministry, to remove the ob- Democratic staclcs to the development of truly popular government. policy of the j^g new Liberal party was more radical than the old Liberal party since party of the time of the first Home Rule Bill as the more ^'°5 conservative Liberals had left it then and had gone over to the opposition. Moreover there now appeared in Parliament a party more radical still, the Labor party, with some fifty members. Radical social and labor legislation was now attempted. That the existing social system weighed with unjust severity upon the masses was recognized by the ministry. "Property," said Asquith, "must be associated in the mind of the masses of the people, with the ideas of reason and justice." In the attempt to realize this aim the Liberal party was forced into new and momentous enterprises. A GRAVE CONSTITUTIONAL PROBLEM 553 THE LIBERAL PARTY AND THE HOUSE OF LORDS But when the Liberals attempted to carry out their fresh and pro- gressive program they immediately .confronted a most formidable obstacle. They passed through the House of Commons xhe Liber- an Education Bill, to remedy the evils of the Education Act ^^ blocked by the of 1902, enacted in the interests chiefly of the Established House of Church ; also a Licensing Bill designed to penalize the liquor ^"'^^ trade which Conservative legislation had greatly favored ; a bill abolishing plural voting, which gave such undue weight to the prop- ertied classes, enabling rich men to cast several votes at a time when many poor men did not have even a single vote. The obstacle en- countered at every step was the House of Lords, which threw out these bills and stood right athwart the path of the Liberal party, firmly resolved not to let any ultra-democratic measures pass, firmly resolved also to maintain all the ground the Conservatives had won in the previous administrations. A serious political and constitu- tional problem thus arose which had to be settled before the . ^ . A constitu- Liberals could use their immense popular majority, as shown in tionai the House of Commons, for the enactment of Liberal policies, p''"''^®™ The House of Lords, which was always ruled by the Conservatives, and which was not, being an hereditary body, subject to direct popular control, now asserted its power frequently and, in the opinion of the Liberals, flagrantly, by rejecting peremptorily the more dis- tinctive Liberal measures. The Lords, encouraged by their easy suc- cesses in blocking the Commons, blithely took another step forward, a step which, as events were to prove, was to precede a resounding fall. The Lords in 1909 rejected the budget, a far more serious act of defiance of the popular chamber than any of these others had been, and a most conspicuous revelation of the spirit of confidence which the Lords had in their power, now being so variously and systemati- cally asserted. THE BUDGET OF 1909 In 1909 Lloyd George, Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the budget. He announced correctly that two new lines of heavy expenditure, the payment of old-age pensions and the rapid „ enlargement of the navy, necessitated new and additional additional taxation. The new taxes which he proposed would bear *^^^*""> mainly on the wealthy classes. The income tax was to be increased. 554 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 In addition there was to be a special or super-tax on incomes of over £5,000. A distinction was to be made between earned and unearned incomes — the former being the result of the labor of the individual, the latter being the income from investments, representing no direct personal activity on the part of the individual receiving them. Unearned incomes were to be taxed higher than earned. Inheritance taxes were to be graded more sharply and to vary decidedly according to the amount involved. New taxes on land of various kinds were also to be levied. This budget aroused the most vehement opposition of Opposition to the class of landowners, the budget capitalists, bankers, per- sons of large property inter- ests, persons who lived on the money they had inherited, on their investments. They de- nounced the bill as socialistic, as revolutionary, as, in short, odious class legislation di- rected against the rich, as confiscatory, as destructive of all just property rights. The budget passed the House of Commons by a large The Lords majority. It then went reject the to the House of Lords. budget p^j. ^ Yong time it had not been supposed that the Lords had any right to reject money bills, as they were an hereditary and not a representative body. They, however, now asserted that they had that right, although they had not exercised it within the memory of men. After a few days of debate they rejected the budget by a vote of 350 to 75 (November 30, 1909). The act At once was precipitated an exciting and momentous politi- deciaredun- (^gl q^^^ constitutional Struggle. The Liberals, blocked again constitutional ... , , / , • by the by the hereditary chamber, consisting solely of the aristocracy Commons ^f ^^^^ ^^^^^ ^^^ blocked this time in a field which had long been considered very particularly to be reserved for the House of Daviu Lloyd Geokgk THE POWER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS 555 Commons, indignantly picked up the gantlet which the Lords had thrown down. The House of Commons voted overwhelmingly, 349 to 134, that the action of the Lords was "a breach of the Constitution and a usurpation of the rights of the House of Commons." . 1 1 TT Asquith Asquith declared in a crowded House that "the House would defines the be unworthy of its past and of those traditions of which '^^"^ it is the custodian and the trustee," if it allowed any time to pass without showing that it would not brook this usurpa- tion. He declared that the "power of the purse " belonged to the Commons alone. The very principle of representa- tive government was at stake. For if the Lords possessed the right they had assumed the situation was exactly this : that when the voters elected a majority of Conservatives to the Commons then the Con- servatives would control the legislation ; that, when they elected a majority of Liberals, the Conservatives would still control 'by being able to block all legislation they disliked by the veto of the House of Lords, always and perma- nently a body adhering to the Conservative party. An he- reditary body, not subject to the people, could veto the people's wishes as expressed by the body that was representative, the House of Commons. In other words, the aristocratic element in the state was really more powerful than the democratic, the house representing a class was more power- ful than the house representing the people. The question of the budget and the question of the proper position and the future of the Upper Chamber were thus linked together. As these questions were of exceptional gravity the ministry resolved Herhkri' AscU'ITH 556 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 to seek the opinion of the voters. Parliament was dissolved and a new election was ordered. The campaign was one of extreme bitterness, expressing itself in numerous acts of violence. The Election, election, held in January, 1910, resulted in giving the Unionists January, g, hundred more votes than they had had in the previous Parlia- ment. Yet despite this gain the Liberals would have a ma- jority of over a hundred in the new House of Commons if the Labor party and the Irish Home Rulers supported them, which they did. In the new Parliament the budget which had been thrown out the previous year was introduced again, without serious change. Again The budget it passed the House of Commons and went to the Lords. That passed House yielded this time and passed the budget with all its so- called revolutionary and socialistic provisions. THE "LORDS' VETO" The Liberals now turned their attention to this question of the "Lords' Veto," or of the position proper for an hereditary, aristocratic chamber in a nation that pretended to be democratic, as did England. The issue stated nearly twenty years before by Gladstone in his last speech in Parliament had now arrived at the crucial stage. What should be the relations between a deliberative assembly elected by the votes of more than six million voters and an hereditary body ? The question was vehemently discussed inside Parliament and out- side. Various suggestions for reform of the House of Lords were made by the members of that House itself, justly apprehensive for their future. The death of the popular King Edward VII (May 6, 1910), and the accession of George V, occurring in the midst of this passionate campaign, somewhat sobered the combatants, though only temporarily. Attempts were made to see if some compromise regarding the future of the House of Lords might not be worked out by the two parties. But the attempts were futile, the issue being too deep and too far-reaching. The ministry, wishing the opinion of the people on this new ques- tion, dissolved the House of Commons again and ordered new elec- Th 1 f s tions, the second within a single year (December, 1910). The of December, result was that the parties came back each with practically ^'^*' the same number of members as before. The Government's majority was undiminished. THE PARLIAMENT BILL 557 The Asquith ministry now passed through the House of Commons a ParUament Bill restricting the power of the House of Lords jhe House in several important particulars and providing that the House °^ Commons of Commons should in last resort have its way in any troversy with the other chamber. This bill passed the House of Commons by a large majority. How could it be got through the House of Lords ? Would the Lords be likely to vote in favor of passes the con- Parliament Bill Interior of the House of Commons the recognition of their inferiority to the other House, would they consent to this withdrawal from them of powers they had hitherto exercised, would they acquiesce in this altered and reduced situation at the hands of a chamber whose measures they had been freely blocking for several years ? Of course they would not if they could help it. But there is one way in which the opposition of the House of Lords can be overcome, no matter how overwhelming. The King can create new peers — as many as he likes — enough to over- come the majority against the measure in question. This supreme weapon the King, which of course in fact meant the Asquith minis- .558 ENGLAND SINCE 1868 try, was now prepared to use. Asquith announced that he had The Pariia- the Consent of George V to create enough peers to secure the passage of the bill in case it were necessary. The threat was sufificient. The Lords on August 18, 191 1, passed the Parlia- ment Act which so profoundly altered their own status, power, and prestige. This measure establishes new processes of law-making. Provisions If the Lords withhold their assent from a money bill, that is, any bill raising taxes or making appropriations, for more than one month after it has passed the House of Commons, the bill may ment Bill passed by the House of Lords of the bill Interior of the House of Lords be presented for the King's signature and on receiving it becomes law without the consent of the Lords. If a bill other than a money bill is passed by the Commons in three successive sessions, whether of the same Parliament or not, and is rejected by the Lords, it may on a third rejection by them be presented for the King's assent and on receiving that assent will become a law, notwithstanding the fact that the House of Lords has not consented to the bill — provided THE THIRD HOME RULE BILL 559 that two years have elapsed between the second reading of the bill in the lirst of those sessions and the date on which it passes the Commons for the third time. This Parliament or Veto Bill contained another important provi- sion, substituting five years for seven as the maximum duration of a Parliament ; that is, members of the Commons are henceforth chosen for five, not seven years. Their term was thus reduced. Thus the veto power of the House of Lords is gone entirely for all financial legislation, and for all other legislation its veto is The Lords' merely suspensive. The Commons can have their way in ^^*° ^^" the end. They may be delayed two years. THIRD HOME RULE BILL The way was now cleared for the enactment of certain legislation desired by the Liberal party which could not secure the approval of the House of Lords. It was possible finally to pass a Home Rule Bill, to the principle of which the Liberal party had Home Rule been committed for a quarter of a century. On April 11, ^^^ i^t^o- 1912, Asquith introduced the Third Home Rule Bill, granting Ireland a Parliament of her own, consisting of a Senate of 40 mem- bers and a House of Commons of 164. If the two houses should disagree, then they were to sit and vote together. On certain subjects the Irish Parliament should not have the right to legislate : on peace or war, naval or military affairs, treaties, currency, foreign commerce. It could not establish or endow any religion or impose any religious disabilities. The Irish were to be represented in the Parliament in London by 42 members instead of the previous number, 103. This measure was passionately opposed by the Conservative party and particularly by the Ulster party, Ulster being that province of Ireland in which the Protestants are strong. They went so far in their opposition as to threaten civil war, in case Ulster were opposition not exempted from the operation of this law. During the next °^ Ulster two years the battle raged around this point, in conferences between political leaders, in discussions in Parliament and the press. At- tempts at compromise failed as the Home Rule party would not consent to the exemption of a quarter of Ireland from the jurisdiction of the proposed Irish Parliament. 56o ENGLAND SINCE i86S The Cabinet Room At No. lo Downing Street. PASSAGE OF THE HOME RULE BILL 561 The bill was, however, passed and was immediately vetoed by the House of Lords. At the next session it was passed again and again vetoed by the Lords. Finally on May 25, 1914, it was passed a third time by the House of Commons by a vote of passed by 351 to 274, a majority of 77. The bill was later rejected by the House of the Lords. It might now become a law without their consent, in conformity with the Parliament Act of 191 1. Only the formal assent of the King was necessary. But the ministry was so impressed with the vehemence and the de- termination of the " Ulster party," which went so far as to organize an army and establish a sort of provisional government, that it decided to continue discussions in order to see whether some compromise might not be arranged. These discussions were interrupted by the outbreak of the European War. Meanwhile a bill disestablishing the Anglican Church in Wales had gone through the same process ; had thrice been ushment of passed by the Commons and rejected by the Lords. Like the ^^^ Welsh *^ Church Home Rule Bill, it only awaited the signature of the sovereign. Finally that signature was given to both bills on September 18, 19 14, but Parliament passed on that same day a bill suspending goth la^^g these laws from operation until the close of the war. suspended England now had far more serious things to consider and she wisely swept the deck clean of contentious domestic matters until a more con- venient season. Whether the Home Rule Act when finally put into force would be accompanied with amendments which would pacify the Protestants of Ulster, remained, of course, to be seen, or whether, indeed, it would ever be put into force. REFERENCES Gladstone's Personality : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. I, Chap. XXIV ; Morley, Gladstone, Book II, Chap. VI ; Bryce, Stiidics in Con- temporary Biography, pp. 400-480. Gladstone's First Ministry : McCarthy, Vol. II, Chaps. LVII-LXII. Disraeli's Mlnistry : McCarthy, Vol. II, Chaps. LXIII-LXVI ; Bryce, pp. 1-68. The Irish Land Question : McCarthy, Vol. Ill, pp. 57-82 ; Johnston and Spencer, Irelatid's Story, pp. 324-338. The Home Rule Movement: McCarthy, Vol. Ill, Chap. X, pp. 171-198; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 65-90. 562. ENGLAND SINCE 1868 Cabinet System of Government: Bagehot, English Constitution, Chap. II; Lowell, The Government of England, Chaps. I, II, III, XXII, and XXIII; Moran, The Theory and Practice of the English Government; Robinson and Beard, Readings in Modern European History, Vol. II, pp. 258-266. England in the Twentieth Century : Larson, Short History of England, pp. 617-639; Cross, History of England, Chap. LVII; Hayes, British Social Politics; Ogg, Social Progress in Contemporary Europe, pp. 265-279 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 52-64. British Foreign Policy since 1880 : Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, Chaps. VI and VII; Schmitt, Germany and England, Chaps. I, VI, VII, IX. CHAP'TER XXVIII THE BRITISH EMPIRE We have thus far concerned ourselves with the history of the Euro- pean continent. But one of the most remarkable features of the nine- teenth century was the reaching out of Europe for the conquest _, Xll6 cxpdii- of the world. It was not only a century of nation building sion of but also of empire building on a colossal scale, a century of "'"p® European emigration and colonization, a century during which the white race seized whatever regions of the earth remained still unap- propriated or were too weak to preserve themselves inviolate. Thus magnificent imperial claims were staked out by various powers either for immediate or for ultimate use. Many were the causes of this new Wandering of the Peoples. One was the extraordinary increase during the century of the population of Europe — perhaps a hundred and seventy -five millions in causes of 1815, more than four hundred and fifty millions a century this growth later. This is unquestionably one of the most important facts in modem history, the fundamental cause of the colossal emigration. Another cause was the transformation of the economic system, the marvelous increase in the power of production, which impelled the producers to ransack the world for new markets and new sources of raw material. And another and potent cause was the spectacle of the British Empire which touched the imagination or aroused the envy of other peoples, who therefore fell to imitating, within the range of the possible. An examination of the histor}^ and characteristics of that Empire is essential to an understanding of modern Europe. At the close of the eighteenth century England possessed in the New World, the region of the St. Lawrence, New Brunswick, Nova jhe British Scotia, Newfoundland, Prince Edward Island, and a large, Empire at the vague region known as the Hudson Bay territory ; Jamaica, eighteenth and other West Indian islands ; in Australia, a strip of the <=«°*"''y eastern coast ; in India, the Bengal or lower Ganges region, Bombay, 563 564 THE BRITISH EMPIRE and strips along the eastern and western coasts. The most important feature of her colonial policy had been her elimination of France as a rival, from whom she had taken in the Seven Years' War almost all of her North American and East Indian possessions. This Empire she increased during the Revolutionary and Napoleonic wars, largely at the expense- of France and Holland, the ally of France. Thus she acquired the Cape of Good Hope, Guiana in South America, Tobago, Trinidad, and St. Lucia, Mauritius in the Indian Ocean, and the large island of Ceylon. In the Mediterranean she acquired Malta. She also obtained Helgoland, and the protectorate of the Ionian Islands. Since 1815 her Empire has been vastly augmented by a long Vast series of wars, and by the natural advance of her colonists over growth of countries contiguous to the early settlements, as in Canada Empire'^ ^^^ Australia. Her Empire lies in every quarter of the since 1815 globe. INDIA The acquisition of India, a world in itself, for the British Crown was the work of a private commercial organization, the East India Com- pany, which was founded in the sixteenth century and given a mo- nopoly of the trade with India. This company established trading stations in various parts of that peninsula. Coming into conflict with the French, and mixing in the quarrels of the native princes, it succeeded in winning direct control of large sections, and indirect control of others by assuming protectorates over certain of the princes, who allied themselves with the English and were left on their thrones. This commercial company became invested with the government of these acquisitions, under the provisions of laws passed by the English Parliament at various times. In the nineteenth century the area of British control steadily widened, until it Overthrow became complete. Its progress was immensely furthered by ^i *u^ .. the overthrow, after a long and intermittent war, of the Mahratta ' ° ' confederacy Mahratta confederacy, a loose union of Indian princes domi- nating central and western India. This confederacy was finally conquered in a war which lasted from 1816 to 1818, when a large part of its territories were added directly to the English pos- sessions, and other parts were left under their native rulers, who, however, were brought effectively under English control by being THE EMPIRE OF INDIA 565 obliged to conform to English policy, to accept English Residents at their courts, whose advice they were practically compelled to follow, and by putting their native armies under British direction. Such is the condition of many of them at the present day. The English also advanced to the north and northwest, from Bengal. One of their most important annexations was that of the Punjab, an immense territory on the Indus, taken as a result Annexation of two difficult wars (1845 to 1849), and the Oudh province, of the one of the richest sections of India, lying between the Punjab ""■'* and Bengal, annexed in 1856. The steady march of English conquest aroused a bitter feeling of hostility to the English, which came to a head in the famous Sepoy Mutiny of 1857, which for a time threatened the complete ^j^g g overthrow of the British in northern India. This mutiny was. Mutiny - however, speedily suppressed. Since then no attempts have ^'^^ been made to overthrow English control. One important consequence of the mutiny of 1857 was that in 1858 the government of India was transferred to the Crown from the private company which had conducted it for a century. It passed under the direct authority of England. In 1876, as we have seen, India was declared an empire, and Queen Victoria assumed the title Empress of India, January i, 1877. This act was officially announced in India by Lord Lytton, the Viceroy, to an imposing assembly of the ruling princes. An Empire it surely is, with its three hundred and fifteen million inhabitants. A Viceroy stands at the head of the government. There is a Secretary for India in the British Ministry. The government is largely carried on by the highly organized ment^and"^"' Civil Service of India, and is in the hands of about eleven population or India hundred Englishmen. About two hundred and forty-four millions of people are under the direct control of Great Britain ; about seventy millions live in native states under native rulers, the "Protected Princes of India," of whom there were, a few years ago, nearly seven hundred. For all practical purposes, however, these princes must follow the advice of English officials, or Residents, stationed in their capitals. Not only did England complete her control of India in the nine- teenth century, but she added countries round about India, Burma toward the east, and, toward the west, Baluchistan, a part of 566 THE BRITISH EMPIRE which was annexed outright, and the remainder brought under a protectorate. She also imposed a kind of protectorate upon Af- Burma and ghanistan as a result of two Afghan wars (1839- 1842 and Baluchistan 1878-1880). BRITISH NORTH AMERICA In 1 8 15, as already stated, Great Britain possessed, in North America, six colonies : Upper Canada, Lower Canada, New Bruns- wick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland ; and the Hudson Bay Company's territories stretched to the north and northwest with undefined 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 Montreal and Quebec and the St. Lawrence valley. This was the French colony conquered by England in 1763. Its population was French-speaking, and Roman Catholic in religion. The two most important of these colonies were Lower Canada, largely French, and Upper Canada, entirely English. Each had re- „ , ceived a constitution in 1791, but in neither colony did the con- Upper and / ^ > j Lower stitution work well and the fundamental reason was that Canada neither the people nor their legislatures had any control over the executive. The Governor, who could practically veto all legis- lation, considered himself responsible primarily to the English Government, not to the people of the province. England had not yet learned the secret of successful management of colonies despite the fact that the lesson of the American Revolution and the loss of the thirteen colonies half a century earlier was sufficiently plain. It took a second revolt to point the moral and adorn the tale. In 1837 disaffection had reached such a stage that revolutionary movements broke out in both Upper and Lower Canada. These were easily suppressed by the Canadian authorities without help from England, but the grievances of the colonists still remained. The English Government, thoroughly alarmed at the danger of the loss of another empire, adopted the part of discretion and sent out to The Durham Canada a commissioner to study the grievances of the colo- Mission nists. The man chosen was Lord Durham, whose part in the reform of 1832 had been brilliant. Durham was in Canada five THE DOMINION OF CANADA 567 months. The report in which he analyzed the causes of the rebellion and suggested changes in policy entitles him to the rank of the greatest colonial statesman in British history. In a word he adopted the dictum of Fox, who had said "the only method of retaining distant colonies with advantage, is to enable them to govern themselves." He proposed the introduction of the cabinet system of government as worked out in England. This gives the popular house of the legis- lature control over the executive. Durham's recommendations were not immediately followed, as to many Englishmen they seemed to render the colonies independent. Ten years later, however, this principle of ministerial respon- sibility was adopted by Lord Elgin (1847), the Governor of responsibUity Canada and the son-in-law of Durham. His example was fol- Introduced ^ into Canada lowed by his successors and gradually became established usage. The custom spread rapidly to the other colonies of Great Britain which were of English stock and were therefore considered capable of self-government. This is the cement that holds the British Em- pire together. For self-government has brought with it contentment. Lord Durham had also suggested a federation of all the North American colonies. This was brought about in 1867 when the British North America Act, which had been drawn up in Canada and ^j^g founding which expressed Canadian sentiment, was passed without of the change by the English Parliament. By this act Upper and Canada, Lower Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick were joined '^^'^ into a confederation 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 province 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 Senate and a House of Commons. The Senate was to be composed of seventy members nominated for life by the Governor-General, himself .^j^^ appointed by the monarch, and representing the Crown. Dominion The House of Commons was to be elected by the people. In some respects the example of the English Government was fol- lowed in the constitution, in others that of the United States. Though the Dominion began with only four provinces provision was made for the possible admission of others. Manitoba Growth of was admitted in 1870, British Columbia in 1871, Prince the Dominion Edward Island in 1873. 568 THE BRITISH EMPIRE THE DOMINION OF CANADA 569 In 1846, by the settlement of the Oregon dispute, the hne dividing the English possessions from the United States was extended to the Pacific Ocean, and in 1869 the Dominion acquired by pur- Canada chase (£300,000) the vast territories belonging to the Hudson practicaUy 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 treat}^ 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 strikingly in her support of England in the South African war. She sent Canadian regiments thither at her own expense to cooperate in an enterprise not closely connected with her own fortunes. The same spirit, the same willingness to make costly sacrifices, were to be shown, on a larger scale, in the war that began in 1914. 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 Canadian contributing to the remarkable development of the west. Pacific ^ . Rauway Another transcontinental railway has recently been built farther to the north. Canada is connected 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 seven million. Her prosperity has grown immensely, and her economic life is becoming more varied. Largely an agricultural and timber producing country, her manufactures are now developing under the stimulus of protective tariffs, and her vast mineral resources are in process of rapid development. AUSTRALIA In the Southern Hemisphere, too, a new empire was created by Great Britain during the nineteenth century, an empire nearly as extensive territorially as the United States or Canada, about three- 570 THE BRITISH EMPIRE fourths as large as Europe, and inhabited almost entirely by a population of English descent. No systematic exploration of this southern continent, Terra Aus- tralis, was undertaken until toward the close of the eighteenth cen- Eariy tury, but certain parts had been sighted or traced much earlier explorations j^y Spanish, Portuguese, and particularly 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, indeed, 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 Holland, claiming it by right of discovery. But they made no attempt to occupy it. The ^^ attention of the English was first directed thither by the The voyages ° -' of Captain famous Captain Cook, who made 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 vegetation 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. At first Australia was considered by English statesmen a good place to which to send criminals, and it was as a convict colony that A convict the new empire began. The first expedition for the colonization colony 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 expiration of their sentences, received lands. Free settlers came too, led to emigrate by various periods of economic depression at home, by promises of land and food, and by an increasing knowledge of the adaptability of the new continent 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. The free settlers were strongly opposed to having Australia re- garded as a prison for English convicts, and after 1840 the system was gradually abolished. Australia was at first mainly a pastoral THE COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA 571 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 en- xhe discov- sued. The population of the colony of Victoria (cut off from ^"^ °* sold 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 Australia, and the neighboring island of Tasmania. These were gradually „. . invested with self-government, parliaments, and responsible Australian ministries in the fashion worked out in Canada. The popula- *^° °^^^^ tion increased steadily, and by the end of the century numbered about four millions. The great political event in the history of these colonies was their union into a confederation at the close of the century. Up to that time the colonies had been legally unconnected with each other, and their only form of union was the loose one under the British „ •' Reasons for Crown. For a long time there was discussion as to the advis- their ability of binding them more closely together. Various ^ oration reasons contributed to convince the Australians of the advantages of federation ; the desirability of uniform legislation concerning commercial and industrial matters, railway regulation, navigation, irrigation, and tariffs. Moreover the desire for nationality, which accomplished such remarkable changes in , Europe in the nineteenth century, was also active here. An Australian the^Aus°rai- patriotism had grown up. Australians desired to make '^^ ^°^' their country the dominant authority in the Southern Hemi- sphere. They 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 discussion (1890- 1 900). 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 572 THE BRITISH EMPIRE THE DOMINION OF NEW ZEALAND 573 the British ParUament 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 of acceptance. Though Parliament made certain suggestions of detail, it did not insist upon them in the case of Australian op- position. The constitution established a federation consisting of the six col- onies which were henceforth to be called states, not provinces as in the case of Canada. It created a federal Parliament of two The Federal houses, a Senate consisting of six senators from each state. Parliament and a House of Representatives apportioned among the several states according to population. The powers given to the Federal Govern- ment were carefully defined. The new system was inaugurated January i, 1901. 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 181 5, but it was not until 1839 that they were formally annexed to the British Empire. In 1854 New Zealand was given responsible government, and in 1865 was entirely separated from New South Wales and made a separate colony. Emigration was methodically encouraged. New Zealand was never a convict colony. Population increased and it gradually became the most democratic 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 over 1,000,000, of whom about 50,000 are aborigines, the New Maoris. Its capital is Wellington, with a population of Zealand about 100,000. Auckland is another 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, legislation concerning labor and capital, landowning and commerce. State control has been ex- tended over more branches of industry than has been the case in any other country. 574 THE BRITISH EMPIRE The Government owns and operates the railways. The 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 social reduced. Comprehensive and successful attempts are made legislation ^^ ^^^^ j^^ 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 tele- phones and conducts postal savings banks. Life insurance 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 legis- lation is remarkable. Its main purpose is to prevent the land from being monopolized by a few, and to enable the people to become landholders. In 1892 progressive taxation on the large estates was adopted, and in 1896 the sale of such estates to the government was made compulsory, and thus extensive areas have come under govern- ment ownership. The state transfers them under various forms of System of tenure to the landless and working classes. The system of taxation taxation, based on the principle of graduation, higher rates for larger incomes, properties, and inheritances, is designed to break up or prevent monopoly and to favor the small proprietor or producer. In industrial and labor legislation New Zealand has also made radi- cal experiments. Arbitration in labor disputes is compulsory if either side invokes it, and the decision is binding. Factory laws are strin- gent, aiming particularly at the protection of women, the elimination of "sweating." In stores the Saturday half -holiday is universal. The Government has a Labor Department whose head is a member Old-age of the cabinet. Its first duty is to find work for the unem- pensions ployed, 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 1 898 and amended in 1905, providing pensions 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 Australian colony of Victoria has enacted much legislation re- sembling that described in the case of New Zealand. THE BEGLXNINGS OF AN AFRICAN EMPIRE 575 BRITISH SOUTH AFRICA As an incident in the wars against Napoleonic France and her ally and dependent, Holland, England seized the Dutch possession in South Africa, Cape Colony. This colony she retained in 18 14, together with certain Dutch possessions in South America, paying acqukes six million pounds as compensation. This was the beginning ^^p^ of English expansion into Africa, which was to attain remark- able proportions before the close of the century. The population at the time England 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 forthwith. Friction between the Dutch (called Boers, i.e. peasants) and the English was not slow in developing. The forms of local government to which the Boers were accustomed were abolished and new ^ . ,. Friction ones established. English was made the sole language used with the 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 propert}^ as the compensation given was inadequate — about three million pounds — little more than a third of what they considered their slaves were worth. 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 for several years. The Great 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. The result was the founding of two independent Boer republics to the north of Cape Colony, namely the Orange Free State and the Transvaal or South African Republic. Theirs was to be a most checkered career. The Orange Free State was declared annexed to the British Empire in 1848 but it rebelled and its independence was recognized by Great Britain in 1854. From that time until 1899 it pursued a peaceful course, its independence not infringed. The independence of the Transvaal was also recognized, in 1852. But twenty-five years later, in 1877, under the strongly imperialistic ministry of Lord Beaconsfield, it was abruptly declared annexed to 576 THE BRITISH EMPIRE The Transvaal annexed to the British Empire the British Empire, on the ground that its independence was a menace to the peace of England's other South African pos- sessions. The Boers' hatred of the English naturally ex- pressed itself and they took up arms in the defense of their independence. In i88p Lord Beaconsfield was overthrown and Gladstone came into power. Gladstone had denounced the annexation, and was ^ ^ Majuba Hill 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 detach- Majuba ment of British troops at Majuba Hill, February 27, 1881. In a military sense this so-called battle of Majuba Hill was an insignificant affair, but its effects upon Englishmen and Boers were tremendous and far-reaching. Gladstone, who had already been negotiating with a view to restoring the independence of the Transvaal, which he considered had been unjustly overthrown, did not think it right to reverse his policy because of a mere skirmish, Hill THE ENGLISH AND THE TRANSVAAL 577 however humiliating. His ministry therefore went its way, not beheving that it should be deflected from an act of justice and conciliation merely because of a military misfortune of no importance in itself. The independence of the Transvaal Gladstone was formally recognized with the restriction that it could not administra- make treaties with foreign countries without the approval of Great Britain and with the proviso, which was destined to gain tremen- dous importance later, that "white men were to have full liberty to re- side 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." Gladstone's action was severely criticized by Englishmen who did not believe in retiring, leaving a defeat unavenged. They denounced the policy of the ministry as hostile to the welfare of the South African colonies and damaging to the prestige of the Empire. The Boers, on the other hand, considered that they had won their inde- pendence by arms, by the humiliation of the traditional enemy, and were accordingly elated. In holding this opinion they were injuring themselves by self-deception and by the idea that what they had done once they could do again, and they were angering the British by keeping alive the memory of Majuba Hill. The phrase just quoted, concerning immigration, 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 popula- tion was impending. The South African Republic was entirely inhabited by Boers, a people exclusively interested in agriculture and grazing, solid, sturdy, religious, freedom-loving, but, in the modern sense, unpro- gressive, ill-educated, suspicious of foreigners, 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 their mountains, the Rand. Immediately a great influx of miners and speculators began. These were chiefly Englishmen. In the heart of the mining district the city of The Johannesburg grew rapidly, numbering in a few years over uitianders 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 ob- stacles were put in the way of their naturalization ; they were given 578 THE BRITISH EMPIRE The Jameson Raid 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 oligarchy, but the Boers felt that it was only by refusing the suffrage to the unwelcome intruders that they could keep con- trol of their own state, which at the cost of much hardship they had cre- ated in the wilderness. In 1895 occurred an event which deeply embittered them, the Jameson Raid — an invasion of the Transvaal by a few hundred troopers under Dr. Jameson, the administrator of Rhodesia, with the appar- ent purpose of overthrowing the Boer Government. The raiders were easily captured by the Boers, who, with great magnanimity, handed them over to England. This inde- fensible attack and the fact that the guilty were only lightly punished in England, and that the man whom all Boers held responsible as the arch-conspirator, Cecil Rhodes, was shielded by the British Government, entered like iron into the souls of the Boers and only hardened 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. Friction steadily increased. The British charged that the Boers were aiming at nothing less than the ultimate expulsion of the English from South Africa, the Boers charged that the British were aiming at the extinction of the two Boer republics. There was no spirit of conciliation in either government. Joseph Chamberlain THE ENGLISH AND THE BOERS AT WAR 579 THE SOUTH AFRICAN WAR Joseph Chamberlain, British Colonial Secretary, was arrogant and insolent. Paul Kruger, President of the Transvaal, was obstinate and ill-informed. Ultimately in October, 1899, the Boers declared war upon Great Britain. The Orange Free State, no party to the quarrel, threw in its lot with its sister 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 Gov- ernment had made no prepara- tion at all adequate, appar- ently 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 insufhcient to put down their resistance. Moreover, for years they had deceived themselves with a gross exaggeration of the significance 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 guerrilla fighting and elaborate, systematic, and difhcult conquest of the country. It was fought with great bravery 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. Paul Kruger 580 THE BRITISH EMPIRE The English won in the end by sheer force of numbers and peace Victory of was finally concluded on June i, 1902. The Transvaal and the English ^\^q Orange Free State lost their independence, and became colonies of the British Empire. Otherwise the terms offered by Annexation ^^^ conqucrors Were liberal. Generous money grants and of the Trans- loans Were to be made by England to enable the Boers to Orange Free begin again in their sadly devastated land. Their language State ^^5 j-Q be respected wherever possible. The work of reconciliation proceeded with remarkable rapidity after the close of the war. Responsible government, 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 Gov- ernment had the most happy consequences, as was 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 repre- sented. 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 ^^^ South African Union was the work of the South Africans African themselvcs, the former enemies, Boers and British, harmoni- ously cooperating. The central government consists of a Governor-General appointed by the Crown ; an Executive Council ; Lord Roberts THE UNION OF SOUTH AFRICA 581 a Senate and a House of Assembly. Both Dutch and Enghsh are official languages and enjoy equal privileges. Difficulty was ex- perienced in selecting the capital, so intense was the rivalry pf dif- ferent cities. The result was a compromise. 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 was but another 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 possessed an empire far more extensive and far more populous than any the world had ever seen, covering about thirteen millions of square ^^^ ^ miles, if Egypt and the Soudan were included, with a total flung British population of over four hundred and twenty millions; This ^"f''^ Empire is scattered ever5rwhere, in Asia, Africa, Australasia, the two Americas, and the islands of the seven seas. The population includes a 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, representative, 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 essential that she may keep open her communications with her far-flung colonies. It is no accident that England 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 practically unlimited self-government enjoyed by several of the colonies, those in which 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 have ruled their colonies directly from Paris and Berlin. But 582 THE BRITISH EMPIRE this system does not apply to the greatest of them all, India, nor to a multitude of smaller possessions. 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 em- of Imperial pire may be more closely consolidated, and for certain pur- Federation poses act as a single state? If so, its power will be greatly augmented, and the world will witness the most stupendous achieve- ment 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. That the World War will have con- tributed to the solution of this problem seems a reasonable expectation. For that war has shown the existence of an intense imperial patriot- ism among Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, South Africans, and apparently even Indians, all rushing instinctively to support the mother country in her hour of need, all evidently willing to give the last full measure of devotion to a cause which they regard as common to them all. So powerful a spirit may well find a way of embodying and crystallizing itself in permanent political institu- tions. The sense of unity, indisputably revealed, may well be the harbinger of a coming organization adapted to preserve and foster that sense and to develop it more richly still. REFERENCES A Century of Empire: Pollard, History of England (Home University Library), pp. 199-225; Cheyney, Short History of England, pp. 649-653, 666- 678. The Indian Mutiny : McCarthy, History of Our Own Times, Vol. II, Chaps. XXXII-XXXV ; Beard, Introduction to the English Historians, pp. 638-644. British Expansion in India : Woodward, The Expansion of the British Empire, pp. 312-330; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII^ Chap. XVI, pp. 457-499- Canada : McCarthy, Vol. I, Chap. Ill; Woodward, pp. 249-261 ; Bourinot, Canada under British Rule. Australia: Woodward, pp. 262-274; Beard, pp. 645-662 ; 'Qryce, Studies in History and Jurisprudence (Constitution of Australia) ; Jenks, History of the A ustralasian Colonies. South Africa : Woodward, pp. 269-285 ; Bright, History of England, Vol. V, pp. 234-266; Bryce, Impressions of South Africa, pp. 99-182. CHAPTER XXIX 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 .^ . ,^ . ■' Africa three in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. In some re- times the size spects the seat of very ancient history, in most its history is °^ Europe 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, mj^sterious, and redoubtable, for a while the powerful rival of Rome, succumbing to the latter only after severe and memorable struggles. The ancient world knew therefore the northern shores of xhe period Africa. The rest was practically unknown. In the fifteenth °^ discovery century came the great series of geographical discoveries, which immensely widened the known boundaries of the world. Among other things they revealed the hitherto unknown outline and magni- tude of the continent. But its great inner mass remained as before, unexplored, and so it remained until well into the nineteenth century. In 1 815 the situation was as follows : the Turkish Empire extended along the whole northern coast to Morocco, that is, the Sultan was nominally sovereign of Egypt, Tripoli, Tunis, and Algeria, situation Morocco was independent under its own sultan. Along ■'» ^^'s 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 pro- ceeded. The interior of the continent was unknown, and was of interest only to geographers. 583 584 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA For sixty years after 18 15, progress in the appropriation of Africa by Europe was slow. The most important annexation was that of Algeria by France between 1830 and 1847. In the south, Eng- conquest of land was spreading out, and the Boers were founding their Algeria ^^q republips. EXPLORATIONS IN AFRICA 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 farther and farther into the interior, traversing the continent in various directions, opening a chapter of geographical discovery of absorbing interest. It is impossible within our limits to do more than allude to the wonderful work participated in by many intrepid explorers, Englishmen, Frenchmen, 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 The sources remained enveloped in obscurity. In 1858 one source was of the Nile found by Speke, an English explorer, to consist of a great lake south of the equator, to which the name Victoria Nyanza was given. Six years later another Englishman, Sir Samuel Baker, dis- covered another lake, also a source, and named it Albert Nyanza. Two names particularly stand out in this record of African explora- tion, Livingstone and Stanley. David Livingstone, a Scotch mis- David sionary and traveler, began his African career in 1 840, and Livingstone continued it until his death in 1873. He traced the course of the Zambesi River, of the upper Congo, and the region round about Lakes Tanganyika (tan-gan-ye'-ka) and Nyassa. He crossed Africa from sea to sea. 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 expedition was sent out to find him, that expedition riveted the attention of Europe as no other in African history had done. It was under the direction of Henry M. Stanley, sent out by the New York Herald. Stanley's story of how he found Living- stone was read with the greatest interest in Europe, and heightened the desire, already widespread, for more knowledge about the great STANLEY'S EXPLORATIONS 585 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. By this time not only was the scientific curiosity of Europe thor- oughly 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 his- explorations tory of modern explorations. Stanley explored the equatorial ^J^^^ lake region, making important additions to knowledge. His great work was, however, his exploration 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 the world, that its length was more than three thousand miles, that it was fed by an 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. AFRICA APPROPRIATED BY EUROPE Thus, by 1880, the scientific enthusiasm and curiosity, the mis- sionary 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 pre- viously all had been blank. Upon discovery quickly followed appropriation. France entered upon her protectorate of Tunis in 1881, England upon her "occupa- tion" of Egypt in 1882. This was a signal for a general j^e parti- scramble. A feverish period of partition succeeded the long, tion of Africa 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 boundaries of their claims. Africa became an annex of Europe. Out of this rush for territories the great powers, England, France, and Germany, 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 586 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA map. Most of the treaties by which this division was affected were made between 1884 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 The Congo second King of Belgium, Leopold II, a man who was greatly Free State interested in the exploration of that continent. After the discoveries of Livingstone, and the early ones of Stanley, he called a conference of the powers in 1 876. 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 cooperate was to collect funds for the common object. In 1879 Stanley was sent out to carry on the work he had already begun. Hitherto an explorer he now became, in addition, an organizer and state builder. During the next four or five years, 1 879-1 884, he made hundreds of treaties with native chiefs and foilnded many stations in the Congo basin. Nominally an emissary of an international association, his expenses were largely borne by King Leopold II. Portugal now put forth extensive claims to much of this Congo region on the ground of previous discovery. To adjust these claims The Berlin ^•I'ld Other matters a general conference was held in Berlin, in Conference 1884-1885, attended by all the states of Europe, with the ex- ception of Switzerland, and also by the United States. The con- ference recognized the existence 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 con- ference, 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 because the King of Bel- gium was the only one to show much practical interest in the project. In 1885, Leopold II assumed the position of sovereign, declaring that the connection of the Congo Free State and Belgium should be merely AFRICA IN i^ 587 0° 10° 200 30° 40° AFRICA EUROPEAN POSSESSIONS IN 1884. 60° 60° 588 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA personal, he being the ruler of botli. This and later changes in the _^ ^ status of the Congo have either been fomiallv recognized or The Congo - o Free State L acquicsced in b}^ tlie powers. This international state finally Beiri^*^* in 1908 was converted outright into a Belgian colony subject, colony not to the personal rule of the King, but to Parliament. EGYPT Egypt, a seat of ancient civilization, was conquered by the Turks and became a part of the Turkish Empire in 1 5 1 7. It remained nomi- nally such down to 1915 when Great Britain declared it annexed to the British Empire as a protected state. During all that time its supreme ruler was the Sultan who resided in Con- stantinople. But a series of remarkable events in the nineteenth cen- tury resulted in giving it a most singular and complicated position. To put dov^m certain opponents of the Sultan an Albanian warrior, Mehemet Ali ( ma'-he-met a'-le), was sent out earlj^ in the nineteenth centurs*. Appointed by the Sultan Governor of Egypt in founds a 1806, he had, by 18 ii, made himself absolute master of the semi -royal countrs'. He had succeeded onlv too well. Originallv house - • o - mereh' the representative of the Sultan, he had become the real ruler of the land. His ambitions grew with his successes, and he was able to gain the important concession that the right to rule as -^aceroj" in Eg^-pt should be hereditan,- in his famih'. The title was later changed to that of Khedive. Thus was founded an Egyptian dynasty, subject to the d^Tiasty of Constantinople. The fifth ruler of this famil}^ was Ismail (is-ma-el') ( i S63-1 879) . 1 1 was under him that the Suez Canal was completed, a great under- taking carried through by a French engineer, Ferdinand de the rapid Lesscps, the monej^ coming largely from European investors, ^owth of the -pi^is Khedive plunged into the most reckless extravagance. Egyptian debt . As a result the Eg^-ptian debt rose with extraordinar}- rapidity from three million pounds in 1863 to eighty-nine million in 1876. The Ivhedive, 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. This was a mere temporaPi^ relief to the Khedive's finances, but was an important advantage to England, as the canal was destined inevitably to be the favorite route to India. ENGLISH INTERVENTION IN EGYPT 589 This 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. Fearing the bank- jntervgntion ruptcy of Egypt the governments of the two countries intervened of England in the interest of their investors, and succeeded in imposing ^° ^^'^'^^ their control over a large part of the financial administration. This was the famous Dual Control, which lasted from 1879 to 1883. The Khedive, Isrriail, resenting this tutelage, was consequently forced to abdicate, and was succeeded by his son Tewlik, who ruled from 1879 to 1892. The new Khedive did not struggle against the Dual Control, but certain elements of the population did. The bitter hatred inspired by this intervention of the for- ^^ ^j , eigners flared up in a native movement which had as its war Arabi cry, "Egypt for the Egyptians," and as its leader, Arabi ^^^^* Pasha, an officer in the army. Before this 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-mal- contents, and that the suppression could be accomplished only expedition by the foreigners themselves. Thus financial intervention "ushes the insurrection led directly to military intervention. England sought the cooperation of France, but France declined. She then proceeded alone, defeated Arabi in September, 1882, and crushed the rebellion. The English had intervened nominally in the interest of the Khe- dive'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 withdraw their army? The question was a difficult one. To withdraw was to leave Egypt a prey to anarchy ; to remain was certainly to offend the European powers which would look upon this as a piece of British aggression. Particularly would such action be resented by France. Consequently England did not annex Eg3''pt. She recognized the Khedive as still the ruler, Egypt as still technically a part of Turkey. But she insisted on assumes the holding the position of "adviser" to the Khedive and also position of ^ insisted that her "advice" in the government of Egj^'pt be followed. From 1883 to 191 5 such was the situation. A British force remained in Egypt, the "occupation," as it was called, con- 590 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA tinued, advice was compulsory. England was ruler in fact, not in law. The Dual Control ended in 1883, and England began in earnest a work of reconstruction and reform which was carried forward under the guidance of Lord Cromer, who was British Consul-General in Egypt until 1907. MASSACRE OF THE ENGLISH IN THE SOUDAN In intervening in Egypt in 1882, England became immediately involved in a further enterprise which brought disaster and humilia- tion. Egypt possessed a de- pendency to the south, the Soudan, a vast region com- prising chiefly the basin of the Upper Nile, a poorly organized territory with a varied, semi-civilized, no- madic 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. Win- Loss of ning successes over the Soudan ^he Egyptian troops, he proclaimed a religious war, the people 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 preserve the Soudan for Egypt ? Gladstone, then prime minister, 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 General Gordon GORDON AND THE SOUDAN 591 apparently supposed that somehow Gordon, without miUtary aid, could accomplish the safe withdrawal of the garrisons. He reached Khartoum, but found the danger far more serious than had been sup- posed, the rebellion far more menacing. He found himself shortly shut up in Khartoum (char-tom'), surrounded by frenzied and confident Mahdists. At once there arose in England a cry for the relief of Gordon, a man whose personality, marked by heroic, ec- centric, magnetic qualities, had seized the interest, enthu- siasm, and imagination of the English people. But the Gov- ernment was dilatory. Weeks, and even months, went by. Finally, an expedition was sent out in September, 1884. Pushing forward rapidly, against great difficul- Death of ties, it reached Khar- Gordon toum January 28, 1885, only to find the flag of the Mahdi floating over it. Only two days before the place had been stormed and Gordon and eleven thousand of his men massacred. For a decade after this the Soudan was left in the hands of the dervishes, Recovery of completely abandoned. ^^^ Soudan But finally England resolved to recover this territory, which she did by the battle of Omdurman in which General Kitchener completely annihilated the power of the dervishes, September 2, 1898. Egypt and the Soudan were formally declared annexed to the British Empire in 191 5 as an incident of the European War. The Khedive was deposed and a new Khedive was put in his place, ^gypt and and Great Britain prepared to rule Egypt as she rules many the Soudan of the states of India, preserving the formality of a native the British prince as sovereign. Egypt was declared a " Protected State." Empire Lord Kitchexeu 592 THE PARTITION OF AFRICA REFERENCES Explorations in Africa : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 805- 813; Hughes, Damd Livingstone; Sta,n\ey, Autobiography, Cha.p. XN ; Harris, N. D., Intervention and Colonization in Africa. The Partition of Africa : Rose, The Development of the European Nations, Vol. II, pp. 228-268; Gooch, History of Our Time (Home University Library), pp. 178-204; Gibbons, The New Map of Africa. Egypt and the Soudan : Rose, Vol. n,^pp. ^143-2.27; Cambridge Modern . History, Vol. XII, Chap. XV, pp. 429-456; Cromer, Modern Egypt; Gibbons, Chaps. I, XX, XXI. The Congo Free State : Johnston, Colonization of Africa, Chap. XI ; Rose, Vol. II, pp. 269-298; Stanley, Chap. XVI; Gibbons, Chap. VIII. CHAPTER XXX THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE There were in Europe in 19 14 about twenty different states. It is difficult to give the precise number, since the exact status of one or two of them was somewhat doubtful. Some of these states were extremely small. There were two petty republics ; one, Andorra, located in the Pyrenees, which consisted chiefly of a valley Andorra and surrounded by high mountain peaks and which had a population San Marino of about five thousand. Its maximum length is seventeen miles, its width eighteen. Andorra is under the suzerainty of France and of the Spanish Bishop of Urgel, paying 960 francs a year to the former, 460 to the latter. The other of these republics is San Marino, which claims to be the oldest state in Europe, which is located on a spur of the Apennines, entirely surrounded by Italy, and which has a population of about twelve thousand. San Marino is the sole survivor of those numerous city-republics which abounded in Italy during the Middle Ages. Then there is also the little principality of Liechtenstein, lying between Switzerland and Liechtenstein Austria, and having a population of about eleven thousand. *°^ Albania There was also in 1914 the principality of Albania, a state which was created by international action inigia and 1913, and which collapsed in the following year at the outbreak of the war. But whatever the exact status of these petty states may be, they may be ignored in our survey as, with the exception of Albania, they have not counted in the general politics of Europe. BELGIUM AND LUXEMBURG There were in 19 14 three other states which occupied a peculiar position. They were the so-called neutralized states, Belgium, Luxemburg, and Switzerland. A neutralized state is one .„,. ■ 1 1 1 • • Three whose mdependence and mtegrity are guaranteed forever by neutralized international agreement. Such states may generally main- ^*^*®^ tain armies, but only for defense. They may never make aggressive 593 594 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE war ; nor ma}' thej' make treaties or alliances with other states that may lead them into war. The reason wh}" a state may desire to become neutralized is that it is weak, that its independence is guar- anteed, that it has no desire or ability to participate in international affairs, in the usual struggles or competitions of states. The reasons why the great powers have consented to the neutralization of such states have differed in different cases. But the chief reason has been connected with the theory of the balance of power, the desire to keep them as buffers between two or more neighboring large states. Switzerland was neutralized in 1815 at the close of the Napoleonic wars, and its neutrality has never been infringed. Belgium was neutralized in 1831 when it separated from Holland and became an independent state. Luxemburg was neutralized in 1867 when it was freed from its previously existing connections with German}^ as an incident to the reorganization of Germany and the establishment of the North German Confederation, after the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 and the famous battle of Koniggratz or Sadowa. A neutralized state may, as has been said, have an army and a navy and may build fortresses, as long as this is done for purposes jy J of self-defense only, for a neutralized state is obliged to defend neutralized its neutrality', if attacked, to the full extent of its powers, states Thus, in 1914, Belgium and Switzerland had armies and ^ universal military service. Luxemburg, however, was an anomaly, as the treaty of 1867, neutralizing her, provided explicitly that she should not be allowed to keep any armed force, with the exception of a police for the maintenance of public security and order. L'nder the circumstances, Luxemburg could do nothing for the defense of her neutrality when invaded in August, 19 14. Belgium, however, could and did make a spirited, though ineffectual, resistance to the invader. Switzerland was not attacked, but nevertheless she mobil- ized her arm}' at the outbreak of the war and stood ready to defend herself, if necessary. Whether Belgium and Luxemburg, whose guaranteed rights were so poor a protection in 19 14, would be neu- tralized again remained, of course, to be seen. It cannot yet be said with confidence whether neutralization as an international device can stand the test of history, or not. Belgium's neutrality was observed by its guarantors for eighty-three years and then ruthlessly broken by one of them ; Luxemburg's for forty- seven, then broken by the same power, Germany. Switzerland, BELGIUM AND HOLLAND 595 as stated, is the only one of these specially "protected" states which has passed unscathed by foreign war, and respected by its protectors for a full century and more. From the point of view of general European politics, the signif- icance of Belgium and of her northern neighbor, Holland, from whom she revolted in 1830, has lain in the fact that they have been Belgium and coveted by those Germans who have desired to increase the Holland coveted by boundaries of the German Empire, and who have, to that end, the Pan- advocated the absorption of certain territories lying beyond '^^'■™^°^ the boundaries of Germany. Belgium and Holland have been cov- eted by the Pan-Germans because of their riches, industrial and agricultural, because of their coastline, abounding in excellent harbors on the Atlantic, fronting England, and also because of their colonies, Belgium possessing a vast African domain, now called the Congo Colony, rich in tropical products, and Holland possessing in- valuable tropical islands in the East Indies, Java, Sumatra, Borneo, and Celebes. The Belgian colony has an area of over 900,000 square miles, an area about a fourth as large as that of the United States, including Alaska, with a population of perhaps ten million. The colonies of Holland or the Netherlands, as that state is officially called, have an area of about 800,000 square miles and a population of approximately thirty-eight millions. The Pan-Germans looked with greedy eyes upon these spacious and inviting territories, belong- ing to countries which, in a military sense, were conveniently weak. SWITZERLAND The chief significance of Switzerland in the general history of modern Europe and the world of to-day lies, not in great events, nor in foreign policy, for she has constantly preserved a strict ^, neutrality, but in the steady and thorough-going evolution of neutrality of certain political forms and devices which have been increas- ^'t^e^and ingly studied abroad and which may ultimately prove of value to all self-governing countries. She has been a land of interesting and suggestive political experimentation. Switzerland is a federal state. Each canton, and there are twenty- five of them, has its own government, with its own definite a federal jurisdiction and powers. But all are united for certain s*^*^ national purposes. The national government resembles, in some 596 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE respects, that of the United States. There is a federal legislature, consisting of two houses ; the National Council, elected directly by the people, one member for every 20,000 inhabitants, and the Council of States, composed of two members for each canton. In the former, population counts ; in the latter, equality of the cantons is preserved. The two bodies sitting together 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 " President of the Swiss Confederation," but whose power is no greater than that of any of the other members. But more important than the organization of the federal govern- ment are certain processes of law-making which have been developed , . in Switzerland and which are the most democratic in character Law-making by the voters known to the world. The achievement in this direction has themse ves ^een SO remarkable, the process so interrupted, that it merits description. In all countries calling themselves democratic, the political ma- chinery is representative, not direct, that is, the voters do not make the laws themselves, but merely at certain periods choose people, their representatives, who make them. These laws are not ratified or rejected by the voters ; they never come before the voters directly. But the Swiss have sought, and with great success, to render the voters law-makers themselves, and not the mere choosers of law- makers, to apply the power of the democracy to the national life at every point, and constantly. They have done this in various ways. Their methods have been first worked out in the cantons, and later in the Confederation. Some of the smaller cantons have from time immemorial been pure democracies. The voters have met together at stated times. Six purely usually in the open air, have elected their ofiicials, and by a democratic show of hands have voted the laws. There are six such can- tons to-day. Such direct government is possible, because these cantons are small both in area and population. They are so small that no voter has more than fifteen miles to go to the voting place, and most have a much shorter distance. But in the other cantons this method does not prevail. In them the people elect representative assemblies, as in England and the United States, but they exercise a control over them not exer- DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS OF SWITZERLAND 597 cised in these countries, a control which renders self-government almost as complete as in the six cantons described above. They do this by the so-called referendum and initiative. In cantons the cantons where these processes are in vogue the people representa- do not, as in the Landesgemeinde cantons, come together in mass meeting and enact their own laws. They elect, as in other countries, their own legislature, which enacts the laws. The The government is representative, not democratic. But the referendum action of the legislature is not final,. only to be altered, if altered at all, by a succeeding legislature. Laws passed by the cantonal legislature may or must be referred to the people (referendum), who then have the right to reject or accept them, who, in other words, become the law-makers, their legislature being simply a kind of committee to help them by suggesting measures and by drafting them. The initiative, on the other hand, enables a certain number of voters to propose a law or a principle of legislation and to require that the legislature submit the proposal to the people, even The though it is itself opposed to it. If ratified, the proposal becomes initiative law. The initiative thus reverses the order of the process. The impulse to the making of a new law comes from the people, not from the legislature. The referendum is negative and preventive. It is the veto power given to the people. The initiative is positive, originative, constructive. By these two processes a democracy makes whatever laws it pleases. The one is the complement of the other. They do not abolish legislatures, but they give the people control whenever a sulhcient number wish to exercise it. The constitution of the canton of Zurich expresses the relation as follows : "The people exercise the law-making power with the assistance of the state legislature." The legislature is not the final law-making body. The voters are the supreme legislators. These two devices, the referendum and the initiative, are intended to establish, and do establish, government of the people, and by the people. They are of great interest to all who wish to make the practice of democracy correspond to the theory. By them Switzerland has more nearly approached democracy than has any other country. Switzerland has made great progress in education and in industry. The population has increased over a million since 1850 and now, numbers about three and a half millions. The population is not 598 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE homogeneous in race or language. About 71 per cent speak Ger- man, 2 1 per cent French, 5 per cent Itahan, and a small fraction speak Population ^ peculiar Romance language called Roumansch. But lan- and guage has not been a divisive force, as it has been elsewhere, ^"^^^ as, for example, in Austria and Hungary and in the Balkan peninsula, probably because no political advantages or disadvantages are connected with it. DENMARK Three other small nations of Europe are the Scandinavian states, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Of these the one that has been most intimately and also most disastrously affected by the The unhappy -' . -^ -^ lot of general course of events in Europe is Denmark. Denmark Denmark ^^^ dismembered twice during the nineteenth century. Her importance, her resources were therefore seriously reduced. The first dismemberment occurred at the time of the fall of Napoleon L During the later wars of Napoleon Denmark had been his ally, remaining loyal to the end, while other allies had taken favorable occasion to desert him. For this conduct the conquerors of Na- poleon punished her severely by forcing her, by the Treaty of Kiel, January, 18 14, to cede Norway to Sweden, which had sided with the conquerors. The condition of the Danish kingdom was, therefore, deplorable indeed. By the loss of Norway her population was reduced one-third. Her trade was ruined, and her finances were in the greatest disorder. The second dismemberment occurred fifty years later when Prussia and Austria declared war upon her in 1864, defeated her and Schieswig Seized the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. Again she and Holstein suffered grievously at the hands of the great military powers. Her territory was reduced by a third, her population by a million. For a year Prussia and Austria governed the two provinces in common ; for another year Prussia governed one, and Austria governed the other. Then Prussia and Austria went to war Annexed by ° Prussia, with each Other in 1866. The former conquered the latter, *^^^ expelled her from Germany, and incorporated both duchies outright in the Kingdom of Prussia. Out of this annexation of half a century ago arose a question des- tined more than fifty years later to receive the attention of the world at a time of general reorganization. Holstein was inhabited PRUSSIAN OPPRESSION OF SCHLESVVIG 599 by a population of about 600,000, who were Germans in race and language and sympathies. These people were glad to be united with Germany, though they would have preferred to enter the North German Confederation as a separate state, rather '^^^ ^ problein of than be incorporated in the Kingdom of Prussia. The other Schieswig province, Schieswig, had a mixed population. About 250,000 were Germans, about 150,000 were Danes. The latter desired to remain with Denmark and, had the principle of nationality been observed, they would have been permitted to. They spoke the Danish language, were Danish in blood, and were located in the northern part of Schieswig, contiguous to Denmark. It seemed at one moment as if their wishes would be satisfied, the justice of their claims being so obvious and unimpeachable. A provision was inserted in the Treaty of Prague which ter- SchlcswicT minated the Austro- Prussian War of 1866 to the effect " that the and the people of the northern district of Schieswig shall be again Treaty of reunited with Denmark if they shall, by a popular vote, express the desire to be." This provision was inserted on the insistence of Austria, at the moment that she was, under compulsion, leaving Germany. Had it been observed, there would have been no Schieswig question demanding solution in our day. But the promise that the people concerned might decide their future allegiance was never kept. This provision was a dead letter for twelve j^ears, from 1866 to 1878. Then in 1878 it was abrogated by the two powers, Germany and Austria, neither of which consulted the wishes of the Schleswigers. In that year Bismarck was able to render certain services to Austria in the Balkans, and in return he asked that Austria consent to "revise" this clause by formally declaring it "null and void." Austria agreed, and thus the Schles- wigers were left to the mercy of Prussia. Since that day the Prussian Government has oppressed the Danes of Schieswig as it has oppressed the people^ of Alsace-Lorraine, as it has long oppressed the Poles, acquired in the three infamous partitions of the eighteenth century. Prussia has ruled oppression of despotically. She has made every effort to stamp out the *^^^^^^°^^. 1 , • 1 • 1111 of Schieswig Danish language, to prevent its being taught m the schools, although it was the mother tongue of those attending them. In 1889 it was forbidden to teach Danish under any circumstances whatever. Nor might any Schieswig family engage a Danish tutor for purposes 6oo THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE of private instruction. Even parents were liable to prosecution if they gave systematic instruction in Danish to their children. Nor were they permitted to send their children to Denmark to be edu- cated. For fifty years the people of North Schleswig have been subjected to this ignoble and pitiless persecution, but they have not been Germanized or Prussianized. However, being few in numbers, less than 200,000, their grievances could gain no hearing, no redress. In the fall of 191 8, when Germany collapsed, these long maltreated people demanded that Prussia renounce all claims to them, and that they should be allowed to be united with their kin in the kingdom of Denmark. Whether their demand would be granted by the world in diplomatic congress assembled remained to be seen. SWEDEN AND NORWAY Another outstanding feature of recent Scandinavian history has been the relation of Sweden and Norway toward each other. We have seen that in 18 14 Norway was torn from Denmark by the Norway -^ . -^ declares her conquerors of Napoleon and given to Sweden. The Nor- independence ^ggjg^^s were not consultcd in this transaction. They were regarded as a negligible quantity, a passive pawn in the international game, a conception that proved erroneous, for no sooner did they hear that they were being handed by outsiders from Denmark to Sweden than they protested, and proceeded to organize resistance. Claiming that the Danish King's renunciation of the crown of Norway restored that crown to themselves, they proceeded to elect a king of their own. May 17, 18 14, and they adopted a liberal consti- tution, the Constitution of Eidsvold, establishing a Parliament, or Storthing. But the King of Sweden, to whom this country had been assigned by the consent of the powers, did not propose to be deprived of it ^ , . , by act of the Norwegians themselves. He sent the Crown Relations of -^ . » Norway Prmce, Bemadotte, mto Norway to take possession. A war and Sweden j-gg^i^-g^j between the Swedes and the Norwegians, the latter being victorious. Thereupon the great powers intervened so per- emptorily that the newly elected Norwegian king. Christian, resigned his crown into the hands of the Storthing. The Storthing (stor'-ting) then acquiesced in the union with Sweden, but only after having formally elected the King of Sweden as the King of Norway, thus RELATIONS OF SWEDEN AND NORWAY 60 1 asserting its sovereignty, and also after the King had promised to recognize the Constitution of 18 14, which the Norwegians had given themselves. Thus there was no fusion of Norway and Sweden. There were two kingdoms and one king. The same person was King of Sweden and King of Norway, but he governed each according to its own laws, and by means of separate ministries. No kingdoms Swede could hold oflfice in Norwav, no Norwegian in Sweden. ^^^^'^ *!»« ... "... ,. same king Each country had its separate constitution, its separate parlia- ment. In Sweden the Parlia- ment, or Diet, consisted of four houses, representing re- spectively the nobility, the clergy, the cities, and the peasantry. In Norway the Parliament, or Storthing, con- sisted of two chambers. Sweden had a strong aris- tocracy, Norway only a small and feeble one. Swedish gov- ernment and society were aris- tocratic and feudal, Norwegian very democratic. Norway, in- deed, was a land of peasants, who owned their farms, and fisherfolk, sturdy, simple, in- dependent. Each country had its own language, each its own capital, that of Sweden at Stockholm, that of Norway , at Christiania. The two kingdoms, therefore, were very dissimilar, with their different languages, different institutions, and different conditions. They had in common a king, and ministers of war and foreign affairs. The connection between the two countries, limited as it was, led during the century to frequent and bitter disagreements, ending a few years ago in their final separation. Under Oscar II, who ruled from 1872 to 1907, the relations between Sweden and Norway became acute, leading finally to complete Oscar II 6o2 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE rupture. Friction between theln had existed ever since 1814, and • had provoked frequent crises. The fundamental cause had lain in Increasing the different conceptions prevalent among the two peoples as to friction ^j^g i-ga,l nature of the union effected in that year. The Swedes between Norway and maintained that Norway was unqualifiedly ceded to them by Sweden ^^iq Treaty of Kiel in 18 14; that they later were willing to recognize that the Norwegians should have a certain amount of inde- pendence ; that they, nevertheless, possessed certain rights in Norway and preponderance in the Union. The Norwegians, on the other hand, maintained that the Union rested, not upon the Treaty of Kiel, a treaty between Denmark and Sweden, but upon their own act ; that they had been independent, and had drawn up a constitution for themselves, the Constitution of Eidsvold ; that they had voluntarily united themselves with Sweden by freely electing the King of Sweden as King of Norway ; that there was no fusion of the two states ; that Sweden had no power in Norway ; that Sweden had no preponderance in the Union, but that the two states were on a plane of entire equality. With two such dissimilar views friction could not fail to develop, and it began immediately after 18 14 on a question of trivial importance. The Norwegians were re- solved to manage their own internal affairs as they saw fit, with- out any intermixture of Swedish influence. But their King was also King of Sweden, and, as a matter of fact, lived in Sweden most of the time, and was rarely seen in Norway. Moreover, Sweden was in population much the larger partner in this uncom- fortable union. By the Constitution of Eidsvold the King had only a suspensive veto over the laws of the Storthing, the Norwegian Parliament. Abolition of ^^^ ^^^ could be enacted over that veto if passed by three Norwegian succcssive Storthings, with intervals of three years between no 1 1 y ^j^g votes. The process was slow, but sufficient to insure victory in any cause in which the Norwegians were in earnest. It was thus that, despite the King's veto, they carried through the abolition of the Norwegian nobility. Contests between the Storthing and the King of Norway, occurring from time to time, over the question of the national flag, of annual sessions, and other matters, kept alive the antipathy of the Norwegians to the Union. Mean- while, their prosperity increased. Particularly did they develop an important commerce. One-fourth of the merchant marine of the SEPARATION OF SWEDEN AND NORWAY 603 continent of Europe passed gradually into their hands. This gave rise to a question more serious than any that had hitherto arisen -■ — that of the consular service. About 1892 began a fateful discussion over the question of the consular service. The Norwegian Parliament demanded a separate consular service for Norwav, to be conducted by itself, to care „ -^ ' Norway and for Norway's commercial interests, so much more important Sweden than those of Sweden. This the King would not grant, on ^^p^''^*^ the ground that it would break up the Union, that Sweden and Norway could not have two foreign policies. The coniiict thus begun dragged on for years, embittering the relations of the Nor- wegians and the Swedes and inflaming passions until in 1905 (June 7) the Noru^egian Parliament declared unanimously "that the Union with Sweden under one king has ceased." The war feeling in Sweden was strong, but the Government finally decided, in order to avoid the evils of a conflict, to recognize the dissolution of the Union, on condition that the question of separation should be submitted to the people of Norway. Sweden held that there was no proof that the Norwegian people desired this, but was evidently of the opinion that the whole crisis was simply the work of the Storthing. That such an opinion was erroneous was established by the vote on August 13, 1905, which showed over 368,000 in favor of separation and only 184 votes in opposition. A conference was then held at Carlstad to draw up a treaty or agreement of dissolution. This agreement provided that any disputes arising in the future between the two countries, which could not be settled by direct diplomatic negotiations, should be referred to the Hague International Arbitration Tribunal. It further provided for the establishment of a neutral zone along the frontiers of the two countries, on which no military fortification should ever be erected. Later in the year the Norwegians chose Prince Charles of Denmark, grandson of the then King of Denmark, as King of Norway. There was a strong feeling in favor of a republic, but it seemed clear jja^jj^n yii that the election of a king would be more acceptable to the King of monarchies of Europe, and would avoid all possibilities of for- °''way eign intervention. The new king assumed the name of Haakon VII, thus indicating the historical continuity of the independent kingdom of Norway, which had existed in the Middle Ages. He took up his residence in Christiania. 6o4 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE On December 8, 1907, Oscar II, since 1905 King of Sweden only, . died, and was succeeded by his son as Gustavus V. In 1909 Sweden took a long step toward democracy. A franchise reform bill, which had long been before Parliament, was finally passed. Manhood suffrage was established for the Lower House, and the qualifications for election to the Upper House were greatly reduced. In Norway, men who have reached the age of twenty-five, and Suffrage in who have been residents of the country for five years, have the Norway right to vote. By a constitutional amendment adopted in 1907 the right to vote for members of the Storthing was granted to women who meet the same qualifications, and who, in addition, pay, or whose husbands pay, a tax upon an income ranging from about seventy-five dollars in the country to about one hundred dollars in cities. About 300,000 of the 550,000 Norwegian women of the age of twenty-five or older, thus secured the suffrage. They had previously, enjoyed the suffrage in local elections. Women are, since 191 3, entitled to vote under the same conditions as men. Sweden has a population of about five and a half millions ; Norway of less than two and a half millions. SPAIN In the Iberian peninsula are two of the lesser states of Europe, Spain and Portugal. Spain possesses a large territory and a popu- lation of twenty million, yet not since the sixteenth century has she played an important role in history. Between the Napoleonic period and the Franco- Prussian War her life flowed on heavily in the traditional channels of the old regime, of monarchical arbitrari- ness and pettiness, of intellectual and religious intolerance, of gov- ernmental incompetence, of economic lethargy. Against the stupidity and essential meaninglessness of such a system and against the monarch who personified it, Isabella II, a revolt finally broke out in 1868 which speedily drove the Queen into exile in France, whence she was not destined to return. The reign of the Spanish Bourbons was declared at an end, and universal suffrage, religious liberty, and freedom of the press were proclaimed. Then began a troubled and changeful period which lasted several years. A national assembly was elected by universal suffrage and the future government of Spain was left to its determination. It SPAIN DECLARED A REPUBLIC 605 pronounced in favor of a monarchy and against a republic. It then ransacked Europe for a king and finally chose Prince Leopold of Hohenzollern. His candidacy is important in history as having -ph h h been the immediate occasion of the Franco- Prussian War. zoUern In the end Leopold declined the invitation. candidacy In November, 1870, the crown was offered by a vote of 191 out of 311 to Amadeo, second son of Victor Emmanuel II, King of Italy .^ The smallness of the majorit}^ was ominous. The new king's Amadeo reign was destined to be short and troubled. Landing in Spain chosen king at the close of 1870, he was coldly received. Opposition to him came from several sources — from the Republicans, who were opposed to any monarch ; from the Carlists, who supported a pretender to the throne ; from the supporters of Alfonso, son of Isabella, who held that he was the legitimate ruler. Amadeo was disliked also for the simple reason that he was a foreigner. The clergy attacked him for his adherence to constitutional principles of government. 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 disorganized and more unpopular. Believing that the problem of giving peace to Spain was insoluble, and wearying of an uneasy crown, Amadeo, in February, 1873, abdicated. Immediately the Cortes or Parliament declared Spain a Republic by a vote of 258 to 32. But the advent of the RepubHc did not bring peace. Indeed, its history was brief and agitated. European powers, with the exception of Switzerland, withdrew dedares*^^ their diplomatic representatives. The United States alone ^p^"* ? recognized the new government. The Republic lasted from February, 1873, to the end of December, 1874. It established a wide suffrage, proclaimed religious liberty, proposed the complete separa- tion of the church and state, and voted unanimously for the imme- diate emancipation of slaves in Porto Rico. Then it fell. The causes of its fall were numerous. The fundamental one was that the Spaniards had had no long political training, essential for efficient self-government, no true experience in party man- agement. The leaders did not work together harmoniously, republic Moreover, the Republicans, once in power, immediately ^^^^'^ broke up into various groups, which fell to wrangling with each other. 1 Sixty-three voted for a republic ; the other votes were scattering or blank. 6o6 THE SiMALL STATES OF EUROPE The enemies of the Republic were numerous ; the Monarchists, the clergy, offended by the proclamation of religious liberty, and all those who profited by the old regime and who resented the reforms which were threatened. Also, the problems that faced the new gov- ernment 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 practically 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, 1874, in favor of Alfonso, son of Isabella II. The Republic fell Alfonso XII without a struggle. Alfonso, landing in Spain early in 1875, promises a ^nd being received in Madrid with great enthusiasm, as- constitu- . . ° . tionai sumed the government, promismg a constitutional mon- monarchy archy. Thus, six years after the dethronement of Isabella, her son was welcomed back as King. The new King was now seven- teen years of age. His reign lasted ten years, until his death in November, 1885. In 1876 a new Constitution was voted, the last in the long line of ephemeral documents issuing during the century from either monarch or Cortes or revolutionary Junta. Still in force, the Constitution of 1876 creates a responsible ministry, and a Parliament of two chambers. Spain possesses the machinery of parliamentary government, ministries rising and falling according to the votes of Parliament. Practically, however, the political wel- fare is largely mimic, determined by the desire for ofhce, not by devotion to principles or policies. Alfonso XII died in 1885. His wife, an Austrian princess, 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 many difficulties. Of these Christina the most serious was the condition of Cuba, Spain's chief proclaimed colony. An insurrection had broken out in that island in regent 1868, occasioned by gross misgovernment by the mother country. This Cuban war dragged on for ten years, cost Spain The Cuban nearly 100,000 men and $200,000,000, and was only ended insurrection [^ j^g by means of lavish bribes and liberal promises of reform in the direction of self-government. As these promises were THE SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR 607 not fulfilled, and as the condition of the Cubans became more unen- durable, another rebellion broke out in 1895. This new war, pros- ecuted with great and savage severity by Weyler, ultimately aroused the United States to intervene in the interests of humanity and civilization. A war resulted between the United States and Spain in 1898, which proved most disastrous to the latter. Her naval power was annihilated in the battles of Santiago and toe^Spai^sh- Cavite ; her army in Santiago was forced to surrender, and American she was compelled to sign the Treaty of Paris of 1898, by which she renounced Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philippine Islands. The Spanish Empire, which at the opening of the nineteenth century bulked large on the map of the world, comprising immense possessions in America and the islands of both hemispheres, has disappeared. Revolts in Central and South America, beginning when Joseph Napoleon becam^e King in 1808, 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, some land about her ancient presidios in Morocco, and a few small islands off the African coast. The disappearance of the Spanish colonial empire is one of the most significant features of the nineteenth century. Once one of the great world powers, Spain is to-day a state of inferior rank. In 1902 the present King, Alfonso XIII, formally assumed the reins of government. He married in May, 1906, a member of the royal family of England, Princess Ena of Battenberg. Pro- Needed found and numerous reforms are necessary to range the country feforms in the line of progress. Though universal suffrage was es- education] tablished in 1890, political conditions and methods have not ^n^ religion changed. Illiteracy is widespread. Out of a population of 20,000,000 '^perhaps 12,000,000 are iUiterate. In recent years attempts have been made to improve this situation ; also to reduce the influence of the Roman Catholic Church in the state. Nothing important has yet been accomplished in this direction. Liberty of public worship has only recently been secured for the members of other churches. PORTUGAL Portugal, too, the other Iberian state, droned along during most of the nineteenth century, under incompetent rulers and selfish and 6o8 THE SMALL STATES OF EUROPE enlightened privileged classes, the dreary monotony of her life only relieved by an occasional national calamity, as when, in 1822, her Portugal leading colony, Brazil, revolted and launched out upon an in- loses Brazil dependent career as an empire. Several reigns followed, tur- bulent in a petty way, or mild and uneventful, as the case might be. But, as the century wore on, and particularly under the reign of Carlos I, from 1899 to 1908, there was a ruffling of the waters and G owth f certain radical parties. Republican, Socialist, grew up. Dis- radicai content with so stagnant a regime expressed itself increasingly par les ^^ 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 controversy between Liberals, Radicals, and Conservatives developed astounding bitterness. Parliamentary institutions ceased to work normally ; necessary legislation could not be secured. On February i, 1908, the King and the Crown Prince were assassinated in the streets of Lisbon. The King's second son, Manuel, succeeded him. Manuel's reign was brief, for, in October, 19 10, a revolution broke out in Lisbon. After several Portu ai days of severe street fighting the monarchy was overthrown proclaimed and a Republic was proclaimed. The King escaped to Eng- epu ic 2^j^^^ j-jj. jhgQpi^Qg Braga, a native of the Azores, and for over forty years a distinguished man of letters, was chosen President. The constitution was remodeled and liberalized. The Church was separated from the State in 191 1, and State payments for the main- tenance and expenses of worship ceased. Since 19 10 Portugal, therefore, has been a Republic. The prob- lems confronting her are numerous and serious. She is burdened jjgj. with an immense debt, disproportionate to her resources, and problems entailing oppressive taxation. Although primary education ^^ has been compulsory since 191 1, over seventy per cent of the population over six years of age still remain illiterate. Portugal's population is about six millions. 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 republic. Portugal was destined to play a minor but honorable role in the European War, side by side with the Entente Allies. PORTUGAL AND THE GREAT WAR 609 The only other small states in Europe, besides those mentioned in this chapter, are the ones which have arisen during the nineteenth century in the Balkan peninsula, and whose history we will now examine. REFERENCES Holland : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 661-668 ; Vol. XII, pp. 243-250; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 238-244. Belgium: Cambridge Modern History, Vol. 'XI, pp. 669-674; Vol. XII, pp. 250-256; Seignobos, pp. 244-255 ; Ensor, Belgium (Home University Library), pp. 142-250; Ogg, The Governments of Europe, Chap. XXIX. History of Switzerland : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. VIII, pp. 234-261 ; Hug and Stead, Switzerland, pp. 382-421 ; Baker, A History of the Rise and Progress of the Swiss People, pp. 462-538; Lowell, Governments and Parties in Continental Europe, Vol. II, pp. 301-336; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 257-284. Political Institutions : Lowell, Vol. II, Chaps. XI and XII ; Ogg, Governments of Europe, pp. 405-439 ; Vincent, Government in Switzerland, pp. 180-300; Hobson, A Sovereign People: A Study of Siviss Democracy; Ogg; Social Progress in Contemporary Europe, Chap. XIV, pp. 200-212. Denm.\rk : Bain, A Political History of Denmark, Norway and Sweden, from ijij to igoo, Chap. XVI; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, Chap. XXIV, • pp. 691-697; Vol. XII, Chap. XI, pp. 290-293; Seignobos, Political History of Europe Since 1814, pp. 566-577. Sweden: Bain, Chap. XVII; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 677-690; Vol. XII, pp. 273-280; Seignobos, pp. 554-SS9- Norway: Bain, Chap. XVII; Cambridge Modern Ifistory,\o\. XI, pp. 677- 690; Vol. XII, pp. 280-290; Boyesen, History of Norway, pp. 516-538; Seigno- bos, pp. 559-566. Spain : Hume, Modern Spain, pp. 248-263 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 550-572; Vol. XII, pp. 257-269; Encyclopccdia Britannica, Yo\. XXV, pp. 556-569; Strobel, The Spanish Revolution, 1S68-1875; H. R. White- house, The Sacrifice of a Throne; J. L. M. Curry, Constitutional Government in Spain. Portugal: Stephens, Portugal, pp. 409-432; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 572-575; Vol. XII, pp. 269-272. The Republic of Portugal: International Year Book, 1910, pp. 599-600; 1911, pp. 582-584. CHAPTER XXXI THE DISRUPTION OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE AND THE RISE OF THE B.\LKAX STATES All through the period covered by this book there went on the process of the dismemberment of an empire which had once terrified Tx * .V the western world, threatening all Europe with subjection DecAv of the ^ r- -• Ottoman beneath her peculiarly galling and debasing yoke. During Empire ^|^^ ^^^ ^^,^ ccnturies that empire has been on the defensive and has steadily lost ground. In the eighteenth century Russia and Austria^ her neighbors, desvx>iled her of some of her valuable lands. In the nineteenth it was, in the main, her own subjects who rose against her, who tore the empire apart, and founded a number of independent states on soil that was formerly Turkish. The map of modem Europe shows no greater change as compared with the map a hundred years ago than in the Balkan peninsula. That change is the prcxiuct of a most eventful histor\-, the solution thus far given to one of the most intricate and contentious problems European <^es^on*™ statesmen have ever had to consider, the Eastern Question, the question, that is, of what should be done with Turkey. The Turks, an Asiatic, Mohammedan people, had conquered south- eastern Europe in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and had subdued many different races; the Greeks, claiming descent from the Greeks of antiquity ; the Roumanians, claiming descent from Roman colonists of the Empire ; the Albanians, and various branches Treatment *^^ ^^^^ great Slavic race, the Serbiai\s, Bulgarians, Bosnians, of subject and Montenegrins. Full of contempt for those whom they ^^^^^ had conquered, the Turks made no attempt to assimilate them or to fuse them into one body politic. They were satisfied with reducing them to subjection, and with exploiting them. These Christian peoples were eftaced for several centuries beneath Moham- medan oppression, their property likely to be confiscated, their tap. ui<¥t rxr ^k»ia 6>ii ft y - S^rlM^M ivy. -^d fyy iSos^a* h-- at -•• a ^ - 'f' • • •. -e diMii«mb«rm«nt of Ewftj>eai> Ttnrfo^jr-, Jl^ av(M^ vats Befafras^Je. tHf. OkEfcK WAR Of f?nr>fcirp.^i>y.^CT. wjtsy th«; GfftcfcA. The Oreefe* I*ad be^^- ht flryy) bat - ' ' • ' ' . ar ■ - >r> 6i2 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES to bend before Turkish arrogance, their prosperity was greater. Th condi There had occurred in the eighteenth century a remarkable tion of the intellectual revival, connected with the restoration and puri- Greeks fication of the Greek language. In 1 82 1 the Greeks rose in revolt and began a war which did not end until they had achieved their independence in 1 829. During the The Greek ^^^^ ^^'^ years they fought alone against the Turks. This war of inde- period was followed by a period of foreign intervention. The pen ence ^^^^ ^^^ ^^^ ^^ Utter atrocity on both sides, a war of extermina- tion, a war not limited to the armies. Each side, when victorious, murdered large numbers of non-combatants, men, women, and children. The war was ineffectually prosecuted by Turkey. The period was made still more wretched by the inability of the Greeks to work together harmoniously. Torn by violent factional quarrels, quarrels they Were unable to gain any pronounced advantage. On the among the other hand, Turkey, unable to conquer bv her own force, Greeks called upon the Pasha of Egypt, Mehemet Ali, for aid. This ruler had built up a strong, disciplined army, well-equipped and trained in European methods, a force far superior to any which the Sultan or the Greeks possessed. Under Ibrahim, the Pasha's son, an Egyptian army of 11,000 landed in the Morea early in 1825, and began a war of extermination. The Morea was rapidly conquered. The fall of Missolonghi after a remarkable siege lasting about a year (April, 1825-April, 1826), with the loss of almost all the inhabitants, and the capture the following year of Athens and the Acropolis, seemed to have completed the subjugation of Greece. Few places remained to be seized. From the extremity of their misfortune the Greeks were rescued by the decision of foreign powers finally to intervene. The sympathy of cultivated people had, from the first, been aroused for the country Foreign which had given intellectual freedom and distinction to the intervention world, this Mother of the Arts, which was now making an heroic and romantic struggle for an independent and worthy life of her own. Everywhere Philhellenic societies were formed under this inspiration of the memories of Ancient Greece. These societies, founded in France, Germany, Switzerland, England, and the United States, sought to aid the insurgents by sending money, arms, and volunteers, and by bringing pressure to bear upon the governments THE KINGDOM OF GREECE 613 to intervene. Many men from western Europe joined the Greek armies. The most illustrious of these was Lord Byron, who gave his life for the idea of a free Greece, dying of fever at Missolonghi in 1824. Finally the governments resolved to intervene. England, Russia, and France, by the Treaty of London of 1827, agreed to de- mand that Greece be made a self-governing state under Turkish sovereignty, be therefore placed in practically the same The battle situation as Serbia. The demand was refused b}^ the Turk- °* Navarino ish government. A naval battle at Navarino (na-va-re'-no)» October 20, 1827, resulted in the destruction of the Turkish fleet. The following year Russia declared war upon Turkey. This ^^^ between. Russo-Turkish war lasted over a year. In the first campaign Russia and the Russians were unsuccessful, but, redoubling their efforts, "^ ^^ and under better leadership, they crossed the Balkans, and marched rapidly toward Constantinople. The French meanwhile had sent an army into the Morea, and had forced the Egyptian troops to leave the country and sail for Egypt. The Sultan was obliged to yield and the Treaty of Adrianople was signed with Russia September 14, 1829. As the outcome of this series of events Greece became a kingdom, entirely independent of Turkey, its independence guaranteed by the three powers, Russia, England, and France. The Danubian principalities, Moldavia and Wallachia, were made prac- of the tically, though not nominally, independent. The Sultan's Kingdom of power in Europe was therefore considerably reduced. In 1833 Otto, a lad of seventeen, second son of King Louis I of Bavaria, became the first King of Greece. A new .Christian state had been created in southeastern Europe. THE CRIMEAN WAR Russia emerged from the Turkish War with increased prestige and power. It had been her campaign of 1829 that had brought the Sultan to terms. Greece had become independent, and was more grateful to her than to the other powers. Moldavia and Wallachia, still nominally a part of Turkey, were practically free of Turkish jhe prin- ; control, and Russian influence in them was henceforth para- "paiities mount. Several years later Russia was emboldened to attempt to extend her influence still farther, and this attempt precipitated a 6i4 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES reopening of the Eastern Question, and the first great European war since the fall of Napoleon I. Russia demanded the right of protection over all Greek Christians living in the Turkish Empire, of whom there were several millions. Russian The demand was loosely expressed and might possibly, if demands granted, grow into a constant right of intervention by Russia in the internal affairs of Turkey, ultimately making that country a War between ^^^^ ^^ vassal of the former. This, at any rate, was the Russia and assertion of Turkey. War therefore broke out between the ^^ ^^ two powers, Russia and Turkey, in 1853. Russia expected that the war would be limited to these two. In this she was shortly undeceived, for England and France and later Piedmont, came to the lition support of the Turks. Russia found herself opposed by four against powers instead of by one. England went to war because she Russia feared an aggressive and expanding Russia, feared for the route to India ; France because Napoleon III wished to pay back old grudges against Russia, wished revenge for the Moscow campaign of Napoleon I, wished also to tear up the treaties of 181 5, which sealed the humili- ation of France. Piedmont went to war merely to win the interest of England and France for Cavour's plans for the making of Italy. The war was chiefly fought in the Crimea, a peninsula in southern Russia, jutting out into the Black Sea and important because there The aUies Russia had Constructed, at Sebastopol, a great naval arsenal, invade the and bccausc the Russian navy was there. To seize Sebastopol, nmea ^^ ^-^j^ ^-^^ fleet, would destroy Russia's naval power for many years, and thus remove the weapon with which she could seriousl)^ menace Turkey. The siege of Sebastopol was the chief feature of the Crimean War. That siege lasted eleven months. Sebastopol was defended in a The siege of masterly fashion by Todleben (tot'-la-ben), the Russian Sebastopol engineer, and the only military hero of the first order that the war developed. Parts of this campaign, subsidiary to the siege, were the battles of the Alma, of Balaklava, rendered forever memor- able by the splendid charges of the heavy and light brigades, and of Inkermann, full of stirring and heroic incident. The Allies suffered fearfully from the weather, the bitter cold, the breakdown of the commissary department, and the shocking inefficiency of the medical and hospital service. These deficiencies were remedied in time, but only after a terrible loss of life. RESULTS OF THE CRIMEAN WAR 615 Early in 1855 (March 2), Nicholas I died, bitterly disappointed at the failure of his plans. Throughout the summer of 1855 the state of Sebastopol grew steadily worse and it finally fell, on September 8, 1855, after a siege of 336 days, and an enormous expenditure in human lives. The war dragged on for some weeks longer, but as most of the powers were anxious for peace, they agreed to enter the Congress of Paris, which met February 25, 1856, and which, after a month's Treaty of deliberation, signed the Treaty of Paris, March 30, 1856. p^"^ The treaty provided that the Black Sea should henceforth be neutral- ized, that it should not be open to vessels of war, even of those coun- tries bordering on it, Russia and Turkey, and that no arsenals should be established or maintained on its shores. I ts waters were to be open to the merchant ships of every nation. The navigation of the Danube was declared free. The Russian protectorate over Moldavia and W'allachia was abolished and they were declared independent under the suzerainty of the Porte. The most important clause was that by which the powers admitted Turkey to the European family of states, from which she had been previously excluded as a barbarous nation, and by which they also agreed no more to interfere with her internal affairs. This action was taken, it was said, because the Sultan had, "in his constant solicitude for the welfare of his subjects, issued a firman recording his generous intentions towards the Chris- tian population of his Empire." Thus Turkey was bolstered up- by the Christian powers of western Europe because they did not wish to see Russia installed in Constanti- nople. As a solution of the Eastern Question the war was a flat failure. The promise of the Sultan that the lot of his Christian sub- jects should be improved was never kept. Their condition became worse. REVOLTS IN THE BALKANS By the middle of the nineteenth century the only part of the Turkish Empire that had become independent was Greece ; Serbia and Moldavia-Wallachia were semi-independent and aspired to become completely so. The two latter provinces shortly declared themselves united under the single name of Roumania and, Rise of in 1866, they chose as their prince, a member of the Roman Roumania Catholic branch of the HohenzoUern family, Charles I. This 6i6 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES German prince, who was the ruler of Roumania until his death in 1914, was at that time twenty-seven years of age. He at Roumania"^ once set to work to study the conditions of his newly adopted country, ably seconded in this by his wife, a German princess, whose literary gift was to win her a great reputation, and was to be used in the interest of Roumania. As "Carmen Sylva" she wrote poems and stories, published a collection of Roumanian folklore, and encouraged the national idea by showing her preference for the native Roumanian dress and for old Roumanian customs. Charles I was primarily a soldier, and the great work of the early years of his reign was to build up the army, as he believed it essential if Roumania was to be really independent in her attitude toward Russia and Turkey. He increased the size of the army, equipped it with Prussian guns, and had it drilled by Prussian officers. The wisdom of this was apparent when the Eastern Question was again reopened. In 1875 the Eastern Question entered once more upon an acute phase. Movements began which were to have a profound effect upon the various sections of the peninsula. An insurrection Reopening , , . , ,1 • t t of the broke out m the summer of that year m Herzegovma, a prov- Eastern j^^^-g ^Qst of Serbia. For years the peasantry had suffered Question from gross misrule. The oppression of the Turks became so grinding and was accompanied by acts so barbarous and inhuman that the peasants finally rebelled. These peasants were Slavs, and „. . as such were aided by Slavs from neighboring regions, Bosnia, The insur- -' t. b b > i rection of Serbia, and Bulgaria. They were made all the more bitter erzegovma ]-,g(,g^^gg ^]^gy ^^^ Slavs in Serbia comparatively contented, as these were largely self- governed. Why should not they themselves enjoy as good conditions as others? Religious and racial hatred of Christian and Slav against the infidel Turk flamed up throughout the peninsula. Christians could not rest easy witnessing the out- rages committed upon their co-religionists. And just at this time those outrages attained a ferocity that shocked all Europe. Early in 1876 the Christians in Bulgaria, a large province of Euro- pean Turkey, rose against the Turkish officials, killing some of them. The Bui- '^^^ revenge taken by the Turks was of incredible atrocity. garian Pouring regular troops and the ferocious irregulars called atrocities Bashi-Bazouks into the province, they butchered thousands with every refinement or coarseness of brutality. In the valley of the THE RUSSO-TURKISH WAR 617 Maritza all but fifteen of eighty villages were destroyed. In Batak, a town of 7000 inhabitants, five thousand men, women, and children were savagely slaughtered with indescribable treachery and cruelty. These Bulgarian atrocities thrilled all Europe with horror. Glad- stone, emerging from retirement, denounced "the unspeakable Turk," in a flaming pamphlet. He demanded that England cease to support a government which was an affront to the laws of Gladstone's God, and urged that the Turks be expelled from Europe "bag denunciation and baggage." The public opinion of Europe was aroused. In July, 1876, Serbia and Montenegro declared war against Turkey, and the insurrection of the Bulgarians became general. The Russian people became intensely excited in their sympathy with their ^^^^-^^ ^^^ co-religionists and their fellow-Slavs. Finally the Russian Montenegro government declared war upon Turkey, April 24, 1877. The ^"^^'^w^"^ war lasted until the close of January, 1878. The chief feature of the campaign was the famous siege of Plevna which the Turks defended for five months but which finally surrendered. This broke Russia de- the back of Turkish resistance and the Russians marched blares war rapidly toward Constantinople. The Sultan sought peace, and on March 3, 1878, the Treaty of San Stefano was concluded between Russia and Turkey. By this treaty the Porte recognized Treaty of the complete independence of Serbia, Montenegro, and Rou- ^^'^ stefano mania, and made certain cessions of territory to the two former states. The main feature of the treaty concerned Bulgaria, which was made a self-governing state, tributary 'to the Sultan. Its frontiers were very liberally drawn. Its territory was to include nearly all of European Turkey, between Roumania and Serbia to the north, and Greece to the south. Only a broken strip across the peninsula, from Constantinople west to the Adriatic, was to be left to Turkey. The new state therefore was to include not only Bulgaria proper, but Roumelia to the south and most of Macedonia. Glad- stone's desire for the expulsion of the Turks from Europe "bag and baggage" was nearly realized. But this treaty was not destined to be carried out. The other powers objected to having the Eastern Question solved without their consent. England particularly, fearing Russian expansion j. j^^^ southward toward the Mediterranean, and believing that demands its Bulgaria and the other states would be merely tools of Russia, declared that the arrangements concerning the peninsula must be THE CONGRESS OF BERLIN 619 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 to determine the outcome of her victory. But as the powers were insistent, particularly England, then under the Beaconsfield administration, and as she was in no position for further hostilities, she yielded. The Congress of Berlin was held under the presidency of Bismarck, Beacons- ^, _ field himself representing England. It drew up the Treaty of gress of Berlin, which was signed July 13, 1878. By this treaty Mon- ^"^"^ tenegro, Serbia, and Roumania were rendered completely independent of Turkey. But Bulgaria was divided into three parts, one of which, called Macedonia, was handed back to Turkey, and another, called Eastern Roumelia, was to be still subject to the Sultan but to have a Christian governor appointed by him. The third part, Bulgaria, was still to be nominally a part of Turkey but was to elect its own prince and was to be self-governing. The powers in making these arrangements were thinking neither of Turkey, nor of the happiness of the people who had long been oppressed by Turkey. The Congress of Berlin, like the Congress of Vienna of 18 15, was indifferent or hostile to the legitimate national aspirations of oppressed peoples, and there- fore its work has had the same fate, it has been undone in one par- ticular and another and the process is continuing at the present moment, not yet quite completed. As far as humanitarian consider- ations were concerned the disposition of Macedonia was a „ Macedonia colossal blunder. Its people would have been far happier had they formed a part of Bulgaria. Owing to the rival ambitions of the great powers Macedonia's Christians were destined long to suffer an odious oppression from which more fortunate Balkan Christians were free. The same powers found the occasion convenient for taking various Turkish possessions for themselves. Austria was invited to "oc- cupy" and administer Bosnia and Herzegovina. England was to "occupy" Cyprus. All these territories were nominally still a part of the Turkish Empire. Their position was anomalous, unclear, and destined to create trouble in the future. 620 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES On the other hand, the benefits assured by the Treaty of BerUn were , , ^ considerable and they were due solely to Russia's interven- Advantages ■' ■' of the Treaty tion, though Russia herself drew little direct profit from her ° ^'"^ war. Three Balkan states, long in process of formation, Montenegro, Serbia, and Roumania, were declared entirely independ- ent, and a new state, Bulgaria, had been called into existence, though still slightly subject to the Porte. As a result of the treaty, European Turkey was greatly reduced, its population having shrunk from seventeen millions to six millions. In other words eleven million people or more had been emancipated from Turkish control. BULGARIA AFTER 1878 The Treaty of Berlin, while it brought substantial advantages, did not bring peace to the Balkan peninsula. Though diminishing the Unsatisfied posscssions of the Sultan, it did not satisfy the ambitions of ambitions ^he various peoples, it did not expel the Turk from Europe and thus cut out the root of the evil. Abundant sources of trouble remained, as the next forty years were to show. The history of the various states since 1878, both in internal 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 1878, made an autonomous state, but it did not attain complete inde- pendence, as it was nominally a part of the Turkish Empire, to which it was to pay tribute. The new principality owed its existence to Alexander of Russia, and for several years Russian influence predominated Battenberg \y^ j^. It was Started on its career by Russian officials. A constitution was drawn up establishing an assembly called the Sobranje. This assembly chose as Prince of Bulgaria, Alexander of Battenberg, a young German of twenty-two, a relative of the Russian Imperial House, supposedly acceptable to the Czar (April, 1879). The Bulgarians were grateful to the Russians for their aid. They recognized those who remained after the war was over as having Friction ^^ the rights of Bulgarian citizens, among others the right to between the }^old office. Russians held important positions in the Bulgarian and the ministry. They organized the military forces and became Russians officers. Before long, however, friction developed, and gratitude gave way to indignation at the high-handed conduct of UNION OF THE TWO BULGARIAS 621 the Russians, who plainly regarded Bulgaria as a sort of province or outpost of Russia, to be administered according to Russian ideas and interests. The Russian ministers were arrogant, and made it evident that they regarded the Czar, 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. Finally, in 1883, 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 action of the people of Eastern Roumelia in 1885 in expressing their desire to be united with Bulgaria. Prince Alexander agreed to this and assumed the title of "Prince of the Two Bulgarias." The powers protested against this unification, and would not recog- nize the change, but they refrained from doing anything further. Russia, however, incensed at the growing independence of the new state, which she looked upon as a mere satellite, resolved to read her a lesson in humility by organizing a conspiracy. The con- . . spirators seized Prince Alexander in his bedroom in the dead Prince of night, forced him to sign his abdication, and then carried ^^^^^^^' him off to Russian soil. Alexander was detained in Russia a short time, until it was supposed that the Russian party was thoroughly established in power in Bulgaria, when he was permitted to go to Austria. He was immediately recalled to Bulgaria, returned to receive an immense ovation, and then, at the height of his popularity, in a moment of weakness, abdicated, apparently overwhelmed by the continued opposition of Russia (September 7, 1886). The situation was most critical. Two parties advocating opposite policies con- fronted each other; one pro- Russian, believing that Bulgaria should accept in place of Alexander any prince whom the Czar should choose for her ; the other national and independent, rallying to the cry of " Bulgaria for the Bulgarians." The latter speedily secured control, fortunate in that it had a remarkable leader in the person of Stam- buloff, a native, a son of an innkeeper, a man of extraordinary firm- ness, suppleness, and courage, vigorous and intelligent. Ferdinand of Through him Russian efforts to regain control of the princi- Saxe-Coburg pality were foiled and a new ruler was secured. Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, twenty-six years of age, who was elected unanimously by the Sobranje, July 7, 1887. Russia protested against this action, and none of the great powers recognized Ferdinand. 622 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES Stambuloff was the most forceful statesman developed in the history of the Balkan states. He succeeded in keeping Bulgaria Dictatorship sclf -independent. During the earlier years of his rule Ferdi- of Stambuloff nand relied upon him, and, indeed, owed to him his continuance on the throne. He won the pretentious title of "the Bulgarian Bis- marck." His methods resembled those of his Teutonic prototype in more than one respect. For seven years he was practicall)^ dictator of Bulgaria. Russian plots continued. He repressed them piti- lessly. His one fundamental principle was Bulgaria for the Bul- garians. 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 Murder of multitude of enemies, and as a result he fell from power in 1894. stambuloff jj^ ^}^g following year he was foully murdered in the streets of Sofia. But he had done his work thoroughly, 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 ac- customed 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 Mace- donia, where, however, she was to encounter many rivals. She only awaited a favorable opportunity 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 Czar. The later history of Bulgaria may best be described in connection with the Balkan wars of 1912 and 1913- THE KIXGDOxM OF ROUMANIA 623 ROUMANIA AND SERBIA AFTER 1878 At the outbreak of the Russo-Turkish war in 1877, Roumania de- clared 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 condition designed to protect the Jews, who were numerous, but who had previously been without political rights. In 1 88 1 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 captured at Plevna, a perpet- ual reminder of what was her war of independence. Rou- proclaimed a mania has created an army on Prussian models of about ^'°2*^°™ 500,000 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 over seven millions. The area of Roumania is about 53,000 square miles. While mainly an agricultural country, in recent years her industrial development has been notable, and her commerce is more important than that of any other Balkan state. Her government 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 iqo7 the peasantry rose in insurrection, demanding agrarian Agrarian dis- reforms. As more than four-fifths of the population live upon turbances 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 intended to bring relief to the peasants from their severest burdens. Serbia, also, was recognized as independent by the Berlin 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, 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 discredited the 624 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES 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. The new king, Peter I, found his position for several years most unstable. A new and important chapter in the history of Serbia began with the Balkan War of 1912. GREECE AFTER 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 bound- aries, lacking Thessaly, which was peopled entirely by Greeks. The country 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 progressive state. King Otto reigned from 1833 to 1862. He was aided in his govern- ment by many Bavarians, who filled important positions in the army Reign of and the civil service. This German influence was a primary ^"° ^ cause of the unpopularity of the new regime. The beginnings were made, however, in the construction of a healthy national life. Athens was made the capital, and a university was established there. A police system was organized ; a national bank created. In 1844 Otto was forced to consent to the conversion of his absolute monarchy into a constitutional one. A parliament with two chambers, the Deputies being chosen by universal suffrage, was instituted. The political education of the Greeks then began. From the reopening of the Eastern Question by the Crimean. war Greece hoped to profit by the enlargement of her boundaries. The great powers, however, thought otherwise, and forced her to remain quiet. Because the Government did not defy Europe and insist Overthrow upon her rights, which would have been an insane proceeding, it of Otto became very unpopular. For this reason, as well as for des- potic tendencies. Otto was driven from power in 1862 by an insur- rection, and left Greece, never to return. A new king was secured in the person of a Danish prince, second son of the then King of Denmark. The new king, George I, ruled THE PROBLEM OF MACEDONIA 625 from 1863 to 191 3. That his popularity might be strengthened at the very outset, England in 1864 ceded to the kingdom the The Ionian Ionian Islands, which she had held since 1 8 15. This was the first islands enlargement of the kingdom since its foundation. A new constitution was established (1864) which abolished the Senate and left all parlia- mentary power in the hands of a single assembly, the Boule, elected by universal suffrage, and consisting of 192 members, with a four- year term. In 1881, mainly through the exertions of England, the Sultan was induced to cede Thessaly to Greece, and thus a Annexation second enlargement of territory occurred. This was in accord- °^ Thessaly ance with the promise of the Congress of Berlin that the Greek frontier should be "rectified." In 1897 Greece declared war against Turkey, aiming at the annexa- tion of Crete, which had risen in insurrection against Turkey. Greece was easily defeated, and was forced to cede certain parts of Thessaly to Turkey and give up the project of the annexation of Crete. After long negotiations among the powers, the latter island was made autonomous under the suzerainty of the Sultan, and under the direct administration of Prince George, a son of the King of Greece, who remained in power until 1906. A new problem, the Cretan, was thus pushed into the foreground of Greek politics. The financial condition of Greece is not sound. Her debt has grown enormously owing to armaments, the building of railroads, and the digging of canals. She has, however, increased in ^^ ^j . population and much has been accomplished ' in the direction outside of of popular education. Several millions of Greeks live outside ^^^^'^^ the Greek kingdom. Those inside are ambitious to have them included. Serbian, Bulgarian, and Greek rivalries met in the plains of Mace- donia, which each country coveted and which was inhabited by representatives of all these peoples, inextricably intermingled. The problem of Macedonia was further complicated by the rivalry of the great powers and by the revolution which broke out in Turkey itself in 1908. REVOLUTION IN TURKEY The Eastern Question entered upon a new and startling phase in the summer of 1908. In July a swift, sweeping, and pacific revolution occurred in Turkey. The Young Turks, a revolutionary, consti- 626 THE RISE OF THE BALKAN STATES tutional party, dominated by the political principles of western Europe, seized control of the government, to the complete surprise of The Young the diplomatists and public of Europe. This party consisted Turks Qf those who had been driven from Turkey by the despotism of the Sultan, Abdul Hamid II (ab'-dol ha-med'), and were resident abroad, chiefly in Paris, and of those who, still living in Turkey, dissembled their opinions and were able to escape expulsion. Its mem- bers desired the overthrow of the despotic, corrupt, and in- efficient government, and the creation in its place of a mod- ern liberal system, capable, by varied and thoroughgoing reforms, of ranging Turkey among progressive nations. Weaving their conspiracy in silence and with remarkable Revolution adroitness, they suc- of July, ceeded in drawing into '^° it the Turkish army, hitherto the solid bulwark of the Sultan's power. Then, at the ripe moment, the army refused to obey the Sultan's orders, and the conspirators demanded peremptorily by telegraph that the Sultan restore the Constitution of 1876, a constitution which had been granted by the Sultan in that year merely to enable him to weather a crisis, and which, having quickly served the purpose, had been immediately suspended and had remained suspended ever since. The Sultan, seeing the ominous defection of the army, complied at Restoration ^"^^ ^^^^ ^^^ demands of the Young Turks, "restored" on of the Con- July 24 the Constitution of 1876, and ordered elections for a parliament, which should meet in November. Thus an odious tyranny was instantly swept away. It was a veritable coup Abdl'l Hamid II From a photograph by W. and D. Downey. stitution THE TURKISH REVOLUTION 627 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, apparently, the main instrument for the achievement of freedom for the democracy. This military revolu- tion, completely successful and almost bloodless, was received with incredible enthusiasm throughout the entire breadth of the Sultan's dominions. Insurgents and soldiers, Mohammedans unan[mity and Christians, Greeks, Serbs, Bulgarians, Albanians, Arme- °* **^'^ movement nians, Turks, all joined in jubilant celebrations of the release from intolerable conditions. The most astonishing feature was the complete subsidence of the racial and religious hatreds which had hitherto torn and ravaged the Empire from end to end. The revolution proved to be the most fraternal movement in modern history. Picturesque and memorable were the scenes of universal reconciliation. The ease and suddenness with which this astounding change was effected proved the universality of the detestation of the reign and methods of Abdul Hamid II throughout all his provinces and among all his peoples. Was this the beginning of a new era or was it the beginning of the end of the Turkish Empire? It will be more convenient to examine this question a little later. REFERENCES Greek War of Independence:' Phillips, Modern Europe, pp. 135-167; Fyffe, History of Modern Europe, Chap. XV. Crimean War : Walpole, History of England Since 1815, Vol. VI, Chap. XXIV; Fyffe, pp. 824-865; Phillips, pp. 332-360; Murdock, Tlie Reconstruction of Europe, pp. 16-95; McCarthy, History of Our Own Titnes, Vol. I, pp. 433- 524; Forbes et al.. The Balkans. Reopening of the Eastern Question, 1877-1878 : Rose, Development of the European Nations, Vol. I, pp. 184-224; McCarthy, Vol. II, pp. 574-595. Russo-TuRKiSH War and the Congress of Berlin : Rose, Vol. I, pp. 225- 298; McCarthy, Vol. II, pp. 595-613; Walpole, History of Twenty-five Years, Vol. IV, pp. 98-187; Fyffe, pp. 1022-1052; Phillips, pp. 486-523. Bulgaria: Rose, Vol. I, pp. 264-299; Cambridge Modern History, Yol. XII, pp. 404-411; Seignobos, pp. 664-669; Miller, The Balkans, pp. 215-248. Roumania : Seignobos, pp. 640-648. Serbia and Montenegro : Seignobos, pp. 657-664. Greece : Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 419-428. CHAPTER XXXII RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER I Russia at the fall of Napoleon 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 European territory covered about 2,000,000 square miles. It was inhabited by a variet}^ 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 Kingdom of Poland had been ac- Russian quired in the three partitions at the close of the eighteenth conquests ccntury, 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 lan- guage, while the mass of peasants were Finns and Lithuanians, 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 Lu- theran. To the east and south were peoples of Asiatic origin, many of them Mohammedans in religion. There were in certain sections considerable bodies of Jews. All these dissimilar elements were bound together by their alle- giance to the sovereign, the Czar, a monarch of absolute, unlimited power. There were two classes of society in Russia — the nobility and the peasantry. The large majority of the latter were serfs of the Czar 628 LIBERALISM OF ALEXANDER I 629 and the nobility. The nobility numbered about 140,000 families. The nobles secured offices in the army and the civil service. They were exempt from many taxes, and enjoyed certain monopolies. ™ . , ■ r ■ , , r^, ThenobiUty 1 heir power over their serfs was extensive and despotic. They enforced obedience to their orders by the knout and by banish- ment to Siberia. The middle class of well-to-do and educated people, 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 of peasants little jhe better off than the serfs. This class was wretched, unedu- peasantry, cated, indolent, prone to drink excessively. In the "mir," or village community, however, it possessed a rudimentary form of com- munism and limited self-government. Over this vast and ill-equipped nation ruled the Autocrat of All the Russias, or Czar, an absolute monarch, whose decisions, expressed in the form of ukases or decrees,' were the law of the land. The Alexander I ruler in 181 5 was Alexander I, a man thirty-eight years of (1801-1825) age. Alexander stood forth as the most enlightened sovereign on any of the great thrones of Europe. In the reorganization of Europe in 18 14 and 1 81 5 he was, on the whole, a liberal force. He favored generous terms to the conquered French, he insisted that Louis XVIII should grant a constitution to the French people, he encouraged the aspira- tions 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 then transformed „ . ^ ^ Poland into the Kingdom of 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 henceforth to be an independent kingdom, not a part of Russia. The only connection between the two was in the person of the ruler. The Czar of Russia was to be King of Poland. Alexander granted a constitution to this state, creating a parliament, and promising liberty of the press and of religion. The Polish language was to be the official language. Poland enjoyed freer institutions at this moment than did either Prussia or Austria. The franchise was wider than that of England or France. Apparently, also, Alexander ' 630 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN considered his Polish experiment as preliminary to an introduction of similar reforms in Russia also. But Alexander's character was unstable. He was impressionable, changeable, easily discouraged. Metternich made it his especial Alexander business to frighten him out of his liberalism, which was the becomes chief obstacle in Europe to his policy of resolute reaction. He reac lonary ccasclessly played upon Alexander's essentially timid nature and it took him only three years to accomplish this conversion. Alexander then became a vigorous supporter of Metternich's policy of intervention which expressed itself in the various congresses and which made the name of the Holy Alliance a by-word among men. He became disappointed over his Polish experiment and began to infringe upon the liberties he himself had granted. He grew more and more reactionary and when he died, on December i, 1825, he left an administration dominated by a totally different spirit from that which had prevailed in the earlier years. THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS I He was succeeded by his brother Nicholas I, whose reign of thirty years, 1825-1855, was eventful. It was one of uncompromising Nicholas I absolutism, both at home and abroad. Nicholas was the great (1825-1855) bulwark of monarchical authority in Europe for thirty years. His system of government was one of remorseless, undeviating repression, through the agencies of a brutal police and an elaborate Systematic censorship. Punishments for Liberals of any sort were of repression great severity. The most harmless word might mean exile to Siberia, without any kind of preliminary trial. In twenty years perhaps 150,000 persons were thus exiled. Tens of thousands lan- guished in the prisons of Russia. Religious persecution was added to political. Nicholas's foreign policy was marked by the same characteristics, and made him hated throughout Europe as the most brutal autocrat His foreign on the Continent. He suppressed the Polish insurrection of poUcy 1830-1831, abolished the constitution granted by Alexander I, and incorporated Poland in Russia, thus ending the history of that kingdom, a history of only fifteen years. He waged two wars against Turkey, previously described, one in 1 828-1 829, and one in 1853- 1855. He interfered decisively to suppress the Hungarian revolutionists in THE EMANCIPATION OF THE SERFS 631 1849. He died in the middle of the Crimean War, though not until it was apparent that the prestige of his country, so overwhelming since Napoleon's flight from Moscow in 181 2, had been completely shattered. This war was not only a defeat but a disillusionment. The Government was proved to be as incompetent and as impotent as it was reactionary. It was clear that the state was honeycombed with abuses which must be reformed if it was to prosper. THE REIGN OF ALEXANDER II That the time for changes had come was clearly seen by the next occupant of the throne, Alexander II, who ruled from 1855 to 1881. Of an open mind, and desirous of ameliorating the conditions Alexander 11 of Russian life, he for some years followed a policy of reform. (1855-1881) . He relaxed the censorship of the press aud 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. Nearly all, practically nine-tenths, of the arable land of Russia, was owned by the imperial family and by the one hundred and forty thousand families of the nobility. The land was, therefore, „ ■' ' Prevailing generally held in large estates. It was owned by a small system of minority ; it was tilled by the millions of Russia who were '^°'* tenure serfs. It was easy for the Emperor to free the crown serfs, about 23,000,000, since no one could question the riglit of the state to do what it would with its own. Consequently the crown serfs were freed by a series of measures covering several years, 1859 to 1866. But the Edict of Emancipation, which was to constitute Alexander II's most legitimate title to fame, concerned the serfs of private land- xhe problem owners, the nobles. There were about 23,000,000 of these, °* serfdom also. These private landlords reserved a part of their land for themselves, requiring the serfs to work it without pay, generally three days a week. The rest of the land was turned over to the serfs, who cultivated it on their own account, getting therefrom what support they could, hardly enough, as a matter of fact, for sustenance. The serfs were not slaves in the strict sense of the word. The}' 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 otherwise had practically 632 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN unlimited authority over his serfs. They possessed no rights which, in practice, he was bound to respect. Sucli a system, it is needless to say, offended the conscience of the age. On March 3, 1861, the Edict of Emancipation was issued. It abol- ished serfdom throughout the Empire, and it won for Alexander the The Edict of popular title of "the Czar Liberator." This manifesto did Emancipation ^ot merely declare the serfs free men ; but it undertook also to solve the far more difficult problem of the ownership of the soil. The Czar felt that merely to give the serfs freedom, and to leave all the land in the possession of the nobles, would mean the creation of a great pro- letariat possessing no property, therefore likely to fall at once into a posi- tion of economic depend- ence upon the nobles, which would make the gift of freedom a mere mockery. Moreover, the peasants were firmly con- vinced that they were the rightful owners of the lands which they and their an- cestors for centuries had lived upon and cultivated, and the 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. On the other hand, to give them the land with their freedom would mean the ruin of the nobility as a class, considered essential to the state. The consequence of this conflict of interests was a compromise, satisfactory to neither party, but more favorable to the nobility than to the peasants. The land problem ALf:XAXDER THE QUESTION OF THE LAND 633 The lands were divided into two parts. The landlords were to keep one ; the other was to go to the peasants either individually or collectively as members of the village community or mir to Division of which they belonged. But this was not given them outright ; ^^^ ^^'^^ the peasant and the village must pay the landlord for the land assigned them. As they were not in a position to do this the state was to advance the money, getting it back from the peasant and the mir in easy installments. These installments were to run for forty- nine years, at the end of which time they would cease and the peasant and the mir would then own outright the lands they had acquired. This arrangement was a great disappointment to the peasants. Their newly acquired freedom seemed a doubtful boon in the light of this method of dividing the land. Indeed, they could not see ^. •^ Disappoint- that they were profiting from the change. Personal liberty ment of the would not mean much, when the conditions of earning a liveli- P^^^^°'''y hood became harder rather than lighter. The peasants regarded the land as their own. But the state guaranteed forever 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 the}^ had less land for their own use than in the pre-emancipation days, and that they had to pay the landlords, through the state, more than ^^ , ^ the lands which they did receive were worth. The Edict of question not Emancipation did not therefore bring either peace or pros- ^°'^®^ perity to the peasants. The land question became steadily more acute during the next fifty years owing to the vast increase of popu- lation and the consequent greater pressure upon the land. The Russian peasant lived 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. Theoretically, at least, every man was free. Moreover, the peasants, though faring ill, yet fared better than had the peasants of Prussia and Austria at the time of their liberation. The abolition of serfdom was the greatest act of Alexander II's reign, but it was only one of several liberal measures enacted at this time of general enthusiasm. A certain amount of local self- Domestic government was granted, reforms in the judicial system were refonns carried through, based upon a study of the systems of Europe and the 634 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN United States, the censorship of the press was relaxed, educational facilities were somewhat developed. This hopeful era of reform was, however, soon over, and a period of reaction began, which characterized the latter half of Alexander's End of the reign and ended in his assassination in 1881. There were era of several causes for this change : the vacillating character of the re orm monarch himself, taking fright at his own work ; the disap- pointment felt by many who had expected a millennium, but who found it not ; the intense dislike of the privileged and conservative classes for the measures just described. Just at this time, when the attitude of the Emperor was changing, when public opinion was in this fluid, uncertain state, occurred an The Polish event which immensely strengthened the reactionary forces, a insurrection new insurrection of Poland. After the failure of their attempt ° ^ ^ to achieve independence in 1831 the Poles had remained quiet, the quiet of despair. As long as Nicholas I lived they were ruled with the greatest severity, and they could not but see the impracti- cability of any attempt to throw off their chains. But the accession of Alexander II aroused hopes of better conditions. The spirit of nationalism revived, greatly encouraged by the success of the same spirit elsewhere. The Italians had just realized their aspiration, the creation of an Italian nation — not solely by their own efforts but by the aid of foreign nations. Might not the Poles hope for as much ? Alexander would not for a moment entertain the favorite idea of the Poles, that they should be independent. He emphatically told them that such a notion was an idle dream, that they "must abandon all thoughts of independence, now and forever impossible." This un- compromising attitude, coupled with repressive measures, irritated the Poles to the point of desperation. Finally in 1863 an insurrection broke out, aiming at independence. It was put down with vigor and without mercy. The only hope for the Poles lay in foreign interv.en- tion, but in this they were bitterly disappointed. England, France, and Austria intervened three times in their behalf, but only by dip- lomatic notes, making no attempt to give emphasis to their notes by a show of force. Russia, seeing this, and supported by Prussia, treated their intervention as an impertinence, and proceeded to wreak her vengeance. It was a fearful punishment she meted out. A process of Russification was now vigorously pursued. The Russian language was prescribed for the correspondence of the THE RISE OF NIHILISM 635 officials and the lectures of the university professors, and the use of Polish was forbidden in churches, schools, theaters, news- a policy of papers, in business signs, in fact, everywhere. Russification It was not long before Alexander, always vacillating, gave up all dallying with reforms and relapsed into the traditional repressive ways of Russian monarchs. This reaction aroused intense discontent and engendered a movement which threatened the very existence of the monarchy itself, namely. Nihilism. The Nihilists belonged to the intellectual class of Russia. Reading the works of the more radical philosophers and scientists of western Europe, and reflecting upon the foundations of their own Rise of national institutions and conditions, they became most de- Nihilism structive critics. They were extreme individualists who tested every human institution and custom by reason. As few Russian institu- tions could meet such a test, the Nihilists condemned them all. Theirs was an attitude, first of intellectual challenge, then of revolt against the whole established order. Shortly, Socialism was grafted upon this hatred of all established institutions. 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 program, 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 campaign in Russia, realizing that nothing could be done unless the millions of peasants were shaken out of their stolid acquiescence in the Nihilist prevalent order which weighed so heavily upon them. This propaganda extraordinary movement, called "going in among the people," became very active after 1870. Young men and women, all belong- ing to the educated class, and frequently to noble families, became day laborers and peasants in order to mingle with the people, to arouse 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 discouraging conditions. It is estimated that, between 1872 and 1878, between two and three thousand such missionaries were active in this propaganda. Their efforts, however, were not rewarded with success. The peasantry 636 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN remained stolid, if not contented. Moreover, this campaign of education and persuasion was broken up wherever possible by the ubiquitous and lawless police. Many were imprisoned or exiled to Siberia. A pacific propaganda being impossible, one of violence seemed to the more energetic spirits the only alternative. As the Government A policy of held the people in a subjection unworthy of human beings, terrorism a,s 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 particularly odious. In turn many of the revolutionists were executed. Finally the terrorists determined to kill the Czar as the only way of overthrowing the whole hated arbitrary and oppressive system. Several attempts were made. In April, 1879, a schoolmaster, upon°the Solovicf, fired five shots at the Emperor, none of which took Emperor's effect. In December of the same year a train on which he life 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. Dyna- mite was exploded, ten soldiers were killed and fifty-three wounded in the guard-room directly overhead, and the floor of the dining room was torn up. The Czar narrowly escaped because he did not go to dinner at the usual hour. St. Petersburg was by this time thoroughly terrorized. Alexander now appointed Loris Melikoff practically dictator. Melikoff sought to inaugurate a milder regime. He released hundreds of prisoners, . „ and in many cases commuted the death sentence. He urged Alexander II -^ '^ and Loris the Czar to grant the people some share in the government, Melikoff believing that this would kill the Nihilist movement, which was a violent expression of the discontent of the nation with the ABSOLUTISM OF ALEXANDER III 637 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 hesi- tation and mental perturbation the Czar ordered, March 13, 1881, Melikoff 's scheme to be published in the official journal. But . . ,. '■ •' Assassination on that same afternoon, as he was returning from a drive, of Alexander 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 tp aid the injured. He was horribly mangled, and died within an hour. Thus perished the Czar 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. 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 powerful physique. His .. ^ education had been chiefly military. He was a man of firm m and resolute rather than large or active mind. (1881-1894) It shortly became clear that he possessed a strong, inflexible character, that he was a thorough believer in' absolutism, and was determined to maintain it undiminished. He assumed an attitude of defiant hostility to innovators and liberals. His Rigorous policy of reign, which lasted from 1881 to 1894, was one of reversion to reaction the older ideals of government and of unqualified absolutism. The terrorists were hunted down, and their attempts practically ceased. The press was thoroughly gagged, university professors and students were watched, suspended, exiled, as the case ^^^ might be. The reforms of Alexander II were in part undone, terrorists and the secret police, the terrible Third Section, was greatly ^^^^^^ augmented. Liberals gave up all hope of any improvement during this reign, and waited for better days. Under Alexander III began the inhuman persecutions of the Jews which have been so dark a feature of recent Russian history. The great Jewish emigration to the United States dates from this time. 638 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN In one sphere only was there any progress in this bleak, stem reign. That sphere was the economic. An industrial revolution began then which was carried much farther under his successor. Russia had been for centuries an agricultural country whose agriculture, moreover, was of the primitive type. W^hatever industries existed were mainly of the household kind. Russia was one of the poorest countries in the world, her immense resources being undeveloped. 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 witte, Finance and Commerce of Sergius de Witte. Witte believed Minister of ^}^^|- Russia, the largest and most populous country in Europe, a world in itself, ought to be self-sufficient, that as long as it remained chiefl}^ agricultural it would be tributary to the industrial nations for manufactured articles, that it had abundant resources, in raw material and in labor, to enable it to supply its own needs Witte's i^ ^hey were but developed. He believed that this develop- industriai ment could be brought about by the adoption of a policy of Dolicv protection. Was not the astonishing industrial growth of Germany and of the United States convincing proof of the value of such a policy? By adopting it for Russia, by encouraging for- eigners to invest heavily in the new protected industries, by showing them that their rewards would inevitably be large, he began and carried far the economic transformation of his country. Immense amounts of foreign capital poured in and Russia advanced in- dustrially in the closing decade of the nineteenth century with great swiftness. One thing more was necessary. Russia's greatest lack was good means of communication. She now undertook to supply this want Extensive ^^ extensive railway building. For some years before Witte raUway _ assumed office, Russia was building less than 400 miles of construction railway a year ; from that time on for the rest of the decade, she built nearly 1400 miles a year. The most stupendous of these undertakings was that of a trunk line connecting Europe with the Pacific Ocean, the great Trans-Siberian railroad. For this Russia borrowed vast sums of money in western Europe, principally in France. Begun in 1891, the road was formally opened in 1902. It has reduced the time and cost of transportation to the East about ACCESSION OF NICHOLAS II 639 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 was destined to have momentous consequences, some of which were quickly apparent. Cities grew rapidly, a large laboring class Rise of labor developed, and labor problems of the kind familiar to western problems countries, socialistic theories, spread among the working people ; also a new middle class of capitalists and manufacturers was created which might some day demand a share in the government. These new forces would, in time, threaten the old, illiberal, unprogressive regime which had so long kept Russia stagnant and profoundly un- happy. 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 humiliating war with Japan. THE REIGN OF NICHOLAS II Alexander III died in 1894, ^I'^d was succeeded by his 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. For ten years the young Czar pursued the policy of Accession of his father with scarcely a variation save in the direction of Nicholas 11 greater severity. A suggestion that representative institutions might be granted was declared "a senseless dream." The govern- ment was not one of law but of arbitrary power. Its instruments were a numerous and corrupt body of state officials and a ruthless, active police. No one was secure against arrest, imprisonment, exile. The most elementary personal rights were lacking. The professional and educated man was in an intolerable position. If a professor in a university, he was watched by the police, and was likely to be removed at any moment as was Professor Milyoukov, a historian of distinguished attainments, for no other reason „ " Persecution than "generally noxious tendencies." If an editor, his po- of the " in - sition was even more precarious, unless he was utterly servile *®"^*^*"^'^ to the authorities. It was a suffocating atmosphere for any man of the slightest intellectual independence, living in the ideas of the present age. The censorship grew more and more rigorous, and included such books as Green's Short History of the English People, 640 RUSSIA TO THE WAR WITH JAPAN and Bryce's American Commonwealth. Arbitrary arrests of all kinds increased from year to" year as the difficulty of thoroughly bottling up Russia increased. Students were the objects of 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 of this kind was not likely to err from excess of sym- pathy with the subject nationalities, such as the Poles and the Finns. Attack upon In Finland, indeed, its the Finns arbitrary course at- tained its climax. Finland had been acquired by Russia in 1809, but on liberal terms. It was not incorporated in Russia, but continued a Grand Duchy, with the Emperor of Russia as simply Grand Duke. It had its own Parliament, its Fundamental Laws or consti- tution, to which the Grand Duke swore fidelity. These Fundamental Laws could not be altered or interpreted or repealed except with the con- sent of the Diet and the Grand Duke. Finland was a con- stitutional state, governing it- self, connected with Russia in the person of its sovereign. It had its own army, its own currency and postal system. Under this liberal regime it prospered greatly, its population increasing from less than a million to nearly three millions by the close of the century, and was, according to an historian of Russia, at least thirty years in advance of that country in all the appliances of material civiliza- tion. The sight of this country enjoying a constitution of its own and a separate organization was an ofifense 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. Nicholas II RELATIONS WITH THE ORIENT 641 It was carried much farther by Nicholas II, who, on February 15. 1899, issued an imperial manifestd which really abrogated the constitution of that country. The Finns began a stub- of the* '°° born but apparently hopeless struggle for their historic rights Finnish con- . , , r , , , , r ■^^■ StltUtlOn With the autocrat of one hundred and forty million men. Under such a system as that just described men could be terrorized into silence ; they could not be made contented. Disaffection of all classes, driven into subterranean channels, only increased, awaiting the time for explosion. That time came with the disastrous defeat of Russia in the war with Japan in 1904-1905, a landmark in contempo- rary history. To understand recent events in Russia it is necessary to trace the course of that war whose consequences have been profound, and to show the significance of that conflict we must interrupt this „. , , ^ '^ Rise of the narrative of Russian history in order to give an account of Far Eastern the recent evolution of Asia, the rise of the so-called Far *^"^^''°° Eastern Question, and the interaction of Occident and Orient upon each other. REFERENCES Russia in 1815 : Skrine, Expansion of Russia, pp. 8-13; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. X, Chap. XIII, pp. 413-439. Reign of Alexander I : Skrine, pp. 15-85. Reign of Nicholas I : Skrine, pp. 86-164. Alexander II and the Emancipation of the Serfs : Skrine, pp. 1 78-191 ; Wallace, Russia, Chaps. XXVII-XXXIII ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 613-627. Alexant)er II and Nihilism: Rose, Development of the European Nations, Vol. I, pp. 344-366; Skrine, pp. 214-222, 265-270; Wallace, Chap. XXXIV; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XI, pp. 628-630. Reign of Alexander III : Skrine, pp. 271-308; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 312-321. Reign of Nicholas II : Skrine, pp. 309-348 ; Wallace, Chaps. XXXVI- XXXIX. Poland Since 1862 : Phillips, Poland (Home University Library), pp. 125- 250; Orvis, A Brief History of Poland, Chaps. VIII-X. CHAPTER XXXIII THE FAR EAST ENGLAND, FRANCE, AND RUSSIA IN ASIA Europe has not only taken possession of Africa, but she has taken possession of large parts of Asia, and presses with increasing force upon the remainder. England and France dominate southern France, and Asia by their control, the former of India and Burma, the Russia in 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 tl"ue of England and of France, and she has been an Asiatic power much longer than they, for she began her expansion into Asia before the Pilgrims came to America. 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 Russia began to devote serious attention to Asia as a field for colonial and Russian Commercial expansion. Siberia was regarded merely as a con- expansion vcnient 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 opposition she encountered, namely, contact , with the ocean, free outlet to the world. Russia's coast line, Russia seeks access to the either in Europe or Asia, had no harbors free from ice the year ^^^ round. Blocked decisively and repeatedly from obtaining such in Europe at the expense of Turkey, she has sought them in Eastern Asia. This ambition explains her Asiatic policies. In 1858 she acquired from China the whole northern bank of the Amur and two years later more territory farther south, the Maritime Province, at 642 CONDITIONS IN CHINA 643 the southern point of which she founded as a naval base Vladivostok, which means the Dominator of the East. But Vladivostok was not ice-free in winter. Russia still lacked her longed-for outlet. CHINA Between Russian Asia on the north, and British and French Asia on the south, lies the oldest nation of the world, China, and one more extensive than Europe and probably more populous, with The civUiza- more than 400,000,000 inhabitants. It is a land of great tion of China navigable rivers, of vast agricultural areas, and of mines rich in coal and metals, as yet largely undeveloped. The Chinese were a highly civilized people long before the Europeans were. They preceded 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 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 industry, and have despised the arts of war. China had always lived a life of isolation, despising the outside world. She had no diplomatic representatives in any foreign coun- try, nor were any foreign ambassadors resident in Peking, xhe isoia- Foreigners were permitted to trade in only one Chinese port, *'°'* °^ China Canton, and even there only under vexati6us and humiliating conditions. It was not likely that a policy of such isolation could be perma- nently maintained in the modern age, and as the nineteenth century progressed it was gradually shattered. The Chinese desired nothing better than to be let alone. But this was not to be. By a long series of aggressions extending to our own day various European powers have forced China to enter into relations with them, to make concessions of territory, of trading privileges, of diplomatic inter- course. In this story of European aggression the Opium War The Opium waged by Great Britain against China from 1840 to 1842 W" was decisive, as showing how easy it was to conquer China. The Chinese had forbidden the importation of opium, as injurious to their people. But the British did not wish to give up a trade in which the profits were enormous. The war, the first between China 644 THE FAR EAST and a European power, lasted two years and ended in the victory of Great Britain. The consequences, in forcing the doors of China open to European influence, were important. By the Treaty of The treaty Nanking, 1 842, she was forced to pay a large indemnity, to ports open to British trade four ports in addition to 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 commercial stations of the British Empire. Other powers now proceeded to take advantage of the British success. The United States sent Caleb Cushing to make a com- mercial treaty with China in 1844, and before long France, Belgium, Holland, Prussia, and Portugal established trade centers at the five treaty ports. The number of such ports has since been increased to over forty. China was obliged to abandon her policy of isolation and to send and receive ambassadors. A period of critical importance in China's relations with Europe began in the last decade of the nineteenth century as a result of a war with Japan in 1 894-1 895. To appreciate this war it is necessary to give some account of the previous evolution of Japan. JAPAN The rise of Japan as the most forceful state in the Orient 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 profoundly 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 and about four thousand smaller ones. It covered, in 1894, an area of 147,000 Description square miles, an area smaller than that of California. The of Japan main islands form a crescent, the northern point being op- posite 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, Fujiyama, rising to a height of 12,000 feet. Of volcanic origin, numerous craters are still active. Earthquakes are not uncommon, 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 EMERGENCE OF JAPAN 645 of the Rising Sun. Only about one-sixth of the land is under culti- vation, owing to its mountainous character, and owing to the prev- alent mode of farming. Yet into this small area is crowded a population of about fifty millions, 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 civilization from China, but in many respects they differed greatly from the Chinese. The virtues of the soldier were held in high esteem. Japanese Patriotism was a passion, and with it went the spirit of unques- "vUization tioning 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. The Japanese had followed the same policy of seclusion as had the Chinese. Japan had for centuries been almost hermetically sealed against the outside world. On the peninsula of Deshima , ° ^ Japanese there was a single trading station which carried on a slight policy commerce with the Dutch. This was Japan's sole point of ** isoation, contact 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 Commodore Perry in 1853, sent out by the Government of the United States, commodore American sailors, engaged in the whale fisheries in the Pacific, Perry v/ere 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 protection for American sailors and property thus wrecked, and permission for American ships to put into one or more Japanese ports, in order to obtain necessary supplies and to dispose of their cargoes. He presented these demands to the Gov- ernment. He announced further that if his requests were refused, he would open hostilities. The Government granted certain imme- diate 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 governing classes was very earnest. Some believed in maintaining the old policy of complete 646 THE FAR EAST exclusion of foreigners. Others, however, beUeved this impossible, owing to the manifest military superiority of the foreigners. They Folic of thought it well to enter into relations with them in order to isolation learn the secret of that superiority, and then to appropriate own -^ £^^ 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 a treaty was made with him (1854) by which two ports were opened to American ships. This was a mere beginning, but the important fact was that Japan had, after two centuries of seclusion, entered into relations with a foreign state. Later other and more liberal treaties were concluded 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 precip- itated a civil war, the outcome of which discussion and conflict was the triumph of the party that believed in change. After 1868 Japan R 'd revolutionized her political and social institutions in a few years, formation of adopted with ardor the material and scientific civilization of Japan ^^^ West, made herself in these respects a European state, and entered as a result upon an international career, which has already profoundl}^ modified the world, and is likely to be a constant and 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 change unique in the history of the world, and notable for the audacity and the intelligence displayed. The entrance upon this course was a direct result of Perry's expedition. The Japanese revolution will always remain an astounding story. Once begun it proceeded with great rapidity. In place of the former military class arose an army based on European models. Military service was declared universal and obligatory in 1872. The German system, which has revolutionized Europe, began to revolutionize Asia. The first railroad was begun in 1 870 between Tokio and Yokohama. Thirty years later there were over 3,600 miles in operation. To-day there are 6,000. The educational methods of the West were also intro- Reform in duced. A University was established at Tokio, and later education another at Kioto. Professors from abroad were induced to accept important positions in them. Students showed great enthusi- WAR BETWEEN CHINA AND JAPAN 647 asm in pursuing the new learning. Public schools were created rapidly, and by 1883 about 3,300,000 pupils were receiving education. In 1873 the European calendar was adopted. The codes of law were thoroughly remodeled after an exhaustive study of European systems. Finally a constitution was granted in 1889, after eight years of careful elaboration and study of foreign models. It coraTe" a^con- established a parliament of two chambers, a House of Peers stitutionai st3.te (the so-called "Elder Statesmen") and a House of Represent- atives. The vote was given to men of twenty-five years or older who paid a certain property tax. The constitution reserved very large powers for the monarch. Parliament met for the first time in 1890. The test of reformed Japan came in the last decade of the nineteenth century and the first of the twentieth, and proved the solidity of this amazing achievement. During those years she fought and defeated two powers apparently much 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 was clearly established broke out with China in 1894. The immediate cause was the relations of the two powers to Korea. Korea was a ^ Cause of the kingdom, but both China and Japan claimed suzerainty over war with it. Japan had an interest 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, in- vaded Manchuria, where they seized the fortress of Port Arthur, the strongest position in eastern Asia, occupied the Liao-tung penin- sula on which that fortress is located, and prepared to advance Treaty of toward Peking. The Chinese, alarmed for their capital, Shimonoseki agreed to make peace, and signed the Treaty of Shimonoseki (April 17, 1895), 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 648 THE FAR EAST (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 Intervention , , 01 1 1 of Russia, a promment part for the next ten years. She soon showed France, and ^j^g^^ gj^g entertained plans directly opposed to those of the Germany ^ . r-r- Japanese. She induced France and Germany to join her in forcing them to give up the most important rewards of their victory, in ordering them to surrender the Liao-tung peninsula on the ground that the possession of Port Arthur threatened the independence of Peking and would be a perpetual menace "to the peace of the Far East." This was a bitter blow to the Japanese. Recognizing, how- Ta an ever, that it would be folly to oppose the three great military relinquishes powers of Europe, they yielded, restored Port Arthur and the peninsula to China, and withdrew from the mainland, indignant at the action 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 integrity of China and the peace of the East was not long in manifesting itself. In 1897 two German missionaries were murdered in the province of Shantung. The German Emperor immediately sent a fleet to German demand redress. As a result Germany secured (March 5, 1898) aggression from China a ninety-nine year lease of the fine harbor of Kiauchau, with a considerable area round about, and extensive com- mercial and financial privileges in the whole province of Shantung. Indeed, that province became a German "sphere of influence." The action encouraged Russia to make further demands. She acquired from China (March 27, 1898) a lease for twenty-five years „ . of Port Arthur, the strongest position in eastern Asia, which, Russia se- 'or- i > cures Port 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 China to open a dozen new ports to the trade of the world, and to grant extensive rights to establish factories and build railways and develop mines. RUSSIA AND MANCHURIA 649 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 tendency was checlced by the rise of a bitterly anti- foreign party, occasioned by these acts of aggression, and culminating in the Boxer insurrections of 1900. These grew rapidly, and spread over northern China. Their aim was to drive the "foreign _. ^ The devils into the sea." Scores of missionaries and their families "Boxer " 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 massacred. In the presence of this com- mon danger the powers were obliged to drop their jealousies and rivalries, and send a relief expedition, consisting of troops from Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Great Britain, and the United States. The Legations were rescued, just as their resources Rgg^^g were exhausted by the siege of two months (June 13-August of the 14, 1900). The international army suppressed the Boxer ^sa ions movement after a short campaign, forced the Chinese to pay a large indemnity, and to punish the ringleaders. In forming this inter- national army, the powers had agreed not to acquire territory, and at the close of the war they guaranteed the integrity of China. . Whether this would mean anything remained to be seen. The integrity of China had been invoked in 1895 and ignored in the years following. Russia, France, and Germany had appealed to it as a reason for demanding the evacuation of Port Arthur by the Japanese in 1895. Soon afterward Germany had virtually indignant annexed a port and a province of China, and France had also ^^^ appre- . hensive 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 statesmen. The acquisition of Port Arthur by Russia meant that now she had a harbor ice-free the year round. That Russia did not look upon her possession as merely a short lease, but as a permanent one, was j^^ggj^^ unmistakably shown by her conduct. She constructed a activity in 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 stationed there. To the Japanese all this 650 THE FAR EAST seemed to prove that she purposed ultimately to annex the immense province of Manchuria, and later probably Korea, which would give her a larger 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 directions, 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. RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR AND ITS CONSEQUENCES Japan's prestige at this time was greatly increased by a treaty con- cluded with England in 1902 establishing a defensive alliance, each power promising the other aid in certain contingencies. In Japanese casc either should become involved in war the other would Treaty of remain neutral but would abandon its neutrality and come 1902 . . -^ . . to the assistance of its ally if another power should join the enemy. 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. The tre'aty 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. Meanwhile Russia had a large army in Manchuria and a leasehold of the strong fortress and naval base of Port Arthur. She had definitely promised to with- Ta an makes ^^^^ from Manchuria when order should be restored, but she war upon declined to make the statement more explicit. Her military "^^** preparations increasing all the while, the Japanese demanded of her the date at which she intended to withdraw her troops from Manchuria, order having apparently been restored. Negotiations between the two powers dragged on from August, 1903, to February, 1904. Japan, believing that Russia was merely trying to gain time to tighten her grip on Manchuria by elaborate and intentional delay and evasion, and to prolong the discussion until she had sufficient troops in the province to be able to throw aside the mask, suddenly THE RUSSO-JAPANESE WAR 651 broke off diplomatic relations and commenced hostilities. On the night of the Sth-gth of February, 1904, the Japanese torpedoed a part of the Russian fleet before Port Arthur and threw their armies into Korea. The Russo-Japanese War, thus begun, lasted from February, 1904, to September, 1905. It was fought on both land and sea. Russia had two fleets in Asiatic waters, one at Port Arthur and one at Ruggo-jap- Vladivostok. Her land connection with eastern Asia was by anese War, the long single track of the Trans-Siberian railway. Japan ^^^^-ipos 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 scene 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 connections of Port Arthur with Russia. It attempted to take Port Arthur by assault, but was unable to carry it, and finally began a siege. This siege was conducted by General Nogi, General Oku being engaged in driving the Russians back upon Mukden. The pof^ Arthur Russian General Kuropatkin marched south from Mukden to relieve Port Arthur. South of Mukden great battles occurred, that of Liao-yang, engaging probably half a million men and lasting several days, resulting 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 bombardment of Port Arthur continued until that fortress surrendered after a siege of ten months, costing the Japanese 60,000 in killed and wounded (January i, 1905). The army which had conducted this siege was now able to march northward to cooperate with General Oku around Mukden. There several battles were fought, the greatest since the Franco-German war of 1870, lasting in each case several days. The last, at Mukden „ , ^ . Mukden (March 6-10, 1905), cost both armies 120,000 men killed and captured by wounded in four days' fighting. The Russians were defeated *^^^ Japanese 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 652 THE FAR EAST round the Cape of Good Hope, was attacked by Admiral Togo as Destruction it entered the Sea of Japan and annihilated in the great naval ^f the battle of the Straits of Tsushima, May 27, 1905. fleet. May The two powers finally consented, at the suggestion of Presi- 27. 1905 ^gj^j Roosevelt, to send delegates to Portsmouth, New Hamp- shire, 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. The war had cost each nation about a billion dollars and about 200,000 in killed and wounded. By the Treaty of Portsmouth Russia recognized Japan's paramount interests in Korea, which country, however, was to remain independ- The Treaty ^^^' Both the Russians and the Japanese were to evacuate of Ports- Manchuria. Russia transferred to Japan her lease of Port Arthur and the Liao-tung peninsula, and ceded the southern half of the island of Saghalin. Japan thus stood forth the dominant power of the Orient. She had expanded in ten years by the annexation of Formosa and Saghalin. Japan's rapid She has not regarded Korea as independent, but since the close expansion Qf ^]^g ^^j- j^^g annexed her (1910). She possesses Port Arthur, and her position in Manchuria is one which has given rise to much 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 com- merce. The drain upon her resources during the period just passed had been tremendous, 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 heav}^ taxation. No people has accomplished so vast a transformation in so short a time. The lesson of these tremendous events was not lost upon the Chinese. The victories of Japan, an Oriental state, over a great The effect of Occidental power, as well as over China, convinced many in- these events flucntial Chinese of the ad.vantage to be derived from an adop- upon ina ^j^^ ^^ European methods, an appropriation of European knowledge. Moreover, they saw that the only way to repel the ^o^^v'^M^"" &rsaaun-n« ASIA IN 1914 Miles HaiJroads I I Russian I I English I — \ French l — \Foriugues& \ZZ\nulch U3 Spanish I 1 6erman UIMnitedStales I \JafMift RADICAL CHANGES IN CHINA 653 aggressions of outside powers was to be equipped with the weapons used by the aggressor. The leaven of reform began to work fruitfully in the Middle King- dom. A military spirit arose in this state, which formerly despised the martial virtues. Under the direction of Japanese instructors a beginning was made in the construction of a Chinese army Reform in after European models and equipped in European fashion, c^^^b. The acquisition of western knowledge was encouraged. Students went in large numbers to the schools and universities of Europe and America. Twenty thousand of them went to Japan. The state encouraged the process by throwing open the civil service, that is, official careers, to those who obtained honors in examinations in western subjects. Schools were opened throughout the country. Even public schools for girls were established in some places, a remarkable fact for any Oriental country. In 1906 an edict was issued aiming at the prohibition of the use of opium within ten years. This edict has since been put into execution and the opium trade has finally been suppressed. Political reorganization was also undertaken. An imperial com- mission was sent to Europe in 1905 to study the representative systems of various countries, and on its return a committee, a constitu- consisting of many high dignitaries, was appointed to study its *^*'° promised report. In August, 1908, an official edict was issued promising, in the name of the Emperor, a constitution in 1917. But the process of transformation was destihed to proceed more rapidly than was contemplated. Radical and revolutionary parties appeared upon the scene, demanding a constitution immediately. As the Imperial Government could not resist, it granted one in 191 1 establishing a parliament with extensive powers. To cap all, in central and southern China a republican movement arose and „, . China pro- spread rapidly. Finally a republic was proclaimed at Nanking claimed a and Dr. Sun Yat Sen, who had been educated in part in the ^^p"^''*= United States, was elected president. A clash between this republi- can movement and the imperial party in the north resulted in the forced abdication of the boy Emperor (February, 191 2). This was the end of the Manchu dynasty. Thereupon Yuan Shih K'ai was chosen President of the Republic of China. The situation confront- ing the new Republic was extremely grave. Would it prove possible to establish the new regime upon solid and enduring bases, or would 654 THE FAR EAST the Republic fall a prey to the internal dissensions of the Chinese, or to foreign aggression at the hands of European powers, or, more likely, at the hands of an ambitious and militaristic neighbor, Japan ? These were the secrets of the future. Yuan Shih K'ai was elected for a term of five years. His admin- istration was marked by a growing tension between his increasingly autocratic tendencies and the liberal and radical tendencies of Parliament. In the midst of his term, the President died, June 6, 1916. He was succeeded by Li Yuan-Lung, the Vice-President, generally considered more loyal to republican principles. REFERENCES Early Relations of Europe with China : Douglas, Europe and the Far East, pp. 41-90. The Opening or Japan: Douglas, pp. 144-168. The Revolution in Japan: Douglas, pp. 169-209; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, Chap. XVIII, pp. 537-575. The Boxer Movement : Douglas, pp. 323-360 ; Cambridge Modern History, Vol. XII, pp. 517-521. Causes of the Russo-Japanese War: Douglas, pp. 409-424; Asakawa, Russo-J apanese Conflict, pp. 1-64. The Russo-Japanese War : Cavihridge Modern History, Vol. XII, Chap. XIX, pp. 576-601. The Treaty of Portsmouth : Hershey, The International Law and Diplomacy of the Russo-Japanese War, Chap. XIII. Conditions in China and Japan : Hornbeck, S. K., Contemporary Politics in the Far East (1916) ; T. E. Millard, Democracy atid the Eastern Qiicstio)i. CHAPTER XXXIV RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN We are now in a position to follow with some understanding the very recent history of Russia, a history at once crowded, intricate, and turbulent. That history is the record of the reaction of the Japanese War upon Russia herself. That war was from the beginning unpopular with the Russians. Consisting of a series of defeats, its unpopularity only increased, and the indignation and wrath of the people were shown during its course in many ways. The Government was justly held ity^n^Rus'^sia responsible, and was discredited by its failure. As it added °^ ^^^ ^^"^ 1 1 I 1 1- 1 11- 1 • , ^ith Japan greatly to the already existmg 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 Minister of the Interior, in whose hands lay the maintenance of public order, was at this time Plehve, one of the most bitterly hated men in recent Russian history. Plehve had been in piehve's power since 1902, and had revealed a character of unusual "°° regime harshness. He had incessantly and pitilessly prosecuted liberals everywhere, had filled the prisons 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, and exiling to Siberia Assassination students, professional men, laborers. He was killed July, °^ Plehve 1904, by a bomb thrown under his carriage by a former student. Russia breathed more easily. 65s 656 RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN The various liberal and advanced elements of the population uttered their desires with a freedom such as they had never known . before. They demanded that the reign of law be established defense of in Russia, that the era of bureaucratic and police control, assassination j-g^ognizing no limits of inquisition and of cruelty, should cease. They demanded the individual rights usual in western Europe, freedom of conscience, of speech, of publication, of public meetings and associations, of justice administered by independent judges. They also demanded a constitution, to be framed by the people, and a national parliament. The Czar showing no inclination to accede to these demands, dis- order continued and became more widespread, particularly when the shameful facts became known that officials were enriching them- selves at the expense of the national 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 defeats, and on January i, 1905, came the surrender of Port Arthur after a fearful siege. The horror of the civilized "Bloody world was aroused by an event which occurred a few weeks Sunday" later, the slaughter of "Bloody Sunday" (January 22, 1905). Workmen in immense numbers, under the leadership 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 occurred. Peasants burned the houses of the nobles. Mutinies in the army and navy were frequent. The uncle of the Czar, the Grand Duke Sergius, one of the most pronounced reactionaries in the Empire, who had said "the people want the stick," was assassinated. Russia ^ „ . was in a state bordering on anarchy. Finally the Czar sought The Mam- ° . . . ,. ..,.. festo of Au- to reduce the ever-mountmg spirit of opposition by issuing a gust 19, 190S manifesto concerning the representative assembly which was so vehemently demanded (August 19, 1905). The manifesto proved a bitter disappointment, as it spoke of the necessity of preserving autocratic government and promised a representative assembly which should only have the power to give advice, not to see that its CREATION OF THE DUMA 657 advice was followed. The agitation therefore continued unabated, or rather increased, assuming new and alarming aspects, which exerted in the end a terrific pressure upon the Government. Finally the Czar on October 30, 1905, issued a new manifesto which promised freedom of conscience, speech, meeting, and association, also jhe Emperor a representative assembly or Duma, to be elected on a wide promises a franchise, establishing "as an immutable rule that no law can trve^lssem- come into force without the approval of the Duma," and giving ^^y "^ Duma to the Duma also effective control over the acts of public officials. THE DUMA OR REPRESENTATIVE ASSEMBLY The Czar thus promised the Duma, which was to be a law-making body and was to have a supervision over state officials. But before it met he proceeded to clip its wings. He issued a decree constituting the Council of the Empire, that is, a body consist- restricted^ ing largely of official appointees from the bureaucracy, or of the Council of • , • , 1 , , , r 1 • V- , ^ the Empire persons associated with the old order of things, as a kind of Upper Chamber of the legislature, of which the Duma should be the Lower. Laws must have the consent of both Council and Duma before being submitted to the Czar for approval. The elections to the Duma were held in March and April, 1906, and resulted in a large majority for the Constitutional Democrats, popu- larly called the "Cadets." In the name of the Czar certain „ . . . ^ ^ ■^ Restricted by "organic laws" were now issued, laws that Could not be the " organic touched by the Duma. Thus the powers of that bod)^ were '^^^ again restricted, before it had even met. The Duma was opened by Nicholas II in person with elaborate ceremony. May 10, 1906. It was destined to have a short and stormy life. It showed from the beginning that it desired a ^ . comprehensive reform of Russia along the well-known lines of the Duma, western liberalism. It was combated by the court and ^^^ ^°' ''"^ bureaucratic parties, which had not been able to prevent its meeting, but which were bent upon rendering it powerless, and were only waiting for a favorable time to secure its abolition. It demanded that the Council of the Empire, the second chamber, should ,^ . 1 1 • , Demands be reformed, as it was under the complete control of the of the Emperor, and was thus able to nullify the work of the people's ^""* chamber. It demanded that the ministers be made responsible 658 RUSSIA SINCE THE WAR WITH JAPAN to the Duma as the only way of giving the people control over the officials. It demanded the abolition of martial law throughout the Empire, under cover of which all kinds of crimes were being per- petrated by the governing classes. It passed a bill abolishing capital punishment. As the needs of the peasants were most pressing, it demanded that the lands belonging to the state, the crown, and the monasteries be given to them on long lease. The Duma lasted a little over two months. Its debates were marked by a high degree of intelligence and by frequent displays of The im o- eloquence, in which several peasants distinguished themselves. tence of the It criticized the abuses of the Government freely and scath- ""^ ingly. Its sessions were often stormy, the attitude of the ministers frequently contemptuous. It was foiled in all its attempts at reform by the Council of the Empire, and by the Czar. The crucial contest was over the responsibility of ministers. The Duma demanded this as the only way of giving the people an effective participation in the government. The Czar steadily refused. A deadlock ensued. The Czar cut the whole matter short by dissolving the Duma, on July 22, 1906, expressing himself as " cruelly disap- pointed" by its actions, and ordering elections for a new Duma. The second Duma was opened by the Czar March 5, 1907. It did not work to the satisfaction of the Government. Friction between it The second ^^^ the ministry developed early and steadily increased. Duma Finally the Government arrested sixteen of the members and indicted many others for carrying on an alleged revolutionary propaganda. This was, of course, a vital assault upon the integrity of the assembly, a gross infringement upon even the most moderate constitutional liberties. Preparing to contest this high-handed action, the Duma was dissolved on June 16, 1907, and a new one ordered to be elected in September, and to meet in November. An imperial manifesto was issued at the same time altering the electoral law in most sweeping fashion, and practically be- aiters the stowing the right of choosing the large majority of the members electoral upon about 130,000 landowners. This also was a grave in- SVStBIU fringement upon the constitutional liberties hitherto granted, which had, among other things, promised that the electoral law should not be changed without the consent of the Duma. The Government declared by word and by act that the autocracy of the ruler was undiminished. Illegalities of the old, familiar kind THE TRIUMPH OF REACTION 659 were committed freely by officials. Reaction ruled unchecked. The third Duma, elected on a very limited and plutocratic The third suffrage, was opened on November 14, 1907. It was com- Duma posed in large measure of reactionaries, of large landowners. It proved a docile assembly. The Government did not dare to abolish the Duma outright, as urged by the reactionaries. The Duma continued to exist, but was rather a consultative than a legislative body. With the mere passage of time it took on more and more the character persists, but of a permanent institution, exerting a feeble influence on the without power national life. However, the Government of Russia became again in practice what it had been before the war with Japan, what it had been all through the nineteenth century. The tremendous struggle for liberty had failed. The former governing classes recovered control of the state, after the stormy years from 1904 to 1907, and applied once more their former principles. Among these were renewed attacks upon the Finns, increasingly severe measures against the Poles, and savage treatment of the Jews. Russia was still wedded to her idols, or at least her idols had not been overthrown. Her medieval past was still the strongest force in the state, to which it still gave a thoroughly medieval tone. Whether the war of 19 14 would result in accomplishing what the war with Japan began but did not achieve, a sweeping reformation of the institutions and policies, ambitions and mental outlook of the nation, was, of course, the secret of the future. REFERENCES The Annual Register ; The International Year Book; Statesman's Year Book. Volumes since 1905. Sections on Russia. Olgin, The Soul of the Russian Revolution. CHAPTER XXXV THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 THE PEACE MOVEMENT The contemporary world, to a degree altogether unprecedented in history, has been dominated by the thought of war, by extraordinary preparations for war, and by zealous and concerted efforts to prevent war. Finally a conflict came which staggered the imagination and beggared description and whose issues were incalculable, a conflict which soon clamped the entire world in its iron grip. This was a ghastly outcome of a century of development, rich beyond compare in many lines. It is, however, not inexplicable and it is important for us to see how so melancholy, so sinister a turn has been given to the destinies of the race. The rise and development of the militaristic spirit have been showai in the preceding pages. The Prussian military system, marked by Spread of scientific thoroughness and efficiency, has been adopted by militarism most of the countries of the Continent. Europe became in the last quarter of the nineteenth century what she had never been before, literally an armed continent. The rivalry of the nations to have the most perfect instruments of destruction, the strongest army, and the strongest navy, became one of the most conspicuous features of the modern world. 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 necessity and the torpedo-boat destroyer was the result. Boats that could navigate beneath the waters would have an obvious advantage over those that could be seen, and the submarine was provided for this need. And finally men took possession of the air with dirigible balloons and aeroplanes, as aerial auxiliaries of war. Thus man's 660 THE FIRST HAGUE CONFERENCE 66 1 immemorial occupation, war, gained from the advance of science and contributed to that advance. The wars of the past were fought on the surface of the globe. Those of the present are fought in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, and in the waters under the earth. But all this is tremendously expensive. It costs more than a hun- dred thousand dollars to construct the largest coast defense gun, which carries over twenty miles, and its single discharge costs a thousand dollars. Fifteen millions are necessary to build a modern dreadnought, and now we have super-dreadnoughts, more instruments ^ of war costly Still and more destructive. The debts of European countries were nearly doubled during the last thirty years, largely because of military expenditures. The military budgets of European states in a time of "armed peace" amounted to not far from a billion and a half dollars a year, half as much again as the indemnity exacted by Germany from France in 1871. The burden became so heavy, the rivalry so keen that it gave rise to a movement which aimed to end it. The very aggravation of the evil prompted a desire for its cure. In the summer of 1898 the civil and military authorities of Russia were considering how they might escape the necessity 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 and the^ issuance by the Czar, Nicholas II, on August 24, 1898, of a limitation of . ... armaments communication to the powers, suggesting that an inter- national conference be held to consider the general problem. The conference, thus suggested by the Czar, 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, peace Con- Japan, Persia, and Siam, — and two were American — the ^?^^^^ ^* United States and Mexico. The Conference was opened on May 18 and closed on July 29. The official utterances of most of the delegates emphasized the frightful burden and waste of this vast expenditure upon the equip- ment for war, when all nations, big and little, needed all their criticism of resources for the works of peace, for education, for social militarism improvement in many directions. Most of the delegates emphasized 662 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 also the loss entailed by compulsory military service, removing mil- lions and millions of young men from their careers, from productive activity for several precious years. A German delegate, on the other hand, denied all this, denied that the necessary weight of charges and taxes portended approaching ruin and exhaustion, declared that the general welfare was increasing all the while, and that compulsory military service was not regarded in his country as a heavy burden but as a sacred and patriotic dut)^ to which his country owed its existence, its prosperity, and its future. With such differences of opinion the Conference was unable to reach any agreement upon the fundamental question which had 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" and the desire that the governments "shall take up the study of the possibility of an agree- ment concerning the limitation of armed forces on land and sea, and of military budgets." With regard to arbitration the Conference was more successful. It established a Permanent Court of Arbitration for the purpose of facili- Estabiish- fating arbitration in the case of international disputes which ment of a it is found impossible to settle by the ordinary means of Court of diplomacy. The Court does not consist of a group of judges Arbitration holding sessions at stated times to try such cases as 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 appoint- ment shall run for six years and may be renewed. Out of this long list the powers at variance may choose, in a manner indicated, the judges who shall decide aijy given case. 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 encouragement to its use. The work of the First Peace Conference was very limited and mod- est, 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 THE SECOND HAGUE CONFERENCE 663 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. For almost on the very heels of this Conference, tie^h century which it was hoped would further the interests of peace, came "p^^s with the devastating war in South Africa, followed quickly by the war between Russia and Japan. Also the expenditures of European 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. Such was the disappointing sequel of the Hague Conference. 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 Roose- Perce Con*- velt had first taken the initiative. The Second Conference Terence at was in session from June 15 to October 18. It was attended by representatives from forty-four of the world's fifty-seven states claiming sovereignty 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, mount- ing from one hundred to two hundred and fifty-six. The chief addi- tions came from the republics of Central and South America. The number of American governments represented rose, indeed, from two to nineteen. Twenty-one European, nineteen American, and four Asiatic states sent delegates to this Second Conference. Its membership 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 nation or of hemi- spheres. The Conference was not European but international, — 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 interna- work of the tional law with greater precision than heretofore. But, con- Conference cerning compulsory arbitration, and concerning disarmament or the limitation of armaments, nothing was achieved. It passed this resolution : "The Conference confirms the resolution adopted by the Conference of 1899 in regard to the restriction of military expendi- 664 THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 tures ; and, since military expenditures have increased considerably 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 com- mentary on its importance in the eyes of the governments was contained in the history of the succeeding years with their ever increasing military and naval appropriations, their tenser rivalry, their deepening determination to be ready for whatever the future might have in store. That future had in store for 191 2 and 191 3 two desperate wars in the Balkan peninsula and for 19 14 an appalling cataclysm. THE COLLAPSE OF THE OTTOMAN EMPIRE We have seen with what enthusiasm the bloodless revolution of July 24, 1908, was hailed by all the races of Turkey. It seemed the , . ^ brilliant dawn of a new era. It has, however, proved to be the The Turkish . . Revolution beginning of the end of the Turkish Empire in Europe, if not of 1908 ^^ ^g-g^ g^g well. From that day to the outbreak of the Euro- pean War six years later the Balkan peninsula was the storm center of the world. Event succeeded event, swift, startling, and sensa- tional, throwing a lengthening and deepening shadow before. No adequate description of these crowded years can be attempted here. Only an outline can be given indicating the successive stages of a portentous and absorbing drama. The ease with which the Young Turks overthrew in those July days of 1908 the loathsome regime of Abdul Hamid, and the principles of freedom and fair play which they proclaimed, aroused the unanimity of happiest anticipations, and enlisted the liveliest sympathy the move- among multitudes within and without the Empire. The very atmosphere was charged with the hope and the expec- tation that the reign of liberty, equality, and fraternity was about to begin for this sorely visited land where unreason in all its varied forms had hitherto held sway. Would not Turkey, rejuvenated, modern- ized, and liberalized, strong in the loyalty and well-being of its citizens, freed from the blighting inheritance of its gloomy past, take an honorable place at last in the family of humane and pro- gressive nations? Might not the old racial and religious feuds dis- THE TURKISH REVOLUTION 665 appear under a new regime, where each locaUty 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 principles of true toleration toward all her . various races and religions ? Had not the time come for the elimina- tion of these primitive but hardy prejudices and animosities ? Might not races and creeds be subordinated to a large and essential unity ? Might not this be the final, though unexpected, solution of the famous Eastern Question ? Even in those golden days some doubted, not seeing any authentic signs of an impending millennium for that distracted corner of the world. At least the problem of so vast a transformation 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 European history suggested. If Turkey were let alone to concentrate her entire energy upon the impending . . work of reform, she might perhaps succeed. But she was not foreign to be let alone now any more than she had been for centuries, p"^®""^ The Eastern Question had long perplexed the powers of Europe, and had at the same time lured them on to seek their own advantage in its labyrinthine mazes. It was conspicuously an international problem. But the internal reform of Turkey might profoundly alter her inter- national 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 and precipitated a series of startling events. Might not a reformed Turkey, animated with a new national spirit, with her arm}' 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 better than to be let 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. 666 THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 On October 3, 1908, Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria-Hungary announced, through autograph letters to various rulers, his decision to incorporate Bosnia and Herzegovina definitely within his Empire. Austria- These were Turkish provinces, handed over by the Congress Hungary of Berlin in 1878 to Austria- Hungary for "occupation" and Bosnia and administration, though they still remained officially under Herzegovina ^-^g suzerainty of the Porte. On October 5 Prince Ferdinand of Bulgaria proclaimed, amid great ceremony, the complete inde- pendence of Bulgaria from Turkish suzerainty, and assumed declares her the title of Czar. Two daj^s later the Greek population of the independence ^gj^j^^j Qf Crete repudiated all connection with Turkey and declared for union with Greece. On the same day, October 7, Francis Joseph issued a proclamation to the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina announcing the annexation of those prov- inces. Against this action Serbia protested vigorously to the powers, her parliament was immediately convoked, and the war spirit flamed up and threatened to get beyond control. Ferdinand was pre- pared to defend the independ- ence of Bulgaria by going to waf with Turkey, if neces- sary. These startling events im- mediately aroused intense ex- citement throughout Europe. They constituted vio- lent breaches of the Treaty of Berlin. The crisis precipitated by the actions of Austria- Hungary and Bulgaria brought all the great powers, signatories of that treaty, upon the scene. It became quickly apparent that they did not agree. Germany made it clear that she would support Austria, and Italy seemed likely to do the same. The Triple The powers do not pre- vent these breaches of the Treaty of Berlin Francis Joseph From a photograph taken in 1915. BREACHES IN THE TREATY OF BERLIN 667 Alliance, therefore, 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. The British Foreign Minister, Sir Edward Grej', announced that Great Britain could not admit "the right of any power to alter an international treaty without the consent of the other parties to it," and demanded that, as the public law of the Balkans rested upon the Treaty of Berlin of 1878, and that as that treaty was made by all the great powers, it could only be revised by the great powers, meeting again in Congress. But neither Austria nor Germany would listen to this suggestion. They knew that Russia could not intervene, lamed, as she was, by the disastrous war with Japan, with her army disorganized and her finances in bad condition. And they had no fear of Great Britain and France. Thus the Treaty of Berlin was flouted, although later the signatories of that treaty formally recog- nized the accomplished fact. Of all the states the most aggrieved by these occurrences was Serbia, and the most helpless. For years the Serbians had entertained the ambition of uniting Serbia, Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Mon- tenegro, peopled by members of the same Serbian race, thus restoring the Serbian empire of the Middle Ages, and gaining access to the sea. This plan was blocked, apparently forever. Serbia could not expand to the west, as Austria barred the way with Bosnia and Herzegovina. She could not reach the sea.' Thus she could get her products to market only with the consent of other nations. She alone of all the states in Europe, with the exception of Switzerland, was in this predicament. Fearing 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 was strong that war, even against desperate odds, was preferable to strangula- tion. However, she did not fly to arms. But the feeling of anger and alarm remained, an element in the general situation that could not be ignored, auguring ill for the future. But trouble for the Young Turks came not only from the outside. It also came from inside and, as was shortly seen, it lay in large measure in their own unwisdom. Difficulties manifold encompassed them about. 668 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 The new Turkish ParUament met in December, 1908, amid general enthusiasm. It consisted of two chambers, a Senate, appointed On' f ^^ ^^^ Sultan, and a Chamber of Deputies, elected by the the Turkish people. Four months later events occurred which threatened ar lament ^j^^ abrupt termination of this experiment in constitutional and parliamentary government. On April 13, 1909, without warning, thousands of troops in Constantinople broke into mutiny, killed some _. , of their oflficers, denounced the Young Turks, and demanded The counter- " ' revolution the abolition of the constitution. The city was terrorized. o pr , 1909 ^^ ^j^g same time sickening massacres occurred in Asia Minor, particularly at Adana, showing that the religious and racial animos- ities of former times had lost none of their force. It seemed that _. -, the new regime was about to founder utterlv. A counter- The Young ° Turks re- revolution was to undo the work of July. But this counter- gam contro revolution was energetically suppressed by troops sent up from Salonica and Adrianople and the Young Turks were soon in power again. 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 27, 1909, Abdul Hamid II was deposed, and was im- of Abdul mediately taken as a prisoner of state to Salonica. , He was ^^™* succeeded by his brother, whom he had kept imprisoned many years. The new Sultan, Mohammed V, was in his sixty-fourth year. He at once expressed his entire sympathy with the armies of the Young Turks, his intention to be a constitutional monarch. The Young Turks were in power once more. From the very beginning they failed. They did not rise to the height of their opportunity, they did not meet the expectations that had been aroused, they did not loyally live up to the principles they The Young professcd. They made no attempt to introduce the spirit Turks be- of justicc, of fair play toward the various elements of their tionary and highly Composite empire. Instead of seeking to apply the prin- despotic ciples of liberty, equality, and fraternity, they resorted to auto- cratic government, to domination by a single race, to the ruthless suppression of the rights of the people. They did just what the Germans have done in Alsace-Lorraine and Posen, what the Russians have done in Finland and in Poland, what the Austrians and Hunga- rians have done with the Slavic peoples within their borders. The policy of oppression of subject races, the attempt at amalgamation by POLICY OF TURKIFICATION 669 force and craft, have strewn Europe with combustible material and the combustion has finally come. The government of the Young Turks was just as despotic as that of Abdul Hamid and its „ J IT Oppression outcome was the same, a further and decisive disruption of the of subject T^ • races Empire. From the very first they showed their purpose. They, the Turks, that is the Mohammedan ruling race, determined to keep power absolutely in their own hands by hook or crook. In the very first elections to Parliament they arranged affairs so that they would-have a major- ity over all other races combined. They did not intend to divide power with the Christian Greeks and Armenians or the Mohammedan Arabs. Their policy was one of Turkification, just as the a policy of Russian policy was one of Russification, the German of Ger- Turkification manization. They made no attempt to punish the perpetrators of the Adana massacres in which over thirty thousand Armenian Chris- tians were slaughtered. The Armenian population was thus alienated from them. They tried to suppress the liberties which under all previous regimes the Orthodox Greek Church had enjoyed. As they intended to subject all the races of the Empire to their own race, so they intended to suppress by force all religious privileges. They thus offended and infuriated the Greeks, whom they also alarmed and embittered by a commercial boycott because the Greeks would not agree to their repressive policy in regard to the Cretans. Their treatment of Macedonia was the acme of folly. They ^ •' ■' Gross mis- sought to reenforce the Moslem elements of the population rule of by bringing in Moslems from other regions. This aroused ^"^^ ^^^^ the Christian elements, Greek, Bulgarian, and Serbian. Large numbers of these Christians fled from Macedonia to Greece, Bulgaria, and Serbia, carrying with them their grievances, urging the govern- ments of those countries to hostility against the Turks. The Turks went a step farther. In the west were the Albanians, a Moslem people who had hitherto combined local independence with loyal and appreciated services to the Turkish authorities, t,, . , , ' Their treat- in both the army and the government. The Turks decided ment of to suppress this independence and to make the Albanians ^^^"^^ submit in all matters to the authorities at Constantinople. But the Albanians had been for centuries remarkable fighters. They now flew to arms. Year after year the Albanian rebellion broke out, only temporarily subdued or smothered by the Turks, who thus exhausted 670 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 their strength and squandered their resources in fruitless but costly- efforts to "pacify" these hardy war-loving mountaineers. Thus only a few years of Young Turk rule were necessary to create a highly critical situation, so numerous were the disaffected elements. There had been no serious attempt to regenerate Turkey, to bring together the various races on the basis of liberty for all. Turkey lost hundreds of thousands of its Christian subjects who fled to surrounding countries rather than endure the odious oppression. These exiles did what they could to hit back at their oppressors. The Young Turks from the very beginning failed as reformers be- cause they were untrue to their promises. Their failure led to war The Young in the Balkans and the war in the Balkans led to the European uTtheir^'^^ War. They spent their time in endeavoring to assert them- promises selves as a race of masters. They sowed the wind and they quickly reaped the whirlwind. THE TURKO-ITALIAN WAR OF 191 1 While the Turkish Empire was in this highly perturbed condition and while the Balkan states were aglow with indignation at the treat- ment being meted out to the members of their races resident in Mace- donia and were trembling with the desire to act, trouble flared up for J .. . the Young Turks in another quarter. Italy had for years been niai aspira- casting longing cyes on the territories which fringe the southern shores of the Mediterranean. She had once hoped to acquire Tunis but had unexpectedly found herself forestalled by France, which seized that country in 188 1. At the same time England began her occupation of Egypt. All that remained, therefore, was Tripoli, like Egypt a part of the Turkish Empire. For many years the thought that this territory ought to belong to Italy had been accepted as axiomatic in influential quarters in the Italian govern- ment and diplomatic circles. Schemes had been worked out and partly put into force for a "pacific penetration" of an economic character of this land. Now, however, the time seemed to have arrived to seize it outright. Austria-Hungary had annexed Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Bulgaria had declared her independence in 1908, and there had been no successful opposition on the part of Turkey or of any of the Great Powers. Was not this the ripe moment for Italy's project? ITALY AND TRIPOLI 671 She evidently thought so, for, in September, 191 1, she sent her warships to Tripoli and began the conquest of that country. It proved a more difficult undertaking than had been imagined, itaiy invades While she seized the coast towns, her hold on them was pre- Tripoli (191 1) carious and her progress into the interior was slow and costly, owing to the fact that the Turks aroused and directed the natives against the invaders. Italy had given her ally, Austria-Hungary, to understand that she would not attack Turkey directly in Europe, as European Turkey was a veritable tinder-box which, if it once caught fire, might blaze up into a devastating and incalculable conflagration. But as month after month went by and Italy was producing only an uncertain effect in Tripoli, she resolved ish islands on more decisive action nearer Constantinople, hoping to '" ^^^ bring the Turks to terms. She attacked and seized Rhodes and eleven other Turkish islands in the ^gean, the Dodecanese. This, and the fact that an Albanian revolution against the Turks was at the same time attaining alarming proportions, made the latter ready to conclude peace with Italy so that they might be free to put down the Albanians. On October 15, 1912, was signed at Treaty of Ouchy, or Lausanne, a treaty whereby Turkey relinquished Lausanne Tripoli. It was also provided that Italy should withdraw her troops from the Dodecanese as soon as the Turkish troops were withdrawn from Tripoli, a phrase about which it was easy to quibble later. The great significance of this war did not lie in the fact that Italy acquired a new colony. It lay in the fact that it began again the process, arrested since 1878, of the violent dismemberment of Momentous the Turkish Empire ; that it revealed the military weakness of character of that Empire, powerless to preserve its integrity ; and, what Turkish is most important, that it contributed directly and greatly to ^^^ a far more serious attack upon Turkey by the Balkan states, which, in turn, led to the European War. The tinder-box was lighted and a general European conflagration resulted. The Italian attack upon Tripoli was momentous in its consequences. THE BALKAN WARS During the war the Balkan states were negotiating with each other with a view to united action against Turkey. This union was not easy to bring about as Bulgaria, Serbia, and Greece disliked each 672 THE BALKAN WARS OF 191 2 AND 1913 other intensely, for historical, racial, sentimental reasons, too numer- ous and too complex to be described here. However, they disliked the Turks more and they were suffering constantly from the states unite Turks. Terrible persecutions, even massacres of the Chris- against the tians in Macedonia in which large numbers of Greeks, Bulgari- Turks * ^ ans, and Serbians lost their lives, inflamed the people of those states with the desire to liberate their brothers in Macedonia. By doing this they would also increase their own territories and diminish or end an odious tyranny. These nations found it possible to unite for the purpose of overwhelming the Turks ; they might not find it possible to agree as to the partition among themselves of any terri- tories they might acquire, since here their old, established ambitions and antipathies might conflict. It was because of the strength of these rivalries and hatreds that neither the Turks nor the outside powers considered an alliance of the Balkan states as at all among the possibilities. But the statesmen of the Balkans had learned something from the troubled history of the peninsula, and saw the folly of continuing their dissensions. They also realized that now was their chance, that they might never again find their common enemy so weak and demoralized, the general European situation so favorable. Thus it came about that in October, 191 2, the four Balkan states, Montenegro, Serbia, Bulgaria, and Greece, made war on Turkey. The Balkan The war was brief and an overwhelming success for the allies. Warofipiz Fighting began on October 15, the very day of the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne between Italy and Turkey, although technically the declarations of war were not issued until October 18. The Greeks pushed northward into Macedonia, gained several victories over the enemy, and on November 8, only three enter weeks after the beginning of the campaign, they entered the Saionica important city and port of Salonica, with Crown Prince Con- stantine at their head. Farther west the Serbians and Montene- grins were also successful. The Serbians won a great victory at Kumanovo where they avenged the defeat of their ancestors at The Serbians Kossova which they had not forgotten for five hundred years. victorious 1 They then captured Monastir. Meanwhile the Bulgarians, who had the larger armies, had gone from victory to victory, defeating the Turks brilliantly in the battles of Kirk Kilisse and Lule Burgas. The latter was one of the great THE FIRST BALKAN WAR 673 battles of modern times, three hundred and fifty thousand troops being involved in fierce, tenacious struggle for three days. The result was the destruction of the military power of the Turks, campaign of By the middle of November the Bulgarians had reached the ^^ . Chataldja line of fortifications which extend from the Sea of Marmora to the Black Sea. Only twenty-five miles beyond them lay Constantinople. The collapse of the Turkish power in Europe was nearly complete. Only the very important fortresses of Adrianople in the east, and Jan- ina and Scutari in the west, had not fallen. In a six weeks' „ ,, Collapse of campaign Turkish possessions in Europe had shrunk to Con- the Turkish stantinople and the twenty-five mile stretch west to the ^°^^^ Chataldja fortifications. This overthrow and collapse came as a staggering surprise to the Turks, the Balkan allies themselves, and the Great Powers. The Ottoman Empire in Europe had ceased to exist, with the exception of Constantinople, Adrianople, Janina, and Scutari. The military prestige of Turkey was gone. In December delegates from the various states met in London to make peace. They were unsuccessful because Bulgaria demanded the surrender of Adrianople, whicli the Turks flatly refused. In March, 191 3, therefore, the war was resumed. One after Peace Con- another the fortresses fell, Janina on March 6, Adrianople ^'^^^'^^ on March 26, Scutari on April 23. Turkey was now compelled to accept terms of peace. On May 30, the Treaty of London was signed. It provided that a line should be drawn from Enos on the ^gean Sea to Midia on the Black Sea and that all Turkey west of that line should be ceded to the allies, except a region of undefined dimensions on the Adriatic, Albania, whose boundaries and status should be determined by the Great Powers. Crete was ceded to the Great Powers and the decision as to the islands in the yEgean which Greece had seized was also left to them. In December, 191 3, of LondTn^ Crete was incorporated in the kingdom of Greece. The Sul- ''^^y 30, tan's dominions in Europe had shrunk nearly to the vanishing point. After five centuries of proud possession he found himself almost expelled from Europe, retaining still Constantinople and only enough territorj^ round about to protect it. This great achievement was the work of the four Balkan states, united for once in the common work of liberation. The Great Powers had done nothing. Europe felt relieved, however, that so great a change as this in the map of 674 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 the Balkan peninsula had been effected without involving the Great Powers in war. The Treaty of London, however, had not long to live. No sooner had the Balkan states conquered Turkey than they fell to fighting A short- among themselves over the division of the spoils. The re- lived peace sponsibility for this calamity does not rest solely with them. It rests in part with the Great Powers, particularly with Austria and Italy. It was the intervention of these powers and their insistence upon the creation of a new independent state, Albania, out of a part of the territory now relinquished by the Turks, that precipitated a crisis whose very probable issue would be war. For the creation of this new state on the Adriatic coast absolutely prevented Serbia Serbia still ' from realizing one of her most passionate and legitimate land-locked ambitions, an outlet to the sea, an escape from her land- locked condition which placed her at the mercy of her neighbors. Before beginning the war with the Turks, Serbia and Bulgaria had defined their future spheres of influence in upper Macedonia, should the war result in their favor. The larger part of Macedonia should go to Bulgaria, and Serbia's gains should be chiefly in the west, in- cluding the longed-for Adriatic seacoast. But now Albania was Austrian op- pl^ntcd there and Serbia was as land-locked as ever. Austria position to was resolved that Serbia should under no conditions become ^"^ '* an Adriatic state. She had always been opposed to the aggrandizement of Serbia, because she had millions of Serbs under her own rule who might be attracted to an independent Serbia, enlarged and with prestige heightened. Moreover she believed that Serbia would be the pawn of Russia, and she would not tolerate Russia's influence on her southern borders and along the Adriatic, if she could help it. She did not propose to be less important in those waters than she had been in the past. Therefore Serbia must be excluded from the Adriatic. It was the blocking of Serbia's outlet to the sea that caused the second Balkan war between the allies. Intense was the indignation of the Serbians, but they could do nothing. They therefore sought as partial compensation larger territories in Macedonia than their treaty with Bulgaria had assigned Claims of them, arguing, correctly enough, that the conditions had greatly Serbia and changed from those contemplated when that agreement was ugana made and that the new conditions justified and necessitated a new arrangement. But here they encountered the stubborn op- THE SECOND BALKAN WAR 675 position of Bulgaria, which refused any concessions along this Une and insisted upon the strict observance of the treaty. Instantly the old, bitter hatred of these two countries for each other framed up again. The Serbians insisted that the expulsion of the Turks had been the work of all the allies and that there should be a fair division of the territories acquired in the name of all. On the other hand, the Bulgarians argued that it had been they who had done the heavy fighting in the war, which was true, that they had furnished by far the larger number of troops, that it was their victories at Kirk Kilisse and Lule Burgas that had annihilated the power of the Turks in Europe, that they were entitled to annex territories in Macedonia which they declared were peopled by Bulgarians. Other considera- tions also entered into the situation. Suffice it to say that Bulgaria intended to have her way. Her army was elated by the recent astounding successes, was rather con- temptuous of the Serbians and Greeks, emphatically minimized „ . . the services rendered by these to the common cause, thought compromis- that it could easily conquer both if necessary, and could take ^^^ ' what territories it chose. It was Bulgaria, whose war party had lost all sense of proportion, all sense of the rights of her former Bulgaria allies, that began the new struggle. She treacherously at- attacks tacked Greece and Serbia at the end of June, 1913. Fierce serb^a^^" fighting ensued for several days. (June, 1913) Bulgaria's action in plunging into this avoidable conflict was all the more foolhardy as her relations with her northern neighbor, Rou- mania, were also unsettled and precarious. Roumania had demanded that Bulgaria cede her a strip of territory in the northeast of .. iT^i, Roumania Bulgaria, m order that the balance of power among the Balkan enters the states might remain practically what it had been. Bulgaria ^" ^famst » i - » Bulgaria ; had refused this so-called compensation. The result was that the Turks Roumania also went to war with Bulgaria. . The Turks, too, ^ ^° seeing a chance to recover some of the land they had recently lost, joined the war. Thus Bulgaria was confronted on all sides by enemies. She was at war with five states, not three, for Montenegro was also involved. By the middle of July she saw that the case was hopeless and consented to make peace, by the Treaty of Bucharest, signed Bucharest August 10, 1915, by which Serbia and Greece secured larger possessions than they had ever anticipated, and by which Roumania 676 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 THE BALKAN STATES ACCORDING TO THE TREATY OF BUCHAREST Acquisitions of New Territory shown by darker hatching Scale of Miles 60 100 150 200 MEDITERliANEAIf \sEA 22° COST OF THE BALKAN WARS 677 was given the territory she desired. Turkey also recovered a large area which she had lost the year before, including the important city and fortress of Adrianople. All this was at the expense of Bulgaria, who paid for her arrogance and unconciliatory temper by losing much territory which she would otherwise have secured, by seeing her former and hated allies victorious over her in the field and in annexa- tions of territory which she regarded as rightfully hers. Bulgaria was deeply embittered by all this and only waited for an oppor- tunity to tear up the Treaty of Bucharest which she refused to consider as morally binding, as in any sense a permanent settle- ment of the Balkans. The year 191 3 will remain of bitter memory in the minds of all Bulgarians. The two Balkan wars cost heavily in human life and in treasure. Turkey and Bulgaria each lost over 150,000 in killed and wounded, Serbia over 70,000, Greece nearly as many, little IMonte- changes in negro over 10,000. The losses among non-combatants were *^* ™*p heavy in those who died from starvation, or disease, or massacre, for the second war was one of indisputable atrocity. On the other hand, Montenegro, Greece, and Serbia had nearly doubled .in size, cost of the Bulgaria and Roumania had grown. The Turkish Empire in Balkan wars Europe was limited to a comparatively small area. We must now examine the reaction of all these profound and aston- ishing changes in the Balkans upon Europe in general. In other words, we must study the causes of the war of 1914. For the Balkan wars of 191 2 and 19 13 were a prelude to the European thTBaikan War of 1914. The sequence of events from the Turkish wars upon Revolution of July, 1908, to the Austrian declaration of war upon Serbia in July, 19 14, is direct, unmistakable, disastrous. Each year added a link to the lengthening chain of iron. The map of Europe was thrown into the flames. What the new map would be no one could foresee. It may be said in passing that the new Albanian state proved a fiasco from the start and that it disappeared completely when the war began in August, 1914, the powers that had created it with- jhe Aiba- drawing their support and its German prince, William of Wied, ""^"^ fiasco leaving for Germany, where he joined the army that was fighting France. He had meanwhile announced his abdication in a high- flown manifesto. 678 THE BALKAN WARS OF 1912 AND 1913 REFERENCES The Regime of the Yoxjng Turks : Gibbons, The New Map of Europe, Chap. XI, pp. 180-219; Pears, Forty Years in Constantinople. The War between Italy and Turkey : Gibbons, Chap. XIII, pp. 241-262. The War between the Balkan States ant) Turkey : Gibbons, Chap. XIV, pp. 263-318; Schurman, The Balkan Wars, pp. 3-60; Seymour, The Diplomatic Background of the War, Chap. X. The War between the Balkan States : Gibbons, Chap. XV, pp. 319-350; Schurman, pp. 63-131 ; Sejonour, Chap. X. Albania : Chekrezi, C. A., Albania Past and Present. CHAPTER XXXVI THE WORLD WAR In August, 1913, the long-drawn-out crisis in the Balkans seemed safely over with the Treaty of Bucharest, to the apparent satisfaction of the people of Europe. It had not resulted in what had been ^^^^^ ^^ greatly feared, a European war. That had been avoided and Germany the world breathed more freely. But that this feeling was ^'fttTthe^ not shared by the governments of Austria and Germany has Balkan since been revealed. Though this was not publicly known until more than a year afterward, it is now established that on August 9, 191 3, the day before the Treaty of Bucharest (bo-ka-rest') was formally signed, Austria informed her ally, Italy, that she proposed to take action against Serbia. She represented this proposed action as defensive and as therefore justifying her in expecting proposes war the aid of Italy under the terms of the treaty of the Triple Al- against liance. Italy through her prime minister, Giolitti, refused to ac- cede to this view, stating that such a war would not be one of de- fense on the part of Austria, as no one was thinking of attack- ^ ing her. The treaty of Triple Alliance required its members supported to aid each other only in the case of a defensive war forced upon ^^ ^*^'^ a colleague. Austria, then, planned war upon Serbia in August, 19 13. Whether she was restrained by the knowledge that Italy would not support her or by other considerations is a matter for conjecture. Prince von Biilow, who for nine years had been Chancellor of Germany, has declared that the collapse of Turke}^ was a blow to Germany, which meant that it imperiled the plans which _ ■^ ' f i- Germany Germany was nourishing for expansion or influence in the prepares for Balkans and the East. It was on this ground that in 19 13 "^^ new army aiid taxation bills, extraordinarily increasing Germany's preparedness for war, were carried through. This inevitably led to similar, though not to as sweeping, legislation in France. 679 68o THE WORLD WAR Austria and Germany, therefore, were far from pleased at the outcome of events in the Balkans, and the former, a great European state of fifty millions, was planning action by arms against Serbia, a nation of now perhaps four millions, a nation both exhausted and elated by two years of war. Of course Austria knew that any such action would bring Russia upon the scene, and that was the reason for her desiring the eventual support of her two allies. While for reasons that are somewhat obscure, Austria finally did not consider the moment opportune for making war on Serbia in August, 19 13, she did consider it opportune in July, 19 14, and from her action at that time came swiftly and dramatically the Great War. The relations of Austria-Hungary and Serbia have already been alluded to, the former's annexation of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1908, and her part in the creation of the new state of Albania Serbia often , , _ , . , . , humUiated by iov the Same purposc, to prevent Serbia s gettmg any outlet to Austria- j-j^g ggg^ Yet, though successful in this, she had not been able Hungary to prevent the growth of Serbia. Serbia had, however, sub- mitted in 1908 and 1909 and in 19 13, to demands which emanated from Austria- Hungary and which were deeply humiliating. On both sides there was, as there had long been, plenty of bad blood. ASSASSINATION OF ARCHDUKE FRANCIS FERDINAND Suddenly a horrible crime occurred which set in motion a mighty and lamentable train of events. On June 28, 1914, the Archduke Francis Ferdinand, nephew of the Emperor of Austria, and heir charged with to the throne, was, with his wife, assassinated in the streets the crime ^^ Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia. The men who had done the infamous deed were Austrian subjects, natives of Bosnia. But they were Serbians by race. An outburst of intense indignation followed against the Serbians, "a nation of assassins," it was declared. Serbia was, by Austrian opinion, held responsible, although the crime occurred on Austrian soil and was committed by Austrian subjects, and although Austrian methods of rule in Bosnia were of such a character as sufficiently to account for the dastardly crime. At any rate, the desire for war was expressed in many Austrian newspapers, which held the Serbian Government responsible. But four weeks went by and the Austrian Government took no action. No information could be obtained by the diplomats in pSSESSLONS ^ POWERS 90 105 120 135 150 AUSTRIAN ULTIMATUM TO SERBIA 68i Vienna as to what she proposed to do. They saw no reason for any- particular worry, as the Government was evidently so self-contained, and they therefore took their usual vacations. It was intimated xhe pro- that Austria would make some demands upon Serbia, but that longed they would be of a moderate character. There was wide- the Austrian spread sympathy with her and a general feeling that she would Government be justified in demanding certain things of Serbia. The representa- tives of the various European governments were kept in ignorance. A despatch, which was destined to shake the very foundations of the world, was being fashioned, in utter silence and mystery. THE AUSTRIAN ULTIMATUM On July 23, Austria delivered this despatch to Serbia. It began by accusing the Serbian Government of not having fulfilled the obligations it had assumed in 1909 toward Austria. It de- manded that the Serbian Government should publish an official demands statement, the terms of which were dictated in the despatch, "''°*' ^^''^* expressing its disapproval of the propaganda in Serbia against Austria-Hungary and its regret that Serbian officials had taken part in this propaganda. In the despatch the murder of the Archduke was ascribed to that propaganda. Then followed ten demands upon the Serbian Government concerning the suppression of the Pan- Serbian propaganda carried on by the newspapers and the secret societies of Serbia. The despatch demanded that the Serbian Government should suppress any publication which fostered hatred of and contempt for the Austro- Hungarian monarch j-, should take the most comprehensive measures for the suppression and extinction of the secret societies, should eliminate from the schools all teachers and from text-books anything that served or might serve to foster the propaganda against Austria-Hungary, should remove from the army and from government positions all oflficials involved in the same propaganda, whose names the Austrian Government reserved the right to communicate, and that Serbia should accept the co- operation of Austrian officials in the work of investigating the con- spiracy of June 28. Other clauses in this fateful despatch concerned the arrest of the accomplices in the assassination and the prevention of the trade in arms and explosives across the frontier. Annexed to the despatch was a memorandum asserting that the murder of the 682 THE WORLD WAR Archduke and the Archduchess had been plotted in Serbia and had been executed through the complicity of Serbian officials. This despatch, harsh in its language, dictatorial in its demands, was an ultimatum, for it required the acceptance of it in its entirety The d ~ t h '^i^^i^''^ forty-cight hours, and it allowed no time for investiga- an uiti- tion or discussion of the charges made and the problems created ™* "™ by the peremptory demand. No nation would issue such a note to an equal without intending and without desiring war. Issued to a power vastly inferior, it could mean only unprecedented humiliation or national extinction, if followed up at the expiration of forty-eight hours. This Austrian ultimatum created a grave crisis. The ultimatum was not a passionate and unreflecting outburst of the Austrian Gov- ernment, swept away by a natural anger at the foul murders, ultimatum It was a cold-bloodcd and deliberate document, composed creates a after four wceks of secret preparation. The Russian ambassa- crflvc Crisis dor had not been told that it was coming and had left Vienna f(3r his vacation. The Italian Government had not been informed, although it was an ally and was particularly concerned with anything J . .- that affected the Balkan peninsula in any way or part. In cance for this fact Italy was to find her justification for remaining *^^ neutral when the war finally broke out, as she regarded that war as an aggressive one begun by Austria. The ultimatum gave Serbia the alternative of accepting egregiously humiliating conditions, practically reducing her to the state of a vassal of Austria, or of accepting war. England, France, and Russia tried to induce Austria to extend her time limit as the only way in which diplomacy might seek to The good ^ct in the matter, as, moreover, required if the relations of offices of nations were to be governed by a reasonable consideration for England, * ■' France, cach Other's rights or wishes. Their efforts were in vain. and Russia fhey then turned to Serbia, urging her, in the interests of Europe in general, to make her answer as conciliatory as possible. The result was that Serbia in her reply yielded to the greater part of what Austria demanded and that she offered, in case Austria was not satisfied with her answer, to refer the question to the Hague Tribunal or to a conference of the Great Powers. No state ever made a more complete submission under particularly humiliating circumstances. Austria, however, immediately declared THE AUSTRIAN CHALLENGE OF RUSSIA 683 the Serbian answer unsatisfactory and prepared for war. She well knew that such action would necessarily draw Russia into the con- troversy. She had every reason a state could have for knowing that, after the defiance of the annexation of Bosnia and Herze- rejects govina in 1908, another attack upon a small Slavic people would Serbia's deeply offend the leading Slavic power. Austria could not and did not expect to be able to wreak her vengeance upon Serbia without having to take Russia into account. Hers, therefore, is the responsibility for a deliberate and highly dangerous prov- deliberately ocation of a great state. Russia, a Slavic power, could not provokes ° ' t- > Russia be ignored by Teutonic powers in determining the future of Slavic peoples. If there was a single well-known fact in the whole domain of European politics it was that Russia was greatly interested in the fate of the Slav states of the Balkans. If there was any other well-established commonplace of European politics, it was this, that every Balkan question has always been considered as of general concern, as distinctly international. As a matter of fact, Serbia's obligations of 1909, already referred to, were undertaken to the Powers, not to Austria alone. Austria's position was that her action concerned herself and Serbia alone ; that no other nation or nations were involved or had any rights in the matter. In this she was supported from start to . j finish by Germany. Both Austria and Germany were aware supported by that warlike steps against Serbia would bring Russia into the ^^"""^^y question and that, owing to the obligations of the Triple and Dual Alliances, a general European war might result, yet both steadily refused to consider that Russia had any right to intervene ; it was all a matter solely between the two, Austria and Serbia. Naturally Russia did not take this view. Her warnings having proved unavailing, when Austria began to prepare for the attack upon Serbia, Russia began to mobilize. The policy of Ger- j^ . many through that last week of July was to support Austria begins to in her contention that this was her affair. She asserted that ™°^*''^® the quarrel was solely one between those two and that no outside power had the right to intervene, that, if the trouble could be kept confined to those two, there would be no general disturbance of the peace, that if the Czar, however, interfered there would be "on account of the various alliances, inconceivable consequences." If this was all that Germany did for peace, which she asserts she 684 THE WORLD WAR made every effort to maintain, then she did simply nothing, for this poUcy of "locaUzation of the conflict" begged the whole question. It assumed that neither Russia nor any other power was in any way concerned. This was an absolutely untenable position in the light of history, of reason, of interest. The question was a part of the Eastern Question which over and over has been considered and known to be emphatically international. No aspect of that question is to be left to the determination of a state of fifty millions in conflict with one of four or five. ENGLAND'S PROPOSAL A proposal was made by England that the ques- tion at issue should pro^pofesan be submitted to a international conference to be conference held in London by the Great Powers not di- rectly concerned, namely Germany, France, Eng- land, and Italy. Perhaps these four might bring about the adjustment of the diflrculties between Serbia and Austria and Russia. Russia signified declined by Germany. Sir Edward Grey her willingness, but the proposal was Other suggestions of a somewhat similar nature looking toward delay and diplomatic discussion or mediation likewise fell before the opposition or indifference of Germany. Germany's Then when England asked Germany herself to suggest some position method of mediation for the preservation of peace, she had nothing to suggest. She simply reaffirmed her position that the whole matter concerned merely Austria and Serbia. She was willing to appeal and did appeal to Russia to keep out, to refrain from mobi- GERMANY'S ULTIMATUM TO RUSSIA 685 lizing, but her appeal was always based on this thesis that the quarrel did not concern Russia, but did concern simply Austria and Serbia, a point of view which, naturally, Russia did not and could not share. Germany was ready to cooperate with other powers in bringing pressure to bear upon Russia, but not upon her ally Austria, who had begun the whole trouble and to whom she gave a free hand in her procedure toward Serbia. The attitudes of Germany and Russia were irreconcilable. Ger- many held that Russia should allow Austria entire liberty of action. Russia believed that Austria's uncompromising and violent Russia procedure demanded a Russian mobilization "directed solely mobilizes against Austria-Hungary" as the only method that might Austria- cause that country to moderate her procedure and induce her Hungary to recognize the rights of others. If Russia remained inactive, then Austria would do what she liked with Serbia. Russia emphatically claimed the right to be consulted in the settlement of Balkan matters. Austria had mobilized and on July 28 had begun a war upon Serbia. Russia accordingly mobilized against Austria. Germany considered this action a menace to herself, and on July ^i sent an ^ ■> ■> ^ Germany's ultimatum to Russia demanding that Russia begin to de- ultimatum mobilize her army within twelve hours : otherwise Germany *° ^"^sia would mobilize. As Russia did not reply to this peremptory demand, German}^ on August i , declared that a state of war existed between Russia and Germany. The German declaration of war against Russia necessaril}^ meant war with France as well, because of the Dual Alliance. We have seen that this Dual Alliance was the inevitable outcome of the existence and power of the Triple Alliance, concluded between Germanv, Austria, and Italy in 1882. The Dual Alliance „,. „ , . -^ The Dual grew out of the need which both Russia and France felt, of and Triple outside support in the presence of so powerful a combination. ■'^'•^'''^^^ If there was to be anything like a balance of power in Europe, Russia and France must combine. Both alliances were defensive. The action of Austria against Serbia brought Russia upon the scene. Russia's action brought Germany forward. Germany's action necessitated action on the part of France. One state was free to act as it saw fit, its conduct not controlled by any entangling alliance, England. The Triple and Dual Al- liances rested on definite treaties, neither of which had been made 686 THE WORLD WAR public, and imposed obligations upon the contracting parties. There had in recent years also grown up what was called the Triple The Triple Entente. The commercial rivalry of Germany and England, Entente during the past fifteen or twenty years, expressing itself in a struggle for markets, in colonial competitions, in a striking development of naval power, had been an outstanding fact in recent European history. Great Britain, seeing that her policy of isolation was possibly becoming dangerous with so active and successful a rival in the field, sought, in the first decade of the twentieth century, to settle long-continued misunderstandings with France and Russia, This she did by a treaty with France in 1904 and with Russia in 1907. These agreements settled certain problems and provided certain measures in common, the former in Africa, the latter in Asia. During „ ^ . , succeeding diplomatic crises the three powers worked in sub- The Triple or- r- Entente not stantial harmony. But the Triple Entente was not an alliance : an aUiance ^^ ^^^ simply a diplomatic group that might be found working together when the interests of its members happened to coincide. There was no actual alliance between Great Britain and France and there was no understanding of any kind between Great Britain and Russia, with regard to any European policy or contingency. When the crisis of 1914 arose Great Britain was free to act as she chose, in the light of what she considered her interests. The diplo- matic correspondence shows that this was understood in Berlin and V^ienna as it was understood in Paris and St. Petersburg. But while Great Britain had no alliances that necessarily involved her in the present war, yet as a European power, and as a great, imperial, colonial state, she had many and important interests of Grear foi" which she must care. It was for her interest that there Britain should be no European war and it was also for the interest of Europe and the world. The negotiations of that week in July, from the issuance of the ultimatum to Serbia to the declarations of war, abundantly demonstrate that she made earnest, repeated, and varied efforts to bring about a peaceful solution of the problems that had been so suddenly thrust forward. She was wedded to no particular scheme or formula and invited Germany to make sugges- tions that might effect the adjustment, if dissatisfied with hers. But despite her efforts a war had come involving at least four large states, Austria, Russia, Germany, and France, and one small state, Serbia. Would the conflagration spread ? What would England do ? THE ATTACK ON BELGIUM 687 It was certainly not for her interest that France should be con- quered by Germany, as that would reduce France to the position of a satellite and would immensely augment the power and ^. . . prestige of Germany. Moreover, England was bound in of England honor to prevent any attack upon the Atlantic seacoast of ^°*^ France France, as, since 1912, she had had a naval agreement with France whereby the French fleet was concentrated in the Mediterranean in order that England might keep larger naval forces in the home waters. It seems probable that England would have been drawn into the war necessarily if France was attacked, which was, of course, the purpose of Germany. But her participation was rendered inevitable by Germany's attack upon Belgium. * Three of the small states of Europe, Belgium, Luxemburg, and Switzerland, had been by international agreements declared neutral territory forever. By these agreements the countries con- ^ . cerned should never make war, nor should they ever be at- a neutralized tacked. The powers that signed the treaties bound them- ^'**^ selves to respect and preserve that neutrality. The treaty guar- anteeing the neutralization of Belgium was signed by England. flrlUcia J-77 U--t'^-i^V l-^J,., JcX. /J<:L^iM^£.. ^ 4jMJ2-/w t<,«_ lUJ: L.'^A^yit t'U'i*,^/ ./ ^/KM^A£^(ta!^«- i.'.axiA- rLCA-^^urC . . cZ£l JAn\. ^t/cce, ti. ir^z£-nT'r ce'^- s-fut-j i-vji. ii^«,'i'raMy(i-- e^^^A^e■nr truy Cu av'.nnv^^B^^^^^^^^^^^^QlV^H a -■^^*^|^ ^^^^SSmi0^^^^^ .^.ititimU ^' "'^ '"' ' ' "^S^*^ Decorations Bestowed on the City of Verdun by France and Her Allies Top, Russian Cross of St. George. Below, left to right, British Military Cross, French Cross of the Legion of Honor, Croix de Guerre, Italian Gold Medal for Military Valor. Bottom, left to right, Serbian Gold Medal for Military Bravery, Belgian Cross of Leopold, Gold Medal of Monteaegro. 710 THE WORLD WAR in irreparable losses, but victory they did not win. The French stiffened, under Retain and later under Nivelle, and with the electri- " They shall fying, cry "lis ne passeront pas ! " "They shall not pass ! " they not pass ! " baffled the fury of the enemy and at the end pitched him out of most of the positions he had won. Verdun did not fall. The military reputations of Retain and Nivelle had grown enormously and the latter soon succeeded Joffre as commander in chief. The Crown Prince did not emerge from this enterprise irradiated with any blinding effulgence of glory. His experiences were, however, calculated to make him a wiser if not a better man. THE BATTLE OF THE SOMME The course and outcome of the later phases of the Verdun cam- paign were affected by another campaign which was being carried on simultaneously in another sector of the long line that ran from Belgium through France to Switzerland. This was the Battle of the Somme. This was an Anglo-French attack, stretching from Arras to some distance south of the Somme River, the English under General Haig, the French under Foch, the Germans under Hinden- burg, who had been transferred to the west after his great successes in the east. England was now striking a new pace, which she was to continue and to increase, in participation in the war on land. In 1914 she had had only a small regular army of a hundred thousand men. This was rapidly increased by volunteering which achieved notable proportions but not notable enough. Finally in January, 19 16, she had adopted conscription for single men, and, in May, for married men as well. Thus she now had universal service for all between the ages of 18 and 41. She was training the new recruits hastily and was increasing her munition supplies enormously. She had taken over more and more of the line until she was now manning about ninety miles from the sea to the Somme. The people of the Allied countries expected that their armies, thus enlarged and elaborately equipped, would attempt to break through the German lines. The Battle of the Somme was an endeavor to bring to an end the long deadlock on the western front. After a terrific bombardment, which had by this time become the customary prelude to an offensive, the general assault was begun on July i. For a few days the Allies made progress, though on the whole very BATTLE OF THE SOMME 711 slowly. The railroad centers, Bapaume and Peronne, were their objectives. The German line stiffened and fiercely counter-attacked. The battle dragged and the rainy season set in, making it almost impossible to move the heavy guns over the muddy roads. While both the English and the French took a number of towns and Result of considerable bodies of prisoners, they were unable to attain '^® b&Me fheir objectives. All through the summer and well into the fall the desperate struggle went on, dying down in October. The total area won by the Allies was small, about 120 square miles. Nowhere had they advanced more than seven miles from their starting point. Nevertheless Haig was right when he announced that the campaign had been a success for three reasons, namely, because it had relieved Verdun ; because, by holding large masses of Germans on the western front, it had enabled Russia to win a cons derable victory on the eastern front ; and because it had worn down the German strength. It was in the second phase of this Battle of the Somme that a new and redoubtable engine of war was introduced by the British, power- ful armored motor cars, quickly nicknamed "tanks," which could cross trenches, break through barbed-wire entanglements, and at the same time could scatter a murderous fire all about from the guns within. Machine gun fire against them was entirely ineffectual. Only when squarely hit by powerful missiles from big cannon were the tanks disabled. There was also serious fighting during 1916 on the Italian and on the Russian fronts. The Austrians, supposing the Russians had learned their lesson in the previous year and that they would itaiy think twice before again assuming the offensive, left their threatened eastern front lightly guarded and prepared to punish the Italians, their historic enemy, and now more hated than ever because of their "treachery" in breaking the Triple Alliance. In May the Austrians began an attack from the Tyrol. Controlling the passes of the Alps, they were able to form a large army and to threaten Verona and Vicenza. The Italians resisted desperately but lost a large number of guns and men. They also lost about two hundred and thirty square miles of Italian territory. But the Austrians had weakened their eastern front so serioush^ that the Russians were winning great victories over them in that theater. This in turn reacted upon the Italian campaign by forcing the Austrians to recall many troops in order to ward off the new danger. Therefore they were 712 THE WORLD WAR obliged to forego for the time being their dream of breaking into the plains of Venetia. While the Russians had been forced by Hindenburg and Mackensen to make a great retreat in 19 15, they had not been put out of the war Brusiioff's and, in June, 1916, they began, under Brusiloff, a new offensive, drive ^hjs time between the Pripet Marshes and the Austrian prov- ince of Bukowina. Brusiioff's drive was for a while successful and netted far larger territorial gains than were made on the western front in the Battle of the Somme. Brusiloff was able to push the Austrians back from twenty to fifty miles, to take a large number of prisoners and to capture many towns and cities, including the important ones of Lutsk and Czernowitz. The campaign lasted from June to October, but after the first month no great progress was made and the offensive gradually wore down and stopped. Russia was far from having recovered what she had lost in the previous year. Indeed, she recovered practically nothing in the north from the Pripet Marshes to the Baltic Sea. The interplay of these various campaigns was unmistakable. The Somme helped Verdun, the Russian drive helped Italy by freeing her of the Austrians and by enabling her to begin an offensive along the Isonzo which yielded Gorizia on August 9 and brought her to within thirteen miles of coveted Trieste. But while there was this interplay, this relieving of pressure in one region by bringing pressure to bear in another, the team-work was most imperfect. The desirability of a unified command of all the Allied forces had hardly begun to dawn. It took the experiences of another year and more to drive that idea into the minds of the governing authorities of the various countries concerned. ROUMANIA ENTERS THE WAR The unhappy consequences of the lack of proper coordination in a common cause were conspicuously shown in another field in this same year of 1916, namely, in Roumania. Roumania entered the war on the side of the Allies on August 27, 1916. Her chief motive was to assure "the realization of her national unity," by which phrase was meant the liberation from Austria-Hungary of the three million Roumanians who lived in the eastern section of the Dual Monarchy, in Transylvania, and their incorporation in the Kingdom of Rou- mania. The principle of nationality was at the basis of Roumania's THE CONQUEST OF ROUMANIA 713 action, the principle that kindred peoples desiring to be united should be united. Roumania's declaration of war was naturally warmly- applauded by the Allies. It was followed immediately by a Rou- manian invasion of Transylvania, which achieved very considerable successes. But the Germans were resolved to prevent this threatened mutila- tion of their ally and also this threatened cutting of the connection between the Central Powers and Turkey. Roumanian sue- Roumania cess, if unimpeded, would widen out into the Balkans and conquered imperil the famous "corridor" through Bulgaria and Serbia. The German General Staff determined, therefore, to strike with all the force at its command, to deal a blow that should be both swift and memorable. Two large armies composed of Germans, Austro- Hungarians, Bulgarians, and Turks, and under the command of Falkenhayn and Mackensen, were sent against Roumania. They conquered the southern part of the kingdom with comparative ease and entered Bucharest, the capital, on December 6. What was left of the Roumanian army withdrew to the north. J assy became the provisional seat of Roumanian government. Peace was not concluded until much later, but meanwhile the Central Powers controlled most of the territory of Roumania, and exploited its rich resources in wheat and oil. The corridor to Constantinople was widened rather than cut. From this time forth the German ambi- tion to create a Middle Europe, dominated by Germany, became more and more pronounced and more and more insistent. The Roumanian disaster was due to the immense superiority of German resources, equipment, and generalship ; also to the mistakes of Roumania. One of these mistakes was the lateness of her decision to enter the war. None of the Allies was in a position to help her, except Russia, whose conduct was now equivocal. Had Roumania declared war in June at the moment of Brusiloff 's great victories, the outcome might have been very different. As it was she declared it when Brusiloff's drive had been brought to a standstill. This was but one more proof of the fact that the Allies must bring about a closer adjustment of their efforts, if they were to win. One more state entered the European War in 1Q16, Portusral. „ * Portugal On February 23, Portugal seized the German ships in her enters the ; harbors, claiming that the shortage of tonnage created by ^^^ Germany's submarine campaign justified the action. Whereupon 714 THE WORLD WAR o Moscow U S S I A AFRICA I Territory of the Central Empires ' and Turkey I Territory Invaded by Central Powers I Railroad to the £ast arul to Africa Scale of Miles NG CO. INC- H t Khartum The '' Middle Europe " Scheme ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE BRITISH NAVY 715 Germany declared war upon her, March 9. A few days later it was officially announced by the Portuguese minister to the United States that "Portugal is drawn into the war as a result of her long- standing alliance with England, an alliance that has withstood unbroken the strain of five hundred years." This, it is curious to note, is a reference to a treaty signed in London on June 16, 1373, by which each country pledged itself to assist the other in case of war, a treaty quite as legitimate as that of the Triple Alliance, much more venerable, and far less injurious to the welfare of Europe. During all these centuries the Anglo-Portuguese Alliance has con- tinued, frequently reaffirmed, the friendship it was designed to bring about still exists, the treaty concluded in 1373 has been broken by neither party and is still considered in force. Portugal participated in the war by sending an army to France and b}' aiding England in Africa. THE XA\AL BATTLE OF JUTLAND The year 19 16 witnessed also a great naval engagement between England and Germany, the Battle of Jutland. England had given since the outbreak of the war remarkable evidence of her might upon the ocean. The mobilization of her fleet in the opening days was quite as noteworthy in its way as the mobilization of the German „ -' ■' _ Services of army, and as the latter entered forthwith upon a career of the British victory, so also did the former. The pressure of the British ^^* navy began at once to be felt where it was intended it should be, in Germany. A blockade of the German coast was established at the very outset, which was destined to be made steadily more effective. Germany's merchant shipping was swept from the ocean, the vast fabric of her sea-borne commerce collapsed. The British fleet prevented Germany from importing such essentials as foodstuffs, petroleum, cotton, coffee, rubber, zinc, tin, so necessary in the work of war. The blockade was not perfect, as now and then a German raider could get through, sure, however, in the end, to be hunted down. But the attention of the world, the attention even of England herself, was not riveted upon this incessant naval war as it was upon the military operations on land. One reason for this was that the naval war was silent and unseen, although its effects were most important. Another was that the war on land was bitterly contested and gave rise to numberless incidents, was a tense, critical, and 7i6 THE WORLD WAR doubtful struggle, while the war on the sea was, generally speaking, devoid of incident. England's command of her element was never in doubt, and was even challenged only infrequently. Submarines could and did do occasional damage, even in one instance sinking three English war vessels, and there had been two or three sea fights between small fractions of the fleets, Germany winning a victory in the early days off Chili, England a far more significant one sub- sequently off the Falkland Islands. These events were, however, of minor importance. But the main German fleet stuck tightly to its base, the harbor of Kiel, and the unremitting, perpetual stress of the blockade offered no sensations to a world which was surfeited with them as a result of the land warfare. But on May 31, 1916, the German High Seas fleet, commanded by Admiral von Scheer, steamed forth, and skirted up the western coast of Denmark. Sighted by the British scouts under Admiral Beatty, about 3.30 in the afternoon, an engagement immediately began, the Battle of main British squadron, under Admiral Jellicoe, coming up only Jutland later. The battle continued for several hours until darkness came on, between eight and nine. It was the greatest naval battle since Trafalgar and, in the strength and power of the units engaged, undoubtedly the greatest in all history. The result was inconclusive. Both sides lost important ships but both claimed to be victorious. That the real victor, however, was England was proved by the fact that the German fleet was obliged to return to Kiel and did not again emerge from that refuge. Britannia still ruled the wave, and it was extremely fortunate for the safety of democracy in England, France, Italy, and the United States, and for liberty everywhere, that she did. Had England rendered no other service than this of making the seas safe for freedom and dangerous for despotism, the debt of humanity to her would be incalculable. But she was doing far more than this. The utterances of her statesmen, like those of France, from the first of August, 1914, defined the issues at stake, and set forth adequately the appalling gravity of the crisis. Not only were those utterances profoundly educative but the}^ were veritable trumpet blasts, summoning to action, action, action, in the interest of all that men in Western Europe and in America had long held most precious. In the darkest hours, and there were many such during those first three years, there was no faltering in high places, no talk of compromise of right with wrong, no weakening of resolu- ENTRANCE OF THE UNITED STATES 717 tion, no abatement of demand that this world be made safe for civiUzed men. It must never be forgotten that the leaders of France and England, and the nations they represented, were constant and valorous defenders of the New World, as of the Old, that it was their heroism and their immeasurable spirit of sacrifice that barred the way of a vulgar and conscienceless tyrant toward universal domina- tion. Never did men die in a holier cause. And they died in enormous numbers, literally by the million. ENTRANCE OF THE UNITED STATES INTO THE WAR In such a contest as that the United States belonged, body and soul. If she was to preserve a shred of self-respect, if she was to maintain inviolate the honor of the American name, if she was to safe- America guard the elementary rights of American citizens, if she was ^'^^ *^^ '"^^ bound in any sense to be her brother's helper in the defense of freedom in the world, then she must take her stand shoulder to shoulder with the hosts of freemen in Europe who were giving and had long been giving the last full measure of devotion to that cause, then she must spend her manhood and her wealth freely and without com- plaint, as France and England and Belgium and Serbia had done. From very early in the war there were Americans who endeavored to arouse their country to a sense of its danger and its duty, to per- suade it to prepare, to fire it with the resolve to keep the nation's 'scutcheon clean. Among those who, by their quick and intelligent appreciation of the situation, by their courage and activity, rendered invaluable service in the campaign of national education were Ex- President Roosevelt and General Leonard Wood. From August, 1914, to April, 1917, America passed through a painful, humiliating, and dangerous experience. Her declaration of war was the expression of the wisdom she distilled from that expe- rience. Her entrance into the war was the most important event of the year 191 7, though not immediately the most important, for the collapse of Russia, occurring also in that year, had a quicker and more direct bearing upon the military situation. But in the end, if America kept the faith, she could tip the scales decisively. We entered the war finally because Germany forced us in, because she rendered it absolutely impossible for us to stay out unless we were the most craven and pigeon-hearted people on the earth. 7i8 THE WORLD WAR Any one who counted on that being the case was entertaining a notion for which he could certainly cite no evidence in our previous history. How did Germany force us into this war? What specific things did she do that could be answered in the end in one way and one way only ? GERMAN OFFENSES AGAINST AMERICA The record is a long one, of offenses to the moral, the intellectual, the spiritual, the material interests of America. First, the wanton attack upon Serbia, a small state, by two bullies, Austria and Ger- many, and the flouting of all suggestions of arbitration or attempts to settle international difficulties peacefully, methods in which Amer- German ica believed, as had been shown by her own repeated use of offenses them, and by her enthusiastic support of the efforts of the two Hague Conferences to perfect those methods and to win general adhesion to them. Second, the invasion of Belgium and the martyr- dom of that country, amid nameless indignities and inhumanities. The indignation of America was spontaneous, widespread, and intense, nor has it shown any tendency to abate from that day to this. The sentiment of horror, thus needlessly aroused, coupled with admiration for the brave resistance of the Belgians and sym- pathy for their sufferings, contributed powerfully to the creation of that state of mind which finally gained expression on April 6, 191 7. But the conquest and the inhuman treatment of Belgium were no direct infringement of our rights. The national indignation was pro- foundly stirred, the national sympathy aroused, but neither the sov- ereignty of the Government nor the persons or property of the citizens of the United States were affected. These were, however, not long to German remain immune from attack. German and Austrian officials, plots accredited to our Government and enjoying the hospitality of our country, proceeded to use their positions here for the purpose of damaging Germany's enemies. They fomented strikes among American munition workers and seamen ; they caused bombs to be placed on ships carrying munitions of war ; they plotted incendiary fires, and conspired to bring about the destruction of ships and factories. In 191 5 the ambassador of Austria-Hungary, Dumba, and the German military and naval attaches, Papen and Boy-Ed, were caught in such activities, and were forced to leave the country. Under the supervision of Papen a regular office was maintained to GERMAN PLOTS 719 procure fraudulent passports, by lying and by forgery, for German reservists. American territory was used as a base of supplies, and military enterprises against Canada and against India were hatched by Germans on American soil. These German plots were in gross defiance of our position as a neutral and of our sovereignty as an independent nation. The German Embassy in Washington was a nest of scoundrels, plotting arson, and murder also, since the incen- diary fires and explosions cost many innocent lives. GERMANY'S SUBINIARINE POLICY While the diplomatic representatives of Germany were engaged in plotting criminal enterprises against Americans at home, the German Government itself had embarked upon a course of procedure that inevitably ended in the destruction of American lives and property on the high seas. In February, 1915, Germany proclaimed the waters around the British Isles "a war zone" and announced that enemy ships found within that zone would be sunk without warning. Neutrals were expected to keep their ships and citizens out of this area. If they did not, the responsibility for what might happen would be theirs, not Germany's. Such was the announcement of German^^'s submarine policy, a polic}' that was to have more momentous consequences than its authors imagined. A submarine is a war vessel and as such has a perfect right to attack an enemy war vessel without warning and sink her if she can. But neither a submarine nor any other war vessel has any right, under international law, to sink a merchantman belonging to the enemy or belonging to- a neutral, except under certain conditions, and one of the conditions is that the persons on board, crew and passengers, shall be removed to the ship attacking or their lives otherwise absolutely safeguarded. President Wilson, six days after the German proclamation, des- patched a note to Germany announcing that the United States would hold the German Government to "a strict accountability" should any American ships be sunk or American lives lost, and that the United States would take all steps necessary "to safeguard American lives and property and to secure to American citizens the full enjoyment of their acknowledged rights on the high seas." To this the German Government replied that neutral vessels en- 720 THE WORLD WAR tering the war zone "will themselves bear the responsibility for any- unfortunate accidents that may occur. Germany disclaims all responsibility for such accidents and their consequences." This was a clear announcement that not only did she propose to sink enemy merchantmen, but neutral merchantmen as well, were they found within the prohibited zone, without removing the passengers to safety or even giving them the warning necessary to enable them to take to the lifeboats, which, on the high seas, would themselves not be places of safety but which at least might perhaps give some chance for life. On March 28, a British steamer, the Falaba, was torpedoed and one American was drowned. On May i, an American ship, the Gulflight, The "Falaba" was torpedoed without warning. The vessel managed to case remain afloat and was later towed into port, but the captain died of heart failure caused by the shock, and two of the crew who jumped overboard were drowned. The Government of the United States began at once to investigate the case, as here apparently were all the elements calling for strict accountability. But before the investigation was completed, indeed before a week had passed, the case was overshadowed by another, the sinking of the Lusita7iia. Germany's ruthless submarine campaign, in force since February, had resulted by the first of May in the sinking of over sixty merchant ships in the war zone, several of them belonging to neutral nations, with a loss of about two hundred and fifty lives, all of them the lives of noncombatants. Germany had deliberately adopted a policy that involved the killing of as many noncombatants, hitherto pro- tected by international law and the usages of warfare among civilized nations, as might be necessary to enable her to achieve her ends. What she had done on land to hundreds and thousands of peaceful, unarmed, non-fighting people in Belgium and France she was now ready and resolved to do on the sea. But while she was torpedoing many vessels, yet England's commerce went on as before, thousands of ships entering and clearing British ports, and Great Britain was transporting an army to France without the loss of a single man. As the German people had been told that the submarines would quickly bring England to her knees and as they were not doing so, something spectacular and sensational must be achieved to justify the promises and expectations, and to silence criticism or discourage- ment at home. Consequently, the largest trans-Atlantic British THE "LUSITANIA" r2i liner still in service was selected for destruction. The world, it was believed, would then take notice and people would think twice before entering the war zone. On May 7, the Lusitania was The torpedoed twice without warning and sank in less than twenty " Lusitania ' minutes. Nearly twelve hundred men, women, and children were drowned, among them over a hundred Americans. This cold- blooded, deliberate murder of innocent noncombatants was the most Copyright by Vndcniood <.t- i'ndu ii uud, A'. Y The "Lusitania" Leaving New York, May ist, 1915 Torpedoed by a German submarine six days later. brilliant achievement of Germany's submarine campaign and was celebrated with enthusiasm in Germany as a great "victory." The rest of the world regarded it as both barbarous and cowardly. The indignation of Americans at this murder of Americans was universal and intense. WTien, three years later, American soldiers in France went over the top, in the campaign of 191 8, shouting "Lusitania'' at their foes, they were but expressing the deep-seated indignation of an outraged people, an indignation and resentment which time had done nothing to assuage. 722 THE WORLD WAR On May 13, President Wilson despatched a message to Germany- denouncing this act as a gross violation of international law, demand- ing that Germany disavow it and make reparation as "far as repara- tion is possible," and declaring that the Government of the United States would not "omit any word or any act necessary to the per- formance of its sacred duty of maintaining the rights of the United States and its citizens and of safeguarding their free exercise and enjoyment."' Germany replied on May 28, evading the main issues of the Ameri- can note and making many assertions that were quickly proved to be Photo from Underwood & Underwood, N. Y. Bronze Medals Awarded to Men Who Helped Sink the "Lusitania" lies. A correspondence ensued between the two governments, in which the President repeated his demand for disavowal and all possible reparation. In the end Germany offered to pay for the lives lost but refused to admit that the sinking of the ship was illegal. No agreement was reached between the two nations. No action, however, was taken. All through 191 5, torpedoing of vessels continued, and several Americans were drowned. The Government steadily asserted our rights, the German Government evading the fundamental principles involved, trying to confuse the issue by raising irrelevant points. UNRESTRICTED SUBMARINE WARFARE 723 On March 24, 1916, occurred another major event m this campaign of indiscriminate murder of innocent noncombatants, namely the torpedoing without warning of an Enghsh ship, the Sussex, The "Sussex" while crossing the English Channel. Two Americans were ^^^^ injured and about seventy others, who were on board, were en- dangered. President Wilson again protested and declared the United States could "have no choice but to sever diplomatic relations with the German Empire altogether," unless the German Government "should now immediately declare and effect an abandonment of its present methods of submarine warfare against passenger and freight-carrying vessels." Finally, on May 4, German}^ agreed that henceforth merchant vessels should not be sunk without warning and without saving human lives, unless these ships should attempt to escape or offer resistance. But she appended a condi- tion, namely that the United States should compel Great Britain to observe international law. If the United States should not succeed, then Germany "must reserve to itself complete liberty of decision." President Wilson accepted the promise and repudiated the con- dition on the ground that our plain rights could not be made con- tingent by Germany upon what any other power should or should not do. To this note Germany sent no reply. That the promise was entirely insincere, that it was the intention to keep it only as long as it should be convenient, that ruthless sub- marine warfare was to be resumed whenever it seemed likely to be successful, was admitted later by the German Chancellor, Bethmann- Hollweg. Sinkings continued to occur from time to time throughout 1916, and finally, on January 31, 1917, the mask of hypocrisy and duplicity was thrown aside and a policy of unrestricted and ruthless submarine warfare was proclaimed. Germany announced „ ^ • ♦ ^ '■ ■' Unrestricted that beginning the next day, February i, she would prevent submarine "in a zone around Great Britain, France, and Italy, and in the ""^^^^^ Eastern Mediterranean, all navigation, that of neutrals included. ... All ships met within that zone will be sunk." The insulting concession was made that one American passenger ship per week might go to England, if it were first painted in stripes, the breadth of which was indicated, and if it carefully followed a route laid down by Germany. "Give us two months of this kind of warfare," said the German Foreign Secretary, Zimmermann, to Ambassador Gerard, THE WORLD WAR THE UNITED STATES ENTERS THE WAR 725 on January 31, "and we shall end the war and make peace within three months." There was only one answer possible to such a note as this, unless the people of the United States were willing to hold their rights and liberties subject to the pleasure and interest of Germany. On Febru- ary 3, the President severed diplomatic relations with Germany, re- called our ambassador and dismissed von Bernstorff. Toward the end of the month Secretary Lansing made public an intercepted despatch from the German Foreign Secretary, Zimmermann, to the German Minister to Mexico, instructing him to propose an alliance with Mexico and Japan and war upon the United States, Mexico's reward to be the acquisition of the States of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. In other words, the United States was to be dis- membered. When, on April 2, 19 17, President Wilson appeared before Congress and in an address, which was a scathing arraignment of Germany before the world, recommended a declaration of war against war this "natural foe to liberty" he had a predestined and enthu- between Germany and siastic response, for he was but expressing the wishes of the the United American. people, who did not intend to have war made upon states them indefinitely without their hitting back at the aggressor with all the force at their command, and who were resolved to share in the enterprise of saving the world from Prussian domination, or, in the words of the President, "to vindicate the principles of peace and justice in the life of the world, as against selfish and autocratic power" and "to make the world safe for democracy." On April 6, Congress passed a resolution to the effect "that the state of war between the United States and the Imperial German Government which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby for- mally declared," and it shortly proceeded to pass a series of important military, financial, and economic measures designed to enable the country to play a worthy part in the great struggle. The United States did not declare war upon Austria-Hungary until December 7, nor did it then or later declare war upon Bulgaria and Turkey. With the two latter diplomatic relations only were broken. Thus a war, begun with incredible lightness of heart by Austria-' Hungary and Germany upon the banks of the Danube, had expanded to include not only most of Europe, but Asia and Africa and now all of North America. Canada had been in the war since its beginning and 726 THE WORLD WAR uta Iha Gvriittamtii mi fta p»«^« ft tit* VsilM 9Mm tat nAtm AmftrtM: llierefore l» B H-mletd t^ tM SsmX* aisrf ffimM e/ J?»;»w«il9fte«» <|l^ (JWfBi Sla^a !>/ Avurtixt U Oeo^fym onmitiM, TtiU the iitato tf wtr imtW(«i (iw rnim) St«te* dtij ibe JwiKtritt OmiMB Otmnaawt wht<^ tiM 9tm taMa tlnxt ii{ii>n (bo United Shtte* i« Iwwby fosMWyaMlMsi! tis4 ttdit flw fraUtat im. «»tl he i» Iwrctiy. auU»»!t«l s»3 «l!«c«ed to eajSoy te tsOM M»»! toil falfltafi. forew .<' the Coagm* of which the Canadians distinguished themselves at V'imy Ridge ; the long-drawn-out Battle of the Aisne, fought by the French from April to November, famous for the fighting about the Chemin des Dames; the British offensive in Flanders, from July to December, which yielded Passchendaele Ridge and other positions ; the Battle of Cambrai, in November and December, in which the Germans were compelled to retire several miles on a front of twenty miles. THE INVASION OF ITALY But while on the French front the Allies made considerable gains, in another region they sustained a serious reverse, in Italy. The Italians had seized Gorizia in 1916 and in the summer of IQ17 they carried on a very successful offensive along the Isonzo and the Carso Plateau. But with the breakdown of Russia and the spread of pacifism in the Russian armies the Germans were able to send large bodies of troops and a great quantity of heavy artillery to the aid of their ally, Austria. On October 28, 19 17, the Austro-German army seized Gorizia ; on the 30th Udine fell ; a rapid retreat of the Italians followed to the Tagliamento. The Germans announced that they had captured 1 80,000 prisoners and 1 500 guns. The Tagliamento ^ „. could not be held and the Italians were driven back to the Piave. For days the Allied world held its breath, fearing that what had happened to Serbia in 191 5, to Roumania in 1916, was now in 1917 to happen to Italy, and that she. would be con- quered and eliminated from the war. But the Piave held and the attempts of the Central Powers to outflank it in the mountains to the north of Venetia, along the Asiago Plateau and other ridges, failed. There the invasion was halted. French and English troops were rushed to the aid of Italy and their arrival greatly helped and encouraged the Italians. But the world had had a bad shock and was apprehensive still, lest the Italian line should be broken. The Germans announced that the campaign had netted them 300,000 prisoners and nearly 3000 guns. Whether this was true or not, cer- tain it was that they had freed Austria of the enemy and that they THE ITALIAN FRONT 735 now themselves occupied four thousand square miles of Italian territory and that they were in a position to threaten the richest section of Italy, which contained, among other things, the great munition plants. The Allied gains on the western front and those in Asia, which will be referred to later, were but a slight comfort in view of the Russian and Italian disasters. The year ended in gloom in the Allied camp. Farthest Italian Advance Austrian Invasion, October, 1917. Italian Front But there was at least some satisfaction to be derived from the fact that Venice had not been taken, and that that matchless creation of art had not been damaged by the ruthlessness of the enemy as had the incomparable cathedral of Rheims, the masterpiece of Gothic archi- tecture, the living embodiment of French history, whose every stone spoke of long lines of kings — and of Joan of Arc. The year 1917, therefore, closed in gloom. The collapse of Russia, the disaster in Italy, were more alarming in their possible, if not probable, consequences than the scattered and costly gains of the Allies on the western front and the entrance of America into the war, 736 THE WORLD WAR perhaps too late to be of any material value, were reassuring. In western Asia, it is true, the year brought some encouragement to the Allies, but how durable or significant the successes there would prove to be it was quite impossible to forecast. As the Germans had loudly proclaimed their intention to link Berlin with Bagdad, and erect a Middle-Europe, and to extend it through Turkey and the great valleys of the Euphrates and the Tigris, and as this meant nothing less than a pointed threat at the British Empire in India and Egypt, it was natural and inevitable that England should accept the German challenge in that part of the world as she had accepted it in western Europe and on the high seas. Consequently, as early as 19 1 5 an expedition had been sent out from India, under General Th E r h Townshend, to prevent the consummation of the German in Mesopo- plans. But the expedition failed disastrously. After hav- tamia -^^g advanced two hundred miles up the Tigris and after having seized the city of Kut-el-Amara, General Townshend found himself besieged in that place by the Turks and after a few months, no relief having reached him, he was forced to surrender with his entire army, about ten thousand men, on April 28, 1916, after a siege of a hundred and forty-three days. Not only was this a serious reverse in itself, but it gravely injured Great Britain's prestige in the East. There was nothing for her to do but endeavor to repair the damage done. She at once organized another expedition on a larger scale and with more careful preparation, which she sent into Mesopo- tamia under General Maude, early in 1917. This expedition was successful. Kut-el-Amara was recaptured on February 24 and on March 11 the British entered Bagdad in triumph. Bagdad was not of great strategic importance, but its capture exercised a decided moral effect throughout the world. Toward the close of the year the British achieved other victories over the Turks, farther west, in Palestine. During the earlier years Capture of o^ fhe war the Turks had seriously menaced England's control Jerusalem qj ^\^q Suez Canal and Egypt. The English resolved to elimi- nate this danger once for all by sending an army into Palestine, under General AUenby. This army gradually forced its way northward, captured Jaffa, the seaport of Jerusalem, in November, and entered Jerusalem itself in triumph on December 10, 191 7. Great was the rejoicing throughout the Christian world at this recovery of its sacred city after seven centuries of Mohammedan control. The achieve- THE CAPTURE OF JERUSALEM 737 Copyright by Underwood ct- Undcrivood, N. Y. General Allenby Entering Jerusalem ment of the medieval Crusaders was being repeated. Would the new victory of the Christian over the Infidel prove ephemeral, as had the earlier one? The Germans were not downcast over the turn of events in these remote theaters of war. Nor had they any reason to be. On the whole they were holding the western front, and the eastern front had 738 THE WORLD WAR disappeared under the terrific blows they had delivered to Russia and which had laid her low. On the 22d of December the German Emperor was undoubtedly expressing the prevalent German opinion of the general situation when he said to the army in France : "The year 19 17 with its great battles has proved that the German people has, in the Lord of Creation above, an unconditional and avowed ally on whom it can absolutely depend. ... If the enemy does not want peace, then we must bring peace to the world by battering in with the iron fist and shining sword the doors of those who will not have peace. . . . But our enemies still hope, with the assistance of new allies, to defeat you and then to destroy forever the world position won by Germany in hard endeavor. They will not succeed. Trusting in our righteous cause and in our strength, we face the year 1 91 8 with firm confidence and iron will. Therefore, forward with God to fresh deeds and fresh victories ! ' ' THE BOLSHEVIKI AND PEACE The first of the fresh victories were to be achieved on the diplomatic field and were to be supremely satisfactory to the Germans. They consisted of the treaties of peace imposed by them upon Russia and Roumania, and upon the big fragments of former Russia which had declared their independence rather than remain connected with a country controlled by the Bolsheviki, namely the Ukraine and Finland. The Bolsheviki demanded immediate peace and when they suc- ceeded in driving Kerensky from power, and themselves assumed con- trol, they began negotiations to that end. They signed an armistice at Brest-Litovsk, the German army headquarters, on December 15, 19 1 7. The leading personages in the ensuing discussion were Kiihlmann for Germany, Czemin for Austria-Hungary, and Trotzky for Russia. The negotiations were long and frequently stormy. Trotzky urged that the peace be based upon the principles of "no annexations, no indemnities." The Central Powers pretended to accept this formula. Their insincerity and duplicity in announcing their adhesion to this principle and to that of the right of peoples to determine their own allegiance were shortly made apparent. They refused to withdraw their troops from the occupied parts of Russia and they indicated clearly that their aims were the opposite THE TREATY OF BREST-LITOVSK 739 of their professions. At this Trotzky balked and withdrew from the conference and the Russian Government announced that it would not sign "an annexationist treaty" but at the same time it announced that the war was at an end and it ordered the complete demobilization of the Russian troops on all fronts. Germany, however, refused to accept this solution of "no war, but no peace." It insisted on a treaty in black and white. As the nego- tiations had been broken off by the departure of the Russian Treaty of delegates on February 10, the German army immediately as- Brest-Litovsk sumed the offensive and began a fresh invasion of Russia, advancing on a front of five hundred miles and to within seventy miles of Petro- grad. This speedily brought the Russians to terms and they signed on March 3, 1918, the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the most notorious "an- nexationist treaty " on record. Its principal provisions were : Russia surrendered all claims to Poland, Lithuania, Courland, Livonia, and Esthonia ; she also renounced all claims to Finland and the Ukraine and agreed to recognize their independence and to make peace with them ; she surrendered Batum, Erivan, and Kars in the Caucasus to Turkey, and she promised to cease all revolutionary propaganda in the ceded regions and in the countries of the Central Alliance. Subsequently and in direct violation of the plain intent of one of the articles of the treaty, the promise of a large money indemnity was exacted from Russia. By this treaty Russia lost an enormous territory, about half a million square miles, a territory more than twice as large as the Ger- man Empire. She lost a population of about 65,000,000, j^.^ which was about that of the German Empire. A year or less ment of of Bolshevism had sufficed to undo the work of all the Russian ^"^^'^ Emperors from Peter the Great to Nicholas II. So complete a mutilation of a great country Europe had never seen. Russia was thrust back into the condition in which she had been in the seven- teenth century and which even then was found intolerable. Never in modern times has a great power surrendered such vast territories by a single stroke of the pen. Pacifism and internationalism had borne their natural fruit with unexpected swiftness. Gorky, the Russian novelist, and considered a radical until the Bolsheviki appeared and gave a new extension to that word, has estimated that this treaty robbed Russia of 37 per cent of her manufacturing indus- tries, 75 per cent of her coal, and 73 per cent of her iron. 740 THE WORLD WAR What the future of the ceded territories should be was not indicated beyond the statement that "Germany and Austria-Hungary intend to decide the future fate of these territories by agreement with their population." A few weeks later the Central Powers dictated a pitiless treaty to Roumania, forcing large cessions of territory and minutely and ingeniously squeezing her of her economic resources for their advantage. The Treaty of Brest-Litovsk laid bare the soul of modern Germany, It proved to all the world that, whatever her professions might be, her greed was unabashed and unrestrained. And this greed was characteristic not simply of her rulers, military and civil. All Germany applauded. The same Reichstag which in July, 191 7, had voted in favor of the principle of "no annexations, no indemni- ties" now enthusiastically ratified the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the Socialists joining in. The rest of the world now knew, if it had not known before, what it might expect, if it was forced to pass under the same yoke. Germany stood completely unmasked. Her ideal was revealed in all its nakedness. Having arranged matters in the east to her satisfaction, and no longer threatened or preoccupied in that quarter, Germany now turned practicallv her entire attention to the western front, Germany ji i i i and the Confident that, by concentrated energy of attack, she could ^ont^'^'^ at last conquer there and snatch the victory which had so long eluded her and which would end the war. Transferring thither her large eastern armies she was confident that now she could compel a decision and could force a settlement to her taste. One more campaign in France and all would be well. The spring drive was to be begun early, the intention being to separate the French and English armies and then defeat each in turn swiftly — before the Americans should arrive in any such numbers as to be able to influence the course of events. THE WAR IN 19 1 8 The drive opened on March 21, 1918. The mood in which it was begun was expressed by the Kaiser the day before : "The prize of vic- The German tory," said he, "must not and will not fail us. No soft peace, drive of 1918 byj- Qne corresponding to Germany's interests." A month later the German financial secretary added an appendant to this Imperial thought when he said in the Reichstag on April 23: THE TREATY OF BREST-LITOVSK •41 ^-'CJ "^-^ '/1i'rfvn > e> ofanendur- and particularly after a war that has swept the whole world ing peace within its destructive range, must be the product of long con- sideration and reflection. It can hardly be hurried and yet hurried it is likely to be, necessarily, because of the general desire for the speedy resumption of the normal activities of life, and also because delay allows time for the dangerous development of all those revolu- tionary passions and appetites, those forces of discontent and disin- tegration which are generally loosened and accentuated by war. After the uncertainties and hazards of war must come the certainties and assurances of peace. Moreover, as the iron must be hammered SOCIALISTS IN POWER IN GERMANY 765 into shape when hot, so the changes efifected by war must be speedily clinched and codified, before those who dislike those changes have recovered sufficiently to be able to oppose and block them. Other- wise what was won by the fighters may be lost by the peace-makers. Thus after the armistice of November 1 1 and after the execution of its immediate provisions for the weakening of the enemy, the in- ternment of his fleet, the occupation of a part of his land, men turned toward the far more difficult work of making peace. On examination, how amazingly complicated the task ! The va- riety and gravity of the problems demanding solution far exceeded those of the Congress of Vienna. Those problems fell naturally into several main classes although those classes were not mutually exclu- sive but were, on the contrary, extraordinarily intertwined with each other. There was first the problem of Germany. Germany The problem must pay, both in territory and in indemnities, for the enormous "^ Germany injuries she had done the world. It would be only just if she were to pa}^ the entire cost of the war, yet that would be practically impossible since the war had cost all the nations probably two hundred billions of dollars. But that part of this colossal burden which was not to be borne by Germany must be borne by those upon whom she had forced the war, and for which they were themselves not responsible. No "healing peace" could be made with Germany, because such a peace would be flagrantly immoral and unjust. The burden of paying for this German-made war must be placed squarely upon the shoulders of Germany, as far as that was humanly possible. But the deter- mination of this very point presented great difficulties of detail. An additional difficulty lay in the fact that the fall of the Empire had left Germany in political chaos, rival groups struggling for the control hitherto exercised by the now fugitive William of Hohenzollern. On November 9, after the armistice terms had been submitted to the Germans but before they had been accepted, Prince Maximilian, the last Chancellor of the imperial regime, announced that the Kaiser had determined to renounce the throne. On that day a republic was proclaimed in Munich with Kurt Eisner, a Jewish Socialist, gocJaUgtg ■ as head and virtual dictator of the Catholic state of Bavaria, control of Also on that day a group of Berlin Socialists demanded of ^^'■™^°y Prince Maximilian that a Socialist government be installed. The Prince acceded to the demand and transferred his office of Chancellor to a prominent Socialist, Frederick Ebert, formerly a saddlemaker --v- MAKIXG THE rE.KCK psijiv^e, B;it th, - . ^ - - - : m Bedin i«ikJ a iLTeat «weti?^> toimMiltx- T^epixtsAt^vi the iwipeni;. co-^ ^ --: — r^ :- * ^--r ^ the ocnt«r 09 jwx^x^u pi . - to tvAWie A ooij-Kj^nitJoin tea ihe i">ev* , The S».vi,v. .^ -- , ,. .\>r m^mT W4tr? oa$t the lar^jc^ number ot x\>tt^ ift eilecricins to the "ReJoh<;ta$ on aJI ^le panies hi the Empire. T^y 3JC«r so' . ' " . . - . - - - - ' -^ >^.\ . ' -:> <^j R;ts«A h. - ^ , . ., . ~ . , V , , , ,- tAll v>t the Houise 05 Konwinon m iq^y. Bm m v^iermAny, «s in Kiis<4A, the Sooialists were d the meASiiTev of th; cV^xT^-nnient dunnii the xcAt, live MinoritT SodAli^ts. iAAise, hAd opjx^esed them. Fvvr the mcsment the two tAOtioins were t«<<\i in the ^M'emment noxr o?t>Attxi, the Eben-HAAse ^ovemr.v '^^ : ot the tex-olution. And i^ly cJki^e-n bv The WaI s/>?^r , xxj^h olAinii:i\$ to Aot toi- the er. une Ai« isoxiet*; oould be totnied All ox-^r Gc. ..,.., . ..„ A tedetAtion, T^ oAreer of this revolxirioinATy iijox^mment wai^ de<;tii>ed to bo irp.v . / - ■ "^\ ,' . " . . \ -.\ / - '^ ' .-,: tb. . ~ . . ,^ ,^ , , , ^ , , ,V ownea by the stAte And operated by the ^^tAte, ti"iAt the pi>5?^nt sx'stem of privAte ownership A)vi piix-Ate production should ooAse, But it WAS ex-ident from the stAtt thAt the mAiority of the n>embers of the i>ew gov^niment did not consider the nv>nient oppv^rtuive fvM st> sweeping; a chAnire, thAt it it were Attenipred it wouW tAil And leAd to A reaciJOin, thAt whAt the pe^^^p^^ denwnded immediAtely was peace. And thAt order And a stAble irox-enunent wet^ essentiAl to tl^e secur- ing of peAce, thAt the tiandAmentAl cliAnge from a t^in^e of pri\*Ate property to one of Sv^- -^nist wAit. On the other hAnc SociAlists seemed to tAX'ov siOoiAl- izAtkvn tirst Ai>d peAoe AfterwArd ; And there was an extix^me ulbtM^M xrini: of the SociAlistSs oAlled the Spanacides, led by KArl «ifi the Liobkiiecht And by Rosa Luxemburg, w]-jo x^-ere not intei-ested ^ in poAce at All but wished to deprix^e the bourjreois olomonts tvf the country of all politicAl rights And to estAblisli tl^e proietAviat in DISTURBANCES IX GERMANY 767 complete control. They repre<^nted the same ideas and metnods that the Bolsheviki in Russia represented — the rule of a single class, the repudiation of democracy, the use of force to effect the immediate introduction of thorough-going socialism. For a month after the re^'olution the Ebert-Haase government was chiefly conspicuoas for its weakness. Claiming to represent the nation as a whole, it was imperfectly obeyed even in Berlin itself. Meanwhile the Spartacides were preparing to seize centred by vio- lence. Through most of December and the early part of January there were recurrent outbreaks, riots, and much bloodshed in the capital. The Spartacides failed and Dr. Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg and many others were counted among the dead. For the moment, at any rate, Bolshevism was blocked in Germany. The Ebert-Scheidemann group now proceeded with its plan of having an assembly elected by all men and women of twenty years or older, which assembly should frame a new constitution for Germany. The elections did not result in a majorit>' for ©f a con- any single party. While the Socialists elected more members stitaeirt than did any other party, still they were in a minority of the whole body. They would not be able to make a purely socialistic constitution. But uniting with the Democratic party they would be able to organize the state. The Constituent Assembly met in Weimar, a small town famous in the history of German liberalism and of German literature, the home of Goethe and Schiller and Herder and Wieland. A provisional constitution was immediately adopted and on February 11, The Weimar 1 910, Frederick Ebert was chosen first president of the German Assembly^ " Reich." A ministry of fourteen members was established, seven of whom were Socialists, seven belonging to other parties. The As- sembly then entered upon its main task, the elaboration of a p>erma- nent constitution for Germany. What the outcome of its delibera- tions would be no one could foretell. More serious still was the doubt as to whether the Weimar Assembly would be able to make a constitution at all or whether, having made one, it would be able to impose it up)on Germany. Would the national fermentation subside or would the more extreme revolutionists of the Bolshevik tj-pe, the Spartacides, be able finally to get control of the state by violent methods, sweep the Weimar Assembly aside, and establish Bol- shevism ? Time alone could tell. 768 MAKING THE PEACE EUROPEAN RECONSTRUCTION But the reorganization of Germany, important as it might be, was only one of a long series of measures that would have to be taken before the world could know once more even relative peace of mind. The general problem of European reconstruction presented innumer- able aspects, bristled with innumerable difficulties, aroused the most varied hopes and fears. A mere catalogue of the changes introduced and of the questions raised by the world-wide war would be both Copyright by Underwood & Undencood, N. Y. The Weimar Assembly Frederick Ebert delivering his address of acceptance as President of Germany. extensive and disheartening, so great would be the labor necessary to bring order out of chaos, so essential would be unprecedented stores of wisdom and good-will. An adequate survey of these ques- tions is impossible here, but one or two of them may be considered. Take, for example, the question of national boundaries. In only a few cases could the boundaries of the future be the same as those of the past. From the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains, from Archangel to Salonica, changes in political frontiers had been effected by events and must be recognized in practice. A few nations might TERRITORIAL PROBLEMS 769 emerge unaltered from the alchem}- of the war, Spain and Portugal, for example, Switzerland, Norway, and possibly Sweden. But where else was there another European state that would issue from the impending readjustment unchanged? The boundaries of national the British Empire, of France, of Germany, of Austria and Hun- boundaries gary, of Italy and Russia, of Serbia and Greece and Roumania and Bulgaria, of Albania and the Turkish Empire, all these must be sketched anew. For the dividing lines of the past had" joined the snows of yesterday. The boundaries of Belgium and Holland and Luxemburg and Denmark must perhaps undergo rectifications. One thing was certain. The map of Europe on which we had been brought up had passed forever into the limbo of discarded things and men must begin forthwith to familiarize themselves with the features of a new strange map. And they must become familiar, not only with a new Europe but with a new Africa and a new Asia and a new Pacific Ocean as well, for German colonies and large parts of the Turkish Empire were destined to pass into other hands. The territorial problems confronting the world in 191 9 had a far wider sweep than those that existed a century earlier upon the down- fall of Napoleon. They arose in .large measure from the fact that a war begun for the extinction of one small state, Serbia, had resulted, not in that extinction, but in the destruction of three great ^^ • ° New empires, Russia, Austria-Hungary, and Turke}^, and in the territorial defeat of a fourth, Germany, and the overthrow of its twenty- p'"^'^™^ two monarchs. IMeanwhile Serbia had emerged from the colossal wreckage covered with glorj-, stronger than ever in its national integrity, and destined to a great enlargement of its territory. It is doubtful if the history of the world contains a more ironical page. Russia, Austria-Hungary, Germany, and Turkey, in 1914, bulked large on the map : Russia, 8,400,000 square miles, or one-seventh of the land surface of the globe ; Austria-Hungary, 261,000 ; Germany, 208,000 ; Turkey, 710,000, or three and a half times as many as the German Empire ; in all, 9,579,000 square miles, or more than three times the continental area of the United States, excluding Alaska, and with a population of two hundred and fifty millions. The Congress of Vienna had a small area and a population of thirty-two millions to provide for as the result of the Napoleonic wars, namely the Duchy of 770 MAKING THE PEACE Warsaw, which was only a part of former Poland, parts of Germany on the left bank of the Rhine, and the Italian peninsula. In all this area of more than 9,000,000 square miles, supporting a population of a quarter of a billion, no man, at the close of the Great War, could point out the boundaries. They had been burned away in the consuming heat of the fray. What should be put in their places remained to be seen. That the drawing of the new map would prove a highly contentious matter was certain beyond peradventure. One thing the victors of the war were committed to, namely the recognition of two new states, Czecho-Slovakia, and Jugo-Slavia, and the restoration of an old state, Poland. The first of these Slovakia, would consist of territories formerly belonging to Austria and jugo-siavia, Hungary ; the second would consist of Serbia and Montenegro and Poland , . . , , ^ , , . , , • , r and territories formerly Austro-Hunganan ; the third of ter- ritories which for well over a century had been ruled over by Russia, Prussia, and Austria. Such were a few of the outstanding territorial problems created by the war, and there were many others, which must receive solution speedily, if peace was to be secured. In most cases the problems were intricate, in some obscure, in all sure to arouse the most heated pas- sions. There was no remotest possibility that they could be settled amicably and in such a way as to leave no ill-feeling. They consti- tuted the very stuff of which resentments and hatreds are made. Nevertheless settled they must be in one way or another. WORLD PROBLEMS Not only must Germany be forced to pay for the criminal destruc- tion she had wrought in the war, not only must most of the frontiers of Europe be redrawn, not only must several new states be erected and guaranteed, but the economic development of these new states must be assured as well. Arrangements assuring peace, security, coionie^s, s'^d good government must be devised for the vast territories Russia, severed from the Turkish Empire and for the former German colonies ; for Armenia, Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, for Constantinople, for the Dardanelles and the Bosporus. Moreover, the future of Russia, of China, of Persia, comprising a third of the population of the world, must be based upon sound institutions, or the peace of the world would be indeed unstable. Again, the whole ECONOMIC PROBLEMS 771 body of international law, flouted by the Central Powers in this most lawless of wars, must be painfully and laboriously reconstructed anew, for unless nations know their rights and duties, unless international they respect them and insist that they be respected by others, ^^^ international relations rest on sand, and humanity is at the mercy of force and guile. In short, in whatever direction one might turn in surveying the world on the morrow of the armistice, one could see only a tangle of thorny questions demanding answers, a profusion of perplexing prob- lems of every description, and the prevalence of passions little propitious for a speedy issue out of all these troubles. Four problems for years of world war had accumulated a staggering mass of the peace- unfinished business which the peace-makers must now confront, and through which they must hew their way, though dangers mani- fold should encompass them about on every side. The mere task of feeding the world was formidable, pressing, and acute, and the neces- sary means and methods hard, if not impossible, to find. In no country in the world was the economic life of the people normal or healthy ; in many countries if was highly abnormal, sadly shat- tered and deranged. Agriculture, the basic industry, manufacturing, trade and commerce, all had been severely damaged and dislocated by the war. A large fraction of the working population had been drawn from industry and commerce into the armies of the com- batants. Less food was produced at a time when more was needed. Markets had been lost or changed. Gradually, under the inexorable pressure of the war, industry had been brought more and more under the control of the state and directed toward serving the needs of war. Industry had been increasingly diverted from private to public control. With peace would come demobilization, the return of millions of men to their homes, seeking their places again in the economic Ufe of the various nations. Other millions would be thrown out of work by the fact that the great war industries, the munition plants, the ship-yards, the various supply services, would now have tion and the to curtail production as rapidly as possible. Women had been economic employed in enormous numbers in place of the men who had gone to the fighting line. Now an infinite number of such personal readjustments must be made. Herculean were the tasks confronting the governments. 772 MAKING THE PEACE They must so order this necessary transition in the economic world from a war basis to a peace basis that there should not be a general outbreak of industrial strife in place of the prolonged and desperate armed strife of the last four years. The relations of capital and labor, always delicate and difficult of adjustment, might easily become more troublesome than ever. The existence and the urgent character of these numerous economic problems would enormously increase the burden resting upon the governments of the various countries, and that too at a time when international affairs of the greatest variety and gravity were likely to occupy of domestic their attention and challenge their ability to the utmost. and foreign g^^ ^j^g ^g^j- ]^^^ been a people's war and the domestic in- terests of the masses must be taken into account in deter- mining the foreign policies of the governments. Internal and external affairs could not be separated into compartments and treated consecutively. They were intertwined, and government programs must have simultaneously in mind both sets of interests, those of the masses of the population as well as those of the countries as wholes and as members of the family of nations. It might well prove in practice that the vastly increased responsibilities resting upon statesmen in so troubled and critical a period of history would exceed their powers as human beings and that their achievements in each of the two great spheres of activity, home affairs, foreign affairs, would fall far short of the hopes and expectations of their constit- uents, and of themselves. This was all the more likely to happen since extravagant hopes and expectations had unquestionably been aroused by loose talkers and writers, since programs of reconstruction had been hastily brought forward in abundance whose realization in definite and concrete reforms could onlj^ be accomplished in years, if not in decades, if indeed they could ever be accomplished. Many were the discordant noises, all declaring that they were the authentic voices of the people but frequently sounding sus- piciously like the voices of special classes. In the very multiplicity of counselors, inevitable, it may be, in an age of democracy and a prolific printing press, lay the seed of much confusion and also of much future disappointment. RETURN OF THE VICTORS 773 774 MAKING THE PEACE A LEAGUE OF NATIONS One of the ideas which had been much discussed during the war was that of a new international organization, which should be de- signed and empowered to prevent the recurrence of such a hideous catastrophe as that which was then devastating and desolating the world and which inevitably would leave a heavy, heartless heri- prevent war tage of sorrow and of debt for long, long years to come. The and main- q],^ organization, or as the critics preferred to say, the old dis- organization of the nations had broken down completely and was utterly discredited. It must be discarded forever. Any attempt to set it up again after the tornado had passed must be defeated. The nations must not be allowed to relapse into their former habits and methods, habits and methods that had led straight to bankruptcy. The old diplomacy, with its alliances, frequently secret, with its intrigues, with its general irresponsibility to the peoples whose destinies it assumed to control, must give way to a new diplomacy, open and above the board,, dedicated to the task of eliminating jealousies, rivalries, and hatreds and of introducing and encouraging the spirit of friendliness and cooperation among the nations. Particularly must war be outlawed. The phrase that this was "a war to end war" became current, as did also the words, "never again." Both expressed the determination to annihilate once for all this immemorial curse of mankind. (This indignant and passionate resolve to find a better way to settle international difficulties in the future than had ever been found in the past enlisted the support of many men in France and England and Popular de- America. Societies were formed in those countries for the mand for a purpose of arousing public opinion to the feasibility as well new interna- ,,.,.,. ^ . . ^ , tionai organi- as the desirability of a new organization of human society zation which should serve the interests of mankind, should express the conscience of mankind. In the United States the League to En- force Peace was founded in Independence Hall in Philadelphia in June, 191 5, with Ex-President Taft as president. In the following year President Wilson gave it as his opinion that, "When the great present war is over, it will be the duty of America to join with the other nations of the world in some kind of a league for the main- tenance of peace." This thought was quite in line with long- existing aspirations of the American people, as shown in their enthu- THE CRASH OF DYNASTIES 775 siastic advocacy, at the Hague Conferences, of peaceful methods in adjusting international contentions and in the approval they had often given to the principle of arbitration. But a league of nations that could prevent war or even render it less probable could not remain a mere aspiration ; it must be translated into a definite organization, with definite powers and obligations, and with a machinery for achieving its lofty purpose. It might ^ ^ortin easily happen that when the attempt should be made to organization embody the aspiration in a concrete institution, grave and ^^^^^^^^ perhaps insuperable difficulties would arise. No two persons might agree, much less two nations, as to the practical means whereby the aspiration could be realized. To desire a constitution is one thing ; to draft it is quite another thing, and much more arduous ; and to get the draft accepted by those who are to be bound by it may be some- thing more formidable still. The cause would not be aided by those uncritical and enthusiastic advocates who wrote and spoke as if only a league of nations were needed in order to realize the dreams of poets and seers throughout the ages, of peace on earth, good-will to all. A lush and rampant sentimentalism, expressed in high-sounding phrases, would not help things along very far, but would, on the contrary, be likely to do more harm than good. Such, then, were some of the elements in the general situation re- vealed by the suspension of hostilities in November, 191 8. Human- ity had narrowly escaped a great and terrible doom. It had passed through an intense strain of desperate endeavor ; it had hovered long over the brink of failure and disaster. In the end it had achieved an astounding victory. Despotism had challenged Kberty for the control of the world and despotism had gone under. Reigning houses that had ruled for centuries and that had held the world in awe had been scattered like chafif before an avenging wind. Hohenzol- lern, Hapsburg, Romanoff thrones had crashed to earth and all their satellites of petty kings and princes had run madly for cover, thinking themselves happy if they escaped with their lives to Switzerland. Monarchies became republics overnight throughout central and eastern Europe. Autocracies yielded to democracies. Peoples, little accustomed by their previous experience or training to govern them- selves, were now forced to do so, or to yield to new forms of oppression and misrule. The dictatorship of self-appointed radicals might be as ruinous to domestic happiness and to foreign peace as the old l-fi MAKING THE PEACE dictatorships of divine-right monarchs had been. NationaUstic, racial, social, economic questions surged up in every direction. It was in a world like this that the Allies who had won the war pre- pared to meet, in order to confer upon and to determine the terms of peace which they would offer their defeated enemies. Having agreed among themselves what those terms should be they would then sub- mit them to the latter for acceptance. Only after the necessary treaties had been made and ratified could the war be considered at an end ; only then could the work of reconstruction be seriously begun. The place chosen for the Peace Conference was appropriately Paris, which Meredith once called "the goddess of the lightning brain," "valiant unto death for a principle" and which had been the Conference nerve-center of the AUied cause, the throbbing heart of the ** ^^^^ coalition, from the first day to the last of the racking struggle. The first session of the Conference of Paris was held on January i8, 1919, in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This formal meeting had been arranged by the Inter- Allied Supreme War Council and by the representatives of the five Great Powers, which had decided. Its member- ^.vciorvg Other things, the number of representatives that each state should have at the Conference. The United States, the British Empire, France, Italy, and Japan were to have five delegates apiece, and the British Dominions and India were also to be repre- sented, two delegates each from Australia, Canada, South Africa, and India and one delegate from New Zealand ; Brazil was given three delegates ; Belgium, China, Greece, Poland, Portugal, the Czecho-Slovak Republic, Roumania, and Serbia two delegates each ; Montenegro, Siam, Cuba, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Liberia, Nicaragua, Panama, Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, and Uruguay one delegate each. This would make an assembly of about seventy mem- bers. While the larger states were given a larger representation, each state was to have but a single vote. This preliminary distribu- tion of delegates was almost immediately altered, owing to the protests of Belgium and Serbia which had fought and suffered from the first day of the war to the last and which now found themselves allotted only two representatives, whereas Brazil, which had not actually fought at all, had three. Belgium and Serbia were forthwith given three apiece and the new Kingdom of the Hedjaz was given two. President Wilson decided to attend the Conference in person, thus departing from the previous practice of the government. He ap- THE OPENING OF THE CONFERENCE OF PARIS 777 778 MAKING THE PEACE pointed as associates on the American delegation, Secretary of State Lansing, Colonel Edward M. House, Mr. Henry White, and General Tasker Bliss. The Prime Ministers and Foreign Secretaries of England, France, Italy attended : namely Lloyd George, Balfour, Clemenceau, Pichon, Orlando, Sonnino. The Prime Ministers of several British Dominions also attended as did those of Serbia and Greece and Roumania, Pachitch and Venizelos and Bratiano. Belgium sent her Minister of Foreign Affairs, Hymans ; Czecho-Slovakia sent Kramar ; Poland, Dmow- ski, and many other men of importance and distinction were among the delegates. The Conference was opened by President Poincare of The opening France in a masterly session address. "Forty-eight years ago to-day," he said, "on the 1 8th of January, 1 87 1, the German Empire was proclaimed by an army of invasion in the Palace of Versailles. It was consecrated by the theft of two French provinces. It was thus, from the very moment of its origin, a negation of right and, by the fault of its founders, it was born in injustice. It has ended in opprobrium. "You are assembled in order to repair the evil that has been done and to prevent a recurrence of it. You hold in your hand the future of the world." M. Clemenceau was unanimously elected president of the Con- ference. Subsequently committees were constituted to investigate Its organ- the great subjects which would require settlement and to ization report ; committees on Responsibility for the War, on Repara- tions, on International Labor Legislation, on Regulation of Ports, ( , nil a, \ , ,, s J ' inio Service, N. Y. Premier Clemenceau ORGANIZATION OF THE CONFERENCE 779 Waterways and Railroads, and on a League of Nations. Of the last of these President Wilson was made chairman, having announced that his main interest in the work of the Conference was centered in the League of Nations and having emphasized the importance of it in various speeches delivered in France, England, and Italy before the opening of the Conference. THE CONFERENCE OF PARIS The Conference of Paris, thus formally opened on January 18, 1919, continued in session throughout the year. The tasks con- fronting it were so varied, so difficult, and so complicated, j ^ and any solutions that might be reached fraught with con- of its sequences so grave, that necessarily progress could be made p''°^^^™^ only slowly, if it were to be made wisely. Decisions so momentous for the future as these would inevitably be must be the product of long and mature consideration or they would leave the world in a worse welter than that in which it already found itself. Time was of the very essence of the problem, time to study every suggestion comprehensively and minutely, time to make innumerable adjust- ments between conflicting plans and interests, time to distill a reason- able unity of agreement from the daily clash of many minds, time, also, to feel the way into the unknown and the untried, for in much of its necessary work the Conference would be without light or guidance from the past. Yet, and this was the stern paradox of the situation, time was the very thing which the world could least afford to grant unstintingly, for its most urgent need was to begin immediately the stupendous work of rehabilitation, to resume speedily its normal activities and to increase their pace, if The need body and soul were to be held together. European society, "^ speed battered and shattered by the agony of the long struggle, impov- erished in every way beyond the possibility of calculation, might easily disintegrate still further, might indeed break up into warring factions driven by elemental passions, unless it could quickly con- centrate its attention upon the problem of recovery. Thus, cir- cumstances being what they were, the Conference was compelled to work under unfavorable conditions. The inner history of the Conference of Paris cannot now be written with any assurance of accuracy or completeness. Much of what 78o MAKING THE PEACE THE PROCEDURE OF THE CONFERENCE 781 has gone on within its councils and committees is veiled in utter secrecy. What records have been kept of its proceedings have not been published or have appeared only in fragmentary or con- jectural reports. The parts played by various men or by different national delegations have been seen as through a glass darkly or have not been seen at all. The miles of newspaper accounts with which an impatient and inquisitive world was regaled during that crowded year revealed more enterprise and imagination on the part of those who composed them than demonstrable knowledge or authentic inspiration. Out of the babel of voices that issued from the immediate neighborhood of the Conference the still small voice of absolute and certified truth was hardly audible. But a few things may be stated, of a quite general nature. And one is this, that as fai^ as the procedure of the Conference was con- cerned history repeated itself in a very striking way. There had been, especially in America, much eloquent denunciation with the of the Congress of Vienna and President Wilson had made <^°ff ess ° of Vienna himself the spokesman of this mdignation and had demanded a new diplomacy which should operate frankly and in the sight of all, should make only "open covenants, openly arrived at." But this was not to be. The pressure of circumstances, the very nature of the task in hand, soon revealed the superficiality of the criticism and the necessity of discussion behind closed doors, if anything was to be done at all. As a matter of fact the procedure of the Conference conformed quite closel}' to that of the Congress of Vienna. To be sure the former had several plenary sessions to which the press was admitted, whereas the latter had no general sessions. But the public meetings of the Conference were merely full-dress parades or, at best, only formally ratified decisions reached elsewhere. The real work of the Conference, as of the Congress, was done' in numerous committees, in informal conversations, and in the secret sessions of the representatives of the Great Powers, the "Big Five," or the "Big Four" with Japan left out, or the "Big Three" with both Japan and Italy missing. No records of these meetings have been given to the world. THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES The immediate and pressing duty of the Conference was to draw up the terms of peace which were to be offered Germany. This 782 MAKING THE PEACE must necessarily precede everything else. After several months of investigation and discussion agreement was reached and the result The treaty was the draft of a treaty, the longest on record, a treaty which with would fill a volume about half the size of the present one. This °^ was submitted, on May 7, 19 19, to the representatives of the German Government, sent to Versailles to receive it. There was to be no direct and oral negotiation between the German delegates and the members of the Conference, but the former were given a certain length of time in which to study the document and to make in writing whatever suggestions they might care to. In due course they sub- mitted arguments and counter propositions which filled a volume not much smaller than the original draft. Most of these propositions were rejected by the Conferees, a few changes^ were made to meet the German objections, and the amended treaty was then returned to them on June 16. Acceptance was required by June 23, under threat of a renewal of war and the invasion of Germany. On the last day of this stated period the German National Assembly at Weimar passed, by a vote of 237 to 138, a resolution to the effect that " the National Assembly agrees to the signature of peace." On June 28 the Treaty of Versailles was signed by Dr. Hermann Miiller, German Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Dr. Johannes Bell, and by the representatives of the Allied and Associated Powers, the Chinese delegation refusing to sign as a protest against the Shantung award which will be described later. This historic event occurred in the same Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles where forty- eight years before the German Empire had been proclaimed. Time had brought its complete revenge. By an appropriate coincidence the Treaty of Versailles was signed on the 28th of June, the fifth anniversary of the assassination of the Austrian Archduke, Francis Ferdinand, at Sarajevo, which had been made to have such amazing and lamentable consequences. THE COVENANT OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS The first part of the Treaty of Versailles provides for the creation of a League of Nations. The League is to consist, at the outset, of Membership two classes of States, first, the original signatories of the in the League treaty, thirty- two in all, and secondly, certain others, thirteen in number, which are to become members on acceptance of the THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS 783 784 MAKING THE PEACE invitation to join.^ It will be noted at once that the Central Allies, Germany, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, Turkey, are not included in the League, nor is Russia nor are any of the states which have recently claimed independence from Russia ; nor is Mexico to be found among those invited to accede. Provision is made for the admission of new members by a two-thirds vote of the Assembly, and for the with- drawal from the League of any member, after having given a two years' notice, " provided that all its international obligations and all its obligations under this Covenant shall have been fulfilled at the time of its withdrawal." The chief bodies created by this Covenant for the accomplishment of the purposes of the League are an Assembly and a Council, the The latter being, as will be seen, far the more important. Every Assembly member of the League is to be represented in the Assembly and may have three representatives, or fewer if it desires. Each state has, however, but one vote. There is thus equality of voting power among all the members, whether large or small. It should be noted that in the Assembly the British Empire has collectively six votes, for, in addition to the single vote allotted to the Empire as a whole, five of the constituent members of that empire have each a separate vote, namely Canada, Australia, South Africa, New Zea- land, and India. The Council, on the other hand, represents, not the theoretical and assumed equality of states, but their actual and obvious ine- 1 Original Members of the League United States of New Zealand Hedjaz Poland America India Honduras Portugal Belgium China Italy Roumania Bolivia Cuba Japan Serb-Croat-Slovene Brazil Ecuador Liberia State British Empire France Nicaragua Siam Canada Greece Panama Czecho-S!ovakia Australia Guatemala Peru Uruguay South Africa Haiti States Invited to Accede Argentine Re- Denmark Persia Sweden public Netherlands Salvador Switzerland Chili Norway Spain Venezuela Colombia Paraguay THE COUNCIL 785 quality. It is to be a small body of nine, and five of the nine shall always be the British Empire, the United States, France, Italy, and Japan. In addition to these five there shall be four others to be selected by the Assembly " from time to time in its discretion." Until the Assembly is organized and makes its first selection the Covenant itself determines that these four shall be Belgium, Brazil, Spain, and Greece. Each state represented on the Council is to have one vote and may not have more than one delegate. Provision is made for the possible enlargement of the two classes of members that compose the Council, the permanent and the temporary. Any member of the League, not a member of the Council, may, however, be represented on the Council whenever any matter is under con- sideration which specially affects its interests. Nothing is said as to who shall decide as to whether that case has arisen. Presumably, therefore, it is for the Council itself to decide, not the state which considers itself affected. Indeed if the meetings of the Council should be secret, and there is nothing in the Covenant that prevents their being so, the given state might not know, until a decision had been reached by the Council and published, that matters affecting it had been under discussion. Its only protection would be the good faith and scrupulousness of the members of the Council. The Council shall meet as occasion may require and at least once a year. No such definite requirement exists in the case of the Assembly, which shall meet "at stated intervals and from Meetings to time to time as occasion may require." WTio is to decide as to ^^ frequent whether the occasion has arisen is not stated. Both Council and Assembly may deal at their meetings " with any matter within the sphere of action of the League or affecting the peace of the world." This is a charter as liberal as the wind, since the history of the past appears to show that almost anything may, under favoring condi- tions, affect the peace of the world. Except where otherwise expressly provided in the Covenant all decisions, either in the Council or in the Assembly, must have the unanimous vote of those present, a pro- vision which enables any state, even the smallest and most insignifi- cant, to veto any contemplated action. Obstruction is easy, and unanimity is generally hard to obtain among any considerable body of human beings. One can also easily foresee that if, for instance, the five Great Powers in the Council wished to adopt a policy opposed by any or all of the others they could only do so by 786 MAKING THE PEACE THE RESTRICTION OF ARMAMENTS 787 bringing to bear such influence, which might amount to oppression, as would force them to yield. Such procedure would of course not be conducive to that good will which should be and probably must be present if the purpose of the League is to be achieved and its life assured. The seat of the League is to be Geneva, but the Council may at any time establish it elsewhere. There is to be a Secretary General, appointed by the Council with the approval of the majority Geneva the of the Assembly. A Secretariat, as elaborate as shall be seat of the needed, shall be established, to preserve the archives, conduct ^^^^ the correspondence and discharge the clerical work of the League, its expenses to be apportioned among the members of the League. As the motive force behind the creation of the League was the desire to find some method of maintaining peace and preventing war, as this is, indeed, the avowed purpose of this organization, the clauses of the Covenant bearing upon this matter are the supreme features of the document, are, in fact, its very pith and marrow. Facile idealists had iterated and reiterated in every strain that this was the last war, the war to end war. If this consummation devoutly to be wished were to be attained it must be through the League ; and both before the Covenant was drawn up and after it had been com- pleted it was recommended by its sponsors either as actually assuring this end or as going a long way toward it. Does a cold examination of the document bear out the pleasing prospect ? THE PROBLEM OF DISARMAMENT The supposed causes of war or kinds of contention that have been wont to lead to it in the past are treated in various ways. The swollen armaments of Europe have been regarded, at least for a full generation, as a menace to peace, an incitement to war, and the First Conference of the Hague in 1899 attempted, unavailingly, to restrict their growth, to reduce their size. Now, after the most devastating war in history the problem is again approached and the Covenant devotes an article to it. And that article says that the Council of the League shall formulate plans for the reduction ^^^^ reduc- of armaments for the consideration and action of the several tionof Governments, that after these plans shall have been adopted ^"^^^^"^ by the several Governments the limits therein fixed shall not be 788 MAKING THE PEACE exceeded without the consent of the Council. The Governments shall also consider how the evil effects attendant upon the private manufacture of munitions can be abated and are to exchange frankly and fully with each other information as to military and naval pro- grams. Under this article it is possible to bring about a reduction of arma- ments, just as it has been possible to bring it about by international agreement at any time during the past twenty years, and no more possible now than then. It cannot be said that the Conference of Paris has treated this problem any more effectually than did either of the Conferences at The Hague. It does little more than point out once more the well-known gravity of the problem and promise to study it. Indeed one of its stipulations may tend to impede rather than to further the process of reduction. While the Council is to formulate plans for reduction, no state is obliged to accept those Veto of the plans. But if a given state does accept them, then it can CouncU never in the future increase the size of its army or its navy or its air-service beyond the limits thus fixed and accepted, without the permission of the Council, giving its unanimous consent. Thus if the Council should recommend for the United States an army of 500,000 men and the United States should agree, then, no matter how grave or desperate the emergency, the United States . could not increase its army without the permission of the eight other states, be they European, Asiatic, or American, that are its col- leagues on the Council. Such being the situation it is reasonable to suppose that each nation will at the very outset, before it is too late, fix its standard high enough to enable it to meet all possible contin- gencies. Thus this clause seems more likely to operate toward the maintenance of maximum or great armaments rather than toward their reduction. For the nations will very likely consider that that way safety lies and that way only. This clause may defeat itself. THE PREVENTION OF WAR This is, however, but one aspect of the general problem of the maintenance of peace, and one of the lesser aspects. More important than the reduction of armaments is the prevention or discourage- ment of their use. If a nation can be impressed with the fact that it is more likely to lose a war which it begins than it is to win it, THE TENTH ARTICLE 789 fewer wars will be begun. This thought has been borne in mind by the makers of the Covenant. Article X aims emphatically to give this impression. The war has created several new states importance and altered the boundaries of many old ones. Article X of Article x says, apropos of this: " The members of the League undertake to respect and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political independence of all the members of the League. In case of any such aggression or in case of any threat or danger of such aggression the Council shall advise upon the means by which this obligation shall be fulfilled." The obligation of every member of the League is as explicit as any obligation can be, the promise is clear and binding to respect and to preserve the territorial integrity and the existing political independence of all the members of the League. While, apparently, the Council only " advises " as to the actual steps to be taken in any given case, the obligation to respect and to preserve has been assumed by all and must be lived up to, otherwise this article is but a scrap of paper. The Conference of Paris put this article into the Covenant in order to throw an impregnable buttress around the entire Treaty by plainly warning any would-be disturber of the peace that if it should attack any member of the League it would be confronted by all the members of the League. With such an imposing array pledged to block its purpose, it might consider discretion the better part of valor, and desist in time. Of course this guarantee could only exercise this sobering effect if it was really believed by the would-be warring state that it would be actually enforced by the members of the League, that, in other words, the latter were sincere and resolute in making their promises. But the League aspires to prevent wars by adjusting internatioaal disputes before they reach the point of explosion. Any war or threat of war whether immediately affecting any of the mem- ^^^^ ^^ ^^ bers of the League or not is declared a matter of concern to consider any the entire League. On the request of any member the Council * ^^* ° ""^^ shall be summoned and may take any action it may deem wise to preserve the peace. Any member may also at any time bring to the attention of the Council or the Assembly any circumstance what- ever which threatens to disturb international peace or the good understanding between nations upon which peace depends. The thought here is that misunderstandings, if freely and fully discussed, 790 MAKING THE PEACE are frequently smoothed away, which is true, but it is also unhap- pily true that discussion often sharpens and envenoms differences of opinion. By another clause the members of the League agree that if any dispute shall arise between them likely to lead to a rupture, they Arbitration wiU submit the matter either to arbitration or to inquiry by or inquiry ^\jq Council and that they will in no case resort to war until three months after the award of the arbitrators or the report of the Council. This clause, if observed, will prevent sudden attacks and allow peacemakers a reasonable time to attempt to adjust the diffi- culty. Had Austria followed such a procedure the war of 191 4 would not have burst so suddenly upon the world and might indeed have been entirely avoided. This clause does not prevent war, since after the stated time has elapsed, the parties to the dispute may commence hostilities, but there is less likelihood of their doing so, owing to the intervention of this cooling-off period. The members also agree that certain questions of a justiciable nature, as distinct from questions of national policy, shall be submitted to a court, either one agreed upon by the parties to the dispute or the Perma- nent Court of International Justice to be established by the League. Disputes as to the interpretation of a treaty, or as to any question of international law would come within this category. If one of the parties accepts the award of the court, the members of the League will not make war upon it, but if one declines to accept it, then the Council shall propose the steps that shall be taken to give effect thereto. If there should arise between members of the League any dispute likely to lead to a rupture which is not submitted to arbitration, the inve ti tidti ^''^ernbers agree to submit it to the Council, which shall investi- by the gate the matter and attempt to effect a settlement. If the Council fails it shall publish a report concerning the facts in the case and containing its recommendations, so that the world may judge and the pressure of public opinion may be brought to bear upon the uncomplying party or parties to the conflict. If the report of the Council is unanimous, exclusive of the members representing the parties to the dispute, the members of the League will not go to war with the party complying with its recommendations. If it is not unanimous, then the members shall take such action as they shall consider necessary. THE ECONOMIC BOYCOTT 791 Such a dispute shall be transferred from the Council to the As- sembly in case either party to the dispute requests it. Thus we see that the members of the League agree not to go to war without first submitting their disputes to one form or another of investigation or arbitration. They do not agree necessarily to accept the results of the arbitration, nor do the other mem- must precede bers of the League not parties to the quarrel agree to force declaration them to. They merely reserve the right to act as they see fit. Here, then, is no prohibition of war ; but, if war comes, it must come only after a certain period of time. It must not come precipitately. THE USE OF ECONOMIC WEAPONS But supposing any member of the League disregards its obliga- tions, breaks its promise to allow an investigation or arbitration, and begins a war in the good old way, summarily. What happens Article xvi then ? Something quite important, as laid down in Article XVI. and economic The offending state shall ipso facto be deemed to have com- p''®^®"® mitted an act of war not merely against its enemy, but against all the other members of the League as well ; and those other members " hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all intercourse between their nations and the nationals of the covenant- breaking state, and the prevention of all financial, commercial, or personal intercourse between the nationals of the covenant-breaking state and the nationals of any other state, whether a member of the League or not." Here is a tremendous force, if applied, and applied it must be " immediately " if the members of the League are to keep their promises. This is the economic pressure about which the world has heard so much recently as a preventive of war. In addi- tion the Council must recommend to the several governments con- cerned what effective military, naval, or air forces the members of the League shall severally contribute to the armed forces to be used to protect the covenants of the League. In other words the economic pressure must come, it appears, instantly, and the nations have no right to delay or to discuss their obligations. These obligations are explicit and peremptory. Whether they have any right to refuse the military force that the Council shall subsequently " recommend " is not clear. Similar provisions look toward investigation and arbitration, in the case of disputes between states not members of the League, 792 MAKING THE PEACE or between such states and those states that are members. And it is agreed that if a state outside the League begins a war upon one within, without first observing the procedure described, then Article XVI, that is the economic boycott and possible war, shall be applied to. that state by all the members of the League. There are other clauses in this Covenant than those which have been described. Their purpose is the same, the maintenance of Secret peace by the elimination of the causes of war. As, in the diplomacy opinion of its framers, secret diplomacy has caused many wars in the past, secret diplomacy must be abolished. Henceforth there must be no private arrangements between various powers, but every treaty or international .engagement entered into hereafter must be forthwith registered with the Secretary of the League and pub- lished, else it shall not be binding ; and all such engagements hitherto made, if inconsistent with the terms of the Covenant, must be abro- gated. But says Article XXI : " Nothing in this Covenant shall be deemed to affect the validity of international engagements such as treaties of arbitration or regional understandings like the Monroe Doctrine, for securing the maintenance of peace." As territorial greed and colonial rivalries have been prolific causes of war in the past the Covenant sets up a new system for disposing The system of the lands that have fallen into the hands of the Allies as a of mandates result of the war, such as the German colonies and Turkish territories. These are not to be divided up among the victors as spoils, but are to be regarded as held in trust for the benefit of the peoples concerned. The various areas are to be intrusted by the League to various members of the League under mandates setting forth the degree and kind of authority that they may exercise, guar- anteeing certain rights to the natives, and requiring annual reports from the mandatories. The mandates may vary according to the community. But these vast stretches of the earth are not to be annexed to the colonial empire of any state. They are to be held in tutelage by the League of Nations until such time as they may be able to stand alone. The conduct of any mandatory in the admin- istration of the territory assigned to it is subject to the supervision of the League, that is, to the enlightened opinion of the world. Whether in practice this new system will be found to be merely an elaborate disguise for the old system which it is intended to super- sede remains of course to be seen. THE LEAGUE NOT A WORLD LEAGUE 793 Such are the main provisions of the Covenant which announces a new experiment in international affairs. The Covenant Amendment may be amended at any time by a unanimous vote of the of the Cove- Council and by a majority of the Assembly. °*° The League of Nations is the method proffered by the Conference of Paris to a heart-sick world to enable it to seek an issue out of some of its troubles. The world is ready for an experiment in the closer cooperation of the nations, and if the machinery provided here should prove to be too clumsy and inefficient to accomplish any- thing important, if the experiment fails, as it easily may, other experiments will subsequently be tried. Whether the unanimity of voting required in most matters, and other restrictions, are so serious as to lead merely to endless talk and contention, with subsequent paralysis, or whether the powers of the League are so great as to threaten the cherished rights of the nations that compose it, will be better known in the future than it is to-day. One thing, however, is entirely clear at the present moment. What has been provided is not a World League. It is a League of the Conquerors of Germany, with a number of small and ^j^^ ^53™^ medium-sized neutrals associated with them, but occupying not a world the lower places in the synagogue. This is a hopeful aspect of ^*^"^ the matter, since it respects the continuity of history and attempts no violent innovation in the midst of an unfinished chapter. For the conquest of Germany is the great and imperative task of the age, a conquest that can be assured only by the enforcement of the Treaty of Versailles, which will be a matter of many years. In the constitution of the League and in the other sections of the treaty are numerous provisions linking the future with the immediate past, and conditioned by the character of that past. For the framers of these documents have correctly seen that the past is not secure until the future is guaranteed. The conquerors of the Central Powers have therefore wisely and necessarily resolved to project their league of victory into the future, until the great work, into which they were unwillingly forced by Germany, shall have been completed. POLITICAL CHARACTER OF THE LEAGUE We ought not to be deceived any more by appearances than by names. While forty-five nations will constitute the League, if all 794 MAKING THE PEACE accept who are invited, yet it would be unnecessarily naive for any one to suppose that there is any general diffusion of real power among the forty-five. Look over the list of the contemplated nance of the associates and you see a large number of negligible quantities. Five Great ^he great military art of camouflage, so richly developed Powers by the war, has gone over into diplomacy, and may be observed in the Treaty, the great art, that is, of self-protection through deception. The chief authority in the League is the Council, a body consisting always of the five great Allied states and of four others chosen from time to time. What is this but the old Concert of Power, slightly disguised, familiar to every student? The old Concert which we meet from time to time in European history accomplished good, accomplished evil, and frequently broke up under the strain of internal dissension, only to reappear under favoring conditions. The old concert was entirely European; the new is a World-Concert for the simple reason that the nineteenth century created two additional great states, the United States and Japan, which cannot be ignored and which have become entangled in Euro- pean affairs. It was a Concert which liquidated Europe after the Napoleonic wars, the nearest parallel to the recent war which history has to show. And a Concert of Powers is liquidating the world to-day and is installing itself securely in the new international organization with its eye intently fixed upon the future, and this is of good omen as it corresponds to the realities of the situation, is grounded in the actual facts of contemporary life, and seems a guarantee of normal development in the future. Of course the Council of the League will be exposed to the same dangers as the Concert. It will consist of politicians or, if one pre- Character of fers, of Statesmen, as did the latter. The Council is a political the Council ^^d diplomatic, not a judicial, body, and its decisions will, it is quite safe to prophesy, be what political decisions usually are, man- ifestations either of power or of the spirit of compromise, that is, of give and take. Only in matters that are referred to an International Court will the process of settlement be judicial. No one should be so innocent as to suppose that the Council will consist of men purely unselfish, absolutely disinterested, without passion, supremely wise. In other words, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Whether the League will work well will not be known until the experiment has been tried. The art of making a political machine that shall INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION 795 operate only to the advantage of men and never to their disadvantage is still a profound mystery. That there is a great need for a better ordering of the international relations of the world does not itself prove that a better ordering is practicable, but it does constitute a challenge that cannot be ignored. And the lessons of the war are distinctly encouraging in this regard. For during it the most varied kinds of intimate and fruitful cooperation were carried through successfully, knitting the Allied nations into the union which in the end gave irresistible strength, and the incredible climax was reached when the armies of old and proud nations, like England and America and Italy, were placed unreservedly under the command of a French general. The analogy between military life and civil life is, of course, not complete. There are profound and fundamental differ- ences, but the reference suggests that we do not yet know the possible limits of the cooperative spirit. The League may fail egregiously. It will consist, as do parlia- ments and congresses, of men wafted up by favoring breezes into the seats of the mighty. There will be politics in the League just as there have been in the Conference of Paris which has fashioned it, and, in politics, one finds personal and sectional ambitions, com- promise, log-rolling — and idealism. The exact proportions in which the various elements are to be mixed in any given case defy prognostication, but mixed they will be at Geneva, as in Paris, London, Rome, Washington, and Tokio. But the League may succeed moderately or greatly if sufficient stores of wisdom and of character are enlisted in its service. It will fail and will be quickly wrecked if it tries to run counter to the ^j^g ^^^^_ deep, underlying forces of the age, such as the spirit of nation- sites of ality, one of the most legitimate and beneficent forces active in the modern world, and censurable and hateful only when grossly perverted and distorted. It will also fail, and be angrily and con- temptuously discarded, if it does not achieve that " international peace and security ", which is given in the preamble as a primary reason for its existence, and the passionate craving for which has furnished the impetus for its creation. THE TREATY WITH GERMANY Of the four hundred and forty articles of the Treaty of Versailles only twenty-six are devoted to the League of Nations. The re- 796 MAKING THE PEACE mainder set forth the measures and precautions which the Allied world has seen fit to adopt in regard to Germany, the determina- Great length ^^°^ '^^ ^^^ future boundaries of that country, the political of the changes in Europe which she must recognize, stipulations in reaty regard to her future military organization, and in regard to penalties and reparations. Elaborate sections of the Treaty concern financial and economic matters, German colonies, ports, waterways and railways, labor organization and legislation. These sections represent the price that Germany must pay for her wanton, criminal adventure, for the unexampled losses, the immense sacrifices, the incredible exertions which her madness imposed upon the world. Considering the infinite complexity of the problems raised by the war, the multitudinous details that must be studied and adjusted as a result of a struggle that left no human being, no corner of the world, unaffected, considering the enormous ravages, the cataclysmic de- struction, which must somehow be repaired if that is possible, and considering all those necessary and fruitful human and social rela- tionships which have been violently torn asunder and which must be joined again, the wonder is that the Treaty of Versailles is not far longer than it is. A summary of that Treaty, every word of which is weighed, each part of which is closely intertwined with every other, and condi- tioned by it, cannot be attempted here. The reader should care- fully study the entire document if he would see how grave a thing it is to tear up the charters of the world, to throw into the caldron the established and beneficent institutions, relations, and usages of men. Only a few of the more conspicuous features of the Treaty can be described in this chapter. THE BOUNDARIES OF GERMANY The boundaries of Germany are drawn anew. She loses Alsace- Lorraine, which reverts to France. Slight changes are provided for Loss of along the Belgian frontier. Provision is made for the people Alsace- of the larger part of Schleswig to resume their former connec- orraine ^.^^ \^[th the kingdom of Denmark if they so desire. For the purpose of discovering their sentiments Schleswig is divided into two zones, and plebiscites are to be taken in each, conducted, not by the German authorities, but under the authority of an International RETURN OF ALSACE-LORRAINE 797 798 MAKING THE PEACE Commission. The northern zone will vote as a unit and if the ma- jority favors reincorporation in Denmark it is to occur forthwith. . The voting in the southern zone will be by communes and the Sciil6swic Five Great Powers shall, after the plebiscite, draw the bound- ary line between Schleswig and Germany, a line which shall take into account the result of the voting and also geographical and economic conditions. Germany agrees to abide by their decision. In these plebiscites, as in others provided for by the Treaty, women are to vote as well as men. Thus another of the wrongs committed by Bismarck and his policy of blood and iron is to be righted. The territorial booty of Logg Qf the war of 1864 must be, in part, disgorged, just as that of the Polish war of 1870 must be. In another region, in the eastern part provincos ^^ Prussia, wrongs committed by Frederick the Great a cen- tury and a half ago are also to be righted. Germany recognizes the Republic of Poland, that miracle of our times, and extensive areas of Prussia are renounced in favor of this old, new state. Some of these are ceded outright by the Treaty and in others plebis- cites are to be held to determine the wishes of the people. Thus in a part of Upper, or Southern, Silesia, seized by Frederick in his famous raid of 1740, and in a part of the province of East Prussia the exact boundaries will not be known until the people have been consulted and until the Five Great Powers shall have finally deter- mined the frontier. But whatever the outcome is, Germany agrees to abide by it. Not all of Frederick's annexations will be lost — only those parts which are mainly Polish in race and in sentiment, but the eastern contours of Germany will differ greatly from those of the past. In this redrawing of the map of Germany two other changes must be noted. Germany renounces, in favor of the Five Great Powers, Memel, in the extreme northeastern tip of Prussia, and agrees to accept whatever disposition may be made of it. She also renounces in their favor the city of Danzig, which is henceforth to be a free city and to be placed under the League of Nations. Danzig had belonged to the former kingdom of Poland, but had been seized by Prussia in the second partition in 1793. The Poles, both Danzig a because they regarded this city as rightfully theirs and also free city because it was their only possible seaport, pleaded for its in- clusion in the new state, but the Conference of Paris did not grant it to them. It took Danzig from Germany, but did not give it to THE SAAR BASIN 799 Poland, but it undertook to negotiate a treaty between the Free City and the RepubUc of Poland whereby the latter might include the former within its customs boundaries and might enjoy its use as a port, quite without restriction. The executive of the Free City, under the League of Nations, is to be a High Commissioner appointed by the League. Danzig is connected with Poland by a strip of terri- tory, a " corridor " which thus separates the main body of the Prus- sian state from that part which lies east of the corridor, namely what is left to Prussia of the province of East Prussia. These terms of the Treat}^ have given great dissatisfaction both to Germany and to Poland. Thus, by the Treaty, Germany has lost probably five million of her population, but, in the main, she has only lost those peoples con- quered by force and belonging to other nationalities. She has only lost, or is to lose, her French and Danish and Polish subjects. The liberation of these peoples is one more triumph of the powerful and unconquerable spirit of nationality, a force which has greatly trans- formed Europe since the French Revolution and which is still trans- forming it. In still another region Germany has lost control, at least pro- visionally, of territory that was hers before the war, of the Saar Basin, contiguous to France. This region, in part, had be- TheSaar longed to France, but had been acquired by Prussia in 1815. ^^sia It is not to be returned outright to France. Like Danzig since 1793, it has become Germanized and as the framers of the Treaty of Ver- sailles have professed the principle that peoples must not be sub- jected to alien states, a principle to which they have conformed more or less in their actual conduct, a quite complicated arrangement has been worked out in regard to the Saar Basin, a region having a Ger- man population of about six hundred thousand. As compensation for the destruction of the coal mines in northern France and as part payment toward the total reparation due from Germany for the damage resulting from the war, Germany cedes to France in full and absolute possession, with exclusive rights of exploitation, the coal mines of the Saar Basin. But Germany does not cede the terri- tor}^ itself to France, only the mines. But in order that the French may have complete freedom in working these mines, without, how- ever, extending their sovereignty over the territory itself and over its German population, which, say the conferees of Paris, would 8oo MAKING THE PEACE create or tend to create another Alsace-Lorraine with the Germans this time as the victims, the framers of the Treaty have evolved elaborate and intricate arrangements for the immediate future of the Saar. Germany renounces, not the territory, but the government of the territory to the League of Nations, which is for fifteen years to act as trustee for the inhabitants, who at the end of that period shall have the right to indicate by a plebiscite under which sovereignty they prefer to be, whether that of Germany, or that of France, or whether they wish to continue indefinitely under the League of Na- tions. The voters having indicated their desires, the League of Nations shall finally decide on the sovereignty under which the territory is to be placed. Meanwhile, during those fifteen years the government shall be in the hands of a commission of five representing the League and appointed by it. Within the territory of the Saar Basin this Governing Commission shall have all the powers of gov- ernment hitherto belonging to the German Empire or to Prussia or to Bavaria. Not only does Germany agree in this Treaty to recognize the inde- pendence of Poland, but also that of the Czecho-Slovak Republic in whose favor she renounces certain territories in Silesia. to be She also recognizes the independence of Austria with whatever annexed to boundaries may be determined upon by the Five Great Powers Germany i a ■ ^ ■> and Austria. She agrees that this independence shall be in- alienable, except with the consent of the Council of the League of Nations. This means that Austria shall not be joined with Germany, even if the people of both countries desire it, save with the approval of the nine states represented in the Council. Germany also agrees to respect as permanent and inalienable the independence of all the territories which were part of the former Russian Empire on August i , 1914, and she undertakes to recognize all treaties that maybe entered into by the Five Great Powers with states now existing or coming into existence within former Russia and to recognize the frontiers of any such states as determined therein. She also agrees to the abrogation of the Brest-Litovsk Treaties and all other agreements she has made with Bolshevist Russia. Outside of Europe she not only cedes her colonies to the Five Great Powers, but she renounces treaty rights and privileges which she has hitherto enjoyed in Mo- rocco and Egypt, and she recognizes the French Protectorate of the former, the English Protectorate of the latter, and abandons all RESTRICTION OF GERMAN MILITARY POWER 8oi rights of intervention. She renounces, in favor of Japan, all the rights and privileges she has enjoyed in China since 1898, that is, her rights in the province of Shantung. DESTRUCTION OF GERMAN MILITARISM Such are Germany's territorial losses as set forth in the Treaty of Versailles. Another important section of the Treaty severely limits her freedom of action in another field, in the field of her greatest interest hitherto. If the terms of a treaty can prevent Germany from again becoming a great military and naval power, able to menace the world, prevented she will be. In great detail the Treaty determines just what forces she may have in the various war services, just what equipment. In a general way these clauses reduce the armed power of Germany to a standard hitherto reached and ex- ceeded by many a small state. If these clauses are enforced Ger- many will no longer be able, by rattling her shining saber, to alarm or terrify her neighbors. Any campaign that she may undertake against them can only be economic or political and propagandist, not military. After 1920 her army may not exceed one hundred thousand men, including not more than four thousand officers. Universal com- pulsory military service is abolished and the German army The German may only be constituted and recruited by voluntary enlistment, *™*y and the period of service is made so long as to act as a deterrent. Privates and non-commissioned officers must enlist, if they enlist at all, for twelve consecutive years ; officers for twenty-five. Not more than five per cent of these may be discharged for any reason in an}^ one j^ear before the expiration of their term of service. These clauses reveal the fact that the authors of them had learned one of the minor lessons that history has to teach. Napoleon, after his conquest of Prussia in 1806, forbade that the Prussian army should henceforth number more than forty-two thousand men. The Prussian Government accepted the requirement under compulsion, but it hit upon the ingenious device of having these men serve with the army only a short time, only long enough to learn the essentials of the soldier's life. Then they would be mustered out and others would pass through the same training. By this method several times forty-two thousand men received a military training and were 802 MAKING THE PEACE MILITARY PROVISLONS 803 able to take the field in those final campaigns which landed Napo- leon at St. Helena. The framers of the Treaty of Versailles intended that, in this respect at least, history should not repeat itself. But not feeling sure that the German of to-day might not in his turn hit upon some device of gaining indirectly what he is forbidden to get directly, they have provided that " educational establishments, uni- versities, societies of discharged soldiers, shooting or touring clubs, and, generally speaking, associations of every description, what- ever be the age of their members, must not occupy themselves with military matters " and must, in particular, neither instruct their members nor allow them to be instructed or exercised in the pro- fession or use of arms. Nor may government officials, such as cus- toms officers, forest guards, coastguards, or the local police, be as- sembled for military training. All military schools not absolutely necessary for the training of the officers of the army are abolished, as is also the Great General Staff, which has bulked so large in the thought and imagination of mankind during recent years. Thus Germany may henceforth produce only a certain number of soldiers. She may also produce only a certain amount of munitions and equipment and that amount is laid down in tables priuted in production of the Treaty. It is also provided that the manufacture of arms war material and munitions or any war material shall be carried out only in ■^^^*"'=*^ factories approved by the Five Great Powers. AH other such estab- lishments shall be closed within three months of the coming into force of the Treaty. Moreover importation into Germany of arms, munitions, and war material of every kind is strictly prohibited, as also is the exportation of such products from Germany. Nor may Ger- many manufacture or import asphyxiating, poisonous, or other gases, nor armored cars or tanks. Germany is forbidden to maintain or to construct any fortifications either on the left bank of the Rhine or on the right bank in a zone ex- tending fifty kilometers or about thirty-six miles east of the uofortifi- Rhine. All existing fortresses and fortified works within that cations on the area and also west of the river are to be disarmed or dismantled. The German navy is to be restricted to six battleships of the large type, six light cruisers, twelve destroyers and twelve torpedo boats and the personnel of the navy must not exceed fifteen thou- The German sand men, inclusive of officers, who must not exceed fifteen "^^ hundred. The warships interned under the armistice of November 804 MAKING THE PEACE 1 1 are to be surrendered. All German submarines are to be handed over to the Five Great Powers, and Germany is forbidden to acquire in the future any submarines, even for commercial purposes. The fortifications, military establishments and harbor of Helgo- land are to be destroyed, nor shall they ever be reconstructed. The Kiel Canal shall be free and open to the commercial and war vessels of all nations at peace with Germany on terms of entire equality. The armed forces of Germany must not include any military or naval air forces. The manufacture or importation of aircraft, or „ . , engines for aircraft, is forbidden in all German territory. All No air forces material of this nature already existing in Germany must, with a slight exception, be delivered over to the Five Great Powers. Such are the drastic provisions, which, if executed, will destroy that German militarism which has cost the world so intolerable a price. But how are they to be enforced? The Treaty provides that the Five Powers shall establish Inter-Allied Commissions of Control which shall be charged with the duty of seeing to their com- plete execution by the German authorities. These Commissions may establish their organizations in the capital of Germany, may proceed the«iselves, or send agents, into any part of Germany, may demand whatever information or aid they may desire of the German Government, which shall bear all expenses connected with the de- livery, the destruction, the dismantling, the demolition provided for by the Treaty. The Treaty also provides another novelty in the art of terminating wars which may in the future have a tendency to restrain would-be William II disturbers of the general peace and to cause them to think to be tried twicc before gaily plunging ahead. It publicly arraigns Wil- liam II, formerly German Emperor, " for a supreme offence against international morality and the sanctity of treaties" and it announces that a court shall be constituted to try him, consisting of five judgesi one appointed by each of the following, the United States, Great Britain, France, Italy, and Japan. It shall be the duty of this court to fix the punishment it may consider appropriate " with a view to vindicating the solemn obligations of international undertakings and the validity of international morality." Also military tribunals are to be established to try other persons accused of having committed acts in violation of the laws and customs of war, such persons to be handed over by the German Government on request to the Allies, THE REPARATION COMMISSION 805 which Government also agrees to furnish whatever documents and information may be needed. REPARATION There is another and extremely important section to this Treaty, that concerning the reparation which Germany must make for the enormous economic injury she has inflicted upon her enemies. By the Treaty she accepts the responsibility of herself and her asso- ciates for all the loss and damage to the Allied governments and the Allied peoples caused by the war. But as the payment of so mon- strous a sum is quite beyond her and their resources, she is to escape from a large part of what would be only a just penalty. But she definitely undertakes to make compensation for all the damage done to the civilian population of her enemies. This means that she must make good in money and in materials and in labor the desolation and destruction she has caused, must help restore the ravaged lands to their former condition, rebuild the demolished villages and cities, restore the loot she has carted away to Germany, replace tool for tool, factory for factory, ship for ship, and, in general, work and pay for the rehabilitation of the countries she has overrun and devas- tated. But how much does all this mean? Obviously this can not be determined off-hand, but only after an exhaustive investi- gation. The Treaty provides, consequently, that the amount of the above damage for which compensation is to be made by Germany shall be determined by an Inter-Allied Commission to be called the Reparation Commission, which shall make the necessary inves- tigation and shall notify the German Government on or before Reparation May I, 192 1, as to the extent of her obligations. This Com- Commission mission will be one of the chief agencies for the execution of the Treaty. It will sit in Paris and, no doubt, its activities will run for many years. It will consider from time to time the resources and the capacities of Germany, and will issue specific demands and will indicate how they are to be satisfied. In order to enable the Allied powers to proceed at once to the restoration of their industrial and economic life, pending the full determination of their claims, Germany shall pay over to the Germany's Reparation Commission before May i, 1921, twenty billion initial gold marks, normally about five billion dollars. What p^^™®"* moneys she must pay beyond that remain to be determined, but 8o6 MAKING THE PEACE may easily run up to a hundred million marks. Germany also agrees to the direct application of her economic resources to repa- ration, that is, agrees to deliver ships and coal and dyestufifs and chemical products and live stock and other things to her enemies, the amounts in general to be determined by the Commission — all these commodities being credited to her reparation account. For in- stance, as an illustration, she is to hand over all her merchant ships of 1600 tons and upward, half of her ships of a tonnage between 1000 and 1600 tons, a quarter of her tonnage of steam trawlers and a quarter of her tonnage of other fishing boats ; and in addition she must, for a period of five years, build ships for the Allies to the amount of 200,000 tons a year. All this is retribution for her merry years of submarine piracy. " A ton for a ton " may well take its place alongside " a tooth for a tooth " as an expression indicating the operation of even-handed, methodical justice among men. This equitable principle is to be applied in the realm of sentiment and the human spirit, as well as in the realm of matter. Germany undertakes to furnish to the University of Louvain manuscripts, printed books, maps, corresponding in number and value to those destroyed in the burning by Germany of the Library of Louvain. She is to restore to France certain archives and diplomatic papers, Restoration trophies and works of art, carried away from France by the of French German authorities in the course of the war of 1 870-1 871, and ^^^ particularly the French flags taken in that war. She must give back to the King of the Hedjaz the original Koran of the Caliph Othman, stated to have been presented to Emperor William II by his friend the Sultan. And certain works of art must be restored to Belgium also. COMMENTS OF LLOYD GEORGE ON THE TREATY Such are a few of the provisions of this monumental treaty. In presenting it to Parliament a few days after it was signed the British Premier Lloyd George said in discussing this very reparation section just described : " I do not think any one can claim the terms imposed constitute injustice to Germany unless he believes justice in the war was on the side of Germany." The terms of the Treaty in some respects were terrible, he said, but terrible were the deeds which justified them, and still more terrible would have been the consequences THE BRITISH PREMIER ON THE TREATY 807 had Germany triumphed. " The world is rocking and reeling under the blow that failed. If the blow had succeeded the liberty of Europe would have vanished." Concerning the territorial ^j^^ terms of the Treaty Lloyd George declared that the territory territorial taken from Germany was a matter of restoration, a restoration *^™^ ^"®' of Alsace-Lorraine, taken by force from the land to which its people were deeply attached, a restoration of Schleswig, the taking of which he described as the "meanest of HohenzoUern frauds, robbing a helpless country on the pretence that they were not doing it and then retaining the land against the wishes of the population," a restora- tion of a Poland torn to bits by Russian, Austrian, and Prussian autocracy and now reknit under the flag of Poland. " They are all territories," he added, "which ought not to belong to Germany." And he also said concerning other aspects of the Treaty : " Having regard to the uses Germany made of her army there is no injustice in scattering and disarming it. If the Allies had restored the col- onies to Germany after the evidence of the ill treatment of the na- tives, and the part the natives have taken in their own liberation, it would have been a base betrayal. Then take the trial of Trial of the those responsible for the war. If wars of this kind are to be pre- Raiser just vented, those personally responsible for them, who have taken part in plotting and planning them, should be held personally responsible. Therefore, the Entente decided that the man who undoubtedly had the primary responsibihty, in the judgment, at any rate, of the Allies, should be tried for the offenses he committed in breaking treaties he was bound to honor, and by that means bringing on the war. It was an exceptional course, and it's a pity it was, because if it had been done before there would have been fewer wars." The Premier proceeded to argue that this was not a vengeful peace, that it was not vengeance " to take every possible precaution against a recurrence of the war and to make such an example J^^^ ^ of Germany as will discourage ambitious rulers and peoples vengeful from ever again attempting to repeat this infamy. The Ger- ^^^'^^ man people approved the war, and, therefore, it was essential in the terms to show, if nations entered into unprovoked wars of aggression against their neighbors, what lies in store for them." It might well be considered ominous that even before the Germans had signed this Treaty in the famous Hall of Mirrors at Versailles on June 28, 1919, two of its explicit terms had been already broken. 8o8 MAKING THE PEACE On the very eve of signature the Germans had sunk the fleet that lay interned since the armistice in Scapa Flow, thus avoiding the German surrender provided by the Treaty. And in Berlin the French breaches of flags captured by the Germans in 1870 had been burned in the Treaty o i ^ / front of the statue of Frederick the Great in Unter den Linden. German officers and soldiers of the Guard Cavalry Division had entered the War Museum and taken out the flags, already packed for delivery to the French. They had soaked the flags in gasoline and as they had tossed them into the flames the crowd had sung " Deutschland iiber AUes." While the Treaty had not been signed at the time these incidents occurred, yet the German Government had already announced that it would accept the terms which had been submitted to it weeks before. The world was given a sufficient hint that breaches or attempted breaches of the Treaty might be confidently expected in course. RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY The fate of the Treaty now lay with the parliaments of the various countries to which it was submitted for ratification. With it were coupled in the case of the English, French, and American parlia- ments certain treaties between the United States and France and between France and Great Britain by the terms of which the two powers agree to move immediately to the aid of France if any un- provoked act of aggression is made against her by Germany. These treaties were signed at Versailles on the same day as the treaty with Germany and were designed to reassure the French, who did not feel that an untried and uncertain League of Nations offered them Treaties a sufficient protection against a neighbor much larger than bctwGGH France, Eng- France and quite likely at the opportune moment to try to land, and the wipe out the humiliation of 1 91 8 by beginning a war of revenge, states It was provided that this virtual Franco- Anglo- American Al- liance should remain in force until the Council of the League of Nations should decide that the League itself assured sufficient pro- tection; It was provided in the Treaty of Versailles that it should come into force as soon as the ratifications of Germany on the one hand and of three of the Five Great Powers on the other should have been deposited in Paris. The German National Assembly ratified on THE ATTITUDE OF AMERICA 809 July 9, by a vote of 208 to 115, 99 deputies refusing to vote. A few days later the British Parliament approved it, and also the Anglo- French Treaty, with practical unanimity, after only a few days' de- bate. The French Parliament ratified in October and the Italian Government announced its adhesion in the same month. The neces- sary number, therefore, had ratified. Would the enforcement of the Treaty begin forthwith? Would the League of Nations begin immediately to function ? AMERICA AND THE PEACE The European nations were reluctant to set the new machinery in motion without the cooperation of America. And in America the Treaty hung lire. There was but slight opposition among the ^ osition people of the United States to that part of the Treaty which to the Treaty directly concerned GermanJ^ The overwhelming opinion was *° America that the terms imposed upon her were just and necessary. Only three of these four hundred clauses and more aroused any vigorous protest and those were the three that concerned the disposition of Shantung, the transfer of Germany's rights and privileges in that Chinese province to Japan. But the twenty-six articles concerning the League of Nations precipitated a long and bitter debate, both in the Senate and among the people. AH through the summer and fall of 1919 the League was the theme of constant discussion, increasing in intensity and acrimony as it progressed. Both in its fundamental principles and in its special provisions it was attacked and defended in many able speeches. The lines of cleavage were mainly between the Democratic Administration supporters and the Republican op- position, which was in a slight majority in the Senate. Every shade of opinion was expressed during the course of the debate. There were those who favored accepting the Treaty exactly as it stood without the elimination of a letter or a phrase. There were those who favored rejecting it outright and in its entirety. And between these extremes were men who wished a few changes and those who wished many. Of these some wished to effect the changes through amendments, which would involve resubmission of the entire Treaty to the Peace Conference, and some wished to make them through " reservations," which, they held, would not require' resub- mission. 8io MAKING THE PEACE On September lo, 19 19, the Committee on Foreign Relations reported the Treaty to the Senate with several amendments and Amendments ^°^'" reservations recommended by the Republican majority of or the Committee and opposed by the Democratic minority. The ions . • (^g|-,^^g proceeded. Finally toward the end of October the amendments came to a vote and were defeated. Many voted against them not on principle, but simply because they were opposed to any procedure that might necessitate reopening negotiations with Germany. They were willing to vote for the same changes if ex- pressed in the form of resolutions. After the defeat of the amend- ments the tense and crucial struggle began. Finally after much debate the majority of the Senate adopted a series of fifteen reserva- The fifteen tions which wcre included in the ratifying resolution. These reservations reservations stated the conditions under which the United States would accept the Treaty of Versailles, including the Covenant of the League of Nations. ' Most of them, indeed, had reference only to the Covenant and embodied many of the criticisms leveled against that document during the discussion. One of them provided that if the United States should desire to withdraw from the League it should be the sole judge as to whether it had fulfilled all its obliga- tions. Another had reference to the famous Article X and an- The change I nounced that " The United States assumes no obligation to in Article X preserve the territorial integrity or political independence of any country or to interfere in controversies between nations or to employ the military and naval forces of the United States under any article of the Treaty, unless Congress shall in any case so decide, Congress possessing the sole power under the Constitution to declare war." In other words not the Council of the League, nor the Pres- ident of the United States, but Congress should determine whether the army or navy should be used and for what purpose, and Congress would have the same right to decline as to accept the recommen- dations of the Council. Another reservation asserted that no man- date should be accepted by the United States except by action of Congress, which meant that the President might not alone commit the United States to such an undertaking. Another reservation declared that the United States reserved to itself exclusively the right to decide what questions are of a domestic nature and refuses to submit any such either to arbitration or to the considera- tion of the Council or Assembly of the League of Nations. Another THE TREATY REJECTED 8ii concerned the Monroe Doctrine, declaring that that doctrine is to be interpreted by the United States alone and lies wholly outside the jurisdiction of the League of Nations. Still another with- Hands off held the assent of the United States from those clauses of the Monroe the Treaty which concern the transfer to Japan of Ger- °*^ ^"^^ ' many's rights in Shantung. The United States was to have full liberty of action in any controversy that might arise under those clauses between China and Japan. Another reservation provided that, if the United States should at any time adopt any plan for the limitation of armaments proposed by the Council of the League of Nations, it should nevertheless retain the right to increase co'ntToUhe such armaments without the consent of the Council whenever size of its the United States should be threatened with invasion or be ^ ^ engaged m war. Such were the more important of the so-called Lodge reservations. Embodied in the clause ratifying the Treaty they would require a two-thirds vote of the Senate. This they could not secure The Treaty unless a considerable number of Republicans and Democrats defeated in should combine. But most of the Democrats were opposed to them and in favor of ratifying the Treaty without reservations. President Wilson denounced the Lodge reservations as amounting to a " nullification " of the Treaty and urged the Democratic Senators to vote against the ratifying resolution in which they were incorpo- rated. Thus it came about that on November 19, 19 19, the Senate refused by a vote of 55 to 39 to pass the ratifying resolution, that is, refused to ratify the Treaty. As far as the United States was con- cerned, the Treaty of Versailles was dead. Whether it could be in any way resurrected, whether it could be passed with a different kind of ratifying clause, no one could foretell. TREATIES WITH AUSTRIA AND BULGARIA Meanwhile, before the era of peace could fully dawn upon a weary world many other negotiations would have to be brought to a head, many other treaties would have to be made and ratified. The Treaty with Germany, no doubt the most important of the series, would be but one. Nor could it stand alone, as others would be needed prop- erly to complete it. This was foreseen in the document itself, which repeatedly required German assent to other treaties not yet made. 8l2 MAKING. THE PEACE M [H o ri H I—* < g" 3 W M 3 H W H O I.J H < ^ W PL, < in ^ o <: H c < 2-rid the Civil War, 13-16; and the Commonwealth, 18- 24; dissolves the Long Parliament, 21-22 ; Lord Proctector, 23 ; foreign policy of, 23-24 ; death of, 24 ; at- titude of the Restoration toward, 25 ; and Ireland. 530. Cromwell, Richard, abdicates, 25. Cuba, war in, 606-607 J ^-I'^d the World War, 727; and the Peace Confer- ence, 776. Cunard, Samuel, 335. Gushing, Caleb, and China, 644. Custozza, battle of, 397, 400, 423, 443. Cyprus, England "occupies," 619. Czecho-Slovakia, 770, -and the Peace Conference, 776, 784, 813. Czecho-Slovaks, declare their inde- pendence, 755. Czechs, in Bohemia, 395-396, 520; and the Taaffe ministry, 521. Czernin, 739. Czernowitz, and the line of battle, 702 ; captured, 712. Dahomey, 504. Dalmatia, 221, 260, 755. Damascus, 753. Danton, a monarchist, 154; leader of the Cordelier Club, 163 ; head of the executive council, 172; on the im- portance of Paris, 176; and the Girondists, 176-177, 181, 184; and the Revolutionary Tribunal, 185, 187; and Robespierre, 195; fall of, 196 ; on education, 206. Dantonists, 195. Danubian Principalities, 292. Danzig, and the treaty of Versailles, 798-799. Dardanelles, attacked, 702-703 ; opened to the Allies, 755 ; problem of, 770. David, 198. Davout, 268. INDEX 831 Deak, Francis, 393-394, Si 6, 524. Debene}', 751. Dego, 215. Delarey, 5S0. Delbriick, Professor, on the German Parliament, 480-481. Delcasse, Theophile, and Italy, 506. Delegations (Austria-Hungary), 518. Denmark, and the Continental Sys- tem, 275; and the Congress of Vienna, 308, 312 ; Prussia's war with, 439-441, 598-599; and Africa, 583; cedes Norway to Sweden, 598 ; and Schleswig and Holstein, 598-600; Prince Charles of, chosen King of Norway, 603. Departments, of France, 147; martial law proclaimed in, 414. Depretis, 511. Derby, Lord, ministry of, 362-364. Desaix, 227, 240. Deshima, peninsula of, 645. Desmoulins, Camille, 195. Devil's Island, Dreyfus and, 496-497. Dey of Algeria, 503. Diderot, 76, 106. Diet, German (Imperial), 59, 160, 319; at Frankfort, 320-321; Bohe- mian, 521 ; Swedish, 601. Directory, composition of, 203 ; work of, 205, 208-235, 273. Disraeli, Benjamin, and the Reform Bill of 1867, 362-364; ministry, 536—538; and the Transvaal, 575- 576; and the Congress of Berlin, 619. Dissenters, in Great Britain, 343- 344, 346 ; and the Education Act of 1902, 550. Divine Right, defined 4; overthrown in England, 26 ; in Europe, 80. Dmowski, 778. Dodecanese, Italy and, 671. Domestic system, of production, 332- 333^ 337- Douaumont, 708. Draga, Queen (Serbia), 624. Dragonnadcs, 35. Dresden, Austrians defeated at, 297 ; Saxony .retains, 310-311; Prussians invade, 442. Dreyfus Case, 495-499. Drogheda, stormed, 19. Dual x\.lliance, 470, 495, 683, 685. Dual Control, 589-590. Dual Monarchy. See Austria-Hun- gary. Dublin, Parliament in, abolished, 530, 541- Ducos, 234. Duma (Russia), 657-659, 727-728. Dumba, 718. Dumouriez, 179. Dunbar, battle of, 19, 24. Dunkirk, England gains, 24; France gains, 32. Dupont, General, 280. Durham, in the Grey Ministrj', 347 ; mission to Canada, 566-567. East Africa, Italy and, 511 ; Germany and, 762. East India Company, 564-565. East Indies, Dutch colonies in, 595. East Prussia, electoral districts in, 478 ; Russia invades, 695, 700. Eastern Question, Russia and, 77, 610, 614-615; Austria-Hungary and, 526, 610; reopened (1876), 538,' 616—620, 624; and the revolution in Turkev, 625, 665 ; and the World War, 684. Eastern Routnelia, 619; and Bul- garia, 621. Ebert, German Chancellor, 758, 765- 767 ; president of the German "Reich," 767. Ebert-Haase government, 766-767. Ecuador, 776. Edict of Emancipation, Alexander II and, 631-633. Education, in Russia, 74 ; the Con- vention (France) and, 206 ; national, in France reorganized, 248; in Eng- land (181 5), 344; national (France), 492; in Italy, 510; in England (1870), 534-535; made free in Eng- land, 535, 546; Act of 1902 (England), 550; Bill of 1906 (Eng- land) , defeated by House of Lords, 553 ; in Switzerland, 597 ; in Portu- gal, 608 ; in Bulgaria, 622 ; in Greece, 625 ; in Japan, 646-647 ; in China, 653- Edward VII (England), accession of, 550; death of, 556. Eg3q)t, Napoleon's expedition to, 225- 229, 230, 240; England and, 506, 832 INDEX 537, 581, 585, 588-591, 670; Turkey and, 583, 696; becomes a protector- ate, 697. Eidsvold, Constitution of, 600-602. Eisner, Kurt, 765. Elba, Napoleon and, 299, 310. Elders, Council of. Sec Council of Elders. Electoral system, in France, 144-147 ; in Germany, 475-479. Elgin, Lord, and Canada, 567. Eliot, Sir John, 7-8. Elizabeth (Russia), 76. Emerson, on Napoleon, 251. Emigres, intrigues of, 157-159, 164- 165, 167, 169, 177; guillotined, 190; laws against relaxed, 244; Louis XVIII and, 300; Charles X and, 369- Empire, earl}' years of the French, 251-272; at its height, 273-285. Empire, The. See Holy Roman Em- pire. Ems dispatch, 452. Ena, Princess of Battenberg, marries Alfonso XIII, 607. Enghien, Duke d', and Napoleon, 250, 278. England, in the seventeenth century, 1-26; Civil War in, 11-16; and the Commonwealth, 18-24; a-nd the Restoration, 25-26; enters Triple Alliance, 31 ; Huguenots flee to, 36 ; and Holland, 37 ; and Louis XIV, 47; in the eighteenth century, 49- 56; and Frederick the Great, 66; government of, 107, in; enters war against France, 179, 205, 208, 231; Napoleon and, 225, 239, 256, 273-275, 290-291, 297; and the Peace of Amiens, 240, 256 ; and the third coalition against France, 256- 258; and the Berlin Decrees, 268; Alexander I and, 269 ; and the con- tinental blockade, 274-275, 286- 287, 292 ; joins the Peninsula cam- paign, 280-281, 283; and the Con- gress of Vienna, 308-314; and the Quadruple Alliance, 315-316; and the Congresses, 328-330; and the Industrial Revolution, 331-338; an Era of Reform in, 339-364; Parliament of, 340-343 ; and religion, 343-344 ; people of, neglected, 344- 345; and the Reform Bill of 1832, 347-352; a democracy, 364; and the July Revolution, 375; and the neutrality of Belgium, 377; Louis Philippe and, 382, 390; and the Crimean War, 416, 426, 614; and Villafranca, 429 ; and Mexico, 447 ; and the Entente Cordiale, 506 ; since 1868, 527-561; and the Boer War, 579-580; and Africa, 583, 585 ; and Egypt, 585, 588-591, 670; and Greece, 612-613, 625; and the Treaty of San Stefano, 617-619; and the Congress of Berlin, 619 ; in Asia, 642 ; and the Opium War, 643-644 ; and China, 648-649 ; and Japan, 650; and the World War, 682, 684, 689-699, 702-703, 706- 707, 710-711, 715-717, 732-735, 737-738, 742-756; and the Triple Entente, 686-687 ; and the Peace Conference, 776-779. Enos, line from, to Midia, 673. Entente Allies, 609. Entente Cordiale, 506-507. Enver Pasha, 696. Epinal, 707. "Equal Rights of Nationalities" (Hungary), 524. Equality, the Revolution and, 105, 134; Bonaparte and, 241; Consti- tutional Charter of 1814 and, 366- 367- Erfurt Interview, 281. Eritrea, 511. Erivan, 740. Esperey, Franchet d', 753. Essling, battle of, 283. Established Church (England), 343. See also Anglican Church. Esterhazy, Major, 496. Esthonia, Russia acquires, 72, 628; and Brest-Litovsk, 740. Eugene, Prince, of Austria, 47. Eugenie, Empress, 416, 453. Europe, in the eighteenth century, 49-83; Seven Years' War, 66-67; Campo Formio treaty changes map of, 221 ; Russia and, 231 ; at peace, 241; coast of, blockaded, 257; dip- lomatic system of, altered, 269; and the Continental System, 273- 276, 286; new map of, 308-314; reaction in, after 1815, 317-327; INDEX 833 influence of the July Revolution upon, 375-382 ; central, in revolt, 392-406 ; map of, altered by Prussia, 444; and the year 1866, 445; and the treaty of San Stefano, 470; German leadership in, 471; ex- pansion of, 563 ; small states of, 593-609; the Turks and, 610; re- construction of, 768-770. European War (1914), and Imperial Federation, 582 ; the Balkan wars of 191 2 and 1913 and, 660-677. See also World War. Eylau, battle of, 269. Factory, Sj'stem of production, 337- 338, 344; Act of 1833, 354, 360; laws (England), 361-362; laws (New Zealand), 574. Faidherbe, 504. Falaba, 720. Falk Laws, 462—463. Falkenhayn, and Roumania, 713. Falkland Islands, naval battle off the, 698, 716. Far East, The, 642-654, 697. Fashoda, 506. Faure, Felix, 495. Favre, Jules, and the Third Republic, 453- Federal Act (German Confederation), 321-322. Federal Council (Switzerland), 596. Federal Tribunal, Switzerland, 596. Federalists, of southern Spain, 606. Ferdinand I (Austria), 319; forced to abdicate, 398. Ferdinand (later Ferdinand VII) of Spain, 276-278, 324. Ferdinand (Naples) and Austria, 326- 327- Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg, and Bul- garia, 621-622; becomes Czar of Bulgaria, 622, 666; and the World War, 703 ; abdicates, 754. Ferry, Jules, and the Third Republic, 453, 491-493 ; and Tunis, 504. Feudalism, relics of, 84-87 ; in France, 95, 102-103, 121; abolished in France, 132, 134, 242; abolished in Spain, 282; in Austria, 319; abol- ished in Hungary, 395 ; in Sweden, 601. Fielden, 354. Fife, 341. Figueras, 606. Finch, Chief- Justice, 9. Finland, Russia and, 269, 275, 292, 311, 628; Nicholas II and, 640-641 ; the Provisional Government and, 728 ; declares its independence, 732 ; and the peace, 739-740. First Consul. Sec Napoleon. Five Hundred, Council of. See Coun- cil of the Five Hundred. Five Members, 11. Five Mile Act, 25. Flanders, British ofTensive m, 735 ; German attack in, 743. See also Spanish Netherlands. Florence, republic of, 400-401 ; cap- ital of Italy, 508. Florida, England acquires, 53. Foch, General, and the Battle of the Marne, 692 ; Commander in Chief, 742 ; assumes the ofTensive, 747- 752; and the armistice, 756; enters Strasburg, 763. Fontainebleau, 299. Formosa, Island of, 647, 652. Forster Education Act (1870), 534- 535- 550- . Fouquier-Tinville, 200. Fox, and the American Revolution, 55 ; and the House of Commons, 349 ; colonial policy of, 567. France, favored by Cromwell, 24; under Louis XIV, 27-48; in the Eighteenth century, 49 ; and the Seven Years' War, 52-53, 66-67, 564; and the American Revolution, 55-56, 113 ; Old Regime in, 84-112 ; beginnings of the Revolution in, 1 13-138; and the making of the Constitution, 140-154; and the Legislative Assembly, 156-174; de- clares war on Austria, 166 ; becomes a democracy, 171; and the Con- vention, 175-206; proclaimed a re- public, 175; under the Directory, 208-235 ; and Corsica, 209 ; threat- ened with invasion, 230; under the Consulate, 236-250; Bank of, founded, 248 ; earl}' years of the Empire, 251-272; third coalition against, 256-258; and the Treaty of Pressburg, 259—260; and the transformation of Germany, 262- «34 INDEX 266; conquers Prussia, 26(^-268; the Empire at its height, 273-285; annexes Holland and northern coasts of Germany, 275; and the Papal States, 275-276, 286, 290; at war with Austria, 282-285 ; and the decline and fall of Napoleon, 286-306 ; and the alliance with Russia, 291—293; invaded 297, 299; reign of Louis XVIII in, 299-301 ; Napoleon returns from Elba to, 301— 303 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 308-314; and the Congresses, 328- 330; industrial revolution in, 336; Reaction and Revolution in, 366- 390; and Belgian neutrality, 377; Second Republic in, and the found- ing of the Second Empire, 407-418 ; and the making of the Kingdom of Italy, 426-429 ; Savoy and Nice ceded to, 429 ; Prussia's war with, 439, 444, 450—451 ; Second Empire in, and the Franco-Prussian War, 445-457; and Mexico, 447; under the Third Republic, 483-507 ; and Africa, 583, 585; and Egypt, 589; Andorra and, 593 ; and Greece, 612- 613; and the Crimean War, 614; in Asia, 642 ; and China, 644, 648- 649 ; and the World War, 682, 684- 759; and the Triple Entente, 686; evacuation of, 761 ; and the Peace Conference, 776-779. Franche-Comte, France gains, 32. Francis I, Emperor of Austria, 264. See also Francis II. Francis II ("Holy Roman Empire), France declares war against, 166- 168; retires from Vienna, 259; be- comes Francis I (Austria), 264; and Metternich, 319. Francis II (Naples), 430-432. Francis Ferdinand, Archduke of Aus- tria, assassinated, 680-682. Francis Joseph I (Austria), accession of, 398; and Hungary, 399, 515- 519, 525; reign of, 515-526; decides to incorporate Bosnia and Herze- govina, 666. Franco-German War, 451-457; com- pletes unification of Germany, 458. Frankfort, Diet of, 320-321, 323, 405, 459 ; German National Assembly at, 396 ; Parliament of, 401-405, 435) 438, 461 ; annexed to Prussia, 443 ; Treaty of, 455-456, 469, 483. Frederick II (the Great), 62-69, 79) 82 ; Napoleon visits tomb of, 268. Frederick III (German Emperor), 461, 471-472. Frederick William I (Prussia), 63-64. Frederick William II, 69. Frederick William III (Prussia), and Napoleon, 266-268; abolishes serf- dom, 289; makes alliance with Russia, 296 ; enters Paris, 299 ; promises constitution, 321 ; perse- cutes the Liberals, 323. Frederick William IV, rejects the work of the Frankfort Parliament, 403- 405; and the "humiliation of 01- miitz," 405 ; grants a constitution, 405-. Frederick William, German Crown Prince, 758. Free trade, England and, 358-360, 467; Holland and, 376; Germany and, 467. French, Sir John, 699. French Congo, 492; Germany and, soy- French Guiana, 496, 503. French Revolution (1789), 3-4, 49, 84; England and, 56; the "philos- ophers" and, 105-112; beginnings of, 1 13-138; the political clubs and, 160—166; and the war in Europe, 166-167; and the September Mas- sacres, 172-174; and the Conven- tion, 175—206; Napoleon and, 241— 243 ; influence of, in South Ger- many, 266; Metternich and, 317; effect of, in Italy, 325; influence of, 339; of 1830, 372-374) 375-382; of 1848, 389-39O) 392- French Soudan, 505. Friedland, battle of, 269. Fulton, and the Clermont, 335. Fundamental Laws (Finland), 640- 641. Gabelle, 93-94. Gaeta, 432. Gag Laws, 346. Galicia, Austria and, 284; Poles in, 521; Russians invade, 695, 700- 702 ; "drive" in, 729. GaUipoli Campaign, 702-703. INDEX 835 Gambetta, Leon, and Napoleon III, 449-450; and the Third Republic, 453-455, 483, 490-491; death of, 493 ; and the clerical party, 500. Gapon, Father, 656. Garibaldi, Anita, 430. Garibaldi, Giuseppe, and Young Italy, 421, 430; and the making of the kingdom of Italy, 430-433. Gaza, 229. Geneva Commission, 535. Genoa, a republic, 49, 57, 78; and Corsica, 209 ; becomes the Ligurian Republic, '219; Napoleon and, 223; IMassena and, 239 ; ceded to King of Piedmont, 308, 312, 325; Maz- zini and, 419-420; Garibaldi and, 432. George I (England), 51-52. George I (Greece), 624-625. George II (England), 51-52. George III (England), 53-5.6, 331; death of, 346; and Australia, 570. George IV (England), reign of, 346- 347- George Y (England), accession of, 556 ; and the Parliament Bill, 558. George, Prince, and Crete, 625. Gerard, Ambassador, 723-725. German Confederation, established, 320—321, 401—402; revived, 405, 435; Holstein a member of, 440; Austria to withdraw from, 443. German East Africa, 469, 706. German Empire (Sec also Holy Roman Empire), Constitution of the new, 458-481. German National Assembly, 395-396, 401, 758. German Southwest Africa, 469, 706. Germans, in Austria, 319, 519; in Bo- hemia, 395-396; in Holstein and Schleswig, 440, 599; in Hungary, 523; in Switzerland, 598; in the Baltic Provinces, 628. Germany, a collection of small states, 59-60; and the problem of Alsace, 160; states of, enter war against France, 1 79, 208 ; French driven out of, 231 ; transformation of, 262-266, 269, 275 ; and the Erfurt Interview, 281; Metternich and, 320-324; in- dustrial revolution in, 336 ; and the July Revolution, 375, 381-382; revolution in (1848), 395-396; de- feat of liberalism in, 401-406; uni- fication of, 435-444, 457; States of South, join the Confederation, 457; no parliamentary system in, 461 ; and the Kulturkampf, 462-463 ; and Socialism, 464-467 ; and pro- tection, 467-468; colonies of, 468- 469 ; and the Triple Alliance, 469— 471; William II and, 471-474; electoral system in, 475-479; chal- lenges the P'ntente Cordiale, 506- 507 ; and Africa, 585 ; covets Bel- gium and Holland, 595 ; and Greece, 612; and Japan, 648; and China, 648-649; and the Hague Confer- ence, 662; and the breaches of the Treaty of Berlin, 666 ; and the Treaty of Bucharest, 679 ; prepares for war, 679; and the World War, 683-756 ; sends ultimatum to Bel- gium, 687 ; invades Russia, 700- 702 ; revolution in, 756-759 ; and the armistice, 761-764; problem of, 765-767 ; and the treaty of Ver- sailles, 781-782; 795-809; consti- tution of the German Republic, 816-820; problem of Germany, 820-822. Gibraltar, England acquires, 47. Giolitti, and the Triple Alliance, 679. Girondists, personnel, 165-166; desire war, 167; and the Jacobins, 173, 176-179, 181-182; twenty-nine ar- rested, 182; guillotined, 190; over- throw of, 192 ; Bonaparte and, 244. Gladstone, and the extension of the suffrage, 362-364 ; First Ministry of, 527-536 ; and Ireland, 529-534 ; and education, 534-535 ; other reforms of, 535-536 ; Second Ministry, 538- 541; Third Ministry, 541-545; Fourth Ministry, 547-548 ; death of, 548; and the Transvaal, 576-577; and the Soudan, 590-591 ; and the Bulgarian atrocities, 617. Gneist, Rudolph, 479. Godoy, 276. Goethe, 281, 322, 767. Golitzin, Prime Minister, 728. Gordon, General, 590-591. Gorgei, 399. Gorizia, 712, 735. 836 INDEX Gork}^, and Brest-Litov^sk, 740. Gortchakoff, and the Congress of Ber- lin, 470. Gouraud, General, 751. Gramont, and the Hohenzollern can- didacy, 452. Grand Monarch. See Louis XIV. Grand Remonstrance, lo-ii. Grattan, 542. Great Britain. Sec England. "Great Commoner." See Pitt, Earl of Chatham. Great Elector (Prussia), 62. Great Khan, 70. Great Saint Bernard Pass, 239. Great WeslerK, sails from Bristol to New York, 335. Greece, and Turkey, 610, 625 ; and the war of independence, 611-612; foreign intervention for, 612—613; kingdom of, 613, 624-625 ; England cedes Ionian Islands to, 625 ; an- nexes Thessaly, 625 ; and Crete, 666, 673; Macedonian Christians and, 669 ; and the Balkan Wars of 1912 and 1913, 671-677; and the World War, 703-705, 727, 753; and the Peace Conference, 776- 778. ~ Greek Orthodox Church. See Cath- olic Church (Greek). Green, his opinion of James I, 5 ; Short History of the English People by, censored in Russia, 639. Gregory XVI (Pope), recovers prov- inces, 381. Grenoble, 302. Grevy, Jules, chosen president, 491 ; resigns, 493. Grey, Earl, and the Reform Bill of 1832, 347-352. Grey, Sir Edward, and the Treaty of Berlin, 667. Guadeloupe, 502. Guam, 469. Guastalla, Duchess of, 261. Guatemala, 776. Guiana, 503, 564. Guilds, in France, 101-102, 118, 134, 242. Guinea, 504. Guizot Ministry, 386-390. Gulflight, 720. Gustavus V (Sweden), 604. Haakon VII (Norway), 603. Haase, 766. Habeas Corpus, 105 ; suspended, 346. Hague, International Arbitration Tri- bunal, 603, 662; Conferences, 661- 664, 718, 775. Haig, General, 699, 710-71 1; issues special order, 743. Haiti, 776. Hallam, Arthur, 528. Ham, 412, 742. Hamburg, 275, 286; American Line, 335; a republic, 460; establishes trading stations, 468 ; revolution in, 757- Hamilton, Sir Ian, 703. Hampden, John, and Charles I, 7-9, II. Hanover, House of, and England, 50- 56, 440; Napoleon seizes, 257; aids Austria against Prussia, 441-442 ; King of, taken prisoner, 442 ; an- nexed to Prussia, 443 ; revolution in, 758. Hapsburg, House of. See Austria. Hardenberg, 288. Hargreaves, James, 333. Harrison, Frederic, concerning Crom- well, 23. Hebert, and the Pere Duchesne, 192- 193 ; guillotined, 195. Hebertists, 195. Hedjaz, Kingdom of, 776. Hedlev, William, and the Puffing Billy, 336. Heidelberg, 766. Helgoland, England and, 311, 564; British naval victory near, 698; to be dismantled, 804. Henry IV (France), and the Edict of Nantes, 34. "Henry V" (France), 487. Henry, Colonel, 496. Herder, 767. Hertling (Chancellor), 473. Herzegovina, Austria "occupies," 470, 619; Austria annexes, 526, 666, 670, 680, 683 ; insurrection in, 6x6. Hesse-Cassel, revolution in, 381 ; aids Austria against Prussia, 441-442 ; Elector of, taken prisoner, 442 ; annexed to Prussia, 443. Hesse-Darmstadt, aids Austria against Prussia, 441. INDEX 837 High Court of Justice, and Charles I, 16. Hindenburg, General von, and the battle of Tannenberg, 695 ; and the campaign in East Prussia, 700-702, 703, 712, 727 ; and the Battle of the Somme, 710; succeeded by Luden- dprff, 743. "Hindenburg Line," 733; battle of the, 749-752. Hohenlinden, 240. Hohenlohe (Chancellor), 473. Hohenzollern candidacy, 451-452, 605. Hohenzollern, House of. Set Prussia. Holland, England and, 24, 37, 240, 311, 564, 575; and the Triple Al- liance, 30-31 ; Louis XIV and, 31- 32, 47; Huguenots flee to, 36; republic in, 49 ; young Russians sent to, 72; and the war against France, 179, 205, 208; colonics of, 240 ; Louis Bonaparte, King of, 260- 261, 275; annexed to France, 275, 286; and Belgium, 310, 312, 594; and the July Revolution, 375-378; New, 570 ; and Africa, 583 ; the Pan- Germans covet, 595 ; and China, 644; William of Hohenzollern flees to, 759. Holstein, question of, 440; annexed to Prussia, 443, 598-600. Holy Alliance, 314-315; 328-330, 381, 630. Holy Roman Empire, 47 ; free cities of, 49, 263, position of, altered, 263- 266, 320. Sec also German3\ Home Rule Bill (Ireland), first, 543- 545; second, 547; third, 559-561. Home Rule Movement, 541-542. Horns, 753. Honduras, 776. Hong Kong, ceded to England, 644 Home, 751. House, Colonel Edward M., 778. Hudson Bay region, England acquires, 47i 563, 566; the Dominion pur- chases, 569. Huguenots, 34-36. Humbert I (Italy), 510; assassinated, 512. Hungary, Kingdom of, 319; and the revolution of 1848, 392-400, 515, 630-631 ; and Francis Joseph I, 515-519; Kingdom of, after 1867, 522-525; demands independence, 525-526; declares her independ- ence, 755. Huskisson, and the tariff, 346. Hymans, 778. Ibrahim, 612. Illiteracy, in Italy, 510; in Spain, 607 ; in Portugal, 608. Illyrian Provinces, 284; Austria and, 311-. Imperial federation. Chamberlain and, 548 ; British, 581-582. Imperial Germany, by Prince von Billow, 481. Imperial Parliament (German), com- position of, 458-461 ; and Socialism, 465 ; electoral system of, 475-478 ; position and powers of the Reichs- tag, 478-481. Imperialism, Disraeli and, 536-538; the Unionists and, 545, 548, 552; Chamberlain and, 548-549. Indemnity, Act of (England), 343. Independence Party (Hungary), 525. Independents, in the English Civil War, 12, 15; and the Restoration, 25- India, England acquires, 50, 563-566; Seven Years' War in, 53 ; Napoleon and, 226; Wellesley in, 2S0; French towns in, 502 ; Queen of England proclaimed Empress of, 537-538, 565 ; government of, 565-566, 581 ; Turkey and, 696 ; and the World War, 737; and the Peace Confer- ence, 776. Indo-China, 504, 642. Industrial Revolution, in England, .59, 331-338, 344; in Russia, 638. Initiative, in Switzerland, 597. Inkermann, 614. Inter-allied Supreme W'ar Council, 776. International African Association, 586. Inquisition, in Spain, 282 ; in Italy, 326. Instrument of Government, 23. Insurance, against sickness, accident and old age in Germany, 466. Intendants, 8q. International Labor Legislation, 778. 838 INDEX Ionian Islands, England and, 311, 564; ceded to Greece, 625. Ireland, supports Charles II, 18; con- quered, 19; representation of, in the English Parliament, 340; famine of 1845 in, 359-360, 531-532; Glad- stone and, 529-534, 541-545, 547; Cromwell and, 530; Home Rule and, 541-542, 547 ; and old age pensions. 552. "Ironsides," Cromwell's, 14, 20. Isabella II, Queen of Spain, 451, 604. Ismail, Khedive of Egypt, 537, 588- 589. Isnard, 166. Isonzo, 735, 754. Istria, 221, 260, 514, 706, 755. Italia Irredenta, 514, 706. Italy, Austria gains territory in, 47 ; a collection of states, 57-59, 219; states of, enter war against France, 179; campaign in, 209, 213-225; French driven out of, 230-231; second campaign in, 239-241 ; and the Code Napoleon, 247 ; Napoleon, king of, 253, 260, 269, 275, 286, 290; Austria receives northern, 311; after 1815, 325-327; and the July Revolution, 375, 381 ; revolution in the Austrian provinces of, 395-397 ; reconquered, 400-401, 515; war of 1859 in, 418; the making of the Kingdom of, 419-434 ; and the Austro-Prussian War (1866), 441- 443 ; seizes Rome, 456-457 ; and the Triple Alliance, 471, 511, 679, 685, 705; and Tripoli, 506; since 1870, 508-514; and Africa, 585; and the breaches of the Treaty of Berlin, 666; invades Tripoli, 671 ; and Al- bania, 674; and Serbia, 679, 682, 684 ; remains neutral, 690, 698 ; joins the Allies, 705-706 ; threat- ened, 711— 712; invasion of, 735- 736 ; and Bulgaria, 753 ; victorious, 754; and the Peace Conference, 776-778. Jacobin Club, 161-163, 186, 197 ; Louis Philippe and, 382. Jacobins, and Girondists, 166, 173, 176, 181-182; desire war, 167; against the King, 168, 178; and the government of Paris, 171; become masters of the Convention, 182; Robespierre and, 196 ; Bonaparte and, 244 ; in Paris, 484. Jaffa, 229, 737. Jagow, von, and the violation of Bel- gian neutrality, 689. Jamaica, England gains, 24, 563 ; slavery in, 354- . . James I, and the divine right of kings, 4-5- James II (England), 25-26; over- thrown, 37. Jameson Raid, 578. Janina, fall of, 673. Japan, early history of, 644-647 ; and the war with China, 647-650 ; and Russia, 650-654; and the Hague Conference, 661 , and the World War, 697-698, and the Peace Con- ference, 776. Jaroslav, captured, 695. Jassy, seat of the Roumanian govern- ment, 713. Java, 595. Jellachich, 398. Jellicoe, Admiral, 716. Jemappes, 382. Jena, battle of, 268, 288. Jerusalem, captured, 737, 752. Jesuits, favored by Frederick the Great, 68 ; expelled from Germany, 462. Jews, under Louis XVI, 103 ; in South Germany, 266 ; in England, 343 ; and the Dreyfus case, 498 ; in Rou- mania, 623 ; in Russia, 628, 637, 655, 659, 728; in Turkey, 696. Joffre, General, 692, 710. Johannesburg, 577. Josephine, Empress, and Napoleon, 211-213, 221, 253, 259, 269; mar- riage of, dissolved, 285. Jourdan, 209. Juarez, 448. Jugo-Slavia, 770, 813. July 14, 1789, 130 ; declared a national holiday, 492. July Monarchy, 384-386. July Ordinances (1830), 371-372. July Revolution (1830), 372-374; influence of, 375-382 ; of 1908 (Tur- key), 625-627, 664-665. June 20, 1792, 168, 211. June 2, 1793, insurrection of, 182. INDEX 839 June Days (1848), 410-41 1. Junot, 280. Jury, introduced (France), 146; Kos- suth demands trial by, 393. Jutland, naval battle of, 715-717. Kaledin, General, 732. Kalisch, Treaty of, 296. Kamerun, Germany and, 469, 507, 706. Karageorge, 611. Karl, Emperor (Austria-Hungary), 755- Kars, 740. Kerensky, 728-730, 739. Khartoum, 590-591. Kiauchau, 648, 697, 706. Kiel, harbor of, 441 ; Treaty of, 598, 602 ; German fleet in, Canal, 698, 716; mutiny at, 756; and treaty of Versailles, 804. "King of Rome," 285; death of, 412. Kioto, 648. Kirk Kilisse, battle of, 672, 675. Kitchener, Lord, and the Soudan, 549, 591 ; and the Boer War, 580. Kleber, 227, 230. Koniggratz, battle of, 442, 445, 450, 594- Korea, and the Chino- Japanese War, 647, 650; Japan invades, 651-652; annexed by Japan, 652. Kossuth, Francis, 525. Kossuth, Louis, and the Hungarians, 392-395, 398-399; flees to Turkey, 399- Kotzebue, 323. Kramar, 778. Kruger, Paul, President of the Trans- vaal, 579. Kiihlmann, 739. Kulturkampf, 462-463. Kumanovo, 672. Kunersdorf, battle of, 67. Kuropatkin, General, 651. Kut-el-Amara, 737. Labor, England and child, 353-354; English, legislation, 360-362, 546, 548; Commission (France), 408; Party (England), 552, 556; legisla- tion (New Zealand), 574. La Bruyere, 46. Ladrone Islands, 469. Lafaj'ette, and the events of Oct. 5 and 6, 1789, 136; and the Declara- tion of the Rights of Man, 140-141 ; and Louis Philippe, 374, 384. La Fontaine, and Louis XIV, 36, 45- 46. Laibach, Congress of, 328. Lamartine, 166, 387 ; head of the Pro- visional Government, 390, 407- 408 ; and the National Assembly, 410. Land, Act of 1870 (Ireland), 533-534, 539; Act of 1881, 539-540, 545; Purchase Bill (Gladstone), 543-545 ; Purchase Act (Salisbury), 545-546, 548; Act of 1903, 546. Landesgcmeinde cantons, 597. Landtag (Prussian), 475. Languedoc, 132. Lannes, 227. Lansing, Secretary, 725, 778. Laon, 751. Lassalle, Ferdinand, and Socialism, 464-465. Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, ex- ecuted, 10. Lausanne, Treat}' of, 671. Law of Associations, 500. Law of Papal Guarantees, 509. League of Augsburg, 47 ; of Nations, 774-779; 782-795; to enforce Peace, 774- Lebrun, 238. Leeds, unrepresented, 343. Legendre, 168. Legion of Honor, founded, 248 ; Drey- fus and, 498. Legislative Assembly, 156-174. Legislative Body (France), 238, 416; convened, 453. Legislative Chamber, Napoleon III and, 449. Legitimacy, doctrine of, 310, 312. Legitimists (France), 384, 487. Leipsic, battle of, 297, 749; Saxony retains, 310-31 1. Lemberg, captured, 695, 702. Lenine, 730. Lenthall, Speaker, to Charles I, 11. Leo XIII (Pope), and Bismarck, 463; refuses to recognize the Kingdom of Italy, 510. Leoben, Truce of, 218-219. INDEX Leopold I (Belgium), and Queen Vic- toria, 356; crowned, 377. Leopold II (Belgium), and Congo Free State, 586-588. Leopold of Hohenzollern, and Spain, 451-452, 605. Lese-majeste, 474. Lesseps, Ferdinand de, 588. Lettres de cachet, 85, 105, 109, 123, 130. Liao-tung peninsula, 647-648, 651- 652. Liao-yang, battle of, 651. Liberal-Unionists, 544-545. Liberals, in Germany, 321-322, 401- 406 ; in Spain, 329 ; in England, 364, 527; in Italy, 423; in Prussia, 439; Napoelon III and, 449-451 ; and Home Rule, 544 ; in power (Eng- land) after 1905, 552; blocked by the House of Lords, 554-556; in Portugal, 608 ; in Russia punished, 630. Liberia, and the World War, 727 ; and the Peace Conference, 776. Liberty, restricted in France, 105 ; Napoleon and, 243 ; religious, es- tablished in South Germany, 265 ; religious, in Great Britain, 343 ; civil, in Germany, 402. Licensing Bill, defeated by House of Lords, 553- Liebknecht, Socialist leader, 464, 766- 767. Liechtenstein, 593. Liege, taken, 691. Liggett, General, 751. Ligurian Republic. See Genoa. Lille, 751. Lisbon, 276, 280; revolution in, 608. Lissa, battle at, 443. Lithuania, overrun, 702 ; Germans control, 732 ; and Brest-Litovsk, 740. Liverpool, 335-336, 528. Livingstone, David, 584-585. Livonia, Russia acquires, 72, 628; and Brest-Litovsk, 740. Li Yuan-Lung, 654. Lloyd George, premier, 551; and the budget of 1909, 553-556; asks for American reinforcements, 745 ; and • the Peace Conference, 778; com- ments of, on treaty of Versailles, 806-807. Lobau, Island of, 284. Lodi, 215, 217-218. Lombardo-Venetian Kingdom, 311, 319, 325-326; declares its inde- pendence, 396, 515; Austria loses, 526. Lombardy, Austria and, 209, 215, 221, 312, 515; revolts, 395; Piedmont and, 427, 428 ; illiteracy in, 510. Lombardy-Venetia. See Lombardo- Venetian Kingdom. Lomenie de Brienne, 120. London, Charles I leaves, 1 1 ; Crom- well returns to, 20 ; and the plot against Napoleon, 249-250 ; riots in, 350; and the Chartist agitation, 357; conference in, recognizes in- dependence of Belgium, 377; Tel- egraph, 478 ; Times, 497 ; colonial conference in, 549 ; and old age pensions, 552; Treaty of (1827), 613; Treaty of (1913), 673-674; Treaty of (1373), 7i5- Long Parliament, 10-15 5 dissolved by Cromwell, 21—22. Lord Protector, Cromwell, 23. Lords, House of, ceases to exist, 18; restored, 25; in 181 5, 340; defeats second Reform Bill, 350-351; and the Reform Bill of 1832, 351 ; Irish bishops lose seats in, 532 ; defeats second Home Rule Bill, 547 ; Glad- stone attacks, 547-548, 556 ; defeats Liberal measures, 553 ; and the budget of 1909, 553-556 ; veto, 556- 559, 561. Loris-Melikoff, 636-637. Lorraine, 132; Germans invade, 453; France cedes a large part of, 455- 456, 469, 483 ; France recovers, 761- 763- , Loubet, Emile, 495 ; and Dreyfus, 497. Louis I (Bavaria), 613, 624. Louis XIII, and Africa, 503. Louis XIV, and Cromwell, 24; France under, 27-48, 113, 550. Louis XV, reign of, 49, 56, 113, 502. Louis XVI, reign of, 49, 85, 87, 92, 105 ; and Protestantism, 103 ; and the beginnings of the Revolution, 1 13-138; accepts the new constitu- tion, 142-144, 238; and the Civil Constitution of the Clergy, 150- INDEX 841 151 ; attempted escape of, 1 51-15 2 ; restored, 154; distrust of, 157-159; intrigues of, 164-165, 168; and the events of August 10, 1792, 169-172 ; and the Convention, 175—206; trial and execution of, 177-179. Louis XVIII, 244; proclaimed king, 299-310; flees, 302; reign of, 366- 369 ; Alexander I and, 629. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, 358, 411- 415. See Napoleon III. Louis Philippe, King of France, 374- 375; and Belgium, 377; and Italy, 381; reign of, 382-390; overthrow of, 390; and Algeria, 503. Louise, Queen (Prussia), 266, 436. Louvois, minister of war, 28-30. Louvre, Museum of, 206, 223. I^owe, Robert, 364. Liibeck, 275, 286 ; a republic, 460. Lucca, 261, 325. Ludendorff, General, 743, 751. Lule Burgas, battle of, 672, 675. Luneville, Treaty of, 240, 256, 262. Lusitania, sunk, 706, 720-721. Lutherans, in the Baltic provinces, 628. Lutsk, captured, 712. Liitzen, battle of, 297. Luxembourg Palace, 408. Luxemburg, a neutralized state, 593— 594, 687 ; German troops occupy, 688; evacuation of, 761. Luxemburg, Rosa, 766-767. Lvoff, Prince, ministry of, 728-729. Lyons, 182, 188-189. Lytton, Lord, Viceroy of India, 565. Macaulay, T. B., and representation in the House of Commons, 350 ; and Gladstone, 529. Macaulay, Zachary, 353. Macedonia, 617, 619; Bulgaria and, 622 ; Serbia and, 625 ; Greece and, 625 ; the Young Turks and, 669- 670, 672; and the Balkan wars of 1912 and 1913, 672-677. Machiavelli, 65. Mack, General, 258-259. Mackensen, General von, 700-702, 712; invades Serbia, 704; and Roumania, 713. MacMahon, Marshal, elected presi- dent, 487-488; policy of, 490-491 ; resigns, 491 ; Roman Catholic Church and, 500. Madagascar, France and, 492, 505. Madeira, 608. Madrid, Louis sends "Treatise" to, 30; Napoleon enters, 282. Maeterlinck, Maurice, on the German invasion of Belgium, 695. Magdeburg, 758. Magenta, battle of, 427, 515. Magna Charta, 3. Magyars, the clominant race, in Hun- gary, 319, 397-398; Francis Joseph I and, 515—516; oppose demands of Czechs in Bohemia, 519-520 ; policy of, 522-525. Mahdi, the, 590. Mahratta confederacy, 564. Majority Socialists, 766-767. Majuba Hill, 576-577, 579. Malesherbes, 105. Malplaquet, 47. Malta, 228, 240; England and, 311, 564- Mamelukes, 228. Manchester, 335-336; unrepresented, 343 ; and the Anti-Corn Law League, 359. Manchuria, Japanese invade, 647 ; Russia and, 649-650, 652. Manifesto, of August 19, 1905 (Rus- sia), 656; of October 30, 1905, Manin, Daniel, and Venice, 395. Manitoba, 567. Mantua, 215-217, 218. Manuel II (Portugal), 608. Maoris, 573. Marat, a monarchist, 154; incites the September massacres, 173; and the Jacobins, 176; acquitted, 181; Charlotte Corday and, 192. March Days, 395-396, 405 ■ March Laws (Hungary), 394-396, 398. Marchand, 506. Marches, the, Victor Emmanuel II and, 432-433. Marengo, 240, 243, 245, 249. Maria Christina, Regent of Spain, 606. Maria Theresa, Empress of Austria, 61, 80, 115. Marie, Minister of Commerce, 409. 842 INDEX Marie Antoinette, Queen, 113, 115- ii?^ 135; S'lid Turgot, 118; and the flight to Varennes, 151-152 ; in- trigues of, 164-165, 168; impris- oned, 172; executed, 190-192, 285. Marie Louise, Archduchess of Aus- tria, marries Napoleon, 285 ; re- ceives Duchy of Parma, 312. Maritime Pro\-ince, Russia acquires, 642. Maritza, 617. Marlborough, \actories of, 47 Marmont, 214, 227. Marne, Battle of the, 692-693, 695, 699, 707; Germans cross the, 744; Second Battle of the, 747-749. Marseilles, 182, 189, 503. Marston ISIoor, battle of, 14. Martinique, 502. Marx, Karl, and Socialism, 464. Marj- (daughter of James II) and the Glorious Revolution, 25-26, 50. Massachusetts Baj', founded, 12. "Massacre of the boulevards," 414. Massawa, 511. Massena, 213, 239, 243. Maude, General, 737. Mauritius, 353, 564. Maximilian (Archduke of Austria), and Mexico, 448-449. Maximilian, Prince (Baden), 473. Maximilian, Prince, Ex-Chancellor, 765- May Laws, 462-463. Maj'ence, 762, 763. Mazarin, 27, 37-40. Mazurian Lakes, Battle of the, 700. Mazzini, Joseph, and "Young Itah'," 419-421; and the making of Italy, 422 ; and Cavour, 424. Mehemet Ali, 588, 612. Melas, 239. Melbourne, Lord, and the first Re- form Bill, 347 ; and Queen Victoria, 356. Memel, 798. Meredith, and Paris, 776. Mesopotamia, Turkey and, 696; ex- pedition to, 737, 753 ; problem of, 770. Messines ridge, 743. Metric system, in France, 206. Metternich, and the Congress of Vienna, 308, 312; and the Quad- ruple Alliance, 315-317; Napoleon on, 317; policy of, 319-320; and Germany. 320-324; and the "right of inters-ention," 327-330; and the July Revolution of 1830, 375, 382; flees to England, 390, 394; and Alexander I, 630. Metz, besieged, 453 ; fall of, 455 ; France cedes, 455 ; IMarshal Petain enters, 762. Mexico, Napoleon III and, 447-449 ; and the Hague Conference, 661 ; and the World War, 725. Michaelis (Chancellor), 473. Middle Europe, 713, 737, 753-754- Midia, 673. Milan, Austria gains, 47, 209 ; Napo- leon and, 215, 223; Decrees, 274; occupied, 427. Milan, King of Serbia, 623-624. IMilitarism, spread of, 660-662 ; and treaty of Versailles, 801-805. MiHtary School (France), 496, 498. Mill, John Stuart, and woman suf- frage, 364. Milosch Obrenovitch, 611. l Milton, and toleration, 15 ; on the I death of Charles I, 16 ; and Crom- well, 20. Milj'oukov, Professor, 639, 728-729. Minorca, England acquires, 47. Minority Socialists, 766-767. Miquelon, 502. Mir, in Russia, 629, 633. Mirabeau, on Prussia, 62 ; impris- oned, 105, 130; defies the King, 127 ; on the Constitution of 1791, 147; and the royal flight, 151. Misitch, General, 704. Missolonghi, siege of, 612-613. Modena, Duke of, 219, 223; duchy of, 221 ; Austria and, 312, 325-326; revolution in, 3S1, 428-429. Mohammed V (Sultan), 668. Mohammedans, in Russia, 628. Molda\aa, practically independent, 613; independent, 615. See Rou- mania. Moliere, 45. Moltke, General von, 442-443. Mommsen, on Germany, 481. Monaco, 325. Monarchists (France), and the Third Republic, 483-484, 486-488, 490- INDEX 843 491, 494; and the Dreyfus case, 498; in Spain, 606. Monastir, captured, 672. ^londovi, 215. Mongols, and Russia, 70. Monroe, James (Pres. of U. S.), and the Monroe Doctrine, 330. Mons, taken, 692. Montalembert, 412. Montbeliard, County of, 34. Montcalm, defeated by Wolfe, 53. Montdidier, 742. Montebello, 219. Montenegro, Turkey and, 610, 617; and the Treaty of San Stefano, 617 ; independent of Turkey, 619-620; and the Balkan Wars of 191 2 and 1913, 672-677 ; and the World War, 696, 698, 704, 707 ; and Jugo- slavia, 770; and the Peace Confer- ence, 776. Montesquieu, loi, 106-108, no, 143, 184. Montijo, Mile. Eugenie de, marries Napoleon III, 416. Montreal, 566. Morea, 612-613. Moreau, 209, 217, 239-240. Morley, Lord, on the execution of Charles I, 16 ; and Irish Home Rule, 543- Morocco, France and, 505-507 ; Tur- key and, 583 ; Spain and, 607. Moscow, capital of Russia, 70, 74; retreat from, 293-295 ; university of, 640; strike in, 727. Mount Kemmel, 743. Mt. Tabor, 229. Mountain, the, 1 76. See also Jacobins. Mukden, 651. Munich, 765. Municipal government (England), reform of, 355. Murat, Joachim, brings cannon to the Tuileries, 204; and Napoleon, 227, 230, 234, 243, 293 ; marries, 261 ; in Spain, 276; becomes King of Naples, 278, 286. Muscovy, Principality of. See Russia. Namur, occupied, 691-692. Nancy, Bishop of, 132. Nanking, Treaty of, 644; Republic proclaimed at, 653. Nantes, Edict of, 24, 34 ; revoked, 35-37, 47, 103; city of, 189. Naples, Austria, gains, 47 ; Napoleon and, 260; Austria and, 325-326; revolution of 1820 in, 327-328; aids revolt against Austria, 395 ; ruler of, deserts the cause, 396 ; conquest of the Kingdom of, 429-432 ; an- nexed to the Kingdom of Italy, 433; illiterates in, 510. Napoleon, and the Holy Roman Em- pire, 60 ; and the sack of the Tuile- ries, 171; defends the Convention, 204—205; early life of, 209-225; campaign in Italy, 213-225; Egyp- tian Ex-pedition, 225-229; resolves to return to France, 229-231 ; plots a coup d'etat, 231-235; and the Consulate, 236-250; sovereign, 238; second Italian campaign of, 239- 241 ; political \-ie\vs of, 241-243 ; as a ruler, 243-245 ; and the Catholic Church, 245-247, 500; Code Napo- leon, 247-248 ; other reforms of, 248 ; and the royahsts, 249 ; Em- peror, 250-285 ; personal charac- teristics, 251-256; and the Third Coalition, 256-258 ; defeats Aus- tria, 258-260; the king-maker, 260-262 ; and the transformation of Germany, 262-266 ; and the con- quest of Prussia, 266-268, 270-271 ; and Russia, 268-269, 281 ; and Spain, 282, 324; and Austria, 282— 284; marries Marie Louise of Austria, 284-285 ; decline and fall of, 2861-306; forced to abdicate, 299; and Elba, 299, 301-303; and the "Hundred Days," 303; and Waterloo, 303 ; and St. Helena, 305- 306, 317; death of, 306. Napoleon III (Emperor of the French), 415-418; and the making of the Kingdom of Italy, 426-429, 432; and the Austro-Prussian war, 445- 447 ; and Mexico, 447-449 ; and the Liberals, 449-451 ; and the Franco- German War, 452-454; the Bona- partists desire, 487; and Senegal, 503-504. Naseby, battle of, 14. Nassau, aids Austria against Prussia, 441 ; annexed to Prussia, 443. National Assembly (1789), Third 844 INDEX Estate declares itself, 126-127; nobility and clergy join, 128; be- comes Constituent Assembly, 128, 140; of 1871, 483, 485-486. National Constituent Assembly (1848), 407, 410-413. _ National Council (Switzerland), 596. National Defense, Government of, 453-454, 483- National Guard, organized, 130; at Paris, 152; in Vendee, 157; Louis Philippe and, 389. National workshops, in France, 388, 408-411. Nationality, Napoleon and, 288 ; Con- gress of Vienna and, 314; in Ger- many, 321 ; in Belgium, 376 ; Poland and, 378-379, 634; in Hungary, 392, 397; Napoleon III and, 427, 447; in Austria-Hungary, 519; in Ireland, 541; in Australia, 571; in South Africa, 581 ; in Schleswig, 599; Roumania and, 712-713. Naumann, Dr. Friedrich, and the Reichstag, 480. Navarino, 613. Navigation Act (1651), 24. Necker, financial reforms of, 118— 120, 122; dismissed, 128, 130. Nelson, Admiral, 228, 271-272. Netherlands. Ste Austrian Nether- lands and Belgium and Holland. Neuilly, treaty of, 814. Neuilly Wood, 744. Neuve Chapelle, Battle of, 699. New Brunswick, England and, 563, 566; and the Dominion, 567. Newcomen, 331-332. Newfoundland, England acquires, 47, 563, 566. New Guinea, 469. New South Wales, 570-571, 573. New York Herald, sends Stanley to Africa, 584. New Zealand", discovered, 570; gov- ernment of, 573 ; legislation of, 574; and the World War, 582, 703; and the Peace Conference, 776. Ney, 243, 269, 293. Nicaragua, 776. Nice, France and, 215, 427, 429. Nicholas I (Russia), aids Francis Joseph I, 399; death of, 615; reign of, 630-631. Nicholas II (Russia), reign of, 639- 641, 656-659; and the Hague Con- ferences, 661-664 ; overthrown, 727- 728. Nicholas, Grand Duke (Russia), sent to the Caucasus, 702. Nieuport, and the battle line, 693, 700. NihUism, rise of, 635-636. Nikolsburg, Peace of, 441. Nile, battle of the, 228 ; sources of the, 584. Nimwegen, Peace of, 32, 34. Nivelle, General, 710. Noailles, Viscount of, 132. Nobility, in France under the Old Regime, 95, 97-100; in the States- General, 123-128; in Russia, 292, 628-629, 631-633; in Austria, 319; in England, 340-344; in Hungary, 392; in Sweden, 601; of Norway abolished, 602. Nogi, General, 651. Non-juring priests, origin of, 150; revolt, 157; deported, 168; mur- dered, 173; guillotined, 190. North, Lord, ministry of, 55-56. North America, expulsion of France from, 47 ; British Colonies in, 566- 569- North German Confederation, 443- 444, 594 ; States of South Germany join, 457 ; and the German Empire, 458. North German Lloyd, 335. Norway, joined with Sweden, 312, 598, 600-603 ; separates from Sweden, 603-604. Notre Dame, 194, 253, 302. Nottingham, Charles I at, 11. Novara, battle of, 328, 400, 423. Nova Scotia, England acquires, 47, 53, 563, 566; and the Dominion, 567- Noyon, 733, 742. O'Connell, and the repeal movement, 531, 542. Oku, General, 651. Old Age Insurance Law (German), 466. Old- Age Pensions, Act (England), 551-552; Law (New Zealand), 574. Old Catholics (Germany), 462-463. Oldenburg, Grand Duchy of, 292, 758. INDEX 84= Old Regime, in Europe, 80-83 ; in France, 84-112; Bonaparte and, 241-243 ; in England, 339-345 ; not restored in France, 366. Old Sarum, 342. Olmiitz, humiliation of, 405. Omdurman, 591. Opium War, 643-644. Oral voting (Prussia), 477. Orange, House of. See Holland. Orange Free State, 575, 570-580. Orders in Council (England), 274. Oregon dispute, settled, 569. Orlando, 778. Orleanists, 487-488. Orleans, Duke of, intrigues of, 135 ; e.xecuted, 192, 382. Oscar H (Sweden and Norway), 601- 604. Ostend, Germans seize, 693 ; Germans give up, 751. Ottawa, parliament at, 567. Otto I (Greece), 613, 624. Ottoman Empire, The Disruption of the, and the Rise of the Balkan States, 610-627; collapse of the, 664-677. See also Turkey. Ouchy, Treaty of, 671. Oudh province, 565. Owen, Robert, and the Factory Act of 1833, 354. O.xford, University, 344, 528; religious tests abolished in, 535. Pachitch, 778. Palestine, Turkey and, 696 ; the British in, 737, 752-753; problem of, 770. Palmerston, Lord, and the first Re- form Bill, 347 ; and Italy, 429 ; on Cavour, 434. Panama, and the World War, 727; and the Peace Conference, 776. Papacy, Napoleon and, 290 ; Kingdom of Italy and, 508-510. Papal States, in the eighteenth cen- tury, 49; Napoleon and, 221, 275, 286, 290; reestablished, 312, 325- 326; revolution in, 381, 395-396; Piedmont and, 427, 429; Victor Emmanuel II leads army into, 423. Paris, and Louis XIV, 32; Peace of, 53; capital of France, 85, 89, 223; paupers in, 102 ; parlement of, de- mands convocation of the States- General, 1 20 ; and the storming of the Bastille, 130; Louis XVI re- turns to, 136; Louis plans to escape from, 151-152; celebrates the end of the Revolution, 156; and the Jacobins, 161-162; insurrection in, 169 ; revolutionary commune of, 171-174, 181-184, 192-193, 195- 202; and the Convention, 176-206; Law and Medical Schools of, 206 ; Napoleon and, 209—210, 213, 223, 225, 230, 234-235, 268, 272, 295, 301-302, 305-306 ; Museum of, 218 ; government centralized in, 239, 263-264 ; ecclesiastical court in, 285 ; the allies enter, 298-299 ; First Treaty of, 308 ; and the telegraph, 2,ss ; and the July Revolution, 372- 374; Poled in, 381; Louis Philippe and, 383, 389-390; Count of, 390, 487; and the June Days, 410; and the coup d'etat of 1851, 413-415; modernized, 41 7 ; Congressof (1856), 416, 426, 615; Siege of, 454-455; and the Commune, 483-485 ; gov- ernment moved to, 491 ; Treaty of (1898), 607; bombarded, 742; Peace Conference at, 776-809. Parlement, 100, 118; of Paris, 120- 122. Parliament (English), development of, 2-4, 50-56; James I and, 4; Charles I and, 5-16; Short, 10; Long, 10-15, 21-22; Barebone's, 23 ; becomes supreme, 26 ; sum- mons William of Orange to the throne, 37; in 1815, 339-343; and the Reform Bill of 1832, 347-352; and the Reform Bill of 1867, 362- 364; and the Reform Bill of 1884, 540-541 ; Home Rulers in English, 542. 547, 556; Irish, granted to Ireland, 559; Canadian, 567; Aus- tralian, 573; South .\frica, 580-581. Parliament Bill (England), 191 1, 557- 559, 561. Parma, Duke of, 219; duchy of, 221, 312, 325-326; revolution in, 381, 429. Parnell, Charles Stuart, and Home Rule, 542. Passchendaele Ridge, 735. Passive citizens, 144-145. 846 INDEX Patterson, Elizabeth, 262, 270. Peace, movement, 660-664; Making the, 760-822. Peasants, in France, 100-102. Peel, Sir Robert, reforms the Penal Code, 346 ; and the second Reform Bill, 350; and Queen Victoria, 356; and the repeal of the Corn Laws, 360; and Gladstone, 529. Peking, 643, 647-649. Penal Code, reformed in England, 346. Peninsula War, 280-281. People's Charter, 356-358. Perier, Casimir, 495. Peronne, 711, 742. Perry, Commodore, and Japan, 645- 646. • Pershing, General, 742. Persia, and the Hague Conference, 661 ; future of, 770. Peru, 776. Pescadores Islands, 647. Retain, General, and Verdun, 708- 710; enters Metz, 762. Peter I (Serbia), 624. Peter the Great, 70-76. Peter III (Russia), 76. Petition of Right, 8. Petrograd, strike in, 727 ; soviet in, 728-729; and the Constituent As- sembly, 732. See also St. Peters- burg. Philip VI (Spain), 47-48. Philip Equality. See Orleans, Duke of. Philippe Egalite. See Orleans, Duke of. Philippine Islands, 607. Pi y Margall, 606. Piacenza, 215. Piave, retreat to the, 735, 754. Pichegru, 249. Pichon, 778. Picquart, Colonel, and Dreyfus, 496, Piedmont, 57 ; Emigres war against France, 214-215; King of, after 1815, 325-326, war against Austria, 401 ; Charles Albert tutional Statute, 405 Crimean -War, 416, constitutional state, in, 151 ; in the 205, 208-209, restored, 308; 328; aids the 395-397, 400^ grants Consti- , 423 ; and the 426, 614; a 423 ; a model state, 425 ; and the making of the Kingdom of Italy, 427-429; con- stitution of, altered, 508 ; illiteracy in, 510. Pillnitz, Declaration of, 158. Pitt, William, Earl of Chatham, Prime Minister of England, 52-53; and the American Revolution, 55. Pitt, William (the Younger), war leader, 240 ; desires reform, 339 ; on the House of Commons, 343 ; and the House of Commons, 349. Pius VI (Pope), 219, 223. Pius VII (Pope), and Louis XVIII, 244; Bonaparte and, 245-246, 252, 253, 275-276, 286, 290, 325, 500; after 1815, 326. Pius IX (Pope), flees, 400; temporal power of, abolished, 400, 456-457, 462 ; and the May Laws (Germany), 463; death of, 463, 510; and the Kingdom of Italy, 507-509. Pius X (Pope), 501. Plehve, 655. Plevna, siege of, 617, 623. Plombieres, interview at, 426-427. Plural voting (England), 541, 553. Poincare, President, and the Peace Conference, 778. Poitou, churches destroyed in, 35. Poland, government of, 49 ; partitions of, 68, 80, 82, 159, 268, 270, 284, 310, 378-379, 628; Russia and, 77, 292, 375 ; Alexander I and, 310-31 1, 379-381, 629-630; and the July Revolution, 375, 378-381 ; King- dom of, 379 ; a promise of the Rus- sian Empire, 381, 630: Nicholas I and, 630, 634 ; Alexander II and, 634 ; Russian, invaded, 702 ; Ger- mans control, 732; and Brest- Litovsk, 740; restoration of, 770; and the Peace Conference, 776-778; 798-799. Poles, in Austria, 521 ; in Galicia, 521 ; in Germany oppressed, 599 ; in Russia oppressed, 659. Polignac ministry, 371. Pomerania, Prussia acquires, 311. Pondicherry, 502. Port Arthur, 647-649, 650-652, 656. Porte. See Turkey. Porto Rico, Spain and, 605, 607. Portsmouth (England), voters in, 354. INDEX 84; Portsmouth (N. H.), Treaty of, 652. Portugal, Napoleon and, 276; revo- lution in, 327 ; and Africa, 583, 585- 586; since 181 5, 608-609; and the European War, 609 ; and China, 644; and the World War, 713-715, 743 ; and the Peace Conference, 776. Posen, Prussia retains, 311. Potsdam, 268. Pragmatic Sanction, 82. Prague, revolt in, 396; Peace of (1866), 441, 450, 599; universities of, 521. Prairial, Law of 22d, 198-201. Presbyterians, in the English Civil War, 12, 15; and the Restoration, 25 ; in Ireland, 529. Press, censored under Old Regime, 85, 103 ; suppressed, 172 ; the Carls- bad Decrees and, 232; gagged in Spain, 324; Gag Laws (England) and, 346; free in France, 367; liberty of, suspended in France, 371 ; liberty of, in Poland, 380, 629 ; in Germany, 382 ; in Hungary, 395 ; in Prussia (1849), 43^; Napoleon III and, 449; freedom of (1881), France, 492; in Spain, 604; in Russia, 630-631, 634, 637, 655. Pressburg, Treaty of, 259—260. Pretoria, 581. Pride's Purge, 15-16. Prince Edward Island, England and, 563, 566; and the Dominion, 567. Prince Imperial, 416. Pripet Marshes, 712. "Protected Princes of India," 565. Protection, England and, 358-360, 551; Belgium and, 376; Bismarck and, 467-468 ; Russia and, 638. Protectorate, The, 23-24. Protestantism, outlawed in France, 103. Protestants, Louis XIV and, 34-37; in Holland, 376. Provence, Count of, 158. Provisional Government (France), 390, 407, 483 ; and the socialists, 407-410; in Russia, 728-730. Prussia, in the eighteenth century, 49, 59-69 ; and the Seven Years' War, 52; acquires Silesia, 80; and the Partition of Poland, 82, 292, 378; and the Emigres, 158; joins Aus- tria against France, 169, 172, 205; and Valm}^ 174; makes peace with France, 208; conquest of, 266-268, 270-271; and the Continental Sys- tem, 275; reorganization of, 288; 290; cooperates with Napoleon, 293 ; Joins Russia against Napoleon, 296 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 308-314 ; and the Holy Alliance and the Quadruple Alliance, 315-316; King of, promises constitution, 321, 395 ; Metternich and, 328-330; and the revolution of 1830, 375; and Belgium, 377; and German unity, 401-405 ; receives a constitution, 405-406, 435 ; three-class system of election in, 406, 476 ; reaction in, after 1849, 435-437; and the uni- fication of Germany, 435-444; army reform in, 436-439; and the war with Denmark, 440, 598-599; and the war with Austria, 441-444, 598-599; and the North German Confederation, 444; and the year 1866, 445; France declares war against, 452-457; King of, becomes German Emperor, 457-458, 461; and the Bundesrath, 459-460 ; and the Kulturkampf, 462 ; ascendancy of, 475 ; electoral system of, 475— 479; and China, 644. Prussian Union (1849), 405. Przemysl, siege of, 695 ; fall of, 702. Punjab, annexed, 565. Puritans. Sec Independents. Puritan Revolution, 12. Pym, John, and Charles I, 7, 11. Pyramids, Battle of the, 228. Quadruple Alliance, and Metternich, 315-316. Quakers, in England, 343. Quebec, 566. Queensland, 571. Quesnay, 106. Racine, 45. Radetzky, 396-397. Radoslavoff, 703. Ramolino, Laetitia, 209, 221. Rand, the, 577. Ravenna, 430. Rawlinson, 751. Reason, Worship of. See Worship. INDEX Referendum, in France, 183 ; in New Zealand, 574; in Switzerland, 597. "Reform banquets," 389-390. Reform Bill, of 1832, 347-352; of 1867, 362-364, 527, 540; of 1884, 540-541. Reichenau, 382. Reichsrath (Austrian Parliament), 521. Reichstag, created, 444; its powers, 458-460; Center party in, 462-463 ; Socialists in, 464, 466, 766 ; repre- sentation in, 478 ; impotence of, 479-480; and the treaty of Brest- Litovsk, 741. Reign of Terror, 184-193, 195-196. Rennes, court-martial at, 496-498. Reparations, 778; Commission, 805- 806. Representatives on Mission, 184; work of, 186. Republic, France proclaimed a, 175- 177; under the Convention, 175- 206 ; under the Directory, 208-235 > under the Consulate, 236—250; England recognizes French, 240; and the Catholic religion, 246; Second, in France, 390, 407-415; Third, in France proclaimed, 453 ; France under the Third, 483-507 ; the religious orders and, 499-500; in Spain, 605-606 ; in Portugal, 608. Republican Party, in France, created, 154; and Louis Philippe, 384-386, 389-390; in Germany, 404—405; Lamartine and, 407 ; Napoleon III and, 416, 450; after 1870, 489; in Spain, 605 ; in Portugal, 608. Residents, English, in India, 565. Responsibility for the War, 778, 804. Restoration, in England, 25-26. Reunion, 503. Renter, Admiral von, 764. Revolution, Puritan (English), 3-4, 11-16; of 1688, 25-26, 52; Amer- ican, 55-56, 566; Spanish (1820), 324-325, 327; in Naples (1820), 327; Industrial, 331-338; Turkish (1908), 625-627, 664-665, 677; Russian, 727-732. See also French Revolution. Revolutionary Tribunal, created, 181, 184; work of, 185-186, 188-190; Robespierre and, 198-201. Rheims, cathedral of, 736 ; freed, 749. Rhine Province, 762-763. Richelieu, 503. Rhodes, Italy seizes, 671. Rhodes, Cecil, 578. Rhodesia, 578, 581. Riga, and the line of battle, 702 ; the Germans take, 730. " Right of intervention," 327-328, 375. Rights of Man, Declaration of, 140- 142, 147, 164, 168, 188, 242. Rio de Oro, 607. Rio Muni, 607. Risorgimento, 419. Rivoli, 218. Roberts, Lord, 580. Robespierre, a monarchist, 154; and the Jacobins, 161 ; opposes war, 167; overthrow of, 172; and the republic, 175; leader of the Jaco- bins, 176, 181; demands execution of Louis XVI, 178-179; and the Committee of Public Safety, 185- 186; and Danton, 194-197; dic- tator, 196-201 ; fall of, 201-202. Rodjestvensky, Admiral, 651 Roland, Madame, 166, 190. Romagna, revolt in, 429. Romanoff, House of, 70. Sec also Russia. Rome, 223; Napoleon and, 286, 290; republic of, 400-401 ; Garibaldi and, 430, 432 ; becomes the capital of the Kingdom of Italy, 457, 508-509. Romilly, on Venice, 312. Roosevelt, President, 652, 663; Ex- President, 717. Rossbach, battle of, 66. "Rotten House of Commons, The," by Lovett, 356. Roubaix, 751. Roumania, kingdom of, 523, 615-616, 623 ; and the Treaty of San Stefano, 617; independent of Turkey, 619- 620, 623; after 1878, 623; enters war against Bulgaria, 675-677 ; and the World War, 712-713; and peace, 739-741, 754; Germany to evacuate, 762 ; and the Peace Con- ference, 776-778. Roumanians, in eastern Hungary, 319, 397-398, 523-524, 712; Tur- key and, 610. Roumelia, 617 ; Eastern, 619. (poy^ />vU- INDEX 851 in Paris, 484; in Austria, 522; in Portugal, 608; in Russia, 728-732, 766; in Germany, 757, 765-767. oissons, 743. olferino, battle of, 427, 515. •* olovief, 636. omaliland, 511. omme. Battle of the, 710-712, 732. )onnino, 778. Jophia, Regent of Russia, 71. oudan, recovered, 549 ; England and, 581, 590-591. 50uth Africa, slaverj^ in, 353 ; Boer War in, 549-55°, 552, 569, 579-580; British, 575-581 ; and the World War, 582, 698, 706 ; and the Peace Conference, 776. 50uth African Republic, 575-580. south African Union, 580-581. South America, Garibaldi and, 430- 431; French Guiana in, 503; Italians emigrate to, 513; England acquires Dutch possessions in, 575 ; revolts in, 607. South Australia, 571. Soviets, rise of, 728-730; in German}', 757, 766. Spain, England and, 24, 47, 53, 240 and the Thirty Years' War, 27 Louis XIV and, 30-32, 47-48 enters war against France, 179, 205 makes peace with France, 208 Napoleon and, 276-281, 288, 607 Metternich and, 324-325; and the revolution of 1820, 324-325, 329; and JMexico, 447 ; Queen Isabella driven out of, 451; Germany pur- chases islands from, 469 ; and Africa, 583; since 1815, 604-607; a Republic, 605-606. Spanish-American War, 607. Spanish Netherlands, Louis XIV and, 30732. Spanish Succession, War of, 47-48. Spartacides, 766-767. Speke, 584. Stambuloff, 621-622. Standard (London), 345. Stanley, and the first Reform Bill, 347. Stanley, Henry M., 584-586. State Socialism, in the German Em- pire, 466-467. States of the Church. Sec Papal Stales. States-General, Dutch, 31 ; in France, 120-129, 140- Steam, engine, 331-336; navigation, 335 ; railroad, 336. Stein, Baron von, 288-289. Stephenson, George, and the Rocket, 336._ Storthing (Norway), 600-604. Strafford, and Charles I, 7 ; executed, 10. Strasburg, 34; archbishop of, 96; Louis Napoleon at, 412; surrenders to the Germans, 455 ; French enter, 763- Stuart, House of, advent of, 3 ; fol- lowed by House of Hanover, 5 1 . Stumm, Baron von, 477. Stiirmer, 728. Suez Canal, Disraeli and, 537, 588- 589 ; threatened, 697. Suffrage, universal in France, 183, 202, 238; in Great Britain (1815), 340-343 ; Cobbett advocates, 345 ; the Reform Bill of 1832 and, 352; extension of, in England, 362—364; France (1814), 366; extended in France, 384 ; in Germany, 401, 406 ; universal in France, 409, 411-412, 415 ; in the new German Empire, 459 ; Socialists demand universal, in Germany, 464 ; in Prussia, 475- 479; in Italy, 510-511; universal in Austria, 522; extension of (Eng- land), 540-541 ; in New Zealand, 574; in Sweden, 604; in Norway, 604; in Spain, 604-605, 607; in Roumania, 623 ; in Greece, 624-625 ; in Poland, 629 ; in Japan, 647 ; in Russia, 657-658; in Germany, 758. Sun Yat Sen, President, 653. Sussex, 723. Suvla Bay, 703. Sweden, and the Triple Alliance, 31 ; in the Seven Years' War, 66; and Russia, 72, 74, 77, 269, 292, 311; and England, 275 ; and Pomerania, 311; and Norway, 312, 598, 600- 603 ; Norway separates from, 603- 604 ; loses Finland, 628. Swiss Guard, 130, 171. Switzerland, a republic, 49, 78; in- creased, 312; and the July revolu- tion, 375 ; Louis Philippe and, 382 ; a neutralized state, 593, 687 ; gov- 852 INDEX ernment of, S95-598; and Greece, 612. Sydney, 570. Syria, invaded, 229 ; Turkey and, 696 ; the French and, 753; problem of, 770. Taaffe ministry, 521-522. Taft, ex-President, 774. Tagliamento, retreat to the, 735. Talleyrand, 263 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 308. Tannenberg, battle of, 695, 700. Tariff, boundaries, 91 ; Napoleon established high protective, 257; boundaries in Spain, 282 ; on bread- stuffs in England, 344, removed, 360 ; Huskisson and, 346 ; Peel and, 360 ; Germany abandons low, 467 ; Chamberlain and the reform of, 551 ; Canada and, 569. Tarnopol, captured, 695. Tasman, and New Zealand, 570. Tasmania, 571. Taxation, in France under the Old Regime, 92-102 ; Turgot and, 102 States-General should vote, 123 Bonaparte improves system of, 248 under Napoleon, 301 ; Austrian nobles and, 318 ; Hungarian nobility exempt from, 393 ; and the Educa- tion Act of 1902 (England), 550 ; and the budget of 1909 (England), 553- 554; New Zealand and, 574; in Portugal, 608 ; in Russia, 629 ; new, in Germany, 679. Telegraph (London), William II and, 478. Tennis Court Oath, 127. "Terrible Year," 483. Terror. Sec Reign of Terror and "Great Terror." "Terrorists," in Russia, 636-637. Test Act, 25. Tewfik, 589. Thessaly, and Greece, 624-625. Thiers, declares a "vacancy of power," 453 ; Chief of the Executive Power, 483 ; government of, 485-487. Third Estate (France), under the Old Regime, 95, 100-105, 121-123; de- clares itself the National Assembly, 126; and the royal session, 127. Third Section (Russia), 637. Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), 27. Thousand, expedition of the, 432. Tilsit, Peace of, 269, 271, 275, 281 291 ; revoliition in, 757. Times, London, and Dreyfus, 497. Tithes, under the Old Regime, 95 102; relincjuished, 132, 134, 241 abolished in South Germany, 265 in Ireland, 532. Tobago, 564. Todleben, 614. Togo, Admiral, 652. Togoland, Germany and, 469, 706. Tonkin, France and, 492, 505. Torchy, 744. Tories, and the Stuarts, 52 ; anc George III, 54-55; in 1815, 340 345 ; reforms of, 346-347. Toul, 707. Toulon, suspects in, 189, recovered 204, 211; Bonaparte and, 226. Toulouse, 499. Tours, government at, 454. Townshend, General, 737. Trades Unions, France and, 492. Trafalgar, battle of, 272—273. Trans-Saharan railroad contemplated SOS- Trans-Siberian railroad, 638, 649 651. Transvaal, 575-580. Transylvania, 519, 523-524, 712-713 Treitschke, 480. Trent, 514. Trentino, 514, 706, 755. Tribunate, 238. Tricolor, adopted, 130; stamped upon 136; the "patriots" and, 163; ban ished, 300; returns, 302; welcomec in Lorraine, 763. Trieste, Austria and, 260, 755 ; Franc< gains, 284; Italy desires, 514, 706. Trinidad, England and, 240, 564. Triple Alliance, 469-471, 4^5, 511 514, 666-667, 669, 683, 685, 705. Triple Entente, 686. TripoH, 503, 506, 513; Turkey and 583; Italy and, 670-671; port of taken, 753. Trochu, General, 453. Troppau, Congress of, 328. Trotzky, 730, 739-74°- Tsushima, Straits of, battle of, 652. Tuileries, 138, 152, 168, 177, 179, 185 INDEX 853 198, 204. 211; attacked, 169-171; surrounded, 182; Napoleon returns to, 301-302 ; Napoleon III and, 416. Tunis, France and, 471, 492, 503- 505, 511, 585, 670; Turkey and, 583 ; Italy and, 670. Turcoing, 751. Turenne, 30. Turgot, on taxation, 102 ; Louis X\T and, 115, 117-118; Napoleon and, 210. Turin, 215, 326; parliament in, 429, 433 ; capital of Italy, 508. Turkey, in the eighteenth century, 49; and Russia, 72, 77, 269, 292, 311, 610, 613, 617; and Egypt, 226, 228 ; Sultan of, declares war against Napoleon, 229; Russia wages war against, 470; Italy and, 513; the future of European, 526 ; and Africa, 583, 588; and Austria, 610; and Serbia, 611, 623: and Greece, 611- 613, 625; Russia and the Greek Christians of, 614-615; admitted to the European family of states, 615; and Roumania, 615—616; and the revolts in the Balkans, 615-619 ; and the Congress of Berlin, 619- 620; and Bulgaria, 620-622; and Roumania, 623 ; Revolution in (1908), 625-627, 664; Nicholas I and, 630-631 ; collapse of, 664-677 ; and the war with Italy, 670-671; and the Balkan wars, 677; and the World War, 696-697, 737, 753-754; and Brest-Litovsk, 740; granted an armistice, 755; Ger- many to evacuate, 762. Turco-Italian War (191 1), 670-671. Tuscany, Austria and, 312, 325-326; aids revolt against Austria, 395 ; ruler of, deserts the cause, 396, 400; ruler of, should be restored, 428 ; revolution in, 429. Udine, 735. Uitlanders, 577-578. Ukraine, declares its independence, 732; and the peace, 739-740. Ulm, 258-259, 271. Ulster, and Home Rule, 559-561. Ultimatum, Austrian, to Serbia, 681- 684, 688; Germany's to Belgium, 687-688. Ultras (France), 368. Umbria, Victor Emmanuel II and, 432-433- Uniformity, Act of, 25. Union, Act of (England and Ireland), movement to repeal, 531. Unionist Coalition, 545. Unionists, policy of, 545 ; in power, 548, 552; and the taritif, 551. United States, Constitution of, com- pared with French Constitution of 1 79 1, 144; and the Monroe Doc- trine, 329-330; Louis Philippe and, 3S2 ; Louis Napoleon and, 412 ; and Mexico, 448-449 ; Senate of, and Bundesrath, 458; and protection, 467; emigration to, 469, 513, 532, 637; and the Alabama award, 535; and the Oregon dispute, 569; ancl the Congo, 586; recognizes Re- public of Spain, 605 ; and Cuba, 607; and Greece, 612; and China, 644, 649 ; and Japan, 645-646 ; and the Hague Conference, 661 ; main- tains neutrality, 698 ; and the World War, 717-727, 744-752, 755; and the Armistice, 761-762; and the League of Nations, 774; and the Peace Conference, 776-779, 809-811. Unredeemed Ital}-, 514, 706. Urgel, Spanish Bishop of, 593. Uruguay, 776. Utrecht, captured, 31. Valenfay, 278. Valenciennes, 751. Valmy, Prussians checked at, 174, 382. Vane, Sir Henry, and Cromwell, 22. Varennes, flight to, 152-154, 157, 158, 161, 162-. Vatican Council, proclaims dogma of papal infallibility, 462. Vauban, 28-30. Vaux, 708. Vendee, civil war in, 150, 157, 179, 182, 189, 231. Vendemiaire, the thirteenth of, 204- 205, 21 u Venetia, Napoleon and, 221, 260; Austria acquires, 312; revolts, 395; Piedmont and, 427, 429; ceded to Italy, 443, 508. 854 INDEX Venice, a republic, 49, 57, 78; young Russians sent to, 72; Republic of, overthrown, 219, 223, 401 ; given to Austria, 221, 312, 325-326; bronze horses of, 223, 312; restores re- public in, 395. Venizelos, 705, 778. Verdun, besieged, 172; threatened, 692; attacked 707-710; freed, 749. Vergniaud, 165. Verona, Congress of, 329; threatened, 711. Versailles, Louis XIV and, 40-44 ; royal residence, 87, 89, 96, 98 ; States-General meets in, 120, 128, 140; tricolor insulted, 135; women march to, 136; William I (Prussia) proclaimed German Emperor in, 45 7 ; Assem-bly removed to, 484 ; seat of government transferred from, 491 ; armistice terms at, 756; Treaty of, 781-809. Vesle, Germans at the, 747. Vicenza, threatened, 711. Victor Emanuel I abdicates, 328. Victor Emmanuel II (Piedmont), ac- cession of, 400, 423 ; and the making of the Kingdom of Italy, 423-434; and Rome, 456-457 ; death of, 509. Victor Emmanuel III (Italy), 512. Victoria, colony of, 571 ; legislation of, 574-. Victoria, Queen, accession of, 355- 356 ; becomes Empress of India, 537-538, 565 ; her diamond jubilee, 548-549 ; death of, 549-550. Vienna, 117, Napoleon and, 259, 283; Peace of, 284; Congress of, 300- 301, 308-314; the center of Euro- pean affairs, 320-321 ; Poles in, 381 ; the storm center in 1848, 392; riot in, 394 ; Prussian army and, 443 ; capital of Austria, 518; revolution .in, 755- Vilagos, 399. Villafranca, preliminaries of, 427-428. Vimy Ridge, 735. Vladivostok, founded, 643; fleet at, 651. Volney, 245. Voltaire, on the death of Charles I, 16 ; and Catherine the Great, 76 ; on the laws of France, 91 ; influence of, loi, 103, 106, 108-110, 210; and the Church, 103, 109; imprisoned, 130. Wagram, battle of, 283-284. Waldeck, 478. Waldeck- Rousseau, 499-500. Wales, representation of, in the Eng- lish Parliament, 340 ; and old age pensions, 552; Anglican Church in, disestablished, 561. Wallachia, practically independent, 613; independent, 615. See Rou- mania. Warsaw, Napoleon and, 268 ; Grand Duchy of, 271, 284, 286, 292, 296, 310-311, 629, 769-770; fall of, 381 ; captured, 702. Wartburg, Festival, 322-323, 283. Waterloo, 56, 225, 303-305, 3i7- Watt, James, and the steam engine, 352-333- Weimar, Duke of, 323; Constituent Assembly in, 767. Wellesley, Sir Arthur (later Duke of Wellington) and the war in Spain, 280-281 ; methods of, 293 ; invades France, 297; and Waterloo, 303- 305 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 308 ; forced to resign, 347 ; unable to form a ministry, 351; and the Chartist agitation, 358. Wellington, Duke of. 5ec Wellesley. Wellington, New Zealand, 573. West Indies, slavery in the English colonies of, 353 ; French possessions in, 502 ; English possessions in, 563. Western Australia, 571. Westminster, Hall, 11, 25 ; Abbey, 24, 548, 585. Westphalia, Treaty of, 27, 34, 160; Kingdom of, 270-271, 286. Wet, Christian de, 580. WethereU, 350. W^eyler, 607. Whigs, in power, 52, 347 ; supported by the Tories, 54; in America, 55; reforms of, 347-355- White, Henry, 778. Whitehall, palace of, 16, 22, 25. Wieland, 281, 767. Wilberforce, 353. William I (Prussia), deadlock be- tween, and ParUament, 435-437 5 and the battle of Sadowa, 443 ; and INDEX 855 the Hohenzollem candidacy, 452; proclaimed German Emperor, 457; death of, 471. WilHam II (German Emperor), char- acter of, 460; reign of, 471-481; and China, 648-649 ; and Kiauchau, 697 ; and the German drive of 19 18, 741; abdicates, 758-759; Bismarck and, 761 ; and the German navy, 763 ; to be tried. 804. William IV (England), reign of, 347- 355- William of Orange, becomes King of England, 25-26, 37, 50; opposes Louis XIV, 32. William of Wied (Albania), 677. Wilson, President, and the World War, 719-725; and peace, 756; and the League of Nations, 774, 779; and the Peace Conference, 776-778. Windischgratz, 396. Windsor, House of, 50. Wissembourg, 763. Witte, Sergius, 638. Wolfe, defeats Montcalm, 53. Wood, General Leonard, 717. Worcester, battle of, 19, 24 World problems, 770-772. World War, 679-759. Worms, Emigres in, 165. Worship of Reason, 193-195, 198. Wurmser, 217. Wtirtemberg, 59 ; becomes a kingdom, 264 ; and the Congress of Vienna, 308; aids Austria against Prussia, 441 ; joins Prussia against France, 453 ; in the Bundesrath, 459. Wytschaete ridge, 743. Yokohama, 646. Young Ireland, 531. Young Italy, Mazzini and, 419-421. Young Turks, 625-626, 664, 667-670. Ypres, Second Battle of, 699 ; freed, 74Q- Yuan Shih K'ai, President, 653-654. Zeebrugge, 751. Zimmermann, and Ambassador Ge- rard_, 723-725. Zola, Emile, and Dreyfus, 496, 498. Zurich, 597. ^./I, ^^" Uf LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 009 528 383 4 p:;:;::fi,^:OT* lM0iS