emancipation in every province where serfage existed, the projects which
they proposed being always subject to revision and approval or rejection
by the Government. The fundamental principles of the movement were
intended to accomplish the work of emancipation by allowing the serfs to
remain for a time on the land subject to the authority of the
proprietors, and during this time they should become possessors, by many
payments or by labor, of their houses and gardens, and have the
temporary use of a certain quantity of land sufficient for their own
support, and their taxes to the proprietors and the State. The limit of
this transition period does not seem to have been prescribed. The next
move was the appointment of an “Elaboration Commission,” composed of
officials and landed proprietors named by the Tsar, which formulated a
new plan, approved by the Tsar, in which the idea of gradual
emancipation was eliminated, and its place was supplied by a general law
for the complete abolition of the authority of the proprietor over the
serf. Thus the serfs were to be transformed into small proprietors of a
commune or village, possessing a house and garden and a section of
communal land. The serf was to be declared personally free, and a price
was to be fixed by Government for the rent of the land. As to the
amount, that was limited to the land actually enjoyed by the peasants.
Before the project became a law, deputies from the Provincial Committees
were summoned to St. Petersburg for consultation in matters of detail
before the commission, but this was a mere formality and added nothing
to the influence of the Provincial Committees, or to future results. The
autocratic power remained supreme. In the opinion of the Tsar, “The
autocratic power created serfage, and the autocratic power ought to
abolish it.”
In 1861, as the time drew nearer there was great excitement all over
Russia. An actor in one of the St. Petersburg theatres shouted from the
stage,—“Let us proclaim throughout all Russia that the time has come for
tearing up evil by the roots!” And the audience responded with frantic
demonstrations of enthusiasm. Speech was free, open, and unrestrained by
police or press censors, and public attention was absorbed by the great
practical issues of the day. The Crimean war had shown the necessity of
constructing railroads, improving roads, and steamboat communication on
the rivers, of developing the natural resources, and had taught them the
lesson that even an efficient army could not be produced from an
ignorant population. Accordingly in current speech and in the public
press different methods of education were discussed, and reforms in all
the branches of the civil service, and as a result of all this they
expected an increase of military power and the consequent respect of
Western nations.
For the furtherance of these reforming projects, for the reason that
twenty millions of the people, one third of the population, were in a
state of bondage, precedence was given to the question of the condition
of the serfs. There were 100,247 landed proprietors, and of these more
than 41,000 were possessors of less than twenty-one male serfs. A
proprietor who was owner of 500 serfs was not considered very rich, and
there were only 3,803 of these. There were a few whose possessions were
enormous. One of the nobles possessed more than 150,000 male serfs, more
than 300,000 souls; the latter estimate naturally including females,
though the Russians have a popular saying that “Women have no souls at
all, but only a vapor.” Another noble owned more than half a million of
acres of land, another extensive mines, but there were few very rich
families. By far the greater part of the territory belonged to the
state, and one-half of the rural population were state peasants whose
condition differed from the other serfs in that they had more land and
more liberty, and their position was not so precarious.
Agriculture and the industries languished for the lack of free labor,
and upon the nation’s honor was the stigma of slavery.
The emancipation law which was signed February 19, 1861, Old Style, or
March 3d as we reckon time, liberated twenty millions of serfs. The
manifesto with which the peasantry is said to have been disappointed,
was read in all the churches and contained these fundamental principles,
to wit:—
“1. That the serfs should at once receive the civil rights of the free
rural classes, and that the authority of the proprietors should be
replaced by communal self-government.
2. That the rural communes should as far as possible retain the land
they actually held, and should in return pay to the proprietor certain
yearly dues in money or labor.
3. That the Government should by means of credit, assist the communes to
redeem these dues, or, in other words, to purchase the lands ceded to
them in usufruct.”
The domestic serfs should continue to serve their masters two years, and
thereafter they should be completely free, but would have no claim on
the land. The disappointment in the minds of the peasants was in the
disposition of the land. Many desired that all the land should be given
to the Communes, making the emancipation in accordance with traditional
right and their material advantage, instead of which they were still to
pay dues on land they believed to be their own by right. The Noblesse
were well pleased with the manifesto.
After a delay of three months, “Arbiters of the Peace” were appointed,
to regulate the future relations between the proprietors and peasantry
and in the interval cases of insubordination were frequent, and even
riots, when order was preserved by the calling out of the troops. The
“Arbiters of the Peace” when organized restored order and regulated the
land question, issued charters, etc. between the proprietors and serfs,
legalizing the new agreements, with or without their consent. In this
reconstruction many differences were to be reconciled owing to the
distrust of the freed serfs, but gradually they came to know the
situation better and to help in the progress of the work, which has
advanced slowly but surely, notwithstanding the complaints in some
instances of the Noblesse, through the wonderful tact of the
conscientious “Arbiters of the Peace.”
The law relating to the dues was as follows:—The dues were capitalised
at six per cent and the Government paid at once to the proprietors
four-fifths of the whole sum. The peasants were to pay to the proprietor
the remaining fifth, either at once or in installments, and to the
Government six per cent, for forty-nine years, on the sum advanced. This
arrangement was willingly acceded to by the proprietors but the peasants
were so backward in their payments, that in most cases their fifth had
to be remitted.
Of this gigantic, though gradual, reform the Tsar Alexander II. is
acknowledged by all to be the chief and most energetic and judicious
promoter. He was ably assisted by his brother the Grand Duke Constantine
and the Grand Duchess Helena, a German Princess, aided by the Noblesse
and the landed proprietors, who when assured that emancipation was
inevitable joined enthusiastically in its execution, and also by the
peasantry of the better sort as soon as they comprehended the advantages
of the law which gave them back their original status in the social
scale, and made them once more personally free.
AFTER EMANCIPATION.
It was so-called freedom in 1861, but they had to serve as they had done
for two years longer, for the law had a provision enjoining them to obey
and work as hard as of old until some new arrangement should be made. On
appealing to the authorities the field work was executed, after a
fashion, but the harvest suffered for a few years, until the peasants
began to realize the burden of the taxes they were obliged to pay on the
land, as well as support themselves, and consented to work in the fields
of their former owners for a moderate compensation, taking advantage of
the scarcity of labor, and taking their leave on a word or two too much
from their employers, who are dependent upon them. Previous to
emancipation it was said that the Russians had little or no practical
acquaintance with pauperism, but now some became fugitives, and made it
a permanent condition of life, wandering through the cities and villages
as professing pilgrims or beggars, and were supported by the alms giving
of the merchants, the public generally and the monasteries.
THE RURAL COMMUNES.
The government of the Rural Commune or Mir, as established by the Act of
Emancipation, is by a Village Assembly and a Village Elder, but the
Elder’s authority is limited by the heads of households, all having a
common responsibility and paying a fixed sum into the common treasury;
even the time of planting, mowing and harvesting, being regulated by the
Assembly, and all the households are equally responsible for the taxes
and dues. The consent of the Assembly must be obtained if a peasant
desires to work in the larger towns, for his liabilities must be made
secure.
Every year the Village has to pay a certain sum into the Imperial
Treasury, according to the number of male peasants; each Village
distributing the land, according to its own judgment, with taxes and
dues in proportion to the land, sometimes according to the working power
of the families, which may change every few years, males and females
alike working on the land.
In the meetings of the assemblies the majority rules, and is decided by
a Court of the members, composed of heads of households of both sexes,
standing in groups out of doors.
The office of Village Elder is sometimes elective, at others he is
appointed by the landed proprietor. The office is not sought for, the
duties being troublesome and annoying, and the pay small. In the
allotment of the land the number of shares of which may or may not be of
advantage, according to the peculiar circumstances of each, the decision
of the Commune is accepted without demur. Some of these divisions take
place annually, others at irregular intervals. The system compels the
peasant to possess land whether he or she desires it or not. Every
peasant, by the simple fact of his birth, possesses an inalienable right
to a share of the land.
All that is necessary for their existence, their houses, land,
agricultural implements etc., are exempt from sequestration, and cannot
be taken for debt. The peasants on the land belonging to the state, have
no masters, but are not allowed to change their official domicile. They
pay taxes and dues. Many of them have left the villages and have amassed
fortunes in the cities, still retaining their hold on the land by paying
the taxes. The remaining land belongs to rich nobles, who rarely visit
their estates, and the condition of the peasants is much the same as
that of the state peasants, while others live on their estates.
Now, forty-three of the forty-nine years have passed, and in January,
1904, the Tsar Nicholas II. grandson of Alexander II., in response to
calls for legislation relative to a new draft of the present code, with
complaints of arbitrary conduct by the administrative machinery from the
highest assemblies to the local committees, stipulates that changes on
three points shall be reserved from discussion, namely, that the peasant
class must remain entirely separate, legally, from the other classes;
that the Commune is to remain untouched by legislation, and that the
peasant lands are to remain inalienable. The autocratic power still
remains supreme. March 3, 1904, for the first time since the
Emancipation of the serfs the anniversary was officially observed
throughout the empire as a general holiday and with special services in
the churches. Thousands stood in the open air, uncovered, in the great
central market of St. Petersburg chanting a Te Deum.
DEATH OF ALEXANDER II.
I was returning to my room in Paris, late one Sunday night in March,
1881, having passed an agreeable evening, first dining at my old
classmate’s, E. D. Boit’s, then listening to some music and meeting some
pleasant people at the house of another artist Mr. G. P. A. Healy, and
last calling with Wad Longfellow upon the Kings, when I heard a newsman
on the boulevard crying out something exciting though I could not catch
what it was. I bought his extra, “le Soir,” took it to my room, and
found that the news was nothing less than this time the successful
assassination on the 13th of the Emperor of Russia.
It made quite an impression upon me as I thought it over, not only
because I had met the Tsar two or three times, but also from the
interest I felt he had taken in the cause of the Union during our civil
war; that he among the crowned heads of the world had been, if not our
only, at least our out-spoken friend and sympathizer.
How much in common there was both in the life and death of Alexander II.
and Abraham Lincoln! Each of these men in his own land had been the
originator and bold champion of a plan of emancipation, and each of them
had at length fallen by the hand of an assassin!
Prince Kropotkin in 1899, gave to the _Atlantic Monthly_ the following
account of the death of the Tsar:—
“A bomb was thrown under the Tsar’s iron-clad carriage. Several
Circassians of the escort were wounded. Rysakoff, who flung the bomb,
was arrested on the spot. Then, although the coachman of the Tsar
earnestly advised him not to get out, saying that he could drive him
still in the slightly damaged carriage, he stepped out. He felt that his
military dignity required him to see the wounded Circassians, to condole
with them, as he had done with the wounded during the Turkish war, when
a mad storming of Plevna, doomed to end in terrible disaster, was made
on the day of his fête.
He approached Rysakoff and asked him something, and as he passed close
by another young man, Grinevetsky, the latter threw his bomb at their
feet, between himself and Alexander II., so that both of them should be
killed by the terrible engine. They lived but a few hours.
There Alexander II. lay upon the snow, profusely bleeding, abandoned by
every one of his followers! All had disappeared. It was cadets,
returning from the parade, who lifted the bleeding Tsar from the snow,
and put him in a sledge, covering his shivering body with a cadet
mantle, and his bare head with a cadet cap. And it was one of the
Terrorists, Emelianoff, with a bomb wrapped in a paper under his arm,
who, at the risk of being arrested on the spot and hanged, rushed with
the cadets to help the wounded man! Human nature is full of these
contrasts.”
It was at the canal bridge near the Nevski Prospect that the bomb which
shattered the body of the Tsar below the waist was thrown, and he died
within an hour at his rooms in the Winter Palace. It is said that these
rooms and their contents have never been disturbed in the least since
the murdered Tsar left them for his drive. The hands of the clock on the
mantel still point to 33 minutes past 3, the moment the Tsar expired.
MONUMENT AT MOSCOW.
August 28, 1898, a monument to Tsar Alexander II. was unveiled at
Moscow. His grandson, the present Tsar, Nicholas II. issued a ukase
referring to the event and eulogizing the deeds of the deceased, notably
the liberation of the peasants from bondage, which earned him the title
of “The Deliverer,” in the mouth of a grateful people. The closing words
were as follows:—
MEDALS MADE HEREDITARY.
“Wishing to seal more firmly the memory of this historical deed, we
have resolved to make hereditary the wearing and possession of the
medals he conferred upon his co-operators, as a sign of his gracious
acknowledgment of their labors.”
The Tsar also sent to M. Constantin Pobiedonostseff, Procurator General
of the Holy Synod, the decoration of the Order of St. Andrew, together
with an imperial rescript reminding him that he, of all the close
co-operators with the deceased monarch, alone remained in possession of
the chiefship of the administrative department then intrusted to him.
The monument was unveiled by Emperor Nicholas II. at 3 o’clock in the
afternoon, in the presence of the Czarina, the Queen of the Hellenes,
the Cabinet, the German and Austrian Ambassadors, deputations from all
the land and naval forces of Russia and the Austrian Uhlans Regiment.
The entire audience knelt while the clergy recited a prayer in memory of
the deceased.
At the moment of the unveiling the troops presented arms, and a salute
of 320 guns was fired. Then the troops, with the Emperor at the head,
marched past the monument amid the enthusiastic cheers of the people.
[Illustration:
ODESSA, 1899.
]
CHAPTER TENTH.
EUROPE AND AMERICA IN 1870. DEMETRIUS GOUBAREFF. RUSSIA AND THE UNITED
STATES.
“Peace—but the ships of steel increase,
And statesmen watch, perplexed:
What is the thing we folk term ‘peace’?
Where will the war be next?”
—_Edwin L. Sabin._
IN LONDON, PARIS AND NICE.
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
The ideas I give of Europe contained in the following sketch written in
London in April, 1870, came to me from a residence of two years there,
during which time I had been constantly watching events, and had been
thrown with many of the leading statesmen and financiers of the United
States.
What I pretended to know of the Eastern question, I learned from the
journey I made the previous autumn through Russia, Turkey and Egypt,
with General Banks. It then struck me that it would be well to open the
eyes of the American people to what was passing there as impartially as
possible, as thus far the English accounts had been one-sided. I may
appear to favor Russia too strongly, but the boat in which we made the
journey from Odessa to Egypt, and then through the Suez Canal, was
filled with Russian representatives, persons representing almost all the
Russian interests, and they spoke to us, being Americans, most freely on
these subjects, and in such a way that we were much impressed with the
high ambitions of that empire. It would have been difficult to have made
the journey under more favorable auspices.
The picture I drew of the future of the United States was very strong,
but the more one lives away from America, the more he appreciates her
greatness, and the position she must surely hold among the nations of
the world, and I thought it good to put the plain facts and statistics
before Europeans as well as Americans.
This paper, which I offered to the press, did not appear originally in
the form of a contribution, as the war suddenly broke out between France
and Prussia before this was accomplished, but I had copies of it printed
in a pamphlet for private circulation, and in that way it was quite
generally read and discussed.
I was of the opinion that neither Americans nor Europeans were
sufficiently alive to the position which the United States was destined
soon to hold among the nations of the world, and that they ought to be
diligently preparing themselves for it.
Having faith that the Great Republic will not only remain undivided, but
increase in territory, population and strength, it logically follows
that she must later be the controlling power. In her, humanity,
commingled together and then reorganized, will practically carry out the
idea of self-government, and such a government, if successful, will be
irresistible.
“EUROPE AND AMERICA IN 1870.”
“Wars and rumors of wars must be, it would seem, for many years to
come the staple of talk in Europe. Nor is this remarkable, so many
different nationalities and languages, so much intelligence and
energy, and so many shades of ambition being concentrated in a small
space of territory. Thus far in the history of the Old World those in
power have generally sought by arms or state craft to strengthen the
country in whose destiny they were interested. Constant wars have been
the result.
The principles of international interest, of working in harmony to
develop the resources of the globe, of which perhaps the best exponent
is trade and the necessary concomitant peace, have been unfortunately
considered beneath the dignity of those who by birth, by fortune, or
by talent, have been able to hold leading positions. Happily this is
being changed. The great discoveries of the last fifty years have
given the world such an impulse as it never received before. The
comparative ease of making money and of possessing it in safety, has
caused persons to look after their own interest more than that of
those who chanced to be their rulers. But the process of change is
slow, and emperors and kings are still able to make wars even in
opposition to the will of their subjects. Wars are still not only a
possibility, but a probability, and every one is on the lookout for
them. When there is lack of other business, the cabinets of Europe
will turn their attention to the always vexed question of the balance
of power.
When newspaper editors are in want of interesting matter to fill their
sheets, they can ever bring out a glowing statement of the Eastern
question, or dilate upon the relations existing between France and
Prussia.
The map of Europe never ceases to be an entertaining study, and so a
slight review of the present state of affairs there, as seen and
judged by the disinterested traveller, may perhaps offer some points
of interest to those who are unable to make the journey themselves.
No one nation in Europe, today, seems to have a preponderating
influence over the others.
ENGLAND AND FRANCE.
England and France for a long time the most powerful have not, during
the last ten years, been making any international progress, and if
they have not by this been actually losing their influence, they have
remained in a state of inaction, while others have made great advances
to equal or eclipse them. Nor is there to be seen in them any prospect
of changing their policy.
England is so much occupied with domestic questions, especially those
relating to Ireland, that she can give little time or thought to
anything else, unless of very great import.
In France the holding the various discordant elements in check, and
forming out of them a strong and popular government, is absorbing all
the talent of her statesmen. The aggressive enterprises that the
existing government, or rather that its head, has lately undertaken,
have been so fruitless and so doubtfully indorsed by the people, that
it is not probable anything of the kind will again be tried unless
upon an almost certainty of success.
PRUSSIA.
Prussia may with a certain show of reason consider herself the leader,
but her, so to speak, inland position, and the consequent difficulty
of her having great naval or commercial power, prevent her from taking
that place to which her arms and politics might entitle her. Besides
this her relations with both Northern and Southern Germany are in a
preparatory state, and the uncertainty of her future movements, and of
how they will be accepted, is a present point of weakness. She is
recognized to be the strongest German nation, but the smaller
independencies, certain though they may be of becoming eventually
absorbed, are tenacious of preserving their individuality as long as
possible. They hesitate about siding with or against Prussia, and as
she cannot well now press the question, matters are more or less at a
standstill.
AUSTRIA.
Austria cannot, since the Peace of Prague, be regarded as a
first-class power of Europe; she must regain her lost strength first,
and for some time to come she will best attempt this by solidifying
her relations with Hungary, and by infusing more advanced principles
of government into the authorities at Vienna.
SPAIN.
In Spain, affairs are still holding their uneasy course, and the world
looks on astonished at the way the country is taking care of itself;
so many forms of government proposed by so many different candidates
that, in reality, there is next to none whatever, but, to balance
this, a fair amount of contentment among the people. Not knowing what
they wish, the Spaniards drift on very well with what they have.
ITALY.
In Italy, economy is so necessary to preserve the country, that no
thought can be given to any foreign ventures, while at Rome all other
questions are dropped, so long as the Ecumenical Council is sitting
there in state.
DENMARK, NORWAY AND SWEDEN.
Denmark, Norway and Sweden, are engaged in discussing topics of much
local interest, and which may perhaps, result in the unity of the
three nations, but they will have little influence upon the general
march of events in Europe.
RUSSIA.
Russia remains, as the last great nation to be discussed, and here, on
the stepping stone between Eastern and Western ideas and
civilizations, can be found the germs of those movements which if not
immediately forthcoming, will, when they burst forth, startle the
world with their grandeur, and essentially change the features of the
map of Europe.
The Russian Empire as it exists today,—the Russia of Alexander II. and
Gortschakoff,—the country which has emancipated twenty million serfs
and offered an equal trial by jury to all its citizens, this nation,
which, day by day is increasing its territory and influence at home,
and which during a civil war in the other hemisphere extended a kindly
though many will say a not disinterested hand to the party which
represented progressive principles, the Russian Empire, the friend of
the American Republic, has many qualities which might justly entitle
it to leadership, but the strange mixture of European and Asiatic
elements in that country, so great in extent and so ambitious of
progress, as interpreted by it, is the cause of a confusion of ideas,
and prevents that unanimity of action which is necessary to insure the
respect and obedience of others.
Moreover, although the spirit of the people is extremely democratic,
the policy of the government is autocratic, and in the latter part of
this century it is impossible for any but a government founded on
popular principles and supported by the people themselves, to command
the esteem and the envy of the masses in other portions of the
civilized world, and thus to give them laws. The seeds of dominion are
there, but it will take time for them to ripen and bear their fruit.
THE EQUIPOISE OF POWER.
From this slight review of the position of the European nations in
1870, one cannot help being impressed with the equipoise of power, and
concluding that this itself is a strong guarantee of peace, but, in
reality the peace is not well founded, and cannot be abiding. It is an
armed peace, and as such, may cause the people deep anxiety. Several
millions of men in Europe, today, are wearing the dress and drawing
the pay of soldiers, and all for nothing. Disarming is continually
talked of, but is not being begun, nor will it be, as long as the
nations are mutually afraid of each other. The pursuits of industry
and commerce, which would develop with increasing force if peace were
secure for ten or twenty years, are now, to a great extent, held in
check. Capitalists are afraid of embarking in great enterprises, as
they know not what may take place before they will be completed.
Thousands of laborers, able-bodied and intelligent, through fear of
being drawn into military service are leaving the lands of their birth
and emigrating to distant shores, there to seek their fortunes: a
great gain to the countries which receive them, but a more than
proportionate loss to those they leave, as their places cannot be
filled.
One should not seriously wish for war, except in the most extreme
cases, and where the prospect of the good to follow seems more than to
compensate for the immediate evil.
LOOKING INTO THE FUTURE.
Without admitting this to be the case now, but believing that the
present peace cannot, from the press of circumstances last many years,
let us look a little into the future, and try to divine where it will
be first broken, and what will be the results. It is to the East of
Europe we must turn our thoughts, and here it seems as if great events
would soon be in motion. The problem to be solved is the dismemberment
of the Ottoman Empire, and the consequent independence of one nation,
and the increase in power of several others.
The actors in the drama will be Turkey, Russia, Egypt, Greece, and
perhaps the Slavonic portions of Austria, the theatre will be parts of
Europe, Asia, and Africa, and the most interested spectators will be
France, England, and the United States.
THE POSSESSION OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
It must be well borne in mind that the integrity of Turkey has been
guaranteed for many years, if not actually preserved, by the cabinets
of France and England. So many pamphlets and articles have been
written by those representing the interests of those governments on
one side, and so little has been said on the opposite side, that it
has almost become an acknowledged fact that the carrying out of this
idea is necessary for the peace of Europe and of the world. Their
arguments are strong, but will not influence him who visits
Constantinople with an unprejudiced mind. The key to the riddle is the
possession of that city. England and France know that they themselves
cannot obtain it, and this being the case, they are determined to do
all in their power to prevent any other nation from doing so. It is
almost impossible for one who has not been there himself, to form a
fair opinion of what should be the future of that beautiful city of
the East, but once there, the decision is soon reached that it should
no longer belong to the Turks, but to some people, whoever they may
be, who will do justice to the advantages Nature has given it.
Constantinople is so placed that it is one of the keys of the waters
of the world, and as such it ought to be a great commercial centre.
The city, as it now is, renders this impossible, and the Turks,
judging from their antecedents and their present manner of existence,
are incapable of change.
A distinguished statesman of the United States (Gen. N. P. Banks) one
day asked the Turkish minister at Washington, if in his country there
were many persons celebrated for their success in finance or business.
The Minister slowly opened his dark mysterious eyes, and with a
half-amused, half-pitying gaze, replied:—
‘Sir, my countrymen know nothing of affairs, the Turks are warriors.’
In the quiet answer of that Turk, a man who held not only a high
position in his own country, but had also seen the active life in
America, there is a meaning which one cannot well appreciate who has
not been among the people of whom he spoke. They seem to belong to a
different age and world from ours. They know almost nothing of the
wonderful things every day done in this nineteenth century, and, if
they are told, they take but little interest, and are incapable of
comprehending them.
As already stated the city of Constantinople, until radically changed,
does not admit of greatness. Some of the civilizing appliances of this
century judiciously put in movement, would soon change the mysterious
city of the Orient, replete with the souvenirs of Constantine and
Mohammed, into a great commercial mart. The past would be sacrificed
for the future, but the sacrifice would be justifiable. Useless
Romance would drop her fascinating garment, and stand arrayed as the
goddess of Practical Progress.
The question then is, who will begin the work?
The Turks will certainly not; indeed, their opposition to it will be
so strong that it cannot well be undertaken until they see that their
empire is broken, and that their natural refuge is over the water into
Asia, where they belong.
The mover of all this will be a nation which has the most to gain from
the results,—Russia, and fortunately a nation fired with the ambitions
of progress, and with sufficient power to be able to carry them out.
The intelligent men of Russia know that it is needful to the dignity
of the nation, as a sentiment, to its safety militarily, and to its
commercial prosperity, to have all the water rights and privileges in
the Black Sea, and in the straits which connect it with those waters
which are acknowledged to be the common property of mankind. Until
this is brought about their machinery is clogged, and for this the
possession of Constantinople is so important as almost to be a
necessity.
The Russians are already at the work, and the faster it advances the
better. Slowly and steadily since the peace was signed at the end of
the Crimean War, the government at St. Petersburg, deeply humbled
then, is preparing for the struggle which will restore her lost
rights, and give her many additional ones. Day by day, she is
spreading out her net-work of railroads, steamboats, telegraphs, and
post-roads; imperceptibly she is increasing her territory, and this on
principles so judiciously arranged for the conquered, that each fresh
Asiatic horde absorbed, soon becomes as proud of the grandeur of
Russia as if it had always been a part of the empire. Vessels for the
navy and commerce are being built on her northern and southern seas,
and her large inland rivers; her grain-trade is rapidly increasing,
and her rich mines and other resources are being developed. Besides
all this, she has a strong point of safety in the intense feeling of
nationality, daily swelling, which pervades all the Muscovites. In
sentiment the army is a unit, and the entire population of the vast
empire shout wildly on every occasion for the health and prosperity of
the Tsar.
There may be something barbaric in all this, but it is the stuff out
of which national greatness can be made, and it may cause anxiety to
those countries where such a feeling does not exist.
THE COUNTRY OF THE PHARAOHS.
The nation most interested after Russia, in the division of Turkey,
perhaps as much or even more interested, because her own independence
is the prize she can win, is Egypt, that historic land, which, once
the mistress of the world, but today a vassal, has in the future as
fine a destiny as could be desired. The canal lately opened through
the Isthmus of Suez, has done more for Egypt than fifty ordinary years
might have accomplished.
It has turned the thoughts of civilized Europe for more than ten years
upon that country; it has kept their attention interested, and the
result has been more than satisfactory.
Europe has not, in modern days, expected to find much good in the
country of the Pharaohs, but it has found that although matters there
are not what the sanguine might wish, they are still unquestionably in
every point where comparison is possible, very far in advance of
Turkey.
The infusion of Western ideas into the inhabitants of a land who have
been brought up for centuries to despise them, is no easy task, but
this the Vice Roi of Egypt has been attempting, and with fair success.
He appreciates the age in which he lives as any one who has visited
Cairo can plainly see, and he feels his superiority over the Sultan so
strongly, that he is merely waiting for the time to be ripe, to openly
disobey the orders from Constantinople, and assert his independence.
Many thought, and with reason, that at the opening of the Suez Canal
the time for this action had come, but nothing was then done, perhaps
because the armed force of the Khedive was insufficient for the
attempt, or that having accomplished a great commercial success, he
hesitated risking a military failure, or, more probably still, because
the diplomatic complications were such that he could not make an
advantageous alliance.
For what is to be done Egypt should go hand-in-hand with Russia, but
at the present time this is a difficult combination to form.
In constructing the Suez Canal, France has done everything for Egypt,
and the presence of the Empress Eugénie at the opening ceremonies was
the natural culmination of the work.
An alliance between France and Egypt, strong enough to give France a
foothold in the East, and thereby to checkmate the power of England,
but not binding her to make a rupture with the rulers at
Constantinople on the question of Egyptian independence, would be a
fine thing for Napoleon, but would do Ismail little good. A rational
alliance between Russia and Egypt, each country working for itself and
the other, would be desirable enough, but for this it would be
necessary to give France the cold shoulder, and in return receive her
resentment.
Russia, France, and Egypt, cannot now combine together. The results of
the Crimean war are not forgotten at St. Petersburg, and, besides
this, the existing relations between Russia and Prussia on other
European questions are such that the former cannot yet offer France a
friendly hand.
The ambition of Napoleon is boundless, but he knows that the prestige
he would acquire in working out the independence of Egypt, would be
overbalanced by what would fall to the share of the Emperor of Russia.
England, too, could not keep out of the dispute, and although lately
she has been very silent on the Eastern question, at the moment of
action, regardless of what she has done in the past, and of her
half-promises for the future, she would bring great force to bear, and
in such a way as to derive advantage for herself alone.
The Austro-Hungarian Empire and Greece have both something to gain
from the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire, but, in their present
condition, they must move in the wake of others, they cannot lead the
operations. A masterly brain and arm might unite the different
Slavonic elements on the banks of the Danube, part of which now belong
to Turkey, and amalgamate them into the Austrian Empire, but it is
doubtful if this would be a desirable move, for, while it would give
strength in territory and population to Austria, it would tend to
weaken the German element of the country, and this would be fatal if
she wishes to be regarded as the great South-German nation.
The title of Kaiser of Germans, always has and could still give
prestige, but the same title held by one whose empire was in reality
composed of Slavs, would not, but on the contrary aid the government
of Prussia in its plans of German unity, and unity on a more
democratic basis. Austria’s best course, therefore, would be to take
no active part, but to await the results and turn them as best she
could to her advantage.
The Greeks and Turks have never loved each other, and while Greece is
too weak for definite action at first, she could later lend a helping
hand in the movements which would result in restoring to her the
provinces of Thessaly and Epirus, which though under the dominion of
Turkey are Greek in everything but the name. Greece thus regenerated,
might again become quite an important country, and with the commerce
which the Suez Canal opens to her with the Indies, take her place as a
growing maritime nation.
There are no other important moves now apparent in the horizon of
European politics. As mentioned above, the great powers are too much
interested in domestic affairs to be able to give much thought to what
their neighbors are doing.
It has been expected by many that the continued growling heard both
from France and Prussia, would sooner or later end in open rupture and
war, (The Franco-Prussian war broke out three months later, July 19,
1870.) but one who watches the course of events closely can see that
while they both say they are ready, neither of them desires to break
the peace. Neither will be the first to sound the alarm, for they both
know they have almost nothing to gain from the result, for, should the
war come, it would accomplish little but the destruction of the lives
of many thousand soldiers. Whichever side was victorious, the boundary
line between the two nations would be but slightly changed. The
existing line is the natural one, for it is the line of language and
race, and, although war could move it on one side or the other, for a
time, it would soon fall back again to the plane from which it
started. The strength of the two nations is so nearly equal that
neither can absorb portions of the other. The Rhine is a German river,
and neither diplomacy nor war can make it French.
THE NON-INTERVENTION OF THE UNITED STATES.
And now, in conclusion, what position should the Government, or rather
the people of the United States, take in relation to the march of
events in Europe? Are we to hold forever to our established principle
of non-intervention, when we conscientiously believe that judicious
intervention would often advance the cause of progress?
Better at least keep the right of speaking and acting as we please,
but use it sparingly, and never hesitate to give sympathy and moral
aid,—sometimes more helpful than actual assistance,—to the parties in
any struggle which we believe to have justice on their side.
But when we look into the future, and a no very distant future at
that, and consider that at the end of this century we shall be a
nation of one hundred millions, thinking persons can easily see that
the preponderance of strength in our favor will be so overwhelming,
that non-intervention will be a practical impossibility. The weak of
the earth will come to us for protection, and we shall not wish to
throw them off.
What a country it will be in 1900!
One hundred million people, all with a strong sense of liberty, but
not of license; all educated, or desirous and able to become so; all
ambitious, because the highest prizes are within their reach; nearly
all speaking one language: with private fortunes greater than the
world has ever seen, and with the natural resources of the country
then in their flower.
One cannot dwell upon this prospect without swelling with pride, and
at the same time almost trembling at its very grandeur.
The mighty Republic of the United States, which sprang into existence
less than a century ago, will be the acknowledged law-giver and
arbiter of the entire world.
Perhaps at no time has the temptation for us to mix in the affairs of
Europe been so strong as today, because, selfishly speaking, we have
everything to gain and nothing to lose. (It must be remembered that
_every word_ of this article was written in 1870.) A mere spark which
could any moment be struck at Washington would in three months’ time
set Europe in flames.
An excuse like the Cuban difficulty (The independence of Cuba,
achieved at the close of the century by the assistance of the United
States in its war with Spain), the long pending question of the
Alabama Claims, (Claims of the United States upon Great Britain for
damages by the _Alabama_ and other Confederate cruisers, settled in
1872, at Geneva, by a court of arbitration.) the relations between the
Sultan and the Khedive, or the foolishness now between France and the
United States about the postal treaty or the Atlantic cable. Any of
these would be sufficient to do the work, and what would be the
result? (The postal union was formed by a congress of delegates
representing the principal governments of Europe and the United
States, assembled at Berne, Switzerland, in September, 1874. A treaty
was concluded establishing a uniform rate of postage for letters of 5
cents per half ounce.)
Thousands and thousands of able-bodied men, with no taste for war, and
especially war for the gratification of crowned heads, would seize
every opportunity of leaving their native lands and hastening to
America. It would be impossible to prevent them.
Millions and millions of treasure seeking safe investment, would find
its way to the United States, and all that is wanted to develop the
country, is hands to work the natural resources and money to pay for
it.
America would become what England has been for many years, the strong
box of the world. England can be so no more.
Telegraph communication and steam have put her so near the continent
of Europe, that she can no longer be regarded as a sure land of refuge
for men or money. Nay, it is doubtful if she could actually keep out
of the conflict. The safe must be separated from the combatants by a
broader piece of water than the Straits of Dover. Three thousand miles
are not too much for perfect security. The action of the United States
could bring on any war it wished, but the country itself would have
nothing to fear. Its strength is so great that it could meet fairly in
the field any possible combination of the nations of Europe. The
feeling of animosity between the northern and southern states, which
has existed during the civil war, but which is happily now almost
over, would end in fraternal enthusiasm if the country should engage
in a popular war against any other nation. But the carnage once begun
in Europe could not be carried over the Atlantic, as there would be
enough to keep it there. The United States would be in any case the
attacked and not the attacking party, and modern warfare has arrived
at the point that, other things being equal, the party which attacks a
distant land is almost sure to be worsted.
What would fall to the lot of the United States would be the business
of the world. The carrying trade of the nations would be done by her,
and the problem of the revival of her shipping be by the action of
others solved. All the merchant vessels which plough the Atlantic and
Pacific oceans, would claim the protection of the Stars and Stripes,
and this means limitless sums of money poured into her treasury,
wealth to the country, and wealth to private individuals. The prestige
of her flag would be such as none ever had before.
THE PATH OF PEACE.
Such is the prospect which opens before the vision of the people of
the United States today. Deeply conscious of our great power, let us
be equally conscious of our responsibility in best employing that
power for the benefit of mankind. Let us remember that our path is the
path of peace, and not that of war, let us endeavor not to be turned
from it by the constant temptations of false glory, for, if we are, we
shall ourselves suffer for it later, and cause others to suffer.
It is for its to show to Europe, not what advantages can be derived
from war and diplomacy, which are the weapons of the past, but what
greater advantages can be derived from the weapons of the present and
the future,—the weapons of our own peculiar fabrication,—such as the
nobility of labor and universal education and freedom. Only by acting
thus shall we be able to prove to the nations who are even now
‘hanging breathless on our fate,’ that we truly carry with us a
grander civilization than has ever yet been seen.”
FROM A LETTER TO MY SISTER AT MANCHESTER.
“Club House, Newport, August 7, 1870: I was in Boston yesterday, and had
just about ten minutes at 39 Beacon street, where I found your nice
letter. I am very comfortably established here, in a little apartment
with my friend Bob. Winthrop of New York, and here I mean to have my
headquarters, running off occasionally to New York or Boston and I hope
before long to turn up at ‘Sharksmouth.’ I have been really very much
occupied the last month, what with my own affairs, _la haute finance_ at
Washington and New York, with the thermometer at 90°, and with
occasional visits to my friends, and have been very happy with all the
work. I have my old horse ‘Trumps’ from South Carolina, and he is in as
fine a condition as when I left him, more than two years ago. He reposes
in solitary dignity in the stable.
Poor Europe in 1870, is terribly changed!
I am going to print my little article in a pamphlet by itself, with an
introduction suited to the times, and will send you a copy when it
appears. I came to the conclusion that to alter it to suit the ever
changing news from Europe would be impossible, and would really spoil
it, and so I will let it remain as it is as one of my first literary
attempts.
I have been to Long Branch, and it is the most extraordinary American
political rendezvous I ever saw.
The war in Europe sickens me, so many thousand poor fellows to be
murdered and maimed for wicked personal ambition. The whole business of
the world is thrown into our hands,—I mean the United States of
America,—if we only take it.”
GOUBAREFF THE RUSSIAN.
Demetrius Goubareff was a very intelligent Russian, to whom I was
first introduced in 1871 or 1872. As a young man he had liberated
his serfs before the emancipation action of Alexander II. and had
been a progressive man in every way. He wrote a book entitled
“Philosophie—Religion.” He had, I believe, taken part in the
Crimean war, and then again in 1879, entered the service of his
country at the time of the later attempt to obtain possession of
Constantinople, which I have been informed was balked only by the
interposition of Bismarck. The matter I thought ought to have been
settled then and there.
Mr. Goubareff lived much at Nice and Paris, and often visited London. He
kept up an extensive correspondence with many interesting persons.
He passed Sunday with me at Vevey, Switzerland, in March, 1876, and we
had an excellent chance to talk there quietly and at our leisure. I
found that he was much interested in the “Association for the
Codification and Reform of the Law of Nations,” of which, on my
proposing him, he became a member. I was very glad of this because he
proposed to make a good deal of occupation for himself out of it,
getting acquainted, and opening correspondence with many of the
distinguished persons who were on the list of its members, and would
prove a very valuable addition to the organization.
The following month in Paris Mr. Goubareff introduced me to the Golovine
family, and we dined with them and strolled together in the beautiful
gardens of St. Germain.
RUSSIA AND THE UNITED STATES.
WRITTEN IN BOSTON IN 1873.
“A good deal has been said and written the last ten years, about the
strong friendship existing between Russia and the United States, the
coquetting, as it has been called, of these two nations with each
other.
That such an _entente cordiale_ has existed is beyond all dispute, but
the causes of it open a wide field for discussion.
The nations of Europe who have watched its progress with some evident
alarm for themselves, have come forward with many unasked-for
explanations, to clearly prove that such a thing is out of all reason,
that it should not be, that it is all nonsense, thereby admitting all
the more plainly the ugly fact. Particularly kind and disinterested
have they been in their advice to the youthful United States, warning
her to be careful, lest she be outwitted by the shrewd diplomacy of
the Muscovite Cabinet, telling her that it was all a smart trick on
the part of the Russian government, from which they only wanted to
carry out their own ambitious ends, and this done, they would be ready
at any moment to give the innocent and confiding Americans the slip.
It is pleasant, as a citizen of the United States to feel what good
friends we have on the other side of the Atlantic,—real friends,
too,—who are ready to come forward, now that we are out of the woods,
to save us from the terrible fate of being killed by too much
kindness.
Like the almost historic personage who was talked to death, perhaps
there is danger in store for the American Republic of being _advised_
to death by her older brothers and sisters.
It does not take an over-intelligent person to see that between a
military autocracy, under the sway of an almost absolute ruler, and a
government of the people, intrusting the management of its affairs
temporarily to its chosen representatives, there cannot be,
theoretically, certainly, much genuine and heartfelt sympathy. This is
superficially the view which any one would take. But deeper reflection
on the traits, or, better still, living among the people of whom such
a comparison is made, will show that this curious sympathy is not by
any means a matter of government alone,—important as that is to aid
it,—but lies hidden in the life of the people themselves, only to be
brought out by a curious combination of circumstances.
THE DOUBLE EVENT OF EMANCIPATION.
At times the spark will be struck, and blaze forth into a great
conflagration. Such a time was the late civil war in North America,
which was the cause of the emancipation of the slaves in the Southern
states, when, to correspond with it, at about the same epoch, but from
entirely different causes, came the liberation of the serfs all
through Russia.
Alexander II. and Abraham Lincoln then found a bond of fellowship
existing between them, which nothing could break, and the masses in
Russia and in the United States, were only too ready to take up the
double event and magnify it in their feeling to an unlimited extent.
Then many other points of similarity were discovered; the great extent
of territory of both nations, giving each a future in the development
of the resources placed there by nature, whether on the surface of the
earth or under it, which restricted limits had denied to the other
nations of the continent. This same vastness of land, educating many
to be merchants, and farmers, and miners, and railroad owners on a
grand scale, caused a corresponding freedom of thought and
independence of action,—in other words democratized the people who had
come under its influence,—in a way which cannot well be appreciated by
those whose life is passed in crowded cities alone, where the prestige
of courts and the presence of cliques make individuality much less
marked.
The two nations, the republic and the empire, owned a wide frontage on
the Pacific ocean, which they came in imagination to regard as a huge
lake, and this their common property. Other events, too, at this time
were used with great effect; such as the arrival of the Russian
squadron in America (The Russian fleet in New York, Boston, and San
Francisco in 1863.), the visit of Assistant Secretary of the Navy Fox
in 1866, and that of Admiral Farragut in 1867, (Admiral Farragut was
in Russia the greater part of August in that year, and it was said the
friendship and courtesy of both government and people were especially
marked.) the purchase of Alaska (In 1867, organized July 27, 1868.)
and the return call of the Grand Duke Alexis to the United States.
(The third son of the Emperor Alexander II. of Russia visited this
country in December 1871, and at a banquet Oliver Wendell Holmes
welcomed him with the following words:—
‘Bleak are our shores with the blasts of December,
Fettered and chill is the rivulet’s flow,
But throbbing and warm are the hearts that remember
Who was our friend when the world was our foe.’
There was a gift to the poor of New York when the Russian squadron
took leave of New York in 1863, a voluntary subscription of $4,760
from the officers, and during the famine in Russia in 1891, our
government sent over five large steamers loaded with grain collected
from almost every state in the Union.)
But, supposing there were no characteristics in common, it will not
soon be forgotten in America that, during the long years of the
terrible war, while many of the nations of Europe were clinging to the
policy of keeping an uncompromising but none the less watchful armed
neutrality, rulers and aristocracies in their hearts against the cause
of the North, while the lower classes everywhere went with it, Russia,
of all the great nations, alone came forward, and gave openly its
sympathy to the side which represented a more advanced civilization,
and which as such, in spite of its many disheartening defeats, was
bound to triumph in the end. A person who is hard pressed in life,
when a friend comes up to give him encouragement, does not stop to
reflect why it is given, and try to put a selfish construction on the
offer, he accepts it on the spot, and is not apt to forget the donor
in a hurry. So Americans are not to be easily persuaded that Russia’s
assistance to them at that critical period in their country’s history,
was a mere diplomatic sham and meaningless parade. They are willing to
be ignorant still, if this is so, and need more powerful arguments to
disprove them than have yet been raised by their officious
counsellors.”
THE RUSSO-AMERICAN FEVER.
In the year of my first journey to Russia, 1866, the Russo-American
fever was at its height, and it was a very pleasant thing for those who
caught it when travelling in the other country. They were fêted and
hugged, and wined, and tossed, according to the customs of the people,
and their nationality alone was a sufficient passport to pass them along
the lines of sight-seeing and pleasure, passing unchallenged,—nay,
rather invited in. The entire nation was in the attitude of “present
arms” to him from the other country who desired to pass through on a
tour of inspection.
* * * * *
“And the great ships sail outward and return,
Bending and bowing o’er the billowy swells,
And ever joyful, as they see it burn,
They wave their silent welcomes and farewells.”
—_Henry W. Longfellow, The Lighthouse._
FINIS.
[Illustration:
PORT SAID. OPENING OF THE SUEZ CANAL.
]
INDEX
TO
PERSONS, PLACES, AND SUBJECTS
Academy of Fine Arts, St. Petersburg, 151.
Academy of Music, Brooklyn, N. Y., 90.
Academy of Music, Newport, R. I., 32.
Admiralty, St. Petersburg, 151.
After Emancipation, 58, 200.
Agricultural Exhibition, 174.
Alabama Claims, 219.
Alaska, 172, 186, 225.
Albania, 108.
Alexander I., 186, 192.
Alexander II., 77, 81, 92, 94–96, 106, 134, 136–138, 161, 162, 164,
173–175, 184, 194–197, 200, 211, 216, 222, 224, 225.
Alexander II., Death of, 203–205.
Alexander II., Monument, 205.
Alexandria, 179.
Alice, yacht, 17–19, 23, 25, 27, 117.
Allston, Washington, 125–132.
Andrews, Christopher Columbus, 169, 170.
Appleton, D. & Co., 146, 153.
Appleton, Thomas Gold, 17–20, 23, 25, 42, 117, 123, 126, 129–132, 148.
Appomattox Court House, Va., 62, 64.
Army of the Potomac, 21, 22, 156, 158.
Artillery Brigade, 157.
Artists’ Club, St. Petersburg, 99.
Ashuelot, man-of-war, 136.
Asniéres, 24.
Astor, W. W., 146.
Augusta, man-of-war, 136.
Avenue de l’Opera, Paris, 35.
Ball, Thomas, 66.
Baltic Sea, 24, 73, 186.
Baltimore, Md., 44, 55, 99.
Banks, Nathaniel P., 160, 168–174, 176, 179, 181, 183, 207, 213.
Barlow, S. L. M., 145.
Bartlett, Joseph J., 30.
Battle of Antietam, 52.
Beaumont, Sir George, 130, 131.
Behring Straits, 103.
Behring, Vitus, discoverer, 103.
Bellevue Avenue, Newport, R. I., 29.
Belmont, August, 33, 145–147.
Bennett, James Gordon, 27, 28.
Bennett, James Gordon, Jr., 27–29, 34, 36, 159.
Berdan, Hiram, 173, 176.
Berlin, 24, 26, 39, 68–74, 167.
Besborodko, Koucheleff, Count, 93, 141.
Bicknell, Albion H., 64.
Bismarck-Schonhausen, Otto Edward Leopold, Prince von, Chancellor of
the Empire, 222.
Black Sea, 214.
Bois de Boulogne, 20, 23, 38–40, 111, 162, 165.
Boit, Edward D., 203.
Boston, 9, 19, 66, 103, 116, 119, 127, 128, 221, 224.
Boston Athenæum, 128.
Boston Board of Trade, 177.
Boston Museum of Fine Arts, 129.
Boston Public Library, 141.
Boulevard des Italiens, Paris, 36.
Bowditch, Henry P., 158.
Bowles Brothers & Co., Bankers, 168.
Bowles, Charles, 34, 168, 177.
Bowles, Drevet & Cie, Paris, 17.
Bowles, Robert, 127.
Boyer, Alexandre, 183.
Brest, 9, 11, 14, 16, 24.
Brevoort House, New York, 90.
Brevoort Place, New York, 89.
Bric-a-Brac Club, Boston, 148.
Brighton Road, Brighton District, Boston, 87, 123, 135.
Brindisi, 179.
Brown, Edward Ingersol, 132.
Brown, John Murray, 181.
Brussels, 24, 26, 39, 68.
Bullock, Alexander H., 167.
Burgess, Frank, 9, 16, 23, 39, 84, 122, 144.
Burlingame, Anson, 165–169, 180.
Burlington Arcade, London, 85.
Café Napolitaine, Paris, 26, 27.
Cairo, Egypt, 179, 216.
Cambridge, Mass., 159.
Cameron, Simon, 50.
Camp Douglas, 21.
Carnatz Connection, 106.
Carolina Filly, 30.
Caspian Sea, 108.
Catherine II., 193.
Caucasus, 186.
Centennial Exposition, Philadelphia, 129.
Cercle des Capucines, 38.
Cercle Franco-Américain, 37, 38.
Champ de Mars, St. Petersburg, 173.
Chandler, Zachariah, 168.
Charing Cross Hotel, London, 20.
Chase, Salmon P., 55, 64.
Chicago, 10.
Chicago Exposition, 66, 129.
China, steamship, 18.
Chinese Embassy, 167–169.
Christmas Day, 81, 92, 98, 103, 113, 114, 122, 132, 133.
Church of Saint Sophia, 140.
Church of Sault Isaac, 86, 87.
Circassia, 83, 85, 92, 108, 142, 145, 147, 204.
Clark, Arthur H., 17, 18.
Clay, Cassius M., 82, 94–96, 98, 137.
Clyde Park, 30.
Coaching Club, 28.
Coffey, Titian J., 172, 173, 177.
Colfax, Schuyler, 65.
Cologne, 69.
Commune, France, 36, 37.
Commune, or Mir, Russia, 201–203.
Compiègne, 20.
Comte, Auguste, 181.
Constantinople, 39, 76, 102, 169, 179, 180, 213–216, 222.
Copenhagen, 168, 171.
Corbin, Austin, 29.
Costume Ball, 144–147.
Cotton Exposition, New Orleans, 21.
Country Club, Brookline, Mass., 30, 32, 33.
Cowdin, Elliot C., 166.
Cowes, 18, 19.
Cowes Roads, 18.
Cracow, 154, 155.
Crane, Edward A., 182.
Crimea, 23, 193, 194.
Crimean War, 193, 194, 197, 215, 216, 222.
Cronstadt, 97, 136.
Crowninshield, B. W., 156.
Cuba, 26, 172.
Curtin, Andrew G., 168, 172, 173, 177, 180.
Curtin, Jeremiah, 81, 103, 118, 134, 181.
Curtis, T. B., 25, 39.
Danube River, 181, 217.
Dauntless, yacht, 29.
Davis, Tom Kemper, 126.
De Gogorza, Anthoine, 183.
De Lesseps, Ferdinand, Count, 164, 165, 179, 182, 183.
Delmonico’s, New York, 144.
De Long, George W., 159.
Demidoff Mines, 87.
De Richelieu, Armand Emanuel du Plessis, Duke, 178.
De Trobriand, Philippe Regis, 20, 21, 24, 91.
Dieppe, 24.
District of Columbia, 45, 49.
Dix, John A., 165–167.
Dneiper River, 185.
D’Osuna et de l’Ynfantado, Duke, Spanish Ambassador, 82, 93, 98.
Dresden, 25, 106, 155.
Drexel, A. J., 34, 35, 168.
Drexel, Harjes & Co., 34, 168.
Dumaresq, Armand, 37.
Dvina River, 185.
Easton’s Beach, Newport, R. I., 31.
Elsinore, 170, 184.
Emancipation, Compensated, 48–50, 60, 196, 197, 199.
Emancipation, Double Event of, 224.
Emancipation, Gradual, 48–50, 196, 197.
Emancipation Law of Russia, Manifesto, 198, 199, 200.
Emancipation, Proclamation in the United States, 52–54.
Emancipation, Result of War, 50, 193.
Emperor of Austria, Franz Joseph I., 182.
English Channel, 18, 117.
English Club, St. Petersburg, 134.
Erlanger, Emile, 183.
Erlanger, Louis, Count Excelmans, 183.
Europe and America in 1870, 207, 209–222.
Evans, Thomas W., 35, 180, 182, 183.
Executive Mansion or White House, 48, 51, 62.
Faneuil Hall, Boston, 41.
Farragut, David Glasgow, Admiral, 224.
Fearing, H. S., 145.
Fetridge, William Pembroke, 34, 36, 38.
Fifth Avenue, New York, 29.
Fifth Corps, Army of the Potomac, Union Forces, War of 1861-’65, 156,
157, 158.
Fifth Mass. Battery, Light Artillery, 63, 116, 157.
Fifteenth Amendment, 57, 58, 60.
Fifty-fifth N. Y. Regt. Inf., 21.
Finland, 186.
Finland, Grand Duchy of, 186.
Finland, Gulf of, 97, 172, 186.
First Mass. Battery, Light Artillery, 158.
First Mass. Cavalry, 16, 156–158.
Fish, Hamilton, 22.
Fleetwing, yacht, 27.
Fogg Museum, Harvard College, 71.
Folies Dramatiques, Paris, 10.
Fontainebleau, 162.
Forbes, Paul, 161, 183.
Ford’s Theatre, Washington, D. C., 61, 66.
Forest of Fontainebleau, 42.
Four-in-Hand Club, 28.
Fourteenth Amendment, 56, 57, 59.
Fox, Gustavus Vasa, 36, 135, 136, 185, 224.
Fox’s Mission, 135, 136.
Fremont, John C., 47, 48, 50.
Friederichshamm, Peace of, 186.
Frog Pond, Boston Common, 85.
Fugitive Slave Law, repeal of, 55.
Gagarine, Julie, Princess, 121.
Galitzine, Prince, 150.
Garcia, John, 36.
Gare de l’ Ouest, Paris, 15.
Garrison, William Lloyd, 44.
Gautier, Théophile, 40.
General Kotzebue, steamship, 179, 182.
German Club, Moscow, 115.
Gettysburg, Penn., 64.
Gillig, Henry F., 26.
Goddard, Ely, 33.
Golden Horn, 181.
Gortschakoff, Alexander Michailowitsch, Prince, 95, 96, 150, 211.
Gostinny Dvor, Moscow, 108.
Gott, Daniel, 45.
Goubareff, Demetrius, 222, 223.
Grand Duchess Helena, 200.
Grand Duke Alexis, 225.
Grand Duke Constantine, 194, 200.
Grand Duke Nicholas, 174.
Grand Hotel, Paris, 15, 16, 24, 35, 166.
Grand Opera, Moscow, 115.
Grand Opera, Paris, 24.
Grand Opera, St. Petersburg, 84, 88, 141, 143, 149.
Grand Prix, Paris, 161.
Grand Theatre, Moscow, 105.
Grant, Ulysses S., 65, 66, 173.
Gray Collection of Engravings, 70, 71.
Gray, Francis Colley, 70.
Gray, George Griswold, 28, 33.
Great Eastern, steamship, 18.
Greek Church, 181, 182, 188.
Green, J. Orne, 72.
Gregg, John I., 156, 157.
Hamburg, 168.
Harvard College, 22, 70, 89.
Havana, Cuba, 26.
Hayti, 44, 51.
Healy, G. P. A., 203.
Henrietta, yacht, 27, 28.
Hereditary Medals, 205.
Hermitage, 84, 151.
Higginson, Frank L., 17.
Holland, J. G., 44.
Holy Synod, 188, 205, 206.
Hooker, Joseph, 62.
Hotel de la Paix, 9.
Hotel Dusaux, Moscow, 103.
Hudson River, 28.
Hunnewell, Hollis, 17.
Hunt, William Morris, 40–42.
Hunter, David A., 50.
Hurlburt, William Henry, 145.
Hyde Park, London, 111.
Imperial Library, St. Petersburg, 151.
Invitation, Note of, 94.
Isla, 141.
Ismail Pasha, Khedive of Egypt, 216.
Ismailia, 179.
Ivan III., 185.
Jackson, Charles C., 17, 25.
Jagellon, Duke of Lithuania, 154.
Jamaica Pond, Roxbury, Mass., 135.
Jay, William, 28.
Jeannette, steamship, 159.
Jerome, Lawrence, 29.
Jerome, Leonard W., 27.
Jockeys’ Ball, 32.
Johnson, Andrew, 117, 136.
Johnson, “Ned”, 27.
Jonesville, East Tennessee, 44.
Khedive, 180, 182, 216, 219.
Kimball, Moses, 66.
King of Prussia, William I., 161, 164.
Knapp, A. W., 29.
Königsberg, 24, 70, 73.
Kosciusko, Thaddeus, 153, 154.
Kremlin, Moscow, 103, 105, 107, 108, 114, 116, 121, 187.
Kremlin, Novgorod, 140.
Kronborg Castle, 170.
Kropotkin, Prince, 204.
Kung, Prince, 166.
Lafayette, Gilbert Motier de, 37, 44.
Lamson, Daniel S., 89, 90.
Lane, David, 89.
Lee, John C., 168.
Lee, Robert E., 21, 52, 62.
Le Ray, Maurice, 16.
Lincoln, Abraham, 41–67, 166, 204, 224.
Lincoln, Abraham, Death of, 61–63.
Lincoln, Abraham, Statues of, 64, 66.
Lithuanian Provinces, 74, 194.
Lockwood, Alfred, 36.
London, Eng., 17, 23, 39, 120, 207, 222.
Long Branch, New Jersey, 221.
Longchamps, 25, 161.
Longfellow, Charles A., 16–19, 23–25, 26, 38, 39, 69, 70, 72, 82, 84,
94, 97, 98, 105, 114, 118, 119, 123, 138–140, 142, 148, 151,
153–159.
Longfellow, Ernest, 23, 122.
Longfellow, Henry W., 16, 38, 70, 88, 125.
Lorillard, George, 36.
Lorillard, Louis, 36.
Loubat, J. F., Duc de, 35, 36, 136.
Louvre, Paris, 23.
Lundy, Benjamin, 43.
Lyrique, Paris, 23.
Manchuria, 186.
Manhattan Club, New York, 145.
Manifesto of Emancipation, Russia, 198.
Marble, Manton, 145.
Martin, Augustus P., 157.
Maximilian, Ferdinand Joseph, Emperor of Mexico, 163.
Mazourka, 115, 121, 154.
McClellan, George B., 52.
McVickar, William H., 28.
Meade, George G., 156.
Mediterranean Sea, 179.
Merrill, T. Watson, 159.
Mesnil, Baron de, 31.
Metropolitan, Moscow, 181.
Metropolitan, St. Petersburg, 137.
Miantonomoh, monitor, 136.
Mickiewicz, Adam, 155.
Mill Dam Road, Boston, 83.
Mine Run, 156, 157.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Russia, 96, 188.
Ministry of Public Instruction, Russia, 186, 188.
Mississippi River, 47.
Morley, Henry, 19.
Moscow, 24, 38, 39, 76, 81, 86, 98–103, 105, 114, 116–118, 121, 134,
139, 176, 177, 181, 185, 187, 189, 194, 205.
Moscow, gas-lighting of, 152.
Mount Cenis Tunnel, 179.
Mount Pleasant, Ohio, 44.
Muscovy, 187.
Nahant, Mass., 18, 153, 159.
Napoleon Bonaparte, 73, 102, 176.
Napoleon III., 25, 161–164, 180, 216, 217.
Narragansett Avenue, Newport, R. I., 32.
National Museum, Washington, D. C., 67.
Navy and Army Club, Cronstadt, 97.
Neva Club, 134.
Neva River, 39, 84, 85, 108, 137, 151, 153, 184, 185.
Neva Skating Club, 84, 85, 93.
Nevski Prospect, St. Petersburg, 83, 87, 111, 134, 205.
Newfoundland, 18.
New or Mount Hope Church, Va., 16, 156–158.
New London, Conn., 29.
New Orleans, La., 21.
Newport, N. H., 29.
Newport, R. I., 16, 28–33, 147, 150, 221.
Newport, R. I., Beach, 30–33, 121.
Newport, R. I., Jockey Club, 31.
New York City, 9, 10, 14, 21, 28, 29, 36, 60, 63, 77, 89, 90, 120, 135,
136, 166, 221, 224, 225.
New York Club, 90, 91.
New York Yacht Club, 27, 28.
Nice, 207, 222.
Nicholas I., 95, 192, 193, 194.
Nicholas II., 202, 203, 205, 206.
Nisbet, W. F., 153.
Nobility Club, 115.
Non-Intervention of the United States, 218–220.
Norton, Charles B., 183.
Nottaway Court House, Va., 62.
Novgorod, 135, 140, 141, 185.
Nuba Pasha, 182.
Odessa, 24, 98, 177–179, 187, 208.
Oglesby, R. J., 65.
Oldroyd Lincoln Memorial Collection, 67.
Opera House, Berlin, 72.
Oriental Quadrille, 144, 146, 147.
Oscar, King of Sweden and Norway, 170.
Otis, James, 147.
Otis, William C., 28.
Ourousoff, Prince, 31, 121, 150.
Ourousoff, Princess, 150.
Palais Royal, Paris, 10.
Panama Canal, 29, 37, 164, 178, 183.
Paris, 9–11, 14–17, 20, 22, 24, 25, 27, 34–40, 68, 69, 73, 83, 85, 86,
88, 103, 115, 117, 126, 153, 155, 161–169, 176, 179, 183, 203, 207,
222, 223.
Paris Exposition of 1867, 39, 41, 151, 160, 164.
Passage, St. Petersburg, 85.
Passage des Panoramas, Paris, 85.
Patriarch Adrian, 188.
Patriarch of Constantinople, 181, 182.
Patriarchal Cathedral, 114.
Patti, Adelina, 26, 27.
Paul, Emperor, 191.
Peabody, George, 152, 153.
Peabody, S. Endicott, 168.
Perkins, C. C., 26.
Peter the Great, 85, 98, 187, 188, 190.
Peter III., 193.
Philippe’s, Paris, 39.
Phœnix, Lloyd, 36.
Picpus Cemetery, Paris, 37.
Pierce, Josiah, Jr., 88.
Place de la Concorde, Paris, 161.
Place de l’Opera, Paris, 35.
Place du Nouvel Opera, Paris, 9.
Plevna, 204.
Poland, 75, 80, 153–155, 186, 195.
Polar Sea, 186.
Pompeiian Villa, 24.
Pomutz, George, 176.
Port Said, 179, 182, 226.
Post, Albert Kintzing, 21.
Postal Union, 219.
Post, Waldron Kintzing, 22.
Prague, Peace of, 210.
Pratt, Thomas, 36.
Pré Catalan, 165.
Presentation, 92, 173.
Proclamation of Emancipation, 52–54.
Raasloff, Waldemar Rudolph, 168, 171.
Rappahannock River, Va., 63.
Rescript of Nazimof, 195.
Review of Troops in France, 161, 162.
Review of Troops in Russia, 121, 173–176.
Review of Troops in Sweden, 170.
Rhodes, 179.
Rice, Alexander H., 177.
Rice, A. Thorndike, 146.
Riggs, Elisha, 36.
Ristori, Adelaide, 25, 26.
River Rhine, 218.
Riverside Park, Cambridgeport, Mass., 115.
Roberts, Benjamin Stone, 97.
Rome, 39, 87, 93, 130, 211.
Rosalie, 123, 125–129, 131.
Rue Auber, Paris, 36.
Rue Castiglione, Paris, 176.
Rue de là Paix, Paris, 9, 17, 24, 35.
Rue Royale, Paris, 176.
Rue St. Honoré, Paris, 176.
Rurik, yacht, 136, original settler, 185.
Russell, Harry, 32.
Russia and the United States, 186, 223–225.
Russian Beggar, 75, 201.
Russian Horse, 77, 78, 81, 97, 98, 105, 106, 108–113, 115, 120, 121,
150.
Russian Navigation Company, 179.
Russian Sleigh, 77, 78, 81, 83, 87, 94, 105, 120, 149.
Russian Yacht Club, 84.
Saint Cloud, 164.
Saint Gaudens, Augustus, 66.
Saint Germain, 223.
Saint Louis, Mo., 47.
Saint Michel Theatre, St. Petersburg, 88.
Saint Petersburg, 17, 19, 24, 38, 39, 72, 74, 78, 81, 82, 91, 92, 96,
98, 102, 103, 108, 116–118, 121, 122, 132–134, 136, 138, 139, 143,
145, 152–154, 167–169, 172, 173, 176, 177, 181, 187, 197, 203, 215,
216.
Saint Petersburg and Moscow Railroad, 99, 101, 177.
Saint Petersburgh and Warsaw Railroad, 80, 177.
Saint Thomas, island, 171.
Samanos, Augustus, 36.
San Francisco, 10, 91, 124, 167, 181, 224.
Sargent, Harry, 17.
Sayles, Henry, 132.
Scilly Islands, 9.
Secession of Southern States, 46.
Serfs, 189–191.
Serfs, Emancipation of, 192–203.
Seward, William H., 51, 54, 55, 64.
Shattuck, George B., 70, 124, 143.
Sherman, William T., 65.
Siberia, 191, 193.
Simpson, Matthew, 62.
Sixteenth Mass. Infantry, 90.
Smith, Charles K., 86, 89–91.
Snead, Thomas L., 48.
Soldiers’ Home, Washington, D. C., 43.
Somerset Club, Boston, 22.
Southwell, Viscount, 32, 33.
Souworoff, or Suwarrow, Alexander Vasilievitch, Count Rymnikski, 143.
Spanish Ambassador, St. Petersburg, 93, 98, 99.
Spencer, Lorillard, 35.
Springfield, Ill., 62.
Staigg Portrait, 117, 122, 124, 132, 133.
Staigg, Richard M., 123, 124, 152.
Stanfield, Harry, 17–19, 23, 24, 29.
Stevenson, Robert H., 25, 27.
Stockholm, Sweden, 167, 169, 170, 180.
Straits of Dover, 220.
Strogonoff, Count, 177.
Suez Canal, 35, 164, 168, 169, 178–180, 208, 215–217, 226.
Sully, Thomas, 126–128.
Sultan of Turkey, Abdul-Aziz, 162, 163, 216, 219.
Sykes, George, 156.
Synod, Holy, 188, 205, 206.
System of Government in Russia, 187–189.
Talleyrand-Perigord, Charles Maurice, Prince of Benevento, 13.
Tchudova, 140.
Thies, Louis, 70.
Thirteenth U. S. Infantry, 21.
Thirty-first U. S. Infantry, 20, 21.
Tilsit, Peace of, 73.
Tivoli, 152.
Trumbull, Lyman, 46.
Tsarskoë Selo, 150.
Union Club, San Francisco, 91.
Union Pacific Railroad, 167.
United States Treasury, 62, 117, 178.
Upsala, 170.
Ural Mountains, 108.
Venice, 102.
Versailles, 23, 36, 98.
Vesta, yacht, 27.
Vevey, Switzerland, 222.
Vice Roi of Egypt, 182, 216.
Victoria Theatre, Berlin, 70.
Vienna, 25, 39, 102, 153, 155.
Ville de Paris, steamship, 9, 14.
Virginia, 156.
Voisin, Armand, 36.
Volga River, 108.
Wainwright, Charles S., 62.
War Department, Washington, D. C., 67.
Warsaw, 24, 148, 153.
War with Spain, 172, 219.
Washburn, Elihu B., 165, 168.
Washington Club, Paris, 22, 29, 34–38.
Washington, D. C., 11, 16, 43, 61, 127, 165, 166, 181, 183, 213, 219.
Washington Heights, 27, 28.
Waterloo, 26, 39, 68.
Wayman, Bishop, 65.
Wheeling, West Virginia, 43.
Whistler, George W., 98, 99.
Whistler, James A. McN., 98.
White Sea, 185.
Willett, “Bronnie,” 34.
Wilna, 24, 70, 73, 74, 79.
Wilson, Henry, 65.
Winans, Ross, 88, 98, 99, 177.
Winans, Thomas de Kay, 99.
Winans, William Louis, 99.
Winter Palace, St. Petersburg, 95, 121, 134, 137, 149, 173, 205.
Winthrop, Eugene, 35.
Winthrop, Robert, 221.
Wood, Fernando, 168.
Wordsworth, William, 131, 132.
Woronzoff, Prince, 178.
Wright, Frances, 44.
Wright, Joseph A., 72.
Wright, Smith, 129, 130.
Yacht Club Pond, 84.
Yacht Club Skating Ground, 141.
Young, Samuel P., 105.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
● Fixed typos; non-standard spelling and dialect retained.
● Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.