deceive Europe; their defence indeed is as triumphant a proof of the
badness of their cause as the most earnest friend of Poland could
desire. Our surprise may well be excited at the weakness of the
argument, particularly when we remember that Catharine's servants had
long been trained in glossing over the basest and most shameful
transactions. "The ministers of St. Petersburg," said a contemporary
writer, "are accustomed to appear without blushing at the tribunal of
the public in defence of any cause; the death of Peter and assassination
of Prince John inured them to it."
Such a work hardly requires refutation. Every sophism and every
falsehood is a damning argument against the Russian cause. Truth, in
fact, is outraged in every page of the writing; and one striking
instance will suffice. Catharine states that the Polish Government would
never make any arrangement about the frontier; but the fact is that even
as late as 1764 commissioners were appointed at the diet of coronation
for this very purpose, but the Russians refused to nominate theirs;
again in 1766, when Count Rzewinski, Polish ambassador to St.
Petersburg, made a similar application, he was answered that the affairs
of the dissidents must be first settled.
The Austrian pretensions were even more elaborately drawn up than those
of Russia. In the first place, the district of Zips, the first sacrifice
to Austrian rapacity, came under consideration. Sigismund, who came to
the Hungarian throne in 1387, mortgaged this district to Wladislas II
(Jagello), King of Poland, in 1412, for a stipulated sum of money. It is
commonly called the "Thirteen Towns of Zips," but the district contains
sixteen. No reclamation of it had been made till the present time; it
had then been in the undisputed possession of Poland nearly three
hundred sixty years. The chief demur which the Austrians now made to the
mortgage was that the King of Hungary was restricted by the
constitution, as expressed in the coronation-oath, from alienating any
portion of the kingdom. But even this plea, weak as it is under such
circumstances, is not available; since it is proved that this article
was never made a part of the coronation-oath until the accession of
Ferdinand I in 1527.
The Austrian minister endeavored also to establish the right of his
mistress to Galicia and Podolia, as Queen of Hungary, and the duchies of
Oswiecim and Zator, as Queen of Bohemia. "What lastly establishes
indisputably the ancient claim of Hungary to the provinces in question
is that in several seals and documents of the ancient kings of Hungary
preserved in our archives, the titles and arms of Galicia are always
used." After exhausting the records, and stating that the crown of
Hungary has never in any way renounced its rights and pretensions, the
author modestly winds up his arguments in the following way:
"Consequently, after such a long delay, the house of Austria is well
authorized in establishing and reclaiming the lawful rights and
pretensions of her crowns of Hungary and Bohemia, and to obtain
satisfaction by the means which she now employs; in the use of which she
has exhibited the greatest moderation possible, by confining herself to
a very moderate equivalent for her real pretensions to the best
provinces of Poland, such as Podolia, etc."
Frederick argues his cause on the general principles of civil law.
"Since then," he says, "the crown of Poland cannot prove express
cessions, which are the only good titles between sovereigns to confer a
legitimate possession of disputed provinces, it will perhaps have
recourse to prescription and immemorial possession. We all know the
famous dispute among the learned on the question of prescription and
natural right, whether it obtains between sovereigns and free nations.
The affirmative is founded only on that very weak argument that he who
for a long time has not made use of his rights is presumed to have
abandoned them; a presumption which is at best doubtful, and cannot
destroy the right and established property of a monarch. Besides, even
this presumption altogether vanishes when the superior strength of a
usurper has prevented the lawful proprietor from claiming his rights,
which has been the case in the present instance.
"Time alone cannot render a possession just which has not been so from
its origin; and as there is no judge between free nations, no one can
decide if the time past is sufficient to establish prescription, or if
the presumption of the desertion [of rights] is sufficiently proved. But
even leaving this point undetermined, the prescription which the
republic of Poland could allege in the present case has not any of the
qualities which the advocates of prescription require, to render it
valid between free states."
We do not imagine that our readers will coincide with Frederick in the
following opinion: "We flatter ourselves that when the impartial public
has weighed without prejudice all that has just been detailed in this
_expose_, they will not find in the step which his majesty has taken
anything which is not conformable to justice, to natural right, to the
general use of nations, and, lastly, to the example which the Poles
themselves have given in seizing all these countries by simple matter of
fact. We trust also that the Polish nation will eventually recover from
its prejudices; that it will acknowledge the enormous injustice which it
has done to the house of Brandenburg, and that it will bring itself to
repair it by a just and honorable arrangement with which his majesty
will willingly comply, sincerely wishing to cultivate the friendship and
good-fellowship of this illustrious nation, and to live with the
republic in good union and harmony."
We have thus given the three monarchs liberty to plead for themselves;
and no one can rise from the perusal of their "Defences" without feeling
additional conviction of their injustice, and resentment at their
hypocrisy. We must own we are almost inclined to interpret Frederick's
appeal as a sneering parody on the cant of diplomacy in general; but, in
whatever light it be viewed, it gives additional insight into the heart
and head of that military despot and disciple of Machiavelli.
Iniquity almost invariably pays virtue the compliment of attempting to
assume her semblance; and the three wholesale plunderers--Russia,
Austria, and Prussia--therefore determined to give some show of justice
to their violent seizure, by wringing from their victims a ratification
of their claims. But "the children of this world" with all their wisdom
cannot always preserve consistency, and, cunning as the villain may
sometimes be, he will, at some time or other, make the most disgraceful
mistakes.
By requiring further ratification, the three powers admitted that their
anterior claims were not well founded; and common-sense ought to have
told them that, if the former claims were not just, the latter,
depending on the same title, were rendered still less so by aggravated
violence. Every show of justice in a villainous action rises up in
sterner judgment against the perpetrator, inasmuch as it evinces design,
and makes him responsible for the motive.
These remarks might be applied to Catharine, Frederick, Maria Theresa,
or Joseph; for though they may shield themselves from personal
accusation by acting under the vague titles of "powers," "states," or
"governments," the evasion is mean and cowardly; for particularly in
such despotic governments as theirs the passions and wills of the rulers
are the directors of every political scheme.
The three powers fixed on April 19, 1773, for the opening of a diet at
Warsaw to ratify their claims. Their troops were in possession of all
Poland; the capital in particular was strongly invested; and Rewiski,
Benoit, and Stakelberg, the Austrian, Prussian, and Russian ministers,
were on the spot to overrule and direct all the debates. They declared
that every deputy who opposed their proposals should be treated as an
enemy of his country and of the three powers. Frederick himself states,
in his description of this transaction, that the deputies were informed
if they continued refractory that the whole kingdom would be
dismembered; but, on the contrary, that if they were submissive the
foreign troops would evacuate by degrees the territory they intended to
leave to the republic. The Diet was to be confederated, that the Poles
might be deprived of their last resource, the _liberum veto_.
Some few patriots still raised their voices, even in the midst of the
united armies of Russia, Austria, and Prussia; and among these Reyten
was the most distinguished. He was a Lithuanian by descent, had acted a
good part in the confederacy of Bar, and had earned a character which
made the electors of Nowogrodek select him for their representative in
the present memorable Diet. His colleague was Samuel Korsak, a worthy
coadjutor, who did not turn a deaf ear to his father's parting words:
"My son, I send you to Warsaw accompanied by my oldest domestics; I
charge them to bring me your head if you do not oppose with all your
might what is now plotting against your country."
Poninski, a creature of the allied powers, was the marshal of the Diet,
appointed by the intervention of the ambassadors; and when the session
opened one of the deputies nominated him, and he was immediately
proceeding to take the seat, without waiting for the election; but
several members rose to protest against this breach of privilege, and
Reyten exclaimed: "Gentlemen, the marshal cannot be thus self-appointed;
the whole Assembly must choose him; I protest against the nomination of
Poninski; name him who is to be your president." Some voices instantly
shouted, "Long live the true son of his country, Marshal Reyten!"
Poninski retired, adjourning the session to the next day.
On the following morning Poninski again made his appearance, merely to
postpone the Assembly one day more. When this period arrived he went to
the hall with a guard of foreign soldiers, to station some of his
faction at the doors and to prevent the entrance of the public. Reyten,
Korsak, and their little band of patriots were soon at their posts, when
Reyten, perceiving that the people were not allowed to enter, exclaimed:
"Gentlemen, follow me. Poninski shall not be marshal of the Diet to-day,
if I live!" It was already twelve o'clock, and Poninski did not appear,
but a messenger arrived to state that he adjourned the meeting. "We do
not acknowledge Poninski for marshal," replied Reyten; and seeing many
of the members about to retire, he placed himself before the door with
his arms crossed, and attempted to stop the deserters. But his exertions
proving useless he threw himself along the doorway, exclaiming, with a
wearied but determined voice, "Go, go, and seal your own eternal ruin,
but first trample on the breast which will only beat for honor and
liberty."
There were now only fifteen members in the hall, and of these but six
persevered in their patriotic determination; namely, Reyten, Korsak,
Durin, Terzmanowski, Kozuchowski, and Penczkowski. At ten a message
arrived from the Russian ambassador, inviting the resolute deputies to a
conference at his house. Four of them, among whom was Korsak,
accordingly went; and Stakelberg at first addressed them mildly, but,
finding them resolute, began to threaten them with confiscation of their
estates. On this Korsak rose and declared, since they wished to seize
his possessions--which were already, however, mostly plundered by the
Russian armies--there was no occasion for so many preliminaries; and he
actually put into his hands a list of all his property, adding: "This is
all I have to sacrifice to the avarice of the enemies of my country. I
know that they also can dispose of my life; but I do not know any despot
on earth rich enough to corrupt or powerful enough to intimidate me!"
Reyten remained still at his post, and the four patriots on returning
found the doors closed, and lay down without for the night. On the
following day the ministers of the three powers repaired to the King's
palace, and Stakelberg threatened him with the immediate destruction of
his capital unless he gave his sanction to the forced confederation.
Stanislaus demanded the advice of his council, but received no reply;
and taking their silence for an assent, and not knowing how to evade a
direct answer, he yielded to the ministers' demands. The corrupt Diet
held their assembly without the hall, because Reyten was still at his
post--such was their dread of even one patriotic individual.
On April 23d, when Poninski and the confederates entered, they found
Reyten stretched senseless on the floor, in which state he must have
lain thirty-six hours. Such was the determination with which he resisted
the oppression of his country, and so entirely were all the energies of
his mind devoted to the cause, that when he learned its fall he lost his
reason.
The allies began to redouble their threats, and signified to the
deputies their intention of portioning out the whole of the kingdom, if
any more opposition were offered; but, notwithstanding, the Diet
continued stormy, and many bold speeches were made. Of all situations
the King's must have been the most perplexing and irksome; but no person
was better adapted to act such a part than Stanislaus. He made the most
pathetic appeals to his subjects, and frequently spoke in a strain more
fit for an unfortunate but patriotic hero than for one who had done
nothing but affect a few tears--for we can hardly doubt that they were
hypocritical--over the misfortunes which he had brought on his country.
The following sentence must have sounded strangely in his mouth:
"_Fecimus quod potuimus, omnia tentavimus, nihil omisimus._" Again, on
May 10th, he absolutely had the audacity to defend his political
conduct, stating that he had always done his duty whenever any business
depended on him.
On May 17th the Diet agreed to Poninski's motion to appoint a commission
that, in conjunction with the three ambassadors, should regulate the
limits of the four countries, and determine upon the changes in the
Polish Government. On the 18th the commissioners were nominated by the
King and Poninski.
Some small remains of liberty lingered even among the commissioners, and
called for fresh threats and violence from the allied powers. At length
they agreed to ratify the treaty of August 5th, and establish a
permanent council in whom the executive power was to be vested. This
council consisted of forty members, and was divided into four
departments, which engrossed every branch of administration. The King
was the nominal president, but the real authority was possessed by the
Russian ambassador. The partition was not fully arranged till 1774, and
then Prussia and Austria began to extend their bounds beyond the agreed
limits. _L'appetit vient en mangeant_, and these encroachments were a
sad augury of future partitions to the Poles.
The indifference with which other states regarded this partition was
indeed surprising. France, in particular, might have been expected to
protest against it; but the imbecility and dotage of Louis XV, and the
weakness of his minister, paid too little attention to the interests of
their own nation to be likely to think of others. They made the most
frivolous excuses, and even had the meanness to attempt to shift the
blame on the shoulders of their ambassador at Vienna, pretending that he
amused himself with hunting instead of politics, and had no knowledge of
the design of partition until it was consummated. Louis contented
himself with saying, with an affectation of rage, "It would not have
happened if Choiseul had been here!" Some few patriots in England
declaimed on the injustice of the proceeding; but the spirit of the
ministry, which was occupied in wrangling with the American colonies
about the imposition of taxes, was not likely to be very attentive to
the cries of oppressed liberty.
The partition is not one of those equivocal acts which seem to vibrate
between right and wrong, justice and injustice, and demand the most
accurate analysis to ascertain on which side they preponderate. Argument
is thrown away on such a subject; for to doubt about the nature of a
plain decisive act like this must necessarily proceed from something
even worse than uncertainty and scepticism concerning the simple
fundamental principles of moral action. A little reflection, however,
will not be lost on so memorable a portion of history, which opens a
wider field for instruction than the "thousand homilies" on the ambition
and glory and other commonplaces of Greek and Roman history.
Such great political crimes reveal a corresponding system of motives of
as black a hue, and even the narrowest experience teaches us that
motives are never so well traced as in their results. The corrupt
principle which prompts injustice and deceit in foreign transactions
would operate equally in domestic affairs; and the minister who uses
hypocrisy and falsehood in manifestoes and treaties would not scruple to
do the same in matters of private life. An implicit confidence in
enemies like these was one of the amiable "crimes" for which "Sarmatia
fell unwept."
THE BOSTON TEA-PARTY
A.D. 1773
GEORGE BANCROFT
One of the most famous demonstrations of the purpose of the American
colonies to resist what they regarded as the unjust taxation laid upon
them by Great Britain was this unique occurrence in Boston harbor.
Everywhere in the colonies the people had begun to go without articles
that were subject to taxes. They ceased to import goods for clothing,
and wore homespun. It was not easy to find a substitute for tea, but
various plants and leaves were used instead of it, and "store tea"
became a popular designation of real tea as distinguished from domestic
herbs. At last the English Government abandoned all taxes except that
laid on tea; this the Government insisted upon laying as strictly as
ever. Ships with cargoes of tea were sent with the expectation that the
colonists would pay the tax. What followed upon the arrival of the
tea-ships at Boston and Charlestown, and gave to American history the
"Boston Tea-party," is fully told in Bancroft's pages.
On Sunday, November 28th, the ship Dartmouth appeared in Boston harbor
with one hundred fourteen chests of the East India Company's tea. To
keep the Sabbath strictly was the New England usage. But hours were
precious; let the tea be entered, and it would be beyond the power of
the consignees to send it back. The selectmen held one meeting by day
and another in the evening, but they sought in vain for the consignees,
who had taken sanctuary in the Castle.
The committee of correspondence was more efficient. They met also on
Sunday, and obtained from the Quaker Rotch, who owned the Dartmouth, a
promise not to enter his ship till Tuesday; and authorized Samuel Adams
to invite the committees of the five surrounding towns, Dorchester,
Roxbury, Brookline, Cambridge, and Charlestown, with their own townsmen
and those of Boston, to hold a mass meeting the next morning. Faneuil
Hall could not contain the people that poured in on Monday. The
concourse was the largest ever known. Adjourning to "the Old South"
Meeting-house, Jonathan Williams did not fear to act as moderator, nor
Samuel Adams, Hancock, Molineux, and Warren to conduct the business of
the meeting. On the motion of Samuel Adams, who entered fully into the
question, the assembly, composed of upward of five thousand persons,
resolved unanimously that "the tea should be sent back to the place from
whence it came at all events, and that no duty should be paid on it."
"The only way to get rid of it," said Young, "is to throw it overboard."
The consignees asked for time to prepare their answer; and "out of great
tenderness" the body postponed receiving it to the next morning.
Meantime the owner and master of the ship were converted and forced to
promise not to land the tea. A watch was also proposed. "I," said
Hancock, "will be one of it, rather than that there should be none," and
a party of twenty-five persons, under the orders of Edward Proctor as
its captain, was appointed to guard the tea-ship during the night.
On the same day the council who had been solicited by the Governor and
the consignees to assume the guardianship of the tea, coupled their
refusal with a reference to the declared opinion of both branches of the
General Court that the tax upon it by Parliament was unconstitutional.
The next morning the consignees jointly gave as their answer: "It is
utterly out of our power to send back the teas; but we now declare to
you our readiness to store them until we shall receive further
directions from our constituents"; that is, until they could notify the
British Government. The wrath of the meeting was kindling, when the
sheriff of Suffolk entered with a proclamation from the Governor,
"warning, exhorting, and requiring them, and each of them there
unlawfully assembled, forthwith to disperse, and to surcease all further
unlawful proceedings, at their utmost peril." The words were received
with hisses, derision, and a unanimous vote not to disperse. "Will it be
safe for the consignees to appear in the meeting?" asked Copley; and all
with one voice responded that they might safely come and return; but
they refused to appear. In the afternoon Rotch, the owner, and Hall, the
master, of the Dartmouth, yielding to an irresistible impulse, engaged
that the tea should return as it came, without touching land or paying
a duty. A similar promise was exacted of the owners of the other
tea-ships whose arrival was daily expected. In this way "it was thought
the matter would have ended." "I should be willing to spend my fortune
and life itself in so good a cause," said Hancock, and this sentiment
was general; they all voted "to carry their resolutions into effect at
the risk of their lives and property."
Every shipowner was forbidden, on pain of being deemed an enemy to the
country, to import or bring as freight any tea from Great Britain till
the unrighteous act taxing it should be repealed, and this vote was
printed and sent to every seaport in the province and to England.
Six persons were chosen as post-riders to give due notice to the country
towns of any attempt to land the tea by force, and the committee of
correspondence, as the executive organ of the meeting, took care that a
military watch was regularly kept up by volunteers armed with muskets
and bayonets, who at every half-hour in the night regularly passed the
word "All is well," like sentinels in a garrison. Had they been molested
by night, the tolling of the bells would have been the signal for a
general uprising. An account of all that had been done was sent into
every town in the province.
The ships, after landing the rest of their cargo, could neither be
cleared in Boston with the tea on board nor be entered in England, and
on the twentieth day from their arrival would be liable to seizure.
"They find themselves," said Hutchinson, "involved in invincible
difficulties." Meantime in private letters he advised to separate Boston
from the rest of the province; and to begin criminal prosecutions
against its patriot sons.