had ceased to exist; the Confederation of the Rhine had
followed it; and from the Black Forest to the Russian frontier
there was nothing but angry ambitions, vengeances, and fears.
If there was ever to be peace again in all these wide regions,
it was clearly necessary to create something new. What was to
be created was a far more difficult question; but already, on
the 30th of May 1814, the powers had come to some sort of
understanding, if not with regard to the means to be pursued,
at least with regard to the end to be attained. In the Treaty
of Paris we find these words: 'Les états de l'Allemagne seront
indépendants et unis par un lien fédératif.' But how was this to
be effected? There were some who wished the Holy Roman Empire
to be restored. ... Of course neither Prussia, Bavaria, nor
Wurtemberg, could look kindly upon a plan so obviously
unfavourable to them; but not even Austria really wished it,
and indeed it had few powerful friends. Then there was a
project of a North and South Germany, with the Maine for
boundary; but this was very much the reverse of acceptable to
the minor princes, who had no idea of being grouped like so
many satellites, some around Austria and some around Prussia.
Next came a plan of reconstruction by circles, the effect of
which would have been to have thrown all the power of Germany
into the hands of a few of the larger states. To this all the
smaller independent states were bitterly opposed, and it broke
down, although supported by the great authority of Stein, as
well as by Gagern. If Germany had been in a later phase of
political development, public opinion would perhaps have
forced the sovereigns to consent to the formation of a really
united Fatherland with a powerful executive and a national
parliament--but the time for that had not arrived. What was
the opposition of a few hundred clear-sighted men with their
few thousand followers, that it should prevail over the
masters of so many legions? What these potentates cared most
about were their sovereign rights, and the dream of German
unity was very readily sacrificed to the determination of each
of them to be, as far as he possibly could, absolute master in
his own dominions. Therefore it was that it soon became
evident that the results of the deliberation on the future of
Germany would be, not a federative state, but a confederation
of states--a Staaten-Bund, not a Bundes-Staat. There is no
doubt, however, that much mischief might have been avoided if
all the stronger powers had worked conscientiously together to
give this Staaten-Bund as national a character as possible.
... Prussia was really honestly desirous to effect something
of this kind, and Stein, Hardenberg, William von Humboldt,
Count Münster, and other statesmen, laboured hard to bring it
about. Austria, on the other hand, aided by Bavaria,
Wurtemberg, and Baden, did all she could to oppose such
projects. Things would perhaps have been settled better than
they ultimately were, if the return of Napoleon from Elba had
not frightened all Europe from its propriety, and turned the
attention of the sovereigns towards warlike preparations. ...
The document by which the Germanic Confederation is created is
of so much importance that we may say a word about the various
stages through which it passed. First, then, it appears as a
paper drawn up by Stein in March 1814, and submitted to
Hardenberg, Count Münster, and the Emperor Alexander. Next, in
the month of September, it took the form of an official plan,
handed by Hardenberg to Metternich, and consisting of
forty-one articles. This plan contemplated the creation of a
confederation which should have the character rather of a
Bundes-Staat than of a Staaten-Bund; but it went to pieces in
consequence of the difficulties which we have noticed above,
and out of it, and of ten other official proposals, twelve
articles were sublimated by the rival chemistry of Hardenberg
and Metternich. Upon these twelve articles the representatives
of Austria, Prussia, Hanover, and Wurtemberg, deliberated.
Their sittings were cut short partly by the ominous appearance
which was presented in the autumn of 1814 by the Saxon and Polish
questions, and partly by the difficulties from the side of
Bavaria and Wurtemberg, which we have already noticed. The
spring brought a project of the Austrian statesman Wessenberg,
who proposed a Staaten-Bund rather than a Bundes-Staat; and
out of this and a new Prussian project drawn up by W. von
Humboldt, grew the last sketch, which was submitted on the 23d
of May 1815 to the general conference of the plenipotentiaries
of all Germany. They made short work of it at the last, and
the Federal-Act (Bundes-Acte) bears date June 8th, 1815. This
is the document which is incorporated in the principal act of
the Congress of Vienna, and placed under the guarantee of
eight European powers, including France and England.
Wurtemberg, Baden, and Hesse-Homburg, did not form part of the
Confederation for some little time--the latter not till 1817;
but after they were added to the powers at first consenting,
the number of the sovereign states in the Confederation was
altogether thirty-nine. ... The following are the chief
stipulations of the Federal Act. The object of the
Confederation is the external and internal security of
Germany, and the independence and inviolability of the
confederate states. A diète fédérative (Bundes-Versammlung) is
to be created, and its attributions are sketched. The Diet is,
as soon as possible, to draw up the fundamental laws of the
Confederation. No state is to make war with another on any
pretence. All federal territories are mutually guaranteed.
There is to be in each state a 'Landständische
Verfassung'--'il y aura des assemblées d'états dans tous les
pays de la Confedération.' Art. 14 reserves many rights to the
mediatised princes. Equal civil and political rights are
guaranteed to all Christians in all German States, and
stipulations are made in favour of the Jews. The Diet did not
actually assemble before the 5th of November 1816. Its first
measures, and, above all, its first words, were not unpopular.
The Holy Allies, however, pressed with each succeeding month
more heavily upon Germany, and got at last the control of the
Confederation entirely into their hands.
{1532}
The chief epochs in this sad history were the Congress of
Carlsbad, 1819--the resolutions of which against the freedom
of the press were pronounced by Gentz to be a victory more
glorious than Leipzig; the ministerial conferences which
immediately succeeded it at Vienna; and the adoption by the
Diet of the Final Act (Sehluss Acte) of the Confederation on
the 8th of June 1820. The following are the chief stipulations
of the Final Act:--The Confederation is indissoluble. No new
member can be admitted without the unanimous consent of all
the states, and no federal territory can be ceded to a foreign
power without their permission. The regulations for the
conduct of business by the Diet are amplified and more
carefully defined. All quarrels between members of the
Confederation are to be stopped before recourse is had to
violence. The Diet may interfere to keep order in a state
where the government of that state is notoriously incapable of
doing so. Federal execution is provided for in case any
government resists the authority of the Diet. Other articles
declare the right of the Confederation to make war and peace
as a body, to guard the rights of each separate state from
injury, to take into consideration the differences between its
members and foreign nations, to mediate between them, to
maintain the neutrality of its territory, to make war when a
state belonging to the Confederation is attacked in its
non-federal territory if the attack seems likely to endanger
Germany."
_M. E. G. Duff,
Studies in European Politics,
chapter 5._
ALSO IN:
_J. R. Seeley,
Life and Times of Stein,
part 8 (volume 3)._
_E. Hertslet,
The Map of Europe by Treaty,
volume 1, number 26
(Text of Federative Constitution)._
See, also, VIENNA: CONGRESS OF.
GERMANY: A. D. 1815.
Napoleon's return from Elba.
The Quadruple Alliance.
The Waterloo campaign and its results.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1814-1815.
GERMANY: A. D. 1815.
Final Overthrow of Napoleon.
The Allies again in Paris.
Second treaty with France.
Restitutions and indemnities.
French frontier of 1790 re-established.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1815 (JUNE),
(JULY-NOVEMBER).
GERMANY: A. D. 1815.
The Holy Alliance.
See HOLY ALLIANCE.
GERMANY: A. D. 1817-1820.
The Burschenschaft.
Assassination of Kotzebue.
The Karlsbad Conference.
"In 1817, the students of several Universities assembled at
the Wartburg in order to celebrate the tercentenary of the
Reformation. In the evening, a small number of them, the
majority having already left, were carried away by
enthusiastic zeal, and, in imitation of Luther, burnt a number
of writings recently published against German freedom,
together with other emblems of what was considered hateful in
the institutions of some of the German States. These youthful
excesses were viewed by the Governments as symptoms of grave
peril. At the same time, a large number of students united to
form one great German Burschenschaft [association of
students], whose aim was the cultivation of a love of country,
a love of freedom, and the moral sense. Thereupon increased
anxiety on the part of the Governments, followed by vexatious
police interference. Matters grew worse in consequence of the
rash act of a fanatical student, named Sand. It became known
that the Russian Government was using all its powerful
influence to have liberal ideas suppressed in Germany, and
that the play-wright Kotzebue had secretly sent to Russia
slanderous and libellous reports on German patriots. Sand
travelled to Mannheim and thrust a dagger into Kotzebue's
heart. The consequences were most disastrous to the cause of
freedom in Germany. The distrust of the Governments reached
its height: it was held that this bloody deed must needs be
the result of a wide-spread conspiracy: the authorities
suspected demagogues everywhere. Ministers, of course at the
instigation of Metternich, met at Karlsbad, and determined on
repressive measures. These were afterwards adopted by the
Federal Diet at Frankfort, which henceforth became an
instrument in the hands of the Emperor Francis and his
Minister for guiding the internal policy of the German States.
Accordingly, the cession of state-constitutions was opposed,
and prosecutions were instituted throughout Germany against
all who identified themselves with the popular movement; many
young men were thrown into prison; gymnastic and other
societies were arbitrarily suppressed; a rigid censorship of
the press was established, and the freedom of the Universities
restrained; various professors, among them Arndt, whose songs had
helped to fire the enthusiasm of the Freiheitskämpfer--the
soldiers of Freedom--in the recent war, were deprived of their
offices; the Burschenschaft was dissolved, and the wearing of
their colours, the future colours of the German Empire, black,
red, and gold, was forbidden. ... The Universities continued
to uphold the national idea; the Burschenschaft soon secretly
revived as a private association, and as early as 1820 there
again existed at most German Universities, Burschenschaften,
which, though their aims were not sharply defined, bore a
political colouring and placed the demand for German Unity in
the foreground."
_G. Krause,
The Growth of German Unity,
chapter 8._
GERMANY: A. D. 1819-1847.
Arbitrary rulers and discontented subjects.
The ferment before revolution.
Formation of the Zollverein.
"The history of Germany during the thirty years of peace which
followed [the Congress of Carlsbad] is marked by very few
events of importance. It was a season of gradual reaction on
the part of the rulers; and of increasing impatience and
enmity on the part of the people. Instead of becoming loving
families, as the Holy Alliance designed, the States (except
some of the little principalities) were divided into two
hostile classes. There was material growth everywhere; the
wounds left by war and foreign occupation were gradually
healed; there was order, security for all who abstained from
politics, and a comfortable repose for such as were
indifferent to the future. But it was a sad and disheartening
period for the men who were able to see clearly how Germany,
with all the elements of a freer and stronger life existing in
her people, was falling behind the political development of
other countries. The three days' Revolution of 1830, which
placed Louis Philippe on the throne of France, was followed by
popular uprisings in some parts of Germany. Prussia and
Austria were too strong, and their people too well held in
check, to be affected; but in Brunswick the despotic Duke,
Karl, was deposed, Saxony and Hesse-Cassel were obliged to
accept co-rulers (out of their reigning families) and the
English Duke, Ernest Augustus, was made viceroy of Hannover.
{1533}
These four States also adopted a constitutional form of
government. The German Diet, as a matter of course, used what
power it possessed to counteract these movements, but its
influence was limited by its own laws of action. The hopes and
aspirations of the people were kept alive, in spite of the
system of repression, and some of the smaller States took
advantage of their independence to introduce various measures
of reform. As industry, commerce and travel increased, the
existence of so many boundaries, with their custom-houses,
taxes and other hindrances, became an unendurable burden.
Bavaria and Würtemberg formed a customs union in 1828, Prussia
followed, and by 1836 all of Germany except Austria was united
in the Zollverein (Tariff Union) [see TARIFF LEGISLATION
(GERMANY): A. D. 1833], which was not only a great material
advantage, but helped to inculcate the idea of a closer
political union. On the other hand, however, the monarchical
reaction against liberal government was stronger than ever.
Ernest Augustus of Hannover arbitrarily overthrew the
constitution he had accepted, and Ludwig I. of Bavaria,
renouncing all his former professions, made his land a very
nest of absolutism and Jesuitism. In Prussia, such men as
Stein, Gneisenau, and Wilhelm von Humboldt had long lost their
influence, while others of less personal renown, but of
similar political sentiments, were subjected to contemptible
forms of persecution. In March, 1835, Francis II. of Austria
died, and was succeeded by his son, Ferdinand I., a man of
such weak intellect that he was in some respects idiotic. On
the 7th of June, 1840, Frederick William III. of Prussia died,
and was also succeeded by his son, Frederick William IV., a
man of great wit and intelligence, who had made himself
popular as Crown-prince, and whose accession the people hailed
with joy, in the enthusiastic belief that better days were
coming. The two dead monarchs, each of whom had reigned 43
years, left behind them a better memory among their people
than they actually deserved. They were both weak, unstable and
narrow-minded; had they not been controlled by others, they
would have ruined Germany; but they were alike of excellent
personal character, amiable, and very kindly disposed towards
their subjects so long as the latter were perfectly obedient
and reverential. There was no change in the condition of
Austria, for Metternich remained the real ruler, as before. In
Prussia a few unimportant concessions were made, an amnesty
for political offences was declared, Alexander von Humboldt
became the king's chosen associate, and much was done for
science and art; but in their main hope of a liberal
reorganization of the government, the people were bitterly
deceived. Frederick William IV. took no steps towards the
adoption of a Constitution; he made the censorship and the
supervision of the police more severe; he interfered in the
most arbitrary and bigoted manner in the system of religious
instruction in the schools; and all his acts showed that his
policy was to strengthen his throne by the support of the
nobility and the civil service, without regard to the just
claims of the people. Thus, in spite of the external quiet and
order, the political atmosphere gradually became more sultry
and disturbed. ... There were signs of impatience in all
quarters; various local outbreaks occurred, and the aspects
were so threatening that in February, 1847, Frederick William
IV. endeavored to silence the growing opposition by ordering
the formation of a Legislative Assembly. But the provinces
were represented, not the people, and the measure only
emboldened the latter to clamor for a direct representation.
Thereupon, the king closed the Assembly, after a short
session, and the attempt was probably productive of more harm
than good. In most of the other German States, the situation
was very similar; everywhere there were elements of
opposition, all the more violent and dangerous, because they
had been kept down with a strong hand for so many years."
_B. Taylor,
History of Germany,
chapter 37._
ALSO IN:
_C. A. Fyffe,
History of Modern Europe,
volume 2, chapters 5 and 7._
See, also, AUSTRIA: A. D.1815-1835.
GERMANY: A. D. 1820-1822.
The Congresses of Troppau, Laybach and Verona.
See VERONA, THE CONGRESS OF.
GERMANY: A. D. 1835-1846.
Death of the Emperor Francis I. of Austria.
Accession of Ferdinand I.
Extinction of the Polish republic of Cracow.
Its annexation to Austria.
See AUSTRIA: A. D. 1815-1846.
GERMANY: A. D. 1839-1840.
The Turko-Egyptian question and its settlement.
Quadruple Alliance.
See TURKS: A. D. 1831-1840.
GERMANY: A. D. 1848 (March).
Revolutionary outbreaks.
The King of Prussia heads a national movement.
Mistaken battle of soldiers and citizens at Berlin.