THE UNIFICATION OF ITALY AND GERMANY
[Sidenote: The general revolutionary movement in western Europe in
1848.]
263. In 1848 the gathering discontent and the demand for reform suddenly
showed their full strength and extent; it seemed for a time as if all
western Europe was about to undergo as complete a revolution as France
had experienced in 1789. With one accord, and as if obeying a
preconcerted signal, the liberal parties in France, Italy, Germany, and
Austria, during the early months of 1848, overthrew or gained control of
the government, and proceeded to carry out their programme of reform in
the same thoroughgoing way in which the National Assembly in France had
done its work in 1789. The general movement affected almost every state
in Europe, but the course of events in France, and in that part of
central Europe which had so long been dominated by Austria, merits
especial attention.
[Sidenote: The revolution of 1848 in France.]
[Sidenote: Unpopularity of Louis Philippe among the republicans.]
The revolutionary movements of 1848 did not begin in France, but in
Italy; yet it was the dethronement of Louis Philippe and the
establishment of a second French republic that gave the signal for the
general European revolt. The Charter of 1814 had been only slightly
modified after the revolution of 1830, in spite of the wishes of the
republicans who had been active in bringing about the deposition of
Charles X. They maintained that the king had too much power and could
influence the _parlement_ to make laws contrary to the wishes of the
people at large. They also protested against the laws which excluded the
poorer classes from voting (only two hundred thousand among a population
of thirty million enjoyed that right), and demanded that every
Frenchman should have the right to vote so soon as he reached maturity.
As Louis Philippe grew older he became more and more suspicious of the
liberal parties which had helped him to his throne. He not only opposed
reforms himself, but also did all he could to keep the _parlement_ and
the newspapers from advocating any changes which the progressive parties
demanded. Nevertheless the strength of the republicans gradually
increased. They found allies in a new group of socialistic writers who
desired a fundamental reorganization of the state.
[Sidenote: The second French republic proclaimed February 27, 1848.]
On February 24, 1848, a mob attacked the Tuilleries. The king abdicated
in favor of his grandson, but it was too late; he and his whole family
were forced to leave the country. The mob invaded the assembly, as in
the time of the Reign of Terror, crying, "Down with the Bourbons, old
and new! Long live the Republic!" A provisional government was
established which included the writer, Lamartine, Louis Blanc, a
prominent socialist, two or three editors, and several other
politicians. The first decree of this body, ratifying the establishment
of the republic, was solemnly proclaimed on the former site of the
Bastile, February 27.
[Sidenote: The social democrats and the 'red republic.']
[Sidenote: National workshops established.]
The provisional government was scarcely in session before it was
threatened by the "red republic." Its representatives, the social
democrats, desired to put the laboring classes in control of the
government and let them conduct it in their own interests. Some
advocated community of property, and wished to substitute the red flag
for the national colors. The government went so far as to concede the
so-called "right to labor," and established national workshops, in which
all the unemployed were given an opportunity to work.
[Sidenote: The insurrection in Paris, June, 1848.]
A National Assembly had been convoked whose members were elected by a
popular vote of all Frenchmen above the age of twenty-one. The result of
the election was an overwhelming defeat for the social democrats. Their
leaders then attempted to overthrow the new assembly on the pretext
that it did not represent the people; but the national guard frustrated
the attempt. The number of men now enrolled in the national workshops
had reached one hundred and seventeen thousand, each of whom received
two francs a day in return for either useless labor or mere idleness.
The abolition of this nuisance led to a serious revolt. Battle raged in
the streets of Paris for three days, and over ten thousand persons were
killed.
[Sidenote: Louis Napoleon elected president.]
[Sidenote: Establishment of the second empire, 1852.]
This wild outbreak of the forces of revolution resulted in a general
conviction that a strong hand was essential to the maintenance of peace.
The new constitution decreed that the president of the republic should
be chosen by the people at large. Their choice fell upon the nephew of
Napoleon Bonaparte, Louis Napoleon, who had already made two futile
attempts to make himself the ruler of France. Before the expiration of
his four years' term he succeeded, by a _coup d'état_ on the anniversary
of the coronation of his uncle (December 2, 1851), in setting up a new
government. He next obtained, by means of a plebiscite,[447] the consent
of the people to his remaining president for ten years. A year later
(1852) the second empire was established, and Napoleon III became
"Emperor of the French by the grace of God and the will of the people."
[Sidenote: Austria's commanding position in central Europe.]
264. When Metternich heard of the February revolution of 1848 in France,
he declared that "Europe finds herself to-day in the presence of a
second 1793." This was not true, however. It was no longer necessary for
France to promote liberal ideas by force of arms, as in 1793. For sixty
years ideas of reform had been spreading in Europe, and by the year 1848
they were accepted by a great majority of the people, from Berlin to
Palermo. The Europe of 1848 was no longer the Europe of 1793.
The overthrow of Louis Philippe encouraged the opponents of Metternich
in Germany, Austria, and Italy to attempt to make an end of his system
at once and forever. In view of the important part that Austria had
played in central Europe since the fall of Napoleon I, it was inevitable
that she should appear the chief barrier to the attainment of national
unity and liberal government in Italy and Germany. As ruler of Lombardy
and Venetia she practically controlled Italy, and as presiding member of
the German Confederation she had been able to keep even Prussia in line.
It is not strange that Austria felt that she could make no concessions
to the spirit of nationality, for the territories belonging to the house
of Hapsburg, some twenty in number, were inhabited by four different
races,--Germans, Slavs, Hungarians, and Italians.[448] The Slavs
(especially the Bohemians) and the Hungarians longed for national
independence, as well as the Italians.
[Sidenote: Overthrow of Metternich, March, 1848.]
On March 13 the populace of Vienna rose in revolt against their
old-fashioned government. Metternich fled, and all his schemes for
opposing reform appeared to have come to naught. Before the end of the
month the helpless Austrian emperor had given his permission to the
kingdoms of Hungary and Bohemia to draw up constitutions for themselves
incorporating the longed-for reforms (equality of all classes in the
matter of taxation, religious freedom, liberty of the press, and the
rest), and providing that each country should have a parliament of its
own, which should meet annually. The Austrian provinces were promised
similar advantages. None of these regions, however, showed any desire to
throw off their allegiance to the Austrian ruler.
[Sidenote: Beginning of Italian war of independence.]
The rising in northern Italy, on the contrary, was directed to that
particular end. Immediately on the news of Metternich's fall the
Milanese expelled the Austrian troops from their city, and soon Austria
had evacuated a great part of Lombardy. The Venetians followed the lead
of Milan and set up a republic once more. The Milanese, anticipating a
struggle, appealed to Charles Albert, King of Sardinia, for aid. By
this time a great part of Italy was in revolt. Constitutions were
granted to Naples, Rome, Tuscany, and Piedmont by their rulers. The king
of Sardinia was forced by public opinion to assume the leadership in the
attempt to expel the interloping Austria and ultimately, perhaps, to
found some sort of an Italian union which should satisfy the longings
for national unity. The pope and even the Bourbon king of Naples were
induced to consent to the arming and dispatch of troops in the cause of
Italian freedom, and Italy began its first war for independence.
[Sidenote: The liberal movement in Germany in 1848.]
The crisis at home and the Italian war made it impossible for Austria to
prevent the progress of revolution in Germany. So spontaneous was the
movement, that before the fall of Metternich reform movements had begun
in Baden, Würtemberg, Bavaria, and Saxony. The opportunity seemed to
have come, now that Austria was hopelessly embarrassed, to reorganize
the German Confederation.
[Sidenote: Frederick William IV (1840-1861) of Prussia takes the lead in
the reform movement in Germany.]
The king of Prussia, seeing his opportunity, suddenly reversed his
policy of obedience to the dictates of Austria, and determined to take
the lead in Germany. He agreed to summon an assembly to draw up a
constitution for Prussia. Moreover, a great national assembly was
convoked at Frankfurt to draft a constitution for Germany at large.
265. By the end of March, 1848, the prospects of reform were bright
indeed. Hungary and Bohemia had been guaranteed constitutional
independence; the Austrian provinces awaited their promised
constitution; Lombardy and Venetia had declared their independence of
Austria; four Italian states had obtained their longed-for
constitutions, and all were ready for a war with Austria; Prussia was
promised a constitution, and lastly, the National Assembly at Frankfurt
was about to prepare a constitution for a united Germany.
[Sidenote: Conservatives and radicals both help to frustrate the
realization of the proposed reforms.]
The moderate reformers who had gained these seeming victories had,
however, only just reached the most difficult part of their task. They
had two kinds of enemies, who abhorred each other but who effectually
combined to undo the work of the moderates. These were, first, the
conservative party, represented by Austria and the Italian rulers who
had been forced most reluctantly to grant constitutions to their
subjects; and, secondly, the radicals, who were not satisfied with the
prospect of a liberal monarchy and desired a republican or socialistic
form of government. While the princes were recovering from the
astonishing humiliations of March, the radicals began to discredit the
revolutionary movement and alienate public opinion by fantastic
programmes and the murder of hostile ministers.
[Sidenote: Defeat of the Italians under Charles Albert of Sardinia,
July, 1848.]
For the moment Austria's chief danger lay in Italy, which was the only
one of her dependencies that had actually taken up arms against her. The
Italians had been unable to drive out the Austrian army, which, under
the indomitable general, Radetzky, had taken refuge in the so-called
Quadrilateral, in the neighborhood of Mantua, where it was protected by
four great fortresses. Charles Albert of Sardinia found himself, with
the exception of a few volunteers, almost unsupported by the other
Italian states. The best ally of Austria was the absence of united
action upon the part of the Italians, and the jealousy and indifference
that they showed as soon as war had actually begun. The pope decided
that his mission was one of peace and that he could not afford to join
in a war against Austria, the stoutest ally of the Roman church. The
king of Naples easily found a pretext for recalling the troops that
public opinion had compelled him to send to the aid of the king of
Sardinia. Charles Albert was defeated at Custozza, July 25, and
compelled to sign a truce with Austria and withdraw his forces from
Lombardy.
[Sidenote: Policy of the Italian republicans.]
The Italian republicans, who had imputed to Charles Albert merely
personal motives in his efforts to free Italy, now attempted to carry
out their own programme. Florence, as well as Venice, proclaimed itself
a republic. At Rome the liberal and enlightened Rossi, whom the pope had
put at the head of affairs, was assassinated in November just as he was
ready to promulgate his reforms. The pope fled from the city and put
himself under the protection of the king of Naples. A constitutional
assembly was then convoked by the revolutionists, and under the
influence of Mazzini, in February, 1849, it declared the temporal power
of the pope abolished and proclaimed the Roman republic.
[Sidenote: Hostility between the Germans and Czechs in Bohemia.]
266. Meanwhile the conditions in Austria began to be favorable to a
reëstablishment of the emperor's former influence. Race rivalry proved
his friend in his Austrian domains just as republicanism tended to his
ultimate advantage in Italy. The Czechs[449] in Bohemia hated the
Germans in 1848, much as they had hated them in the time of Huss. The
German part of the population naturally opposed the plan of making
Bohemia practically independent of the government at Vienna, for it was
to German Vienna that they were wont to look for protection against the
enterprises of their Czechish fellow-countrymen. The Germans wanted to
send delegates to the Frankfurt convention, and to maintain the union
between Bohemia and the German states.
[Sidenote: The Pan-Slavic Congress of 1848.]
[Sidenote: Beginnings of revolt in Bohemia suppressed.]
The Czechs determined to offset the movement toward German consolidation
by a Pan-Slavic Congress, which should bring together the various Slavic
peoples comprised in the Austrian empire. To this assembly, which met in
Prague in June, 1848, came delegates from the Czechs, Moravians,
Ruthenians, and Poles in the north, and the Servians and Croatians in
the south. Its deliberations were interrupted by an insurrection that
broke out among the people of Prague and gave the commander of the
Austrian forces a sufficient excuse for intervening. He established a
military government, and the prospect of independence for Bohemia
vanished. This was Austria's first real victory.
[Sidenote: The Slavic peoples revolt against Hungary.]
The eastern and southern portion of the Hapsburg domains were not more
homogeneous than the west and north. When a constitution was granted to
Hungary it was inevitable that the races which the Hungarians (Magyars)
had long dominated should begin to consider how they might gain the
right to govern themselves. The Slavs inhabiting Carniola, Carinthia,
Istria, Croatia, Slavonia, Bosnia, and Servia had long meditated upon
the possibility of a united Slavic kingdom in the south. Both the
Servians and Croatians now revolted against Hungary. Like the Germans in
Bohemia, the Servians and Croatians were on the whole friendly to the
Vienna government, from which they had less to fear than from the
establishment of Hungarian independence, which would put them at the
mercy of the Magyars. It was, therefore, with the support of the
Austrian ministry that an army of Servians and Croatians crossed into
Hungary in September.
[Illustration: The Various Races of Austro-Hungary]
[Sidenote: Insurrection of the radicals in Vienna suppressed.]
[Sidenote: Accession of Francis Joseph I, 1848-.]
In October, 1848, the radical party rose in Vienna as it had in Paris
after the deposition of Louis Philippe. The minister of war was brutally
murdered and the emperor fled. The city was, however, besieged by the
same commander who had put down the insurrection in Prague, and was
forced to surrender. The imperial government was now in a position still
further to strengthen itself. The emperor, a notoriously inefficient
person, was forced to abdicate (December 2, 1848) in favor of his
youthful nephew, Francis Joseph I, who still sits upon the Austrian
throne. Moreover, a new Metternich appeared in the person of
Schwarzenberg.
[Sidenote: Suppression of Hungarian republic.]
[Sidenote: Final peaceful union between Austria and Hungary, 1867.]
A vigorous campaign was begun against Hungary, which, under the
influence of the patriotic Kossuth, had deposed its Hapsburg king and
declared itself an independent republic under the presidency of Kossuth.
The Tsar placed his forces at the disposal of Francis Joseph, and with
the aid of an army of one hundred and fifty thousand Russians, who
marched in from the east, the Hungarians were compelled, by the middle
of August, to surrender. Austria took terrible vengeance upon the
rebels. Thousands were hung, shot, and imprisoned, and many, including
Kossuth, fled to the United States or elsewhere. But within a few years
Hungary won its independence by peaceful measures, and it is now on
exactly the same footing as the western dominions of Francis Joseph in
the dual federation of Austria-Hungary.
[Sidenote: Austria defeats the king of Sardinia at Novara, March, 1849.]
[Sidenote: Accession of Victor Emmanuel as king of Sardinia.]
It remained for Austria to reëstablish her prestige in Italy and in the
German Confederation. In March, 1849, Charles Albert renewed the war
which had been discontinued after the defeat at Custozza. The campaign
lasted but five days and closed with his crushing and definitive defeat
at Novara (March 23), which put an end to the hopes of Italian liberty
for the time being. Charles Albert abdicated in favor of his son, Victor
Emmanuel, who was destined before many years to become king of Italy.
[Sidenote: Austria reëstablishes the former conditions in Italy, except
in Piedmont.]
After bringing the king of Sardinia to terms, Austria pushed southward,
reëstablishing the old order as she went. The ephemeral Italian
republics were unable to offer any effectual resistance. The former
rulers were restored in Rome, Tuscany, and Venice, and the constitutions
were swept away from one end of the peninsula to the other, except in
Piedmont, the most important part of the king of Sardinia's realms.
There Victor Emmanuel not only maintained the representative government
introduced by his father, but, by summoning to his councils d'Azeglio
and others known throughout Italy for their liberal sentiments, he
prepared to lead Italy once more against her foreign oppressors.
[Sidenote: Question of the extent of the proposed union.]
[Sidenote: Impossibility of a German state which should include both
Austria and Prussia.]
267. In Germany, as elsewhere, Austria profited by the dissensions among
her opponents. On May 18, 1848, the National Assembly, consisting of
nearly six hundred representatives of the German people, had met at
Frankfurt. It immediately began the consideration of a new constitution
that should satisfy the popular longings for a great free German state,
to be governed by and for the people. But what were to be the confines
of this new German state? The confederation of 1815 did not include all
the German inhabitants of Prussia, and did include the heterogeneous
western possessions of Austria,--Bohemia and Moravia, for example, where
a great part of the people were Slavs. There was no hesitation in
deciding that all the Prussian territories should be admitted to the new
union. As it appeared impossible to exclude Austria altogether, the
Assembly agreed to include those parts of her territory which had
belonged to the confederation formed in 1815. This decision rendered the
task of founding a real German state practically impossible; for the new
union was to include two great European powers who might at any moment
become rivals, since Prussia would hardly consent to be led forever by
Austria. So heterogeneous a union could only continue to be, as it had
been, a loose confederation of practically independent princes.
[Sidenote: The Assembly at Frankfurt gives Austria time to recover.]
The improbability that the Assembly at Frankfurt would succeed in its
undertaking was greatly increased by its unwise conduct. Instead of
proceeding immediately to frame a new form of government, it devoted
several months to the formulation of the general rights of the German
citizen. This gave a fine opportunity to the theorists, of which there
were many in the Assembly, to ventilate their views, and by the time
that the constitution itself came up for discussion, Austria had begun
to regain her influence and was ready to lead the conservative forces
once more. She could rely upon the support of the rulers of South
Germany, for they were well satisfied with the old confederation and the
independence that it gave them.
[Sidenote: The Assembly asks the king of Prussia to become emperor of
Germany.]
[Sidenote: Frederick William IV refuses the imperial crown.]
In spite of her partiality for the old union, Austria could not prevent
the Assembly from completing its new constitution. This provided that
there should be an hereditary emperor at the head of the government, and
that exalted office was tendered to the king of Prussia. Frederick
William IV had been alienated from the liberal cause, which he had at
first espoused, by an insurrection in Berlin. He was, moreover, timid
and conservative at heart; he hated revolution and doubted if the
National Assembly had any right to confer the imperial title. He also
greatly respected Austria, and felt that a war with her, which was
likely to ensue if he accepted the crown, would not only be dangerous to
Prussia, since Francis Joseph could rely upon the assistance of the
Tsar, but dishonorable as well, in Austria's present embarrassment. So
he refused the honor of the imperial title and announced his rejection
of the new constitution (April, 1849).
[Sidenote: The National Assembly disperses and the old diet is
restored.]
This decision rendered the year's work of the National Assembly
fruitless, and its members gradually dispersed, with the exception of
the radicals, who made a last desperate effort to found a republic.
Austria now insisted upon the reëstablishment of the old diet, and
nearly came to war with Prussia over the policy to be pursued.
Hostilities were only averted by the ignominious submission of Prussia
to the demands of Schwarzenberg in 1851.
[Sidenote: Results of the revolutions of 1848.]
While the revolutions of 1848 seem futile enough when viewed from the
standpoint of the hopes of March, they left some important indications
of progress. The king of Prussia had granted his country a constitution,
which, with some modifications, has served Prussia down to the present
day. Piedmont also had obtained a constitution. The internal reforms,
moreover, which these countries speedily introduced, prepared them to
head once more, and this time with success, a movement for national
unity.
It will be noted that the revolution of 1848 aimed to do more than the
French Revolution of 1789. Not only was the national question everywhere
an important one, but there were plans for the economic reorganization
of society. It was no longer simply a matter of abolishing the remnants
of feudalism and insuring equal rights to all and the participation of
the more prosperous classes in the government. Those who lived by the
labor of their hands and were employed in the vast industries that had
developed with the application of steam machinery to manufacture also
had their spokesmen. The relation of the state to the industrial
classes, and of capital to labor, had become, as they still are, the
great problems of modern times.
[Sidenote: Decline of Austrian influence after 1851.]
In 1851 Austria had once more, in spite of the greatest obstacles,
established the system of Metternich. But this victory was of short
duration, and it was her last. Five years later the encroachments of
Russia in Turkey brought on the Crimean War, of which something will be
said later. In this war Austria observed an inglorious neutrality; she
thereby sacrificed much of her prestige with both Russia and the western
powers, and encouraged renewed attempts to free both Italy and Germany
from her control.
[Sidenote: Development of Piedmont under Cavour.]
268. Under Victor Emmanuel and his great minister, Cavour, Piedmont had
rapidly developed into a modern state. It sent a contingent to the aid
of the western powers in the Crimean War waged by France and England
against Russia (1853-1856); it developed its resources, military and
economic, and at last found an ally to help it in a new attempt to expel
Austria from Italy.
[Sidenote: Position and policy of Napoleon III.]
Napoleon III, like his far more distinguished uncle, was a usurper. He
knew that he could not rely upon mere tradition, but must maintain his
popularity by deeds that should redound to the glory of France. A war
with Austria for the liberation of the Italians, who like the French
were a Latin race, would be popular; especially if France could thereby
add a bit of territory to her realms, and perhaps become the protector
of the proposed Italian confederation. A conference was arranged between
Napoleon and Cavour. Just what agreement was reached we do not know, but
Napoleon no doubt engaged to come to the aid of the king of Sardinia,
should the latter find a pretense for going to war with Austria. Should
they together succeed in expelling Austria from northern Italy, the king
of Sardinia was to reward France by ceding to her Savoy and Nice, which
both geographically and racially belonged to her.
[Illustration: Cavour]
[Sidenote: Victories of Victor Emmanuel and Napoleon III over Austria.]
By April, 1859, Victor Emmanuel had managed to involve himself in a war
with Austria. The French army promptly joined forces with the
Piedmontese, defeated the Austrians at Magenta, and on June 8, Napoleon
III and Victor Emmanuel entered Milan amid the rejoicings of the
people. The Austrians managed the campaign very badly, and were again
defeated at Solferino (June 24).
[Sidenote: Napoleon III alarmed by the Italian successes.]
Suddenly Europe was astonished to hear that a truce had been concluded,
and that the preliminaries of a peace had been arranged which left
Venetia in Austria's hands, in spite of Napoleon III's boast that he
would free Italy to the Adriatic. The French emperor had begun to fear
that, with the growing enthusiasm which was showing itself throughout
the peninsula for Piedmont, there was danger that it might succeed in
forming a national kingdom so strong as to need no French protector. By
leaving Venetia in possession of Austria, and agreeing that Piedmont
should only be increased by the incorporation of Lombardy and the little
duchies of Parma and Modena, Napoleon III hoped to prevent the
consolidation of Italy from proceeding too far.
[Sidenote: The formation of a kingdom of Italy, 1860.]
He had, however, precipitated changes which he was powerless to check.
Italy was now ready to fuse into a single state. Tuscany, as well as
Modena and Parma, voted (March, 1860) to unite with Piedmont. Garibaldi,
a famous republican leader, sailed for Sicily, where he assumed the
dictatorship of the island in the name of Victor Emmanuel, "King of
Italy." After expelling the troops of the king of Naples from Sicily, he
crossed to the mainland, and early in September he entered Naples
itself, just as the king fled from his capital.
[Sidenote: Napoleon III intervenes to prevent the annexation of Rome to
the kingdom of Italy.]
Garibaldi now proposed to march on Rome and proclaim the kingdom of
Italy from the Quirinal. This would have imperiled all the previous
gains, for Napoleon III could not, in view of the strong Catholic
sentiment in France, possibly permit the occupation of Rome and the
destruction of the political independence of the pope. He agreed that
Victor Emmanuel might annex the outlying papal possessions to the north
and reëstablish a stable government in Naples instead of Garibaldi's
dictatorship. But Rome, the imperial city, with the territory
immediately surrounding it, must be left to its old master. Victor
Emmanuel accordingly marched southward and occupied Naples (October).
Its king capitulated and all southern Italy became a part of the kingdom
of Italy.
In February, 1861, the first Italian parliament was opened at Turin, and
the process of really amalgamating the heterogeneous portions of the new
kingdom began. Yet the joy of the Italians over the realization of their
hopes of unity and national independence was tempered by the fact that
Austria still held one of the most famous of the Italian provinces, and
that Rome, which typified Italy's former grandeur, was not included in
the new kingdom. Within a decade, however, both these districts became a
part of the kingdom of Italy through the action of Prussia. William I
and his extraordinary minister and adviser, Bismarck, were about to do
for Germany what Victor Emmanuel and Cavour had accomplished for
Italy.[450]
[Sidenote: William I of Prussia, 1861-1888.]
269. With the accession of William I in 1858,[451] a new era dawned for
Prussia. A practical and vigorous man had come into power, whose great
aim was to expel Austria from the German Confederation, and out of the
remaining states to construct a firm union, under the leadership of
Prussia, which should take its place among the most powerful of the
states of Europe. He saw that war would come sooner or later, and his
first business was to develop the military resources of his realms.
[Sidenote: William I's plan for strengthening the army.]
The German army, which was the outgrowth of the early reforms of William
I, is so extraordinary a feature of the Europe of to-day, that its
organization merits attention. The war of independence against Napoleon
in 1813 had led to the summoning of the nation to arms, and a law was
passed in Prussia making military service a universal obligation of
every healthy male citizen. The first thing that William I did was to
increase the annual levy from forty to sixty thousand men, and to see
that all the soldiers remained in active service three years. They then
passed into the reserve, according to the existing law, where for two
years more they remained ready at any time to take up arms should it be
necessary. William wished to increase the term of service in the reserve
to four years. In this way the state would claim seven of the years of
early manhood and have an effective army of four hundred thousand, which
would permit it to dispense with the service of those who were
approaching middle life. The lower house of the Prussian parliament
refused, however, to make the necessary appropriations for increasing
the strength of the army.
[Sidenote: Bismarck and his struggle with the Prussian parliament.]
The king proceeded, nevertheless, with his plan, and in 1862 called to
his side one of the most extraordinary statesmen of modern times,
Bismarck. The new minister conceived a scheme for laying Austria low and
exalting Prussia, which he succeeded in carrying out with startling
precision. He could not, however, reveal it to the lower chamber; he
would, indeed, scarcely hint its nature to the king himself. In defiance
of the lower house and of the newspapers, he carried on the
strengthening of the army without formal appropriations, on the theory
that the constitution had not provided for a dead-lock between the upper
and lower house, and that consequently the king might exercise, in such
a case, his former absolute power. For a time it seemed as if Prussia
was returning to a pure despotism, for there was assuredly no more
fundamental provision of the constitution than the right of the people
to control the granting of the taxes. Yet Bismarck was eventually fully
exonerated by public opinion, and it was generally agreed that the end
had amply justified the means.
[Sidenote: The Schleswig-Holstein affair.]
270. Prussia now had a military force that appeared to justify the hope
of victory should she undertake a war with her old rival. In order to
bring about the expulsion of Austria from the confederation, Bismarck
took advantage of a knotty problem that had been troubling Germany, and
which was known as the Schleswig-Holstein affair. The provinces of
Schleswig and Holstein, although inhabited largely by Germans, had for
centuries belonged to the king of Denmark. They were allowed, however,
to retain their provincial assemblies, and were not considered a part of
Denmark any more than Hanover was a part of Great Britain in the last
century.
In 1847, just when the growing idea of nationality was about to express
itself in the Revolution of 1848, the king of Denmark proclaimed that he
was going to make these German provinces an integral part of the Danish
kingdom. This aroused great indignation throughout Germany, especially
as Holstein was a member of the confederation. Frederick William IV
consented to go to war with Denmark, but only succeeded in delaying for
a few years the proposed absorption of the provinces by Denmark. The
constant encroachments of the government at Copenhagen upon the
privileges claimed by Schleswig-Holstein aroused new apprehension and
much discontent. In 1863 Schleswig was finally incorporated into the
Danish kingdom.
[Sidenote: Bismarck's audacious plan for the expulsion of Austria from
Germany.]
"From this time the history of Germany is the history of the profound
and audacious statecraft and of the overmastering will of Bismarck; the
nation, except through its valour on the battlefield, ceases to
influence the shaping of its own fortunes. What the German people
desired in 1864 was that Schleswig-Holstein should be attached, under a
ruler of its own, to the German Federation as it then existed; what
Bismarck intended was that Schleswig-Holstein, itself incorporated more
or less directly with Prussia, should be made the means of the
destruction of the existing Federal system and of the expulsion of
Austria from Germany.... The German people desired one course of action;
Bismarck had determined on something totally different; with matchless
resolution and skill he bore down all the opposition of people and of
the [European] courts, and forced a reluctant nation to the goal which
he himself had chosen for it" (Fyffe).
[Illustration: Bismarck]
[Sidenote: The working out of the plan.]
Bismarck's first step was to invite Austria to coöperate with Prussia in
settling the Schleswig-Holstein difficulty. As Denmark refused to make
any concessions, the two powers declared war, defeated the Danish army,
and forced the king of Denmark to cede Schleswig-Holstein to the rulers
of Prussia and Austria jointly (October, 1864). They were to make such
disposition of the provinces as they saw fit. There was now no trouble
in picking a quarrel with Austria. Bismarck suggested the nominal
independence of the duchies, but that they should become practically a
part of Prussia. This plan was of course indignantly rejected by
Austria, and it was arranged that, pending an adjustment, Austria should
govern Holstein, and Prussia, Schleswig.
[Sidenote: Prussia declares the German Confederation dissolved.]
Bismarck now obtained the secret assurance of Napoleon III that he would
not interfere if Prussia and Italy should go to war with Austria. In
April, 1866, Italy agreed that, should the king of Prussia take up arms
during the following three months with the aim of reforming the German
union, it too would immediately declare war on Austria, with the hope,
of course, of obtaining Venice. The relations between Austria and
Prussia grew more and more strained, until finally in June, 1866,
Austria induced the diet to call out the forces of the confederation
with a view of making war on Prussia. This act the representative of
Prussia declared put an end to the existing union. He accordingly
submitted to the diet Prussia's scheme for the reformation of Germany
and withdrew from the diet.
[Sidenote: War declared between Prussia and Austria.]
271. On June 12 war was declared between Austria and Prussia. With the
exception of Mecklenburg and the small states of the north, all Germany
sided with Austria against Prussia. Bismarck immediately demanded of the
rulers of the larger North German states--Hanover, Saxony, and
Hesse-Cassel--that they stop their warlike preparations and agree to
accept Prussia's plan of reform. On their refusal, Prussian troops
immediately occupied these territories, and war actually began.
[Sidenote: Prussia victorious.]
So admirable was the organization of the Prussian army that, in spite of
the suspicion and even hatred which the liberal party in Prussia
entertained for the despotic Bismarck, all resistance on the part of the
states of the north was promptly prevented, Austria was miserably
defeated on July 3 in the decisive battle of Königgrätz, or Sadowa,[452]
and within three weeks after the breaking off of diplomatic relations
the war was practically over. Austria's influence was at an end, and
Prussia had won her right to do with Germany as she pleased.
[Sidenote: The North German Federation.]
Prussia was aware that the larger states south of the Main River were
not ripe for the union that she desired. She therefore organized a
so-called North German Federation, which included all the states north
of the Main. Prussia had seized the opportunity considerably to increase
her own boundaries and round out her territory by annexing the North
German states, with the exception of Saxony, that had gone to war with
her. Hanover, Hesse-Cassel, Nassau, and the free city of Frankfurt,
along with the duchies of Schleswig and Holstein, all became Prussian.
[Sidenote: Requirements of the proposed constitution.]
Prussia, thus enlarged, summoned the lesser states about her to confer
upon a constitution that should accomplish four ends. First, it must
give all the people of the territory included in the new union,
regardless of the particular state in which they lived, a voice in the
government. A popular assembly satisfied this demand. Secondly, the
predominating position of Prussia must be secured, but at the same time
(thirdly) the self-respect of the other monarchs whose lands were
included must not be sacrificed. In order to accomplish this double
purpose the king of Prussia was made president of the federation but not
its sovereign. The chief governing body was the Federal Council
(Bundesrath). In this each ruler, however small his state, and each of
the three free towns--Hamburg, Bremen, and Lübeck--had at least one
vote; in this way it was arranged that the other rulers did not become
_subjects_ of the king of Prussia. The real sovereign of the North
German Federation and of the present German empire is not the king of
Prussia, but "all of the united governments." The votes were distributed
as in the old diet, so that Prussia, with the votes of the states that
she annexed in 1860, enjoyed seventeen votes out of forty-three. Lastly,
the constitution must be so arranged that when the time came for the
southern states--Bavaria, Würtemberg, Baden, and south Hesse--to join
the union, it would be adapted to the needs of the widened empire.
The union was a true federation like that of the United States, although
its organization violated many of the rules which were observed in the
organization of the American union. It was inevitable that a union
spontaneously developed from a group of sovereign _monarchies_, with
their traditions of absolutism, would be very different from one in
which the members, like the states of the American union, had previously
been governed by republican institutions.
[Sidenote: Disappointment of the hopes of Napoleon III.]
272. No one was more chagrined by the abrupt termination of the war of
1866 and the victory of Prussia than Napoleon III. He had hoped that
both the combatants might be weakened by a long struggle, and that at
last he might have an opportunity to arbitrate and incidentally to gain
something for France, as had happened after the Italian war. But Prussia
came out of the conflict with greatly increased power and territory,
while France had gained nothing. An effort of Napoleon's to get a
foothold in Mexico had failed, owing to the recovery of the United
States from the Civil War and their warning that they should regard his
continued intervention there as an hostile act.[453] His hopes of
annexing Luxembourg as an offset for the gains that Prussia had made,
were also frustrated.
[Sidenote: France declares war upon Prussia, July 19, 1870.]
One course remained for the French usurper, namely, to permit himself to
be forced into a war against the power which had especially roused the
jealousy of France. Never was an excuse offered for war more trivial
than that advanced by the French,[454] never did retribution come more
speedily. The hostility which the South German states had hitherto shown
toward Prussia encouraged Napoleon III to believe that so soon as the
French troops should gain their first victory, Bavaria, Würtemberg, and
Baden would join him. That first victory was never won. War had no
sooner been declared than the Germans laid all jealousy aside and ranged
themselves as a nation against a national assailant. The French army,
moreover, was neither well equipped nor well commanded. The Germans
hastened across the Rhine, and within a few days were driving the French
before them. In a series of bloody encounters about Metz, one of the
French armies was defeated and finally shut up within the fortifications
about the town. Seven weeks had not elapsed after the beginning of the
war, before the Germans had captured a second French army and made a
prisoner of the emperor himself in the great battle of Sedan, September
1, 1870.[455]
[Sidenote: Siege of Paris and close of Franco-Prussian War.]
[Sidenote: Cession of Alsace and Lorraine to Germany.]
The Germans then surrounded and laid siege to Paris. Napoleon III had
been completely discredited by the disasters about Metz and at Sedan,
and consequently the empire was abolished and France for the third time
was declared a republic. In spite of the energy which the new government
showed in arousing the French against the invaders, prolonged resistance
was impossible. The capital surrendered January 28, 1871, and an
armistice was arranged. Bismarck, who had been by no means reluctant to
go to war, deeply humiliated France, in arranging the treaty of peace,
by requiring the cession of two French provinces which had formerly
belonged to Germany,--Alsace and northeastern Lorraine.[456] In this way
France was cut off from the Rhine, and the crest of the Vosges Mountains
was established as its boundary. The Germans exacted, further, an
enormous indemnity for the unjustifiable attack which the French had
made upon them. This was fixed at five billion francs, and German troops
were to occupy France till it was paid. The French people made pathetic
sacrifices to hasten the payment of this indemnity, in order that the
country might be freed from the presence of the hated Germans. The
bitter feeling of the French for the Germans dates from this war, and
the longing for revenge still shows itself. For many years after the war
a statue in Paris, representing the lost city of Strasburg, was draped
in mourning.
[Sidenote: The insurrection of the Paris commune of 1871.]
Immediately after the surrender of Paris the new republican government
had been called upon to subdue a terrible insurrection of the Parisian
populace. The insurgents reëstablished the commune of the Reign of
Terror, and rather than let Paris come again into the hands of the
national government, they proposed to burn the city. When, after two
months of disorder, their forces were completely routed in a series of
bloody street fights, the city was actually set on fire; but only two
important public buildings were destroyed,--the Palace of the Tuilleries
and the city hall.
[Sidenote: The French constitutional laws of 1875.]
A National Assembly had been elected by the people in February, 1871, to
make peace with Germany and to draw up a new constitution. Under this
temporary government France gradually recovered from the terrible loss
and demoralization caused by the war. There was much uncertainty for
several years as to just what form the constitution would permanently
take, for the largest party in the National Assembly was composed of
those who favored the reëstablishment of a monarchy.[457] Those who
advocated maintaining the republic prevailed, however, and in 1875 the
assembly passed a series of three laws organizing the government. These
have since served France as a constitution.
[Sidenote: Character of the present French republic.]
While France is nominally a republic with a president at its head, its
government closely resembles that of a limited monarchy like Belgium.
This is not strange, since the monarchists were in the majority when its
constitutional laws were passed. The French government of to-day is
therefore a compromise, and since all attempts to overthrow it have
proved vain, we may assume that it is suited to the wants of the nation.
[Sidenote: Permanent character of the French government in spite of
changes in the constitution.]
As one reviews the history of France since the establishment of the
first republic in 1792, it appears as if revolutionary changes of
government had been very frequent. As a matter of fact, the various
revolutions produced far less change in the system of government than is
usually supposed. They neither called in question the main provisions of
the Declaration of the Rights of Man drawn up in 1789, nor did they
materially alter the system of administration which was established by
Napoleon immediately after his accession in 1800. So long as the latter
was retained, the civil rights and equality of all citizens secured, and
the representatives of the nation permitted to control the ruler, it
really made little difference whether France was called an empire, a
constitutional monarchy, or a republic.
[Sidenote: Final unification of Germany.]
[Sidenote: Proclamation of the German empire, January 18, 1871.]
273. The attack of France upon Prussia in 1870, instead of hindering the
development of Germany as Napoleon III had hoped it would, only served
to consummate the work of 1866. The South German states,--Bavaria,
Würtemberg, Baden, and south Hesse--having sent their troops to fight
side by side with the Prussian forces, consented after their common
victory over France to join the North German Federation. Surrounded by
the German princes, William, King of Prussia and President of the North
German Federation, was proclaimed German Emperor in the palace of
Versailles, January, 1871. In this way the present German empire came
into existence. With its wonderfully organized army and its mighty
chancellor, Bismarck, it immediately took a leading place among the
western powers of Europe.
[Illustration: EUROPE OF TO-DAY]
[Sidenote: Predominance of Prussia in the present German empire.]
The constitution of the North German Federation had been drawn up with
the hope that the southern states would later become a part of the
union; consequently, little change was necessary when the empire was
established. The king of Prussia enjoys the title of German Emperor, and
is the real head of the federation. He is not, however, _emperor of
Germany_, for the sovereignty is vested, theoretically, not in him, but
in the body of German rulers who are members of the union, all of whom
send their representatives to the Federal Council (Bundesrath).
Prussia's influence in the Federal Council is, however, secured by
assigning her king a sufficient number of votes to enable him to block
any measure he wishes.
[Illustration: Proclamation of the German Empire at Versailles]
[Sidenote: Rome added to the kingdom of Italy, 1870.]
The unification of Italy was completed, like that of Germany, by the
Franco-Prussian War of 1870. After the war of 1866 Austria had ceded
Venetia to Italy. Napoleon III had, however, sent French troops in 1867
to prevent Garibaldi from seizing Rome and the neighboring districts,
which had been held by the head of the Catholic church for more than a
thousand years. In August, 1870, the reverses of the war compelled
Napoleon to recall the French garrison from Rome, and the pope made
little effort to defend his capital against the Italian army, which
occupied it in September. The people of Rome voted by an overwhelming
majority to join the kingdom of Italy; and the work of Victor Emmanuel
and Cavour was consummated by transferring the capital to the Eternal
City.
[Sidenote: Position of the pope.]
Although the papal possessions were declared a part of the kingdom of
Italy, a law was passed which guaranteed to the pope the rank and
privileges of a sovereign prince. He was to have his own ambassadors and
court like the other European powers. No officer of the Italian
government was to enter the Lateran or Vatican palaces upon any official
mission. As head of the church, the pope was to be entirely independent
of the king of Italy, and the bishops were not required to take the oath
of allegiance to the government. A sum of over six hundred thousand
dollars annually was also appropriated to aid the pope in defraying his
expenses. The pope, however, refused to recognize the arrangement. He
still regards himself as a prisoner, and the Italian government as a
usurper who has robbed him of his possessions. He has never accepted the
income assigned to him, and still maintains that the independence which
he formerly enjoyed as ruler of the Papal States is essential to the
best interests of the head of a great international church.[458]
[Sidenote: Southeastern Europe.]
274. To complete the survey of the great political changes of the
nineteenth century, we must turn for a moment to southeastern Europe.
The disposal of the European lands occupied by the Turks has proved a
very knotty international question. We have seen how the Turks were
expelled from Hungary by the end of the seventeenth century, and how
Peter the Great and his successors began to dream of acquiring
Constantinople as a Russian outpost which would enable the Tsar to
command the eastern Mediterranean.[459] Catherine II (1762-1796) had
extended the Russian boundary to the Black Sea. On the whole, however,
the Turks held their own pretty well during the eighteenth century, but
the nineteenth witnessed the disruption of European Turkey into a number
of new and independent Christian states.
[Sidenote: Servia and Greece revolt from the Sultan.]
The Servians first revolted successfully against their oppressors, and
forced the Sultan (1817) to permit them to manage their own affairs,
although he did not grant them absolute independence. Of the war of
independence which the Greeks waged against the Turks (1821-1829)
something has already been said.[460] The intervention of Russia,
England, and France saved the insurgents from defeat, and in 1829 the
Porte recognized the independence of Greece, which became a
constitutional monarchy. The Turkish government also pledged itself to
allow vessels of all nations to pass freely through the Dardanelles and
the Bosporus.
[Sidenote: The Crimean War, 1853-1856.]
[Sidenote: Origin of the principality of Roumania, 1859.]
Inasmuch as a great part of the peoples still under Turkish rule in
Europe were--like the Russians--Slavs and adherents of the Greek church,
Russia believed that it had the best right to protect the Christians
within the Sultan's dominions from the atrocious misgovernment of the
Mohammedans. When in 1853 news reached the Tsar that the Turks were
troubling Christian pilgrims, he demanded that he be permitted to assume
a protectorate over all the Christians in Turkey. This the Porte refused
to grant. Russia declared war and destroyed the Turkish fleet in the
Black Sea. The English government looked with apprehension upon the
advance of the Russians. It felt that it would be disastrous to western
Europe if Russia were permitted to occupy the well-nigh impregnable
Constantinople and send its men-of-war freely about the Mediterranean.
England therefore induced Napoleon III to combine with her to protect
the Sultan's possessions. The English and French troops easily defeated
the Russians, landed in the Crimea, and then laid siege to Sevastopol,
an important Russian fortress on the Black Sea. Sevastopol fell after a
long and terrible siege, and the so-called Crimean War came to a close.
The intervention of the western powers had prevented the capture of
Constantinople by the Russians, but very soon the powers recognized the
practical independence of two important Turkish provinces on the lower
Danube, which were united in 1859 into the principality of Roumania.
[Sidenote: Revolt of Bosnia, 1875.]
The Turkish subjects in Bosnia and Herzegovina naturally envied the
happier lot of the neighboring Servians, who had escaped from the
bondage of the Turks. These provinces were stirred to revolt in 1875,
when the Turks, after collecting the usual heavy taxes, immediately
demanded the same amount over again. The oppressed Christians proposed
to escape Turkish tyranny by becoming a part of Servia. They naturally
relied upon the aid of Russia to carry out their plans. The insurrection
spread among the other Christian subjects of the Sultan, especially
those in Bulgaria.
[Sidenote: The Bulgarian atrocities.]
Here the Turks wreaked vengeance upon the insurgents by atrocities which
filled Europe with horror and disgust. In a single town six thousand of
the seven thousand inhabitants were massacred with incredible cruelty,
and scores of villages were burned. Russia, joined by Roumania,
thereupon declared war upon the Porte (1877). The Turks were defeated,
but western Europe would not permit the questions at issue to be settled
without its approval. Consequently, a congress was called at Berlin
under the presidency of Bismarck, which included representatives from
Germany, Austria, Russia, England, France, Italy, and Turkey.
[Sidenote: The Congress of Berlin (1878) and the eastern question.]
The Congress of Berlin determined that Montenegro, Servia, and Roumania
should thereafter be altogether independent. The latter two became
kingdoms within a few years, Roumania in 1881 and Servia in 1882. Bosnia
and Herzegovina,[461] instead of becoming a part of Servia, as they
wished, were to be occupied and administered by Austria, although the
Sultan remained their nominal sovereign. Bulgaria received a Christian
government, but was forced to continue to recognize the Sultan as its
sovereign and pay him tribute.[462]
To-day the once wide dominions of the Sultan in Europe are reduced to
the city of Constantinople and a strip of mountainous country stretching
westward to the Adriatic.
General Reading.--In addition to the works of Andrews and Fyffe
referred to in the footnotes, the following are excellent short
accounts of the political history of Europe since 1815. W.A.
PHILLIPS, _Modern Europe_ (The Macmillan Company, $1.50);
SEIGNOBOS, _Political History of Europe since 1814_, carefully
edited by MacVane (Henry Holt & Co., $3.00), and the readable but
partisan German work of Müller, _Political History of Recent Times_
(American Book Company, $2.00). For Germany: MUNROE SMITH,
_Bismarck and German Unity_ (The Macmillan Company, $1.00) and KUNO
FRANCKE, _History of German Literature as determined by Social
Forces_ (Henry Holt & Co., $2.50). For Italy: THAYER, _Dawn of
Italian Independence_ (Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 2 vols., $4.00);
STILLMAN, _Union of Italy_ (The Macmillan Company, $1.60); COUNTESS
CESARESCO, _Liberation of Italy_ (Charles Scribner's Sons, $1.75)
and her _Cavour_ (The Macmillan Company, 75 cents). For England:
MCCARTHY, _History of our Own Times_ (issued by various publishers,
e.g., Coates & Co., 2 vols., $1.50).