FIRST MUTTERINGS OF THE STORM. SEPTEMBER, 1847-MARCH, 1848.
State of Naples and Sicily under Ferdinand II.--The birds and the
King.--The conspiracy.--The September rising and its
results.--Christmas in Naples.--The 12th of January in
Palermo.--The insurrection spreads to Naples.--The first
Constitution of 1848.--The effect in Rome--in Tuscany--in
Genoa.--The editors of Turin.--"Voleva e non voleva."--The
government of Milan.--The Milanese view of their rulers.--Count
Gabrio Casati--Ficquelmont.--The "Panem et Circenses"
policy.--Giambattista Nazari--His speech in the Congregation.--Its
effect.--Rainieri and Spaur on Nazari.--The grievances of different
parts of Lombardy.--Condition of Venetia.--Charles Bonaparte in
Venice.--Daniele Manin.--Niccolo Tommaseo.--Manin's
programme.--Moncenigo's treachery.--Manin's imprisonment.--The
tobacco massacres at Milan.--Their effect.--Metternich's programme
of Italian reform.--"Viva il sangue Palermitano!"--The
"Administrators" in Hungary.--The programme of Kossuth and
Deak.--The Constitutional victories in Hungary.--State of
Vienna.--The division of classes.--The ruling trio.--Effect of
Ferdinand's accession in Vienna.--The
"Lese-Verein."--Hye-Andrian.--Kuranda and Schuselka.--The German
movement in Vienna considered morally.--The Archduke John's
toast.--The relations between rich and poor.--The anti-Jesuit
feeling.--The illegal soup-kitchen.--The "Professional"
opposition.--Die Sibyllinische Buecher.--"The Austrian has no
fatherland."--The censorship.--Metternich's policy in
Switzerland--in Lombardy.
The failure of the struggles for liberty in Naples and Sicily in 1821
had not prevented continual abortive insurrections from breaking out
after that period; and, while these attempts produced no immediate
results except the strengthening of tyranny, they were yet gradually
teaching Sicilians and Neapolitans the two great lessons of confidence
in each other and distrust of the Bourbons. Francis had succeeded to
Ferdinand I., and Ferdinand II. again to Francis; and, unless there
were some slight variety in the forms of cruelty and tyranny, the
change of kings may be said to have brought no change to the peoples
whom they governed. Corruption and espionage prevailed both in Naples
and Sicily. The only perceptible distinction between those two
countries was that the clergy exercised rather more tyranny in Naples,
while in Sicily robbery and brigandage were more rife. The Bourbons,
like the Hapsburgs, sought to keep alive the disunion between the
different races of their subjects, thus hoping to increase their own
power; and so Sicilian Ministers were brought to govern Naples, and
Neapolitan commissioners sent to Sicily. The desire for reform
awakened by the accession of Pius IX. was a bond between all the
different countries of Italy, and the King of Naples recognized this
by suppressing all newspapers in his dominions that praised Pius IX.
But Ferdinand was not to be left altogether without warning before the
blow against his power was actually struck. In June, 1847, he paid a
visit to Sicily to inspect the military defences of the island. In
visiting Messina he found several statues of himself, but the ears of
all of them had been stopped up. The King was alarmed; for, whether he
understood or not this significant practical joke, he saw at least
that some insult was intended. Perhaps he was able to accept the
explanation of his courtiers that "the birds had chosen the ears of
the royal statues to build their nests in." At Palermo he received
another hint as to the nature of the birds who had paid this homage to
royalty, for there he was met by a petition for freedom of the Press.
He angrily rejected this request, and refused to make any inquiry into
the growing misery of the Sicilians. More soldiers and stronger forts,
he considered, were the only needs of the country.
Yet at this very time an insurrection was preparing of a far more
dangerous character than the spasmodic outbursts in Messina and
Calabria which had disturbed the repose, but scarcely endangered the
throne, of Ferdinand's predecessors. The Sicilians and Neapolitans had
now learned to act together, and planned a simultaneous rising in
Calabria and Sicily. The revolutionists were to march upon the nearest
fortified places, and eventually to seize Naples, where they were to
proclaim the Unity of Italy. According as circumstances guided them,
they were either to compel the King to accept the Constitution, to
depose him in favour of his son, to choose a new dynasty, or, if
necessary, to proclaim a Republic; but in any case they were to assert
the unity and independence of Italy.
Some hint of an approaching outbreak seems to have reached the ears of
the King or his Ministers; for in August two artillery officers and
some other citizens were arrested in Palermo. "But," says La Farina,
the Sicilian historian, "nothing could be discovered, since the
Sicilians knew better than any nation how to stand firm in preserving
silence in all tortures: an ancient virtue not yet destroyed by modern
corruption."
The miserable local jealousies which had hindered the former struggles
for liberty had for a time disappeared; but there was still in this
conspiracy, as in every other, the natural division between the
impetuous and the prudent, between the party of speedy action and the
party of delay. And while the fiery spirits of Messina and Calabria
were eager for an immediate rising, the citizens of the two capitals,
Palermo and Naples, were in favour of slower action. At Messina,
therefore, the first outbreak took place. On September 1 some officers
met at an inn in that town to celebrate the promotion of one of their
generals by a dinner. The conspirators seized this opportunity for an
outbreak, and surrounded the inn as if from mere curiosity; but when
sufficient numbers had gathered they suddenly unfurled the tricolour
flag and raised the cries of "Viva Italia!" "Viva Pio Nono!" "Viva la
Costituzione!" The officers at last became alarmed, and, rushing out,
summoned the soldiers and ordered them to fire. They hesitated to obey,
and listened to the appeal of the conspirators, who urged their common
cause and the duty of Neapolitans and Sicilians to stand together
against their common oppressor. Discipline, however, proved stronger
than patriotism; the soldiers fired, and several Sicilians fell,
amongst them Giovanni Grillo, the youth who had played the part of the
birds in stopping the ears of the King's statues.
The insurgents retreated; but a shoemaker named Sciva, who was at work
near the scene of action, left his shop and rushed forward to rally
them; and a priest named Kriny also fought gallantly in their ranks.
The movement, however, had been too hastily organized; the insurgents
were either forced to fly or were arrested on the spot, and Sciva,
the shoemaker, was condemned to death. The authorities, indeed, hoped
to persuade him to save his life by betraying his friends; but he
refused, even on the scaffold, to accept a pardon on such terms, and
died bravely. Kriny, as a priest, had his sentence commuted from death
to imprisonment. Grillo died of his wounds.
Desperate efforts were made by the Government to obtain information as
to the details of this conspiracy. Three hundred ducats were offered
to anyone who would kill the chief conspirators; a thousand to anyone
who would arrest them. But, though the leaders of the insurrection
were hidden in the houses of very poor men, no one could be found to
betray them, even for the sake of so large a reward. Even where the
Government had made sure of their prey, it sometimes slipped through
their hands. One of the insurgents was brought wounded to a house, and
his hiding-place was discovered and surrounded by soldiers; but, by a
false alarm, the guards were frightened away and the wounded man
conveyed elsewhere. The owner of the second place of refuge was
arrested, but the fugitive was again enabled to escape. His wound
brought on fever, and he remained hidden for fifteen days without
food, sucking the end of a sheet for nourishment; he was then so
exhausted that his friends thought him dead and carried him to a
church; but he revived, and was at last shipped to Marseilles, where
he recovered.
A people so vigorous and determined were obviously not far from
freedom. The heroism of the Sicilians had strengthened the courage of
the Neapolitans; and on Christmas Day the latter rose to the cry of
"Evviva Palermo!" This demonstration, however, was only the forerunner
of the Revolution; for it was still from Sicily that the first
successful action was to come. So little did the Sicilians care to
conceal their intentions that a pamphlet was circulated fixing January
12 as the day for the actual rising. The police, thinking that they
would be able easily to suppress the movement, began to make arrests;
but their efforts were in vain.
La Farina, who afterwards became a member of the Sicilian Assembly,
gives the following account of the rising:--
"On the night that preceded the 12th January, 1848, the streets of
Palermo were silent and deserted; but in the houses the citizens were
wakeful, agitated by fears and hopes. At the dawning of the new day the
soldiers were in arms in fortified places and in their own quarters;
some battalions of infantry and gensdarmes occupied the public places
of the prefecture of police and of the royal palace, where the General
De Majo, the Lieutenant of the King, General Vial, Commandant of the
Piazza, and other royal officers, were assembled in council. The
cannons of Castellamare were drawn out for a festival, for it was the
birthday of Ferdinand II., and the roads were extraordinarily full of
people; all were waiting for the conspirators to appear, for the sign
to be given, for the first cry to break out, when Buscerni, a bold and
ready youth, weary of delay, raised on high a musket that he had held
concealed, and cried resolutely, 'To arms! To arms!' Then Pasquale
Miloro came out armed into the street of the Centorinari; the abbot
Ragona and the priest Venuti exhorted the people to rise in the name
of God. There ran up to them, in arms, the advocate Tacona, Giuseppe
Oddo, Prince Grammonte, Baron Bivona, Lo Cascio, Pasquale Bruno,
Francesco Ciaccio, Giancinto Carini, Amodei, Enea, and a few others.
Giuseppe La Masa bound to a stick a white pocket-handkerchief, a red
one, and a green ribbon, and waved the three Italian colours. Santa
Astorina went about distributing tricolour ribbons and cockades."
"At the sight of the arms, and of the small number of those who bore
them, the crowd grew thin and dispersed; the shops were closed, and
the few eager men remained alone. A few of the unarmed remained with
them to divide the honour and perils of the attack; and among these,
distinguished by the loftiness of their mind and remarkable probity,
were Vincenzo Errante and the Baron Casimiro Pisani. They were not
disheartened; they stood firm and bold in their resolve; the bells of
the Church of Orsola sounded an alarm, those of the Convent of the
Gangia answered them; the Revolution had become irrevocable. Small
bands were forming themselves here and there. They had neither rules,
orders, nor plans; they did not barricade the streets; they did not
make trenches, as is usual in other cities; they did not make head in
any one position; troops of children preceded them, dancing and
singing; they drew near to the troops, watched their motions and acts,
and returned to warn the insurgents even while the blood was dropping
from the blows that they had received. One band of the insurgents put
to flight a military patrol in the street of the Albergava; others had
the same fortune in the Raffadale street, at the church of San
Gaetano, near the gate of St. Antonino, in the street of Calderari,
and in other places. Thus passed the whole day; two of the insurgents,
among whom was L'Amodei, were dead, and ten soldiers; the wounded were
more numerous. The insurgents withdrew within the Piazza of Fiera
Vecchia, which since the morning had been the centre of the movements
and the seat of a committee formed of the first insurgents. There were
not more than fifty who had firearms; a company of infantry would have
been sufficient to disperse them; but the soldiers remained immovable
in the positions which they had taken up, because, remembering the
year '20, they had determined not to advance into the populous
quarters of the city. To this it is necessary to add that all the
houses were lighted for the festival, and that the balconies of the
windows were crowded with men, women, and children, who all clapped
their hands and gave loud Vivas to Italy, the Sicilian Constitution,
and Pio Nono; a spontaneous, unexpected, and universal agreement of
the people which made the rulers lose their heads and the soldiers
their hearts. In the night the insurgents were recruited from the
country districts and the neighbouring communes. The first to arrive
were sixty countrymen from Villabate; then others from Misilmeri and
from other places. By the next day Fiera Vecchia contained about 300
men armed with guns, and as many more armed with scythes, billhooks,
knives, spits, and those iron tools which the popular fury changes
into arms. The fortress of Castellamare bombarded the city; the
artillery of the royal palace was dragged along the Cassero; but the
insurgents attacked, stormed, and destroyed the police commissariats
and made themselves masters of the military hospital of San Francesco
Saverio; the soldiers who remained prisoners were embraced as
brothers, and provided with every accommodation which they needed."
Brilliant as these successes sound, the victory was not yet complete;
and to diplomatists, at any rate, the result seemed still uncertain.
The Consuls of Austria, France, and Sardinia tried to persuade the
insurgents even now to yield, on condition of obtaining a pardon. An
attack made by La Masa on the Royalist forces was repelled, and
several of the revolutionary committees fled from Palermo. But many of
the leaders stood firm, and Mariano Stabile declared that Sicily
should recover her ancient liberties, and that Ferdinand and not the
people was the rebel. At the same moment the bells sounded, and the
Royalist artillery was brought to bear upon the city. For three hours
the struggle lasted; but at the end of that time the Royalists were
driven back. The Neapolitan soldiers, grown savage by their defeats,
began to sack private houses and commit various acts of cruelty; and
when the foreign Consuls went again to the Governor's palace to ask
for mercy to the insurgents, they were fired upon.
In the meantime new insurgents were pouring in from the country
districts, and the revolution was developing a government. Mariano
Stabile was made secretary of the Governing Committee, and Ruggiero
Settimo, an old man of seventy who had held office under the original
Constitution of 1812, and who had helped to proclaim the Spanish
Constitution in Sicily in 1820, was chosen President. Nor was the
movement any longer confined to Sicily. The Neapolitans had risen in
Salerno. The King, in a panic, had dismissed Del Caretto, the head of
the police, from office; and General Ruberti, the Commandant of the
fortress of St. Elmo, had told the King that he would not fire upon
the people. A demonstration in favour of the Constitution of 1820 had
taken place; and when the rain threatened to disperse the people, the
umbrellas which were opened displayed the Italian colours.
Alarmed at the risings in Naples and Sicily, and uncertain on whom he
could depend, Ferdinand, on January 29th, conceded a Constitution to
Naples. At the same time he entreated Lord Minto to intervene between him
and the Sicilians. Neither Neapolitans nor Sicilians, however, were
entirely satisfied. In the Kingdom of Naples the Constitutionalists met
with much opposition from the supporters of the old system, and some
skirmishes followed between these two parties. In Sicily the Liberals
demanded that the granting of a Constitution should be followed by an
adhesion to an Italian Confederation. They therefore answered Lord
Minto's appeal by a renewed attack on the fortress of Castellamare,
which they succeeded in capturing after four hours' fighting, and thus
destroyed the last hold of Ferdinand over Palermo, and left in his hands
no important Sicilian position except the citadel of Messina. The hopes
thus raised were soon increased by the appointment of two men who had
recently suffered imprisonment for their liberal opinions. These were a
lawyer named Bozzelli, who became Prime Minister, and the new head of
the police, Carlo Poerio, who belonged to a family which had given many
champions and sufferers to the cause of Liberty, and who had himself
been imprisoned in the previous year. When, then, the Constitution was
actually promulgated on February 12, the hopes of the Neapolitans had
risen to their highest pitch. The Constitution itself was but a poor
affair, far less encouraging to popular hopes than its Spanish
predecessor of 1820. It was founded, indeed, on the French Constitution
of 1830, and the Parliament was therefore composed of two Houses, the
upper one nominated by the King. A nominal freedom of the Press was
secured, but carefully limited, especially in matters treating of
religion. And there seems to have been hardly any security for
Ministerial responsibility. But the granting of a Constitution against
his will by a Bourbon King was, whatever its deficiencies, a fact which
naturally supplied a spark to the combustible material to be found in
all parts of Italy.
The news of the movement in Sicily had already kindled new hopes in
Rome. There matters had been proceeding more slowly than in the first
months of Pius IX.'s rule. Even Ciceruacchio had begun to think that a
more definite programme might be accepted by the Pope; and on December
27, 1847, he drew up a list of the reforms which he thought especially
needed in Rome. In these, while professing continued zeal for Pio
Nono, he put forward requests of a kind not likely to be conceded;
such as the removal of the Jesuits, the abolition of monopolies, and
the emancipation of the Jews; while other demands were so vague that
the Pope might easily have seemed to concede them without much
trouble. For instance, Ciceruacchio required that the Pope should
show confidence in the people, that individual liberty should be
guaranteed, and that restraint should be put on excessive exercise of
power.
The Pope, though not disposed to accept the exact programme of
Ciceruacchio, was influenced by this address, and on December 31, 1847,
he issued a decree promising separate and independent responsibility to
each of the Ministers. When, then, the news arrived of the Sicilian
insurrection, the enthusiasm in Rome rose to the greatest height; and
when the Pope next appeared in public, people scattered flowers in his
way, and Ciceruacchio displayed a banner bearing the words, "Santo
Padre fidatevi nel Popolo" (Holy Father, have confidence in the
people). Still, it was rumoured that the wicked cardinals were holding
back the good Pope, and that they were opposing the armaments voted by
the Council of State.
During the excitement caused by this fear the news arrived that the
Sicilians had been successful, and that Ferdinand had granted a
Constitution to Naples. Again the Romans rose, and this time with the
cry of, "Away with the men of bad faith! Long live the secular
ministry! Give us arms!" A Minister appeared on the balcony, promising
the people a secular ministry and increase of the army. This was
actually conceded a few days later, and Ciceruacchio once more called
upon the people to have confidence in the reforming Pope. The news of
the Sicilian and Neapolitan movements steadily spread northwards, and
in Tuscany they chimed in with the new belief that Leopold was a
reforming sovereign.
But matters took here a rather different complexion from that which
they had assumed in Rome. The zeal of the Tuscans had been kindled by
their struggle with the Duke of Modena, and the free life of Tuscany
had attracted many democratic Italians; while, on the other hand,
though Leopold might have wiped out the memory of the surrender of
Renzi, he could not cease to be a Hapsburg, and could never attract to
himself the same imaginative enthusiasm which was kindled by the dream
of a reforming Pope. At any rate, the first spark of a revolutionary
movement had been kindled by Guerrazzi in Leghorn, before the success
of the Sicilians had been known; and though Ridolfi had suppressed the
movement and imprisoned Guerrazzi, the bitterness caused by it still
remained. And even when the news of the Neapolitan Constitution
reached Florence, the Tuscan reformers hastened to congratulate, not
the Neapolitan Ambassador, but a representative of the revolutionary
Sicilians who happened to be in Florence. But Leopold was ready to
yield with a much better grace than Ferdinand; and when, on February
17, the Constitution appeared it was found, in the matter of religious
liberty, to be considerably in advance of the Neapolitan Constitution.
In the Kingdom of Sardinia the city of Genoa supplied the same kind of
element which the Tuscans found in Leghorn. The questionable manner in
which that city had been annexed to Piedmont had left, no doubt, a
continual soreness and readiness for revolution among the Genoese;
while, on the other hand, its important geographical position and
great commercial reputation had led Charles Albert to push forward its
development as much as possible. It soon came to the front during the
movement for reform, and its citizens tried to urge on Charles Albert
whenever he hesitated. As he drifted gradually in the direction of
bolder action, the Genoese were ready to encourage festivals in his
honour, and on the occasion of a demonstration in November, at Genoa,
a citizen had called out to him, "Charles Albert, cross the Ticino and
we will follow thee." When, then, the news arrived of the Sicilian
rising, the Genoese sent to Turin a petition for the expulsion of the
Jesuits and the concession of a national guard. In the meantime the
editors of leading newspapers in Turin were meeting to decide on the
policy which they should support, and Count Cavour, who had hitherto
been disinclined to Liberal movements, proposed that they should
demand a Constitution. D'Azeglio, Durando, and others, supported the
proposal, and Cavour was despatched to present it to the King.
While Charles Albert was still hesitating, the news of the Neapolitan
Constitution arrived. The people of Turin at once made a demonstration
in honour of the event, and Pietro di Santa Rosa[8] proposed in the
Municipal Council that that body should support the petition for the
Constitution. The Municipal Council, though previously a reactionary
body, accepted the proposal by a large majority. But Charles Albert
still hesitated. On February 7th, he held a meeting of his Council, in
which he at first refused to discuss the question whilst the crowd was
gathering outside. On their dispersal, he began to consider the
proposals, and the discussion lasted for eight hours. When the sitting
of the Council was concluded, the representatives of the Municipality
arrived, but were received very coldly by Charles Albert. While
things were still in this state, a message arrived from the Governor
of Genoa that, unless the Constitution was proclaimed, it would be
necessary for the King to place Genoa in a state of siege. At last he
consented to grant what was called a Statuto, of which the terms
seemed at first very indefinite, while the delays in carrying it into
execution irritated the more decided reformers. But the faith of
Charles Albert's admirers was as robust as that of the admirers of
Pius IX. Banquets were held in his honour, and those who took part in
these exulting demonstrations had at least the excuse for their joy
that the promise of the Statuto had roused the irritation of the
Austrians; and Radetzky even threatened to occupy Alessandria. But
Radetzky and the Austrians had enough to think of nearer home.
The Government of Milan was at this time in a very peculiar condition,
seeing that there were not less than seven people who were, in
different ways, responsible for the maintenance of order in the town
or its neighbourhood. Of these, the nominal head was probably
Rainieri, the Viceroy; but he seems to have been a man of less vigour
than some of those who acted under him; and though willing enough
to do acts of violence, yet not able altogether to control his
subordinates. The second, probably, in nominal importance was Spaur,
the Governor of Milan: a Tyrolese nobleman, credited, even by his
opponents, with some remains of honourable feeling, but crushed in
spirit by his habit of constant deference to the Court, and to
Metternich. Next came Torresani, the head of the police, a man who
must have been in some respects pleasanter to deal with than the
other rulers; for, though not disinclined to cruelty and tyranny, he
managed to cover them with a certain Italian wit and courtesy which
must have been rather a relief, as a contrast to the tone of some of
his colleagues. Thus, for instance, on one occasion the Town Council
remonstrated with him for the action of the police in a riot, and
urged that he should take measures for preserving order among his
subordinates; Torresani chose to interpret the idea of order in his
own fashion, and the next day issued a stern public notice against
disorderly meetings, while at the same time he sent a polite note to
the Council, pointing out that, by this proclamation, he had met their
wishes for the preservation of order.
But if Torresani could soften by witticisms the necessary savageries
of his position, any deficiencies in roughness on his part were amply
atoned for by his subordinate Bolza, who was looked upon as the
completest embodiment of the spirit of cruelty in the Government. On
the other hand, the craft and treachery of the system were best
represented by a Bohemian named Pachta. He was one of those men whose
complete loss of reputation in private affairs fits them to become
useful engines of despotism. He had been known previously as having
swindled a lady out of some jewels which she had entrusted to him; and
he had plunged so heavily into debt, that nothing but his favoured
position protected him from arrest. He held some nominal office in the
Council at Milan; but his real duty was to act as a spy upon his
colleagues. Indeed, it may be said that that description might, with
more or less force, apply to all the rulers of Milan, and to many
others of the Government officials. A spy was set by the Home
Government upon Torresani, and another to watch that spy. Rainieri was
entrusted with one set of police, Spaur with another, Pachta with
another. But while all these men divided the civil administration of
Milan, there stood at their back the one man who did enjoy more of the
permanent confidence of the Government than anyone else in Lombardy.
This was the celebrated Field-Marshal Radetzky.
It is somewhat strange that this man, who has been considered, by many
of those interested in these movements, as one of the most complete
embodiments of Austrian cruelty, was yet looked upon by the Milanese
at this time mainly as a theatrical buffoon. In the caricatures which
are preserved at Milan, Rainieri generally appears as a hypocrite,
sometimes cunning, sometimes maudlin; Bolza as a ferocious ruffian;
while in Pachta and Torresani the appearance of cruelty is modified by
a slightly idiotic expression. But Radetzky is invariably the
theatrical blusterer, who might have supplied Shakespeare with a model
for Ancient Pistol. Such was the Government with which Lombardy was
blessed under the Metternich system.
On the other hand, the only official embodiment of popular feeling
during the longest period of this rule had been the Town Council of
Milan. The Central Congregation which had embodied the Austrian idea
of a Lombard Constitution had been deprived of all freedom of
utterance; but the Town Council was no doubt considered a more
harmless body, and therefore had been allowed a certain amount of
freedom. Since 1838 this Council had been presided over by Count
Gabrio Casati, who has probably received more praise and more blame
than he deserved. He seems to have been a man by no means deficient
either in courage or patriotism; and had he continued to exercise his
office during a period when passive resistance and formal protests
were still useful weapons, he might have left a reputation somewhat
like that of Speaker Lenthall or Lord Mayor Beckford in our own
History. As it is, he was called on by circumstances to play a part in
the struggle against Austria for which he was unfitted; and, while he
has received undue praise from those who have accepted him as the
embodiment of Milanese heroism, he has, on the other hand, been
somewhat too fiercely condemned by those who noted his actual
shortcomings, and could not make allowance for the difficulty of his
position. During the first years of his office he did his best to bring
before Metternich and his colleagues the evils which prevailed in the
Government of Lombardy; and when the growth of the Italian movements
led to the demonstrations in favour of the Italian Archbishop of Milan,
and the solemn funeral to Confalonieri, Casati showed his sympathy with
the popular feeling, and protested against the various acts of cruelty
which were perpetrated in the suppression of these movements. Indeed,
so prominent a part did Casati play in these matters that Sedlnitzky,
the head of the Viennese police, wrote to Spaur to tell him to keep his
eye on Casati, and to see that on the next occasion a Podesta of better
principles was elected.
In October, 1847, Metternich added a new element to the confusion of
the Milanese Government by sending a new agent to share the authority
of the other rulers of Lombardy. This new emissary was Count
Ficquelmont, whose work was of a much more definite character than his
official position. This work was, in fact, the carrying out of that
part of Menz's programme which had been modelled on the Circus shows of
the Emperors of Rome. This was to be effected by the introduction of
Fanny Ellsler and other people of a similar character to the
pleasure-loving population of Milan. But the mission only succeeded in
eliciting new signs of discontent. Ficquelmont and his protegees appear
in the collection of Milanese caricatures; and a popular agreement to
abstain from theatre-going was so rigorously carried out that, on one
evening, only nine tickets were sold for the principal theatre in
Milan.
But, before this remarkable abstention had come into force, a new
character had been given to the Lombard resistance to Austrian rule.
The Central Congregation of Lombardy had suddenly awakened to life;
and the grievances under which the country suffered had been placed
before their rulers at Vienna with a clearness previously unknown. The
author of this sudden change affords one of those curious instances of
men who do a great and important work for their country, and then pass
suddenly into obscurity before their reputation has spread beyond
narrow limits. Giambattista Nazari was a lawyer of Treviglio. All that
seems to be known of him previously to his election to the Central
Congregation was that he was a man of moderate fortune, with a large
family; but both those facts may be taken as adding something to the
courage of his public action. Treviglio is a town in the district of
Bergamo; the people of that district, presumably with Austrian
sanction, had accepted Nazari as their representative, and on December
8 or 9, 1847, he came forward in the Central Congregation to give, for
the first time since 1815, free and peaceable expression to the wants
of the people of Lombardy.
"Illustrious Congregation," he said, "it does not require much
shrewdness to discern that for some time past there have been in this
province manifest signs of discontent shown by all classes of
citizens, as the rulers themselves ought to have known every time that
they have tried to deaden its effects. And from whence does the
agitation which has thus been produced arise--an agitation which
increases the more they try to restrain it? From whence comes this
universal disquiet? From whence this suspicion between governors and
governed? The latter have, perhaps, just reasons to complain; and if
they have, who ought to present those reasons to the Prince? For my
part, I do not see that anyone can be better interpreters of the
desires of our country than we; since, even in our private condition,
we are sharers of the good and evil which are the fruits of good and
evil institutions; and since, moreover, we have the precious office of
discovering the needs of the populations and of presenting them at the
Imperial Throne. In order, then, that that agreement between ruler and
people which alone can secure the quiet of the State may be restored,
I am resolved to propose that you should choose as many men as there
are provinces in Lombardy, and give them a commission to examine
specially into the present conditions of the country; and when they
have discovered the causes of discontent, to refer them to the whole
Congregation in order to give fitting opportunity for petitions. This
I say and advise, from a desire for the public good, from affection
for my Prince, and from a sentiment of duty. For as citizen I love my
country, as subject I desire that the Emperor should be adored and
blessed by all, and as deputy I should think that I had failed to keep
my oaths if I did not say what was imposed on me by the duty of not
being silent."
On December 11 this protest of Nazari's was presented in due form to
the rulers of Milan, and produced from them the sternest rebukes. The
awkward point of the protest was that, both in form and substance, it
was undoubtedly legal, and could not therefore be wholly disregarded.
Accordingly, Rainieri told Spaur that it was desirable that a
commission should be appointed; but that, instead of being composed of
representatives chosen from the Lombard provinces, it should be
limited to those few people who were noted for their zeal and
attachment to the Austrian Government. Further, such commissioners
were not to assume that discontent existed, nor even to make mention
of such discontent in their discussions. At the same time, Nazari was
to be told that he had acted irregularly in bringing forward his
motion, and Torresani was to be directed to keep a special watch on
this dangerous agitator.
Spaur thereupon addressed the Congregation, telling them that the
Viceroy had consented to Nazari's proposal, provided that the
Congregation limited itself strictly to the powers entrusted to it by
the Constitution; and, further, that the Government was occupying
itself with the wishes of the Lombard provinces, and that the Viceroy
had left to Spaur's decision the appointment of the members of the
Commission. Spaur concluded with a rebuke to Nazari for the want of
confidence that he had shown in him, as President of the Congregation,
in not communicating to him his intended motion. Nazari answered that
he had wished to take upon himself the sole responsibility of his act;
and that, as to the proposed previous application to Spaur, he would
rather be wanting in confidence than respect; for that if he had told
Spaur of his intention, and Spaur had tried to persuade him to be
silent, he would have been compelled to be rude enough to disobey him.
In the meantime the motion had created the greatest enthusiasm, and
many Milanese hastened to pay their respects to Nazari; four thousand
visiting cards were left on him, and petitions flocked in from various
places in support of his movement. In the Provincial Congregation of
Milan, indeed, the supporters of Nazari encountered the same kind of
official obstruction which their leader had met with in the Central
Congregation of Lombardy, for the President refused to join his
colleagues in signing the petition. Thereupon the members of that body
threatened to resign; and the Viceroy, who had just declared Nazari's
protest irregular, urged the President to yield. But the movement had
spread far into the provinces. Many of the provincial towns had their
own causes of grievance against the centralizers of Vienna. Pavia had
been deprived of its arsenal; Brescia had been compelled to close its
armourers' shops, Bergamo its ironmongeries; Cremona had lost one
trade, Salo another; Como and other towns had lost their linen trade.
Everywhere there had been signs of the sucking out of the strength of
the country by the Central Government at Vienna. Nazari's protest,
therefore, naturally attracted sympathy far beyond Milanese circles;
and amongst other petitions came one from the old Lombard capital of
Pavia asking that it might be specially represented on the Commission
proposed by Nazari, and suggesting special reforms needed in Lombardy
and Venetia.
But by far the most remarkable of the Lombard petitions produced by
Nazari's protest was one which was apparently signed by the Lombards
irrespective of their provincial divisions. In this the petitioners
call upon the Central Congregation to keep alive the courage which had
been shown by Nazari's protest. They remind the deputies of the
promises previously made by the Austrian Government, and the breach of
them. They declare that "The Lombards were formerly distracted by
discordant hopes, but are now almost miraculously unanimous in their
desires;" and they call on the deputies "to speak out the whole truth,
to proclaim that they have faith in God, and that they leave to others
the infamy of lying."... They call upon them "To declare the abuses of
the Tribunals which are concealed by secret bribery; the arrogance of
the police, the puerile corrections of the censorship; but above all to
proclaim the great truth of nationality, to demand a federal union, and
to remind Austria of her proclamation of April 16, 1815, in which she
promised to conform the institutions of Lombardy to the character of
the Italians. Ten million Italians are now united by an agreement
between princes and people, defended by a flourishing army, and
sanctioned by the authority of the Pope." The petitioners then proceed
to call attention to the success of Hungary in its Constitutional
struggle; and they point out that, while Austria had held out hopes of
a special representation for Lombardy and Venetia, she had, in fact,
drawn the power more and more to Vienna, while the Press had been
subjected to the most petty persecutions. "An invisible network of
information, conjectures, suspicions, has surrounded all the citizens.
The Government is arbitrary both by ignorance and violence. It is only
the representatives of the people who can explain _that_; and they must
show that all these evils spring from the first great falsehood of a
people that has not the life of a people, of a kingdom that has not the
life of a kingdom. Lombardy is governed by foreign laws and foreign
persons. It is taxed for the benefit of Austrian industries, while a
barrier of customs duties separates it from Italy."
It is worth noting that now, for the first time, the leaders of
Italian political movements began to consider the special grievances
of the poor. As Mazzini had roused the working men to care for the
liberty and unity of their country, so a common suffering had
gradually taught the wealthier leaders to care for the troubles of
their poorer neighbours; and these petitions enumerate a number of
taxes which specially weighed on the poor. The tax on salt was the
material burden most generally felt; while the lottery, with its
deliberate encouragement of the spirit of gambling, increased the
moral loathing of the Lombards for the Austrian rule. But the crushing
out of national feeling and intellectual life were still the two main
complaints of these petitioners; and, besides the more general proofs
of these mentioned above, the petitioners dwelt with great emphasis
on the conscription which carried off the youth of the country for
eight years. And they finally demand that the representatives of the
people should ask for "A complete and irrevocable separation in every
branch of the administration; that they should be governed by a
person, not by a foreign people;" and that "their own nationality,
history, language, and brotherhood with other Italians should not be
considered as crime and rebellion." They finally close with the words,
"To-day you can still speak of peace. The future is in the hands of
the God of Justice."
The petition of Nazari had, as already mentioned, produced effects in
the Lombard provinces; but it had also called out sympathy, though a
little more slowly, in the neighbouring province of Venetia. There the
hand of Austria seemed to have weighed more heavily than even in
Milan. Perhaps the absence of old traditions of internal freedom,
and the terrible corruption which had hastened the fall of its
independence, may have had something to do with the silence of Venice.
Perhaps, too, the sense of the singular baseness of the crime, by
which they had become possessed of the Venetian district, may have
goaded the Austrians into greater tyranny than even that which they
exercised in their other dominions. But, whatever was the cause, there
seems to be no doubt, as one of the historians of the time puts it,
that Venice was then reckoned "the least sturdy city in the kingdom,
and the one least disposed to movement." But even Venice could not be
shut out from the influence of the Italian spirit, and the first sign
of awakening life was called out, curiously enough, by a Buonaparte.
The Prince of Canino, who had already succeeded in turning Scientific
Congresses at Genoa and Milan into opportunities for political
demonstrations, had come, in September, 1847, to Venice to preside in
the Geological Section of the Congress. There he had introduced a
discourse on Pius IX., which was received with loud applause; and when
the Austrian police compelled him to leave the State, people followed
him on his road with cheers of sympathy. But the spark which Charles
Buonaparte had lighted required other hands to keep it alive; and it
appeared that there was no one in the Venetian Congregation bold
enough to take up the part which had been played at Milan by Nazari.
Under these circumstances, Daniele Manin, the lawyer, who had already
opposed the Austrian Government about the Lombardo-Venetian railway,
came forward to take upon himself the office from which the official
members of the Congregation had shrunk. He presented a petition
calling on the members of the Venetian Congregation to imitate the
example of Nazari, ending his appeal with the words, "It is unjust and
injurious to suppose that the Government has granted to this kingdom a
sham national representation."
This address of Manin's was sent to the Congregation on December 21st.
On the same day Niccolo Tommaseo addressed a letter to Baron von
Kuebeck, one of the Viennese ministry, asking for permission to print a
discourse which he had just delivered at Venice on the Austrian press
law. In this discourse he had shown that the Austrian law was in
theory more liberal than the Piedmontese law, but that it was not
carried out, a fact which he illustrated by the signatures to a
petition which was then being circulated in favour of the proper
enforcement of the Austrian law. "If this petition be granted," said
Tommaseo, "the country will find peace, and Austria an honourable
security." He ended with a remarkable warning--"If the movements of
the brothers Bandiera alarmed the Austrian Government, how much more
will there be danger now that the altar is no longer on the side of
the throne?"
Tommaseo had already been marked out by the Government as a dangerous
person. He had been the first to introduce Mazzini to the public by
securing the publication of his article on Dante which had been
refused by the "Antologia," and he had joined with Mazzini in the
revolutionary struggle of 1833. It was therefore as a pardoned man
that he had been allowed to return to Venice; and the authorities were
doubly indignant that he should venture to come forward again. But
Manin's attempt to stir up the Venetian Congregation attracted the
hostility of the Government more than Tommaseo's petition. He had
already protested against a new form of official cruelty--the shutting
up of a political prisoner in a lunatic asylum; and Palffy had
threatened to let the prisoner out and shut up Manin instead. But
it seemed for a time as if his attempt to stir up the Venetian
Congregation would fail, for he could get no member to present his
petition for him. Nothing daunted, however, he printed it, and sent it
himself to the Congregation. This act soon attracted attention, and
several provincial governments sent in similar petitions.
Still the Venetian Congregation would not stir; so, on January 8,
Manin sent in a second petition, in which he no longer confined
himself to vague appeals, but set forth the necessary programme of
reform. He demanded that the laws should be published and obeyed, that
no obedience should be required to unpublished laws, and that the
territories of Lombardy and Venetia should form a separate kingdom,
not a province, "still less a mere outlying village of Vienna. We
ought to be governed," he said, "according to our character and
customs; to have a true national representation, and a moderately free
press which could control and enlighten the chiefs of the Government
and the representatives of the nation."... "The germs planted by the
laws of 1815 had not developed, and only a madman or an archaeologist
would refer to them as a guide." He then proceeded to demand that the
Viceroy of Lombardo-Venetia should be completely independent of all
but the Emperor; that the finances and the army should also be
separated from the government at Vienna; that the communal governments
should be more independent than at present, and that trials should be
by jury, and should be oral and public; that the power of the police
should be limited, and that a moderate law should be substituted for
the existing censorship of the Press; that a civic guard should be
granted; that citizens should be made equal before the law; that
Jewish disabilities and feudal tenures should be abolished, and that
there should be a general revision of the laws.
Manin's petition alarmed the timid spirits of the Congregation; and one
of them named Moncenigo sent it to Governor Palffy. Manin had already
protested against the appointment of this Moncenigo on the sham
Commission of Enquiry which the Viceroy had granted; and no doubt
personal irritation combined with political cowardice to prompt
Moncenigo's breach of confidence. But, whatever its motives, this
act of servility produced a protest from another lawyer, who,
while denouncing Moncenigo's act as unworthy of the dignity of a
commissioner, alluded to the period of Napoleon's rule as one of
greater freedom than had ever been allowed by Austria. The police had
in the meantime been preparing a report for the criminal tribunal; and
on January 19, 1848, Manin was suddenly seized and carried off to
prison on the charge of disturbing the public peace.
In the meantime the Milanese movement had been assuming a more serious
character. Demonstrations at the theatre, or abstentions from it,
songs and other public expressions of opinion, were continually
alarming the authorities. That separation, too, between the altar and
the throne, to which Tommaseo had called attention, was even more
marked in Milan than in Venice; and Radetzky a little later ordered
his soldiers not to attend the sermons or the confessional of the
Milanese clergy, "since they are our enemies." But this ferocious
commander was resolved at all hazards to drive the Milanese to
extremities; and he soon found an opportunity for carrying out his
plans. One of the most universal forms of protest against the
Government in Lombardy was the determined abstention from tobacco on
the ground that it was a Government monopoly. This protest began on
January 1, 1848, and it seemed at first as if it would be allowed
to pass without remark. But Radetzky, in spite of the advice of
Torresani, ordered his soldiers to appear in public, smoking. This
order was carried out on January 2, 1848. In some parts of the town
this demonstration provoked nothing but a few hisses from the crowd;
but in one part, where the police and soldiers had collected in large
numbers and many citizens had gathered to watch the smokers, the
soldiers suddenly turned upon the crowd with their bayonets and
charged them. Casati remonstrated with Torresani, but could get no
redress, and was even himself assaulted by the police when he appealed
to them.
This, however, was merely the preliminary of Radetzky's proceedings.
The following afternoon a much larger force of soldiers appeared in
Milan, and every one of them was smoking. The crowd gathered as
before, and was, as usual, largely composed of boys. Suddenly two of
the sergeants gave a signal, and the soldiers, drawing their swords,
rushed upon the crowd, wounding many boys seriously and killing an old
man of seventy-four. The crowd fled at the attack; but the soldiers
followed them, breaking into the shops in which they took refuge,
destroying what they found there, and killing or wounding those whom
they came across. In one place they broke into an inn, gave the
hostess several severe wounds in the head, besides beating violently a
little girl of four years old.
Throughout the city these scenes of barbarity continued during the
greater part of the day, and naturally aroused the most tremendous
indignation. Similar smoking demonstrations took place in Brescia,
Cremona, and Mantua; but in these places they seem to have passed off
without a riot. In Pavia and Padua, on the other hand, the smokers
came into collision with the students, who fought with their bare
fists against the soldiers' swords. In Milan the indignation was not
confined to the opponents of Austria. Monsignore Oppizzoni, who was on
the whole a supporter of the Government, headed a deputation to the
Viceroy in which he used these words:--"Your Highness, I am old, and
have seen many things. I saw the profanation of the Jacobins and the
cruelty of the Russians; but I never saw nor heard of before such
atrocious acts as have happened in the days just past."
Companies of ladies met at the Casa Borromeo to collect funds for the
wounded. In all the principal cities of Lombardy funeral rites were
performed for those who had died in the riots; and the people refused
to walk in the Corso Francesco, which had been the scene of the
principal massacre, and went instead to another street, which they
renamed the Corso Pio Nono. Even some of those who had served the
Austrian Government raised a protest against these atrocities. Count
Guicciardini, for such a protest, was deprived of his office; while
the Councillor, Angelo Decio, declared that he would resign if the
Government would not put a restraint on the undisciplined soldiers.
The Viceroy, taken aback at this sudden outburst of indignation,
promised reforms and dismissed some of the troops from Milan.
But the saner members of the Austrian Government had completely lost
hold of affairs, and Radetzky had become the sole ruler of Milan. He
harangued his troops in one of those bombastic addresses whose
absurdity seemed to take even a deeper root in men's minds than the
atrocity of his acts. "Let us not," he said, "be forced to open the
wings of the Austrian eagle which have never yet been clipped." This
calm ignoring of Austerlitz and Marengo specially tickled the fancy
of the Milanese; more particularly as Radetzky was credited, whether
justly or unjustly, with having played a somewhat ignominious part in
the latter battle. A few utterly inadequate and trivial reforms were
won from Metternich by the spectacle of the Sicilian revolution, the
growing popularity of the Pope, and the Neapolitan Constitution. On
January 18 it was proposed that the Viceroy should transfer himself
from Milan to Verona; that he should be surrounded by persons better
informed than his subordinates were; that the Government of Milan
should be made more strong; and that some of the members of the
Central Congregation of Milan should be summoned to Vienna. How
absurdly unlike these concessions were to the real wishes and needs of
the Lombard people it is scarcely necessary to point out; but, had the
concessions been far more important, they would have been utterly
worthless while they were accompanied by the closing of the clubs, the
arrest of suspected persons, and, above all, while Radetzky still
ruled Milan.
It was to a population excited by this state of things that there came
the news of the Neapolitan Constitution. The Milanese at once flocked
to the Cathedral to return thanks, and on the walls of Milan were
written up the words, "Viva il sangue Palermitano! Seguiamo l'esempio
di Sicilia! Il pomo e maturo." And near these inscriptions was drawn
the picture of a house in ruins, and over it, "Casa d'Austria." New
riots followed, and the Universities of Pavia and Padua were closed by
authority. But it was felt that the electric current had now spread
right through Italy from Palermo to Milan; and, on the very day before
the University of Pavia was closed, a secret circular was issued by the
friends of Italy at Milan urging that further demonstrations should be
abandoned for the present on the ground that "the cause of Italy is now
secure."
And though Metternich was still disposed to dispute that view, though
he still held to the opinion which he had uttered in August, 1847,
that "Italy was a mere geographical expression," he yet felt the shock
of the Sicilian insurrection, and was willing to secure friends in
other parts of the Austrian dominions by more important concessions
than those which he had made to Lombardy and Venetia. _The_ most
important, or at least the most obvious, of these popular victories
had been gained in Hungary. There, indeed, Metternich had ingeniously
contrived to defeat his own purpose, to weaken that division which had
been gradually growing between the different sections of his opponents
in Hungary, and to throw into the hands of Kossuth far more power than
he had previously possessed. At the close of the Diet which had met in
1843 these elements of division were more various and more prominent
than at any other period of the struggle. Besides the quarrel between
Magyar and Slav, there had grown up a difference of opinion between
the Magyar champions of reform. For while Kossuth was advocating the
strengthening of the county governments as the great hope for
Hungarian liberty, Baron Eoetvoes was urging the necessity for making
the central parliament stronger at the expense of the local bodies.
But Metternich, as if determined to consolidate the various elements
of opposition against him, shortly after the dissolution of the Diet,
took a step which, while it seemed to justify Kossuth's belief in the
importance of county governments, silenced at the same time all those
who were opposed to Kossuth, whether on grounds of race or party, and
roused the dislike to Metternich's system to a height not previously
known in Hungary. Mailath, the popular Chancellor of Hungary, was
removed, and his successor, Apponyi, was directed to supersede the
Hungarian County Assemblies by administrators appointed by himself.
No step could possibly have been taken more likely to defeat
Metternich's own objects; for if there was one institution round which
all the peoples of Hungary rallied, it was their County Governments.
Kossuth felt the strength of his position, and tried to remove the
causes of division. For the moment he seemed even disposed to abandon
his extreme anti-Slavonic policy, and opposed a proposal for compelling
the use of the Hungarian language in elementary schools. The opposition
to the Administrator system in the counties seemed to Kossuth an
opportunity for bringing forward the whole body of reforms which he had
long desired. The movement for relieving the peasants of their burdens
had naturally widened the circle of those who took interest in
political affairs; and a famine which was quickening the political
feeling of the Silesian peasants and of the artizans of Berlin had also
spread to Hungary, and was making the ordinary grievances of the
peasant doubly grievous to him. Along with the demands for the relief
of the peasantry from their burdens, Kossuth and his friends now put
forward proposals for Constitutional reforms. Deak, though no longer a
member of the Assembly, gave his assistance in putting their plans
into shape, and for the first time there was formed, in 1847, a
complete programme of the Hungarian Liberals. Their demands were:
Publicity of parliamentary debates; a parliamentary journal in which
speeches were to be published in full; triennial elections and regular
yearly meetings of the Diet; improvement of the government of the towns
and enlargement of their right of election to the Diet; universal
taxation of all classes; the abolition of forced labour of the peasant,
and of other restrictions on his mode of life.
But while it was of importance that the reformers should thus be able
to put into shape their programme of reform, it was round the
"Administrator" question that the real fight gathered, and Metternich
was urged to make at least some concessions on this point. When, then,
the Diet met in 1847, Kossuth found himself supported by many who
might have shrunk back from parts of his policy before. Count
Batthyanyi had formerly acted with Szechenyi; but he now arrived at
the conclusion that the opposition of that nobleman to Kossuth was
unwise, and he drifted more and more into the position of the Leader
of Opposition in the House of Magnates. Eoetvoes, too, however much he
may have retained his belief in the importance of a centralizing line
of policy, yet could not refuse to stand by his countrymen in defence
of County Government against the Administrators of Metternich.
Batthyanyi and Eoetvoes were thus willing to suspend their special
grounds of opposition to Kossuth; but it was still impossible for them
to carry with them the House of Magnates; and Kossuth's great
influence in the country was increased by the fact that the centre of
reform was rather to be found in the class of professional men to
which he belonged than in the nobles who had been previously looked to
as the leaders of the country. The Diet of 1847, therefore, saw a
repetition of the struggle of the two Houses which had formed so
prominent a part of the parliamentary history of 1839. In the Lower
House Kossuth carried a measure for enforcing municipal taxes on
nobles, and it was thrown out by the House of Magnates, who called
upon the Lower House to limit themselves to votes of thanks or to
express their grievances in general terms.
But neither the land question nor the question of parliamentary
liberty were felt by the Hungarian leaders to be as important at this
crisis as the rescue of the counties from the tyranny of Metternich's
Administrators; and it was the struggle on this point which was
brought to a crisis by the news of the Sicilian Revolution and of the
growing discontents in Milan. Again Metternich was disposed to make
concessions, and again his concessions were so framed as to be utterly
inadequate to the occasion. He declared that the Administrators should
only be appointed under exceptional circumstances; and that the
present Administrators should be withdrawn when the exceptional
circumstances in the counties were removed. This proposal was
unwelcome to all parties; and so much force did the discontent of the
country gain that on February 29 a motion in favour of reform in the
representation was carried in the House of Magnates. When this
resolution had passed the House of Representatives Szechenyi entered
in his diary the words, "Tout est perdu."
In the meantime the Hungarian movement had been keeping alive hopes
which in late years had begun to show themselves in Vienna. In that
centre of the Metternich system it was not wonderful that political
death had been more complete and unmistakeable than in any other part
of Europe. While in other parts of Europe the press was interfered
with, here Count Sedlnitzky, the head of the police, had it completely
under his control. In other parts of the Empire national feeling was
discouraged. Here, for even reminding the Austrians of the popular
efforts against Napoleon, Hormayr was driven from the Archduchy of
Austria. In other parts of the Empire local affairs might sometimes be
interfered with, but were often passed over as unimportant; in Vienna
officials were thrust into the place of the elected Town Council. Nor
was there any assembly at all fitted to be the mouthpiece of Austrian
discontent in communications between the people and the Government.
The only assembly which met at Vienna, except the Town Council, was
that of the Estates of Lower Austria. This assembly represented mainly
the aristocracy, even the richer burghers not possessing more than a
nominal voice in their councils. Therefore, even if this body had
possessed as much freedom as was allowed to the Hungarian Diet, they
could not have rallied the people round them, because they did not
understand their wants and had no sympathy with them. Indeed, the
barrier between rich and poor, noble and serf, seems to have been more
marked, or at any rate more painfully felt, in the province of Lower
Austria than in any part of the Empire, except, perhaps, Bohemia. For
in Vienna there was rapidly growing up all the miseries of a city
proletariate. The protectionist tariff made dear the articles of
food, while the absolute suppression of public discussion, and the
obstacles thrown in the way of any voluntary organization, prevented
even the benevolent men among the wealthier classes from understanding
anything of the wants of the poor.
So far were the Government from interfering to correct this evil that,
when, in 1816, the citizens of Salzburg petitioned for a reduction of
taxes, on the ground that people were dying of hunger in the streets,
Francis rebuked the citizens for the arrogance of this appeal, and
marked Salzburg out for special disfavour in consequence. But the
crushing out of genuine education was so complete that the poorer
classes in Vienna were for a long time unable to see how their misery
was increased by the arrangements of the Government. They saw that no
leader in the well-to-do classes seemed to concern himself in their
affairs. For while healthy political and intellectual life was
repressed in Vienna, that town was not, after all, an unpleasant abode
for those who gave themselves up to mere self-indulgence. Menz's
precedent of the Roman circus was followed here also; and Vienna
became known as the "Capua der Geister." Thus, deprived alike of
sympathy and power of self-help, the poor could only show their
bitterness in occasional bread-riots, the reports of which were
carefully excluded from the papers of the Government. One result of
this utter depression was that the Viennese eagerly caught at any
signs of moderation, or the most superficial tendency to Liberalism,
in any of their rulers; and, being at the centre of affairs, they were
naturally able to get hints of differences among the official people
which were unknown to the citizens of other towns. Thus they knew
that the Government, which to outsiders seemed wholly concentrated
in Metternich, was, at least nominally, divided between three
persons--Metternich, the Archduke Louis, and a Bohemian nobleman named
Kolowrat. The third of this trio was credited with the desire for
a certain amount of liberty; and it was supposed to be by his
encouragement that the National Bohemian Museum was founded in Prague
and became a centre of Slavonic culture. Kolowrat's Liberal sympathies
would not have counted for much in any other place or time. But the
fact that he was an opponent of Metternich was enough to gain him some
sympathy from the Viennese; and when, after the death of Francis,
Metternich tried to get rid of Kolowrat, he only increased the general
sympathy for one who was thus marked as his opponent.
The death of Francis, an event hardly felt in the rest of Europe, was
of considerable importance to Vienna; not so much from any actual
changes which it produced as from the new hope which it aroused. A
dull flame of a sort of loyalty to the House of Hapsburg still
lingered in the breasts of the Viennese; and the sole consolation
which reconciled them to their abject condition was the belief that
they were at least carrying out the wishes of the Head of that House.
Such a consideration, if, from one point of view, it may be described
as a consolation, yet increased the sense of despair of any redress of
grievances. But the accession of the Emperor Ferdinand changed this
feeling. He at least was credited with the desire for a milder policy;
while the fact that he had suffered for years from epileptic fits made
it easier to believe that he was not responsible for the failure to
carry out his own plans; and thus a heavier burden of hatred was
thrown upon Metternich. It was not, indeed, confined to his political
opponents. The Archduchess Sophia, the wife of the Heir Apparent, had
reasons of her own for disliking him; and his own arrogance, backed by
the arrogance of his wife, roused against him the opposition of that
aristocratic part of the community which was inclined to favour his
general policy. On the other hand, the admission of the Archduke
Francis Charles, the heir to the throne, to the Council of the
Emperor, tended to increase the belief in the Liberal tendencies of
Ferdinand. But the concession in 1842 of the permission to establish a
Reading and Debating Society was considered by the Viennese the
greatest triumph of Liberal principles.
The formation of this Society was sanctioned by Ferdinand, while
Metternich was temporarily absent on a journey for his health.
Ferdinand was induced to consent to it, by his respect for his former
tutor Sommaruga, who had taken a part in its formation. This Society
speedily became a centre of all kinds of discussion; and Sedlnitzky,
the head of the police, soon began to suspect and hamper it, and
thereby to point out to the rising reformers their natural leaders.
Professor Hye, a man, as it afterwards appeared, of no very great
strength of purpose, praised this Society as a power in the State
which had been gained by the spirit of Association. A police spy at
once hastened to the Court; the Council was called together; and a
proposal was made to deprive Hye of his professorship. Archduke Louis
had the good sense to oppose this proposal; but the fact that it had
been made speedily got wind, and attracted a certain amount of
sympathy to Hye. Newspapers and pamphlets, too, somehow gained ground
under the new _regime_; and three writers especially acquired an
influence in stirring up public feeling not unlike that which had been
exercised by Balbo, Gioberti, and others in Italy.
A writer named Andrian took up the question of reform from the
aristocratic side, stirred up the Landtag in Bohemia to assert the
Constitutional rights of which they had never been entirely deprived,
and also influenced the Estates of Lower Austria to strengthen their
body by admitting a more complete representation of the citizens.
Schuselka, on the other hand, called upon the Emperor to turn from the
nobles as untrustworthy, and rely for his help on the citizens. But the
man who seems to have drawn most support and attention to his opinions
was Ignatz Kuranda. He did not venture to propound his ideas in
Austria, but started a paper in Leipzig called the _Grenz Boten_. To
this all Austrians who desired reform, whether from the aristocratic or
democratic point of view, hastened to contribute. And the Government
soon became so much alarmed at these writings that they demanded that
both Kuranda and Schuselka should be expelled from all the States of
Germany. It was a sign, perhaps, that Metternich's power was beginning,
even at that time, to wane, that he was unable to obtain this
concession; and then the paid writers of the Government set themselves
to answer the reformers. This attempt, of course, only produced new
writers on the side of Kuranda; and so the movement gathered additional
force.
But however excellent the awakening of intellectual freedom might be,
no steady movement of reform could be inaugurated at this period which
did not sooner or later gather round the national principle. Neither
Vienna nor the Archduchy had any traditions of national life; while
the Austrian Empire, which, in its separate form, was not half a
century old, was the very negation of the national principle. While,
therefore, the Viennese looked for lessons in Constitutional freedom
to the neighbouring State of Hungary, their only hope of sharing in a
national life seemed to rest on their chance of absorption in Germany.
Hence arose a movement in many ways hopeless and illogical, and the
cause of much injustice to other races; but which, nevertheless,
supplied a strength and vigour to the reformers of Vienna which they
would otherwise have lacked. They have been denounced for wishing to
sacrifice the position of their city as the capital of a great Empire
by consenting to its absorption in another nation, in which it would
play, at best, only a secondary part. Yet the desire to take a share
in the common struggles, common traditions, and common hopes of men of
the same language and race is surely a nobler aspiration than the
ambition to be the centre of a large number of jarring races, held
together by military force or diplomatic intrigue. Circumstances and
History had made the desire of the Viennese impossible of execution;
but this desire had none the less an element of nobility in it, which
should not be disregarded. The first to give prominent utterance to
the new aspiration was the Archduke John, who, at a banquet in
Cologne, proposed a toast which he afterwards to some extent tried to
explain away, but which was long remembered by the Germans. "No
Prussia! No Austria! One great united Germany, firm as its hills!" At
that period, the most satisfactory bond between Austria and Germany
would have been found in the Zollverein which had been established by
Prussia. A German named List came to Vienna in 1844 for the purpose of
encouraging this union; and a banquet was held in the Hoher Markt at
Vienna at which List gave the toast of "German Unity," which was
welcomed with loud cheers, while the health of Metternich, proposed by
the American Consul, was received in dead silence.
In the meantime, the discussions on public affairs were growing more
and more keen; and, as the news arrived of the various rebuffs to
Metternich mentioned in the last chapter, the reformers gained heart.
Yet it still seemed doubtful whether they could enlist the sympathy of
the poorer classes on the side of Constitutional liberty. The Estates
of Lower Austria, however willing to make certain concessions to
popular feeling, showed none of that care for the improvement of the
condition of the poor which had been prominent in the Hungarian Diet,
and also in the Lombard petition. The horrible contrast between wealth
and poverty, during the distress of 1846 and 1847, is illustrated by
the following facts:--In the year 1846 a widow in Vienna killed one of
her children and set it before the others for food. About the same
time, a Viennese banker gave a dinner at which strawberries were
produced costing in our money about a pound a-piece!
This awful contrast would naturally prevent the poor from feeling any
keen sympathy for reform movements inaugurated by the wealthier
classes; yet, in this very year 1846, some of the poorest citizens of
Vienna began, for the first time, to show a strong desire for the
removal of Metternich from office. The ground of this new outburst
of feeling was the belief that Metternich's championship of the
Sonderbund arose from his strong sympathy with the Jesuits. It is
difficult to discern the exact ground of the bitter feeling of the
poor of Vienna against this Order. The Emperor Francis had disliked
and discouraged the Jesuits as much as their bitterest opponents could
wish; nor had Ferdinand been able to secure them any prominent
position in the State; while Metternich's real feeling towards them
was, as before remarked, by no means so friendly as the Liberals
supposed. The citizens of Vienna could therefore hardly believe that
these men were the pampered favourites of fortune; and the only
explanation of the universal hatred towards them must be that their
air of mystery and power made them natural objects of suspicion to men
who had been driven desperate by poverty, and who were not able to
discover the causes of their misery. Whatever the reason may be, there
is little doubt that Metternich's supposed sympathy with the Jesuits
on this occasion roused bitterness against him in the hearts of many
whose poverty had hitherto made them callous about questions of
government.
But a more reasonable bond between the poorer classes and the
reforming leaders was soon to be established. The discussions of the
Viennese Reading and Debating Club had been concerned during these
terrible years with the condition of the poor; and, on April 10, 1847,
the leaders of the Club held a meeting to prepare for the organization
of a soup-kitchen. They soon formed a Committee, under the leadership
of the future Minister Bach, and issued an appeal for help. For
issuing this appeal without the previous sanction of the censorship
the Committee received a stern rebuke from Sedlnitzky; and though,
after some discussion, the police allowed the appeal to appear, the
officials complained continually of the independent action of this
Committee, and tried to hamper it in every way.
It was not merely, however, as the centre of efforts for the relief of
the poor that the Debating Club and those who supported it attracted
the sympathy of the reformers. Both there and in the University there
were ever-growing signs of political life. Professor Hye had fiercely
denounced the annexation of Cracow, and had encouraged his pupils to
debate the subject of the freedom of the Press; and Professor Kudler
had promoted the study of political economy. The books of both these
professors were prohibited by the Government, and, in consequence,
were widely read. More prominent still, as champions of University
Reform, were the leaders of the medical profession. The Court
physicians had succeeded, for a time, in bringing the Medical Faculty
under the complete supervision of the Government; but in 1844 the
students undertook to draw up new rules which should emancipate their
course of study from this subservient position; and, after three
years' struggle, in September, 1847, they won the day, and established
a government for their Faculty which was independent of Metternich.
This new institution attracted the sympathies of the freest spirits
of Vienna, and the growth of clubs was favoured by the leading medical
professors.
It was obvious that the great movements which were stirring in Italy
would affect the feeling of the Viennese; but the result was perhaps
less in Vienna than in other parts of Europe, because of the dislike
felt for the Germans by the Italians. And, in spite of the growing
desire for a German national life, the Viennese could not throw off
the coarse Imperialism which naturally connected itself with the
position of their city; nor could they get rid entirely of the old
theory of Joseph II., that enlightenment and culture must necessarily
come to all races from the Germans. But the desire to reconcile the
love of liberty with the instinct of domination showed itself
curiously enough in a pamphlet which appeared in 1848 called "Die
Sibyllinische Buecher," by Karl Moering, an officer in the army. Moering,
like Schuselka, called on the Emperor to become a citizen king, and to
break down all monopolies and oligarchical distinctions. But, while
this writer wished to let the Italians go as being unnaturally
connected with the Empire, he desired to compensate the Emperor for
this loss by the annexation of the Balkan provinces; and he uttered
the warning that, unless freedom were granted, the Austrian Empire
would break up, and Magyars and Czechs on the East and West would
found separate kingdoms. "The Empire," says Moering, "can reckon
thirty-eight million subjects, but not one political citizen; not one
man who, on moral and political grounds, can be proved to be an
Austrian.... The Austrian has no Fatherland."
This pamphlet produced a great effect, for it appealed at once to the
two great rival aspirations of the Austrian Liberals; and perhaps it
attracted all the more attention from the fact that the writer was a
captain in the army. Metternich, however, steadily refused to believe
in the extent of the discontent, and rebuked Sedlnitzky for the
warnings that he brought. It was evident that Metternich was determined
to fight to the last, and, if possible, to ignore to the last the
dangers that were surrounding him. Kolowrat, after a fierce struggle,
succeeded in securing a new College of Censorship, which he thought
would be more favourable to literature; but no sooner was it
established than Sedlnitzky succeeded in turning it into a new engine
of oppression, and so heavy a one that the booksellers feared that
their trade would be entirely crushed out.
And, while Metternich and his followers were prepared to deal in this
manner with the people of Vienna, he at least was equally determined
to crush those other opponents whom he considered the most troublesome
at the moment. On January 12, 1848, the Austrian Government had,
in concert with France and the German Confederation, threatened
Switzerland with a commercial blockade, to be followed by armed
intervention, if the Swiss attempted to make any change in their
Constitution without the consent of the three Great Powers; and
Metternich was preparing for a conference to devise means for carrying
out this threat. With his Lombard subjects he was prepared to deal
still more summarily; and, on February 22, the following Edict was
issued for that province. In case of riot, sentence of death was to be
given in fifteen days by a Commission, without appeal to the Emperor.
Everyone who wore certain distinctive badges, sung or recited certain
songs, wore or exhibited certain colours, applauded or hissed certain
passages in a drama or concert, joined in a crowd at a given place of
meeting, whether for the purpose of raising subscriptions or of
dissuading from acting with certain persons, might be imprisoned,
banished, or fined to the extent of 10,000 lire. Such were the
measures by which Metternich was hoping to crush out the growing
freedom of Europe, when the shock of the French Revolution once more
disturbed his calculations.
FOOTNOTE:
[8] I do not know what relation he was to the more celebrated Santa
Rosa of 1821.