admitted that "things had happened which ought not to have occurred,
and which should not occur again." The diet did not conceal its
resentment. The comitat of Zala, through its representatives, demanded
the names of the traitors who had misled the king; and the
representatives of all the other counties supported the proposition.
One of the royal commissioners came in tears to apologise to the diet;
another, who attempted to justify himself on the ground of obedience
to the king, was told that a faithful subject honoured his sovereign
when he reminded him of his duty. The articles of 1790 were declared
to have been openly violated, and the diet complained that the public
security had been outraged by arrests and prosecutions, founded on
anonymous denunciations. The address to the king, in which they set
forth their grievances, concluded with the following petition:--
"Convinced that these acts do not emanate from your Majesty,
but that they proceed from a system constantly pursued for
several centuries, we entreat your Majesty henceforth not to
listen to evil counsels--to despise anonymous
denunciations--not to exact any impost or any levy of
soldiers without the concurrence of the diet--to reinstate
the citizens disgraced for having legally resisted the royal
commissioners, and regularly to convoke the states, with whom
you share the sovereign power."
In his answer, Francis blamed the diet for their proceedings, but
wisely conceded their demands. By article 3d of 1825, he engaged to
observe the fundamental laws of the kingdom. By article 4th, never to
levy subsidies without the concurrence of the diet; by article 5th, to
convoke the diet every three years.
The attempt of Francis II. to subvert the constitution of Hungary
terminated, as the similar attempt of Joseph II. had terminated
thirty-five years before--in renewed acknowledgments of the
independence of Hungary, and the constitutional rights of the
Hungarians.
After three centuries of contention, the cabinet of Vienna now
appeared to have abandoned the hope it had so long entertained, of
imposing upon Hungary the patriarchal system of Austria. Relinquishing
the attempt to enforce illegal edicts, it relied upon means more in
accordance with the practice of constitutional governments. It could
command a majority at the table of Magnates, and it endeavoured, by
influencing the elections, to strengthen its party in the Deputies.
But in this kind of warfare the cabinet of an absolute monarch were
far less skilful than the popular leaders of a representative
assembly. The attempts to influence the elections by corrupt means
were generally unsuccessful, and, when exposed, exhibited the
government in a light odious to a people tenacious of their liberties
and distrustful of Austria.
There had long been two parties in the diet, of which one, from
supporting the views of the court, was considered Austrian; the other,
from its avowed desire to develop the popular institutions and
separate nationality of Hungary, was considered Hungarian, and took
the designation of the patriotic party. There was thus a government
party and an opposition, which, in 1827, was systematically organised.
But as Hungary had not a separate ministry, responsible to the diet,
that could be removed from office by its votes, there was little
ground for the usual imputation of a struggle for place. The patriotic
party could expect no favour from the court; their opposition was,
therefore, so far disinterested, and was, in fact, founded upon the
instructions of the counties they represented.
It must appear extraordinary that the majority of an assembly composed
of nobles, of which nine-tenths of the members were elected by
hereditary nobles or freeholders, should advocate opinions so liberal
as to alarm even the Austrian government. A great majority of the
electors, it is true, though rejoicing in the designation of nobles,
were men who tilled the soil with their own hands; but they are truly
described by Mr Paget as "generally a proud, unruly set of fellows,
with higher notions of privilege and power than of right and justice;
but brave, patriotic, and hospitable in the highest degree." After
describing the national character of the Majjars, he adds,--
"It is scarcely necessary to say that, with such
dispositions, the Majjar is strongly inclined to
conservatism; he hates new-fangled notions and foreign
fashions, and considers it a sufficient condemnation to say,
'not even my grandfather ever heard of such things.'"
To suppose that these men had republican tendencies would, of course,
be absurd; and as the patriotic party in the diet represented their
opinions, we may be well assured that they were not such as, to any
party in this country, would appear dangerous from excess of
liberality.
To the government of Austria, however, nothing caused greater
uneasiness than attempts to consolidate and improve the popular
institutions of Hungary, or to foster feelings of separate
nationality, which it had been the constant aim of its policy to
obliterate. Determined to maintain, at all hazards, her own
patriarchal system, Austria saw Hungary already separated from the
Hereditary States by the form of her institutions and by national
feelings, and dreaded the wider separation which the onward march of
the one, and the stationary policy of the other, must produce. In
superficial extent, Hungary is nearly half the empire--in population,
more than one-third. The separation of the crowns would reduce Austria
to the rank of a second-rate power; and Hungary separated from
Austria, and surrounded by despotic governments jealous of her
constitutional freedom, could not be safe. Not only an Austrian, but a
patriotic Hungarian, might therefore resist, as perilous to his
country, any course of legislation that appeared to lead towards such
a result. If Hungary continued to advance in material prosperity and
intelligence, and succeeded in giving to her constitution a basis so
broad as to insure a just distribution of the public burdens, and to
unite all classes of her population in its support, she must
ultimately separate from Austria, or Austria must abandon her
stationary policy, and advance in the same direction. It was
impossible that two contiguous countries, of extent and resources so
nearly equal, governed on principles so different, and daily
increasing the distance between them, should long continue to have
their separate administrations conducted by one cabinet, or could long
be held together by their allegiance to the same sovereign. To give
permanence to their connexion, it was necessary that Austria should
advance, or that Hungary should stand still. But the condition and
circumstances of more than one-half of her population made it
indispensable to her safety--to her internal tranquillity, her
material prosperity, and social order--that Hungary should go forward.
The nobles, holding their lands by tenure of military service, bore no
part of the public burdens during peace. The peasants, though they
were no longer serfs, and had acquired an acknowledged and valuable
interest in the lands they held from the proprietors, for which they
were indebted to Maria Theresa, were yet subject to all manner of
arbitrary oppressions. They had been promised ameliorations of their
condition as early as 1790, but these promises had not yet been
fulfilled. In the mean time, the peasants had been left to endure
their grievances, and did not endure them without murmuring. The more
intelligent and enlightened nobles felt the danger, and sought to
remedy the evil, and hitherto without success. But it is unjust to
attribute to Austrian influence all the opposition encountered by
those who sought to ameliorate the condition of the peasants. Men who
had hitherto been exempted from all public imposts, and who considered
it humiliating to be taxed, resisted the equalisation of the burdens;
men who had been taught to consider the peasant as a creature of an
inferior race, shrank from giving him civil rights equal to their own.
Nevertheless, in 1835, measures were passed which greatly improved the
position of the oppressed classes. We cannot stop to trace the course
of legislation, or to point out the wisdom and disinterested humanity
that distinguished the leaders in this movement. Amongst them stands
conspicuous the name of Szechenyi, to whom his country owes an
everlasting debt of gratitude. Alas! that a mind like his, whose
leading characteristic was practical good sense, that rejected every
visionary project, should now be wandering amidst its own morbid
creations in an unreal world. Several of the wealthier nobles put
beyond all question the sincerity of the opinions they had maintained,
by voluntarily inscribing their names in the list of persons subject
to be taxed; and thus shared the public burdens with their peasants.
Writing after the acts of 1835 had been passed, Mr Paget thus
describes the feelings of the peasants,--
"I know that the Hungarian peasant feels that he is
oppressed; and if justice be not speedily rendered him, I
fear much he will wrest it--perhaps somewhat rudely too--from
the trembling grasp of the factitious power which has so long
withheld it from him."--(Vol i., p. 313.)
The elective franchise was still withheld from a man born a peasant,
whatever might be his stake in the country. He was not equal with the
noble before the law; and, what was perhaps still more grievous to
him, he continued to bear the whole burden of taxation, local and
national. The noble contributed nothing. Besides the labour and
produce he gave to his proprietor as rent for his land, the peasant
paid tithes to the church, and a head-tax and property-tax to the
government. He paid the whole charges for the administration of
justice, which he could rarely obtain; for the municipal government,
in the election of which he had no vote; for the maintenance of public
buildings, from many of which he was excluded; and by much the greater
part of the expenses of the army, in which he was forced to serve,
without a hope of promotion. He alone made and repaired the roads and
bridges, and he alone paid tolls on passing them. On him alone were
soldiers quartered, and he had to furnish them, not only with lodgings
in the midst of his family, but with fuel, cooking, stable-room, and
fodder, at about one halfpenny a-day, often not paid, and to sell his
hay to the government, for the use of the troops, at a fixed price,
not equal to one-fourth of its value in the market. At the same time,
a noble who tilled the ground like the peasant--who was perhaps not
more intelligent, not more industrious--had a hereditary privilege of
exemption from all these burdens, and enjoyed a share in the
government of the country.
The revolt of the Ruthene peasants of Gallicia in 1846, who had
massacred whole families of the Polish nobles, and the belief that the
Austrian government had encouraged the revolt, had been slow to put it
down, and had rewarded its leaders, produced agitation amongst the
peasants in Hungary, and the greatest anxiety in the minds of the
nobles. They felt that the fate of Gallicia might be their own, if the
peasants should at any time lose hope and patience, or if the Austrian
government should be brought to adopt, in Hungary, the policy
attributed to it in Gallicia. In short, it was plain that, so long as
the grievances of the peasants remained unredressed, there could be no
security for Hungary. But these grievances could not be redressed
without imposing new burdens on the nobles, and, at the same time,
restricting their privileges. If they were to tax themselves, they
required an efficient control over the public expenditure, and a
relaxation of the Austrian commercial system, which prevented the
development of the country's resources.
The diet had been summoned for November 1847; and in June of that
year, the patriotic party put forth an exposition of its views
preparatory to the elections, which, in Hungary, are renewed for every
triennial meeting of the diet. In that document, a translation of
which is now before us, they declare, that "our grievances, so often
set forth, after a long course of years, during which we have
demanded, urged, and endured, have to this day remained unredressed."
After enumerating some of these grievances, they proceed to state
their demands--
"1st, The equal distribution of the public burdens amongst
all the citizens; that the diet should decide on the
employment of the public revenue, and that it should be
accounted for by responsible administrators.
"2d, Participation, by the citizens not noble, in the
legislation, and in municipal rights.
"3d, Civil equality.
"4th, The abolition, by a compulsory law, of the labour and
dues exacted from the peasants, with indemnity to the
proprietors.
"5th, Security to property and to credit by the abolition of
_aviticite_, (the right of heirs to recover lands alienated
by sale.)"
They go on to declare that they will endeavour to promote all that
tends to the material and intellectual development of the country, and
especially public instruction: That, in carrying out these views, they
will never forget the relations which, in terms of the Pragmatic
Sanction, exist between Hungary and the Hereditary States of Austria:
That they hold firmly to article 10, of 1790, by which the royal word,
sanctified by an oath, guarantees the independence of Hungary: That
they do not desire to place the interests of the country in
contradiction with the unity or security of the monarchy, but they
regard as contrary to the laws, and to justice, that the interests of
Hungary should be made subordinate to those of any other country: That
they are ready, in justice and sincerity, to accommodate all questions
on which the interests of Hungary and Austria may be opposed, but they
will never consent to let the interests and constitution of Hungary be
sacrificed to unity of the system of government, "which certain
persons are fond of citing as the leading maxim, instead of the unity
of the monarchy."
"That unity in the system of government," they assert, "was the point
from which the cabinet set out when, during the last quarter of the
past century, it attacked our nationality and our civil liberty,
promising us material benefits in place of constitutional advantages.
It was to this unity in the system of government that the constitution
of the Hereditary States of Austria was sacrificed, and it was on the
basis of absolute power that the unity of the government was
developed."
They declare that they consider it their first and most sacred duty to
preserve their constitution, and to strengthen it more and more by
giving it a larger and more secure basis; and they conclude by
expressing their persuasion "that, if the Hereditary States had still
enjoyed their ancient liberties, or if, in accordance with the demands
of the age, they were again to take their place amongst constitutional
nations, our interests and theirs, which now are often divided,
sometimes even opposed, would be more easily reconciled. The different
parts of the empire would be bound together by greater unity of
interests, and by greater mutual confidence, and thus the monarchy,
growing in material and intellectual power, would encounter in greater
security the storms to which times and circumstances may expose it."
The diet which met in November 1847, had scarcely completed the
ordinary forms and routine business with which the session commences,
when all Europe was thrown into a revolutionary ferment, from the
Mediterranean to the Baltic, from the Atlantic to the Black Sea. The
revolution of February in Paris, was followed by that of March at
Vienna, by the expulsion of the Austrians from Milan, and by Sclavonic
insurrections in Prague and Cracow. Constitutional Hungary alone
remained tranquil. Surrounded by revolutions, incited by daily reports
of republican triumphs, Hungary preserved her composure, her
allegiance, and her internal peace. At a moment when republican
doctrines found favour with a powerful party in every other portion of
the emperor's dominions, the diet of Hungary, with the full
concurrence of the Archduke Palatine, peacefully and unanimously
passed those acts which the national party had prepared and announced
some months before the storms had arisen that shook the thrones of
Europe. At Paris, Berlin, Naples, Rome, Vienna, and in almost every
minor capital of Germany and Italy, it became a question whether
monarchy was to be preserved, or whether social order was to be
overthrown. In Hungary no such questions ever arose or could arise.
True to their conservative principles, and firm in their allegiance to
their king, the nobles of Hungary sought by constitutional means, in
the midst of general anarchy, the same ameliorations of their
constitution which, in the midst of general tranquillity, they had
already demanded. But the emperor had, in the mean time, conceded
constitutional government, and a responsible ministry, to the
revolutionary party in the Hereditary States, and the change which had
thus been effected required a modification of the relations between
Hungary and the imperial government. By the laws of Hungary, no
foreigner could hold office in her administration; and, by the same
laws, every Austrian was a foreigner. These laws had been respected;
Austrians had not been appointed to offices in the Hungarian
administration. No act of the government of Hungary, no communication
from the king to the diet, had ever been countersigned by an Austrian
minister. A ministry responsible to the parliament of Austria, and not
responsible to the parliament of Hungary, could not administer the
government of the latter country; and the same ministry could not be
responsible to both parliaments. If Hungary was not to be incorporated
with Austria, it was necessary that she should have a separate
ministry, responsible only to her own diet. An act providing such a
ministry was passed unanimously, in both houses of the diet, with the
full concurrence of the Archduke Palatine.
To complete the administration of the kingdom, and to preserve and
maintain the due influence of the crown in the constitution, it was
demanded, on the part of the crown, that the powers of the Palatine or
viceroy should be extended; and having found a precedent--a
preliminary almost as necessary in the diet of Hungary as in the
parliament of Great Britain and Ireland--an act was passed without
opposition, giving the Palatine, in the absence of the king, full
powers to act in the name and on behalf of the sovereign.
By unanimous votes of both houses, the diet not only established
perfect equality of civil rights and public burdens amongst all
classes, denominations, and races in Hungary and its provinces, and
perfect toleration for every form of religious worship, but, with a
generosity perhaps unparalleled in the history of nations, and which
must extort the admiration even of those who may question the wisdom
of the measure, the nobles of Hungary abolished their own right to
exact either labour or produce in return for the lands held by
urbarial tenure, and thus transferred to the peasants the absolute
ownership, free and for ever, of nearly half the cultivated land in
the kingdom, reserving to the original proprietors of the soil such
compensation as the government might award from the public funds of
Hungary. More than five hundred thousand peasant families were thus
invested with the absolute ownership of from thirty to sixty acres of
land each, or about twenty millions of acres amongst them. The
elective franchise was extended to every man possessed of capital or
property of the value of thirty pounds, or an annual income of ten
pounds--to every man who has received a diploma from a university, and
to every artisan who employs an apprentice. With the concurrence of
both countries, Hungary and Transylvania were united, and their diets,
hitherto separate, were incorporated. The number of representatives
which Croatia was to send to the diet was increased from three to
eighteen, while the internal institutions of that province remained
unchanged; and Hungary undertook to compensate the proprietors for the
lands surrendered to the peasants, to an extent greatly exceeding the
proportion of that burden which would fall on the public funds of the
province. The complaints of the Croats, that the Majjars desired to
impose their own language upon the Sclavonic population, were
considered, and every reasonable ground of complaint removed.
Corresponding advantages were extended to the other Sclavonic tribes,
and the fundamental laws of the kingdom, except in so far as they were
modified by these acts, remained unchanged.
The whole of the acts passed in March 1848 received the royal assent,
which, on the 11th of April, the emperor personally confirmed at
Presburg in the midst of the diet. These acts then became statutes of
the kingdom, in accordance with which the new responsible Hungarian
ministry was formed, and commenced the performance of its duties with
the full concurrence of the emperor-king and the aid of the Archduke
Palatine. The changes that had been effected were received with
gratitude by the peasants, and with entire satisfaction, not only by
the population of Hungary Proper, but also by that of all the
Sclavonic provinces. From Croatia, more especially, the expression of
satisfaction was loud, and apparently sincere.
"If," says Prince Ladeslas Teleki, "the concessions of the
emperor-king to the spirit of modern times had been sincerely
made, if his advisers had honestly abandoned all idea of
returning to the past, Hungary would now be in the enjoyment
of the peace she merited. The people who but yesterday held
out the hand of brotherhood, would have proceeded, in peace
and harmony, on the way of advancement which was opened to
them, and civilisation, in its glory and its strength, would
have established itself in the centre of Eastern Europe. But
the reactionary movement commenced at Vienna the very day
liberty was established there. The recognised rights of
Hungary were considered but as forced concessions, which must
be destroyed at any price--even at the price of her blood.
Could there be surer means of attaining that end than
dividing and weakening her by civil war? It was not
understood that honest conduct towards a loyal nation would
more certainly secure her attachment, than attempts to revive
a power that could not be re-established. Neither was it
understood _that the interests of Hungary demanded that she
should seek, in a cordial union with constitutional Austria,
securities for her independence and her liberties_."