Слике страница
PDF
ePub

substituted for the Prussian one as an identic communication from the two Governments to Denmark.

It was finally agreed that each Government should present its own communication, which was accordingly done on the 25th of August.

The Prussian despatch, after re-asserting the right of the Diet to insist on the fulfilment of the Danish engagements respecting Schleswig, proceeded to define the claims of Germany arising from the engagements of 1851-52, as follows:-1. An independent and equally privileged position for the various parts of the Danish monarchy in regard to their separate affairs, and an organic and equal union of them for their common affairs; no portion to be incorporated into or made subservient to another. 2. Equal rights for Holstein of voting the laws and budget common to the monarchy. 3. The above condition to apply equally to Schleswig. 4. The principle of representation in the common organization to be such that the duchies may not suffer from their numerical inferiority. 5. The executive Government to be responsible to the duchies as well as to the kingdom. 6. The duchies to be represented by an independent organ in the executive. 7. The proposed organic institutions to be established by constitutional and legal means, with the co-operation of the assemblies of each part of the monarchy. 8. The non-political relations of Schleswig and Holstein to be maintained. 9. The rights of the University of Kiel to be protected. 10. Equal rights and effective protection to be granted to the German as well as the Danish nationality.

The points in which the engagements had been infringed were thus stated:1. The de facto closer connection of Schleswig with the kingdom by which a preponderating influence is given to the latter. 2. The subordinate position of Holstein in regard to the common affairs, especially the budget. 3. The systematic destruction of all natural and neighbourly relations between Schleswig and Holstein. 4. Non-observance of engagements respecting the University of Kiel. 5. The introduction of Danish employés and Danish clergy. 6. The oppression of the German nationality, especially in regard to language.

The demands which Prussia accordingly made were:-1. Abolition of

the common constitution of October 1855. 2. The submission to the several representative assemblies of a new project of constitution not based on the principle of universal representation. 3. The concession of equal influence in the common affairs to the several local assemblies. Until the general assembly is constituted, the Government to be equally responsible to each of them. 4. The status quo ante of 1848 with respect to language to be provisionally introduced into Schleswig, until a new law is passed with the sanction of the Schleswig assembly.

The Austrian communication, which was in the form of a memorandum, contained a long historical retrospect of the different phases of the question since 1846, and laid down the following points as the fundamental conditions of a settlement:-1. That a new constitutional law for common affairs should be agreed to by the several assemblies. 2. That a provision should be introduced for protecting the German element in this new constitution from the numerical majority of the Danes. 3. That all decrees and administrative measures oppressive to the Germans in Schleswig should be abolished, and the question of language, &c., regulated in concert with the Schleswig States.

The proposals of Austria and Prussia met with no better success at

Copenhagen than the former communications of those Governments, and on the 24th September, Lord Russell, on the part of her Majesty's Government, addressed to the courts of Vienna, Berlin, and Copenhagen, new proposals for the settlement of the question.

These proposals are thus summed up by Lord Russell:-1. Holstein and Lauenburg to have all that the German Confederation ask for them. 2. Schleswig to have the power of self-government, and not to be represented in the Reichsrath. 3. A normal budget for ten years to be agreed upon by Denmark, Holstein, Lauenburg, and Schleswig. Its distribution to be confided to a council of State formed two-thirds of Danes and onethird of Germans. 4. Any extraordinary expenses to be submitted to the Rigsraad, and to the separate Diets of Holstein, Lauenburg, and Schleswig.

The above proposals were submitted to the cabinets of Vienna, Berlin, and Copenhagen. The Austrian and Prussian Governments expressed their readiness to accept them as the basis of a settlement, and to recommend them as such to the Diet.

[ocr errors]

The reply of the Danish Government was unfavourable. They stated that they were prepared to consent to the vote of the common budget and common laws by the Holstein States, provided the eventual position of Holstein should be clearly defined, and the relations of Denmark with the Confederation be placed by this sacrifice on a permanent basis. But with regard to the proposals affecting Schleswig they declined to entertain them, on the ground that the concessions to that duchy must be made by the King's free will; and they rejected the proposal for the abolition of the common constitution of Denmark and Schleswig on the ground that it would lead to the dismemberment of the monarchy.

Lord Russell replied to the objections of the Danish Government, further explaining his views respecting the proposals, and urging their adoption. Reverting to the grievances of the Duchy of Schleswig, the existence of which were, he said, established by the admissions of M. Bille made personally to him, and the report of a British agent specially sent by her Majesty's Government to that duchy, (Mr. Rainals) he stated that in view of the repeated refusal of Denmark to remedy these grievances, it had become necessary for Denmark to select one of the four following courses:1. To allow the present state of uneasiness and danger to continue till it ended in some violent explosion. 2. To adopt a common constitution, in which the German element would have more weight than mere numbers would give it. 3. To divide Schleswig into two parts, of which one to be German, and closely connected with Holstein, and the other to be Danish, and incorporated with Denmark. 4. To adopt a plan framed upon the basis of the proposals of September 24. Her Majesty's Government thought the last course the most favourable to the integrity and independence of Denmark, and therefore most in accordance with the treaty of London.

[ocr errors]

Early in November the Danish Government had sent answers to the last despatches of Austria and Prussia, and had laid down the three following points as embodying their views:-1. That the secession of Holstein and Lauenburg from the common constitution, which was the result of a decree of the German Confederation, does not affect the legality of the constitution of Denmark and Schleswig. 2. That the only new constitutional arrangement which the Danish Government can entertain is to give to the

Holstein States "a legislative and financial authority in common affairs, by the side of, and in conjunction with, the existing Rigsraad for the other parts of the monarchy that do not belong to the German Confederation." 3. That the internal relations of the duchy of Schleswig, including the language regulations, cannot be subjects of investigation or discussion on the part of the Confederation.

Lord Russell, in remarking on these points, stated that he considered them less advantageous to the real interests of Denmark than his proposals, as under such a system the Holstein States would be less likely to grant supplies for military and naval expenditure; and he thought that the result of this plan, which was intended to withdraw all German influence from the Government of Denmark proper and Schleswig, would be to enfeeble and impair the Danish monarchy as a whole.

M. Hall replied that he would prefer trusting to the normal budget, which, according to his plan, would be secure, to submitting a new one to the four assemblies as proposed by Lord Russell, which might lead to the refusal by Holstein of any supplies whatever for the navy.

On receiving the Danish note, the Prussian Government intimated its intention of discontinuing the negotiations for the present, and of making a communication to the Diet, in which the proposals of her Majesty's Government should be recommended as the basis of an arrangement. A proposal in this sense was accordingly made to the Vienna Cabinet, and agreed to by them.

The intentions of the Danish Government as to its future course of action are, according to Mr. Paget-" To convoke the Holstein States, and to submit to them their quota of the common budget for the present financial period, as well as other laws of common interest. If the credits are refused, and the laws rejected, a complete separation of Holstein from the rest of the monarchy, save and except the union of the Crown, will be the probable result. The States of Schleswig to be also assembled, a project of constitution by which the liberty of the press, right of meeting, &c., will be guaranteed, to be offered to them. A new electoral law to be also proposed to them, on the acceptance of which the ultimate promulgation of a new constitution will probably be made to depend."

Mr. Paget recently reported that the Russian minister having by order of his Government urged M. Hall to accept the proposals of her Majesty's Government as a basis of arrangement, was convinced by the language of that minister that it was hopeless to attempt to obtain from the Danish Government any departure from the line of policy they had laid down.

Lord Russell, in replying to M. Paget on the 6th January, stated that he entirely agreed with this opinion, and that her Majesty's Government being interested in the question only in so far as it concerned the peace of Europe and the welfare of Denmark, would be happy to find that the propositions to be made by the Danish Government to Holstein and Schleswig fulfil the expectations and meet with the acceptance both of Holstein and of Schleswig.

The Swedish Government objected to Lord Russell's proposals on the ground that it would be impossible for the Danish Government to manage four Parliaments; but Count Manderström, in conversation with Mr. Jerningham, expressed a hope that a satisfactory arrangement might ultimately grow out of them. He admitted that the Danish Government had not fulfilled their engagement to place the Germans in Schleswig upon an equal

footing with the Danes, and stated that he had expressed, and should continue to express, an opinion to that effect at Copenhagen, as he thought that the worst consequences might result from the persistence of the Danish Government in the non-fulfilment of their engagements, whereas when they had once fulfilled them they might fearlessly challenge public sympathy. The French Government have given merely a general support to the principles embodied in Lord Russell's proposals.

A decree has been signed for the assembly of the Holstein States. The answer of the Danish Government to Lord Russell's despatch of the 20th November was communicated on the 10th January. With regard to Holstein, the despatch touches on the concession of a vote in the common affairs, which it characterizes as "a notable sacrifice extorted by the force of circumstances," and not a duty, as stated by Lord Russell; and it defines the limits of the power of the Confederation over its members. With regard to Schleswig, the despatch goes again over the old ground, and asserts that the Confederation has no right to interfere, and that the engagements taken by Denmark have been carried into effect. It defends the administration of Schleswig, and throws doubts on the correctness of the report alluded to in Lord Russell's despatch. Finally, it states the following as the only course left open to Denmark:-1. To accept the necessity of granting to the Holstein States the position which the Frankfort Diet exacts, but with the reserves necessary to prevent that province becoming the master and arbiter of the destinies of the remainder of the monarchy. 2. Schleswig to remain out of the action of the Confederation, and to preserve her constitutional relations with the kingdom for common affairs.

The first point, the despatch concludes, will remove all pretext for a Federal execution in Holstein. The second is a condition indispensable to the existence of a Danish State.

Lord Russell replied in a despatch to Mr. Paget, dated the 21st of January. His lordship therein stated that her Majesty's Government saw no advantage in prolonging this controversy, but mentioned the following points for Mr. Paget's guidance, in case of any future conversation with M. Hall on the question of the Danish duchies :

That the recent negotiations between Austria, Prussia, and Denmark were brought about, in 1861, by her Majesty's Government, in order to avoid a Federal execution. That these negotiations having produced no result, his lordship had given to Mr. Paget, at Brussels, in the beginning of September, an outline of the plan of settlement subsequently developed in his despatch of the 24th of that month. That had that plan been adopted, it might have averted interference on the part of Germany, and given time for the passions excited to cool down. That the Danish Government had a perfect right to refuse this proposal, but that her Majesty's Government must still consider that there were certain engagements of the King of Denmark which he was bound in honour to fulfil, and that it was not for his Majesty's interest any more than for his reputation to place his German subjects in a situation inferior to that of his subjects of Danish origin, either as privilege or as to favour.

SOUTHERN ITALY.

Correspondence respecting Southern Italy.

On the 29th January, 1862, Earl Russell received a despatch from Consul Bonham, showing that the prospects of commerce were very favourable. Complaints were made on the export duty on olive oil, since the crop had been very abundant. The new currency of lire had been introduced in substitution for the Neapolitan currency of ducats and grains.

On the 25th February, another despatch was received from the same, giving an account of a demonstration which had taken place on the 9th against the temporal power of the Pope.

From the early morning all the Toledo was adorned with flags bearing inscriptions alluding to the circumstance. Although the weather was cold and rainy, Toledo was also crowded by people. About mid-day the demonstration, composed of all classes of citizens, divided itself into two sections: a very numerous one with flags at its head traversed the Toledo; the other, much larger, went to the house of the French consul. It was an imposing spectacle, and which contrasted strangely with the assertions of Cardinal Antonelli relative to the sentiments of the Italian people. Here were, not a few individuals, but an immense crowd composed of every class of every rank of persons without exception; the Liberal clergy figured everywhere.

99

In the section which traversed the Toledo the following inscriptions were legible on a great national flag: "Long live the Pope!" "Down with the temporal power!" "Long live Victor Emmanuel II. in the Campidoglio! "Long live Garibaldi!" in addition to which other papers were seen affixed to the walls of the Toledo, and on the flags which flew about from the houses with these words: "Long live the Pope not King!" "Long live Italy with its King in the Campidoglio!" "Long live France with its Emperor!" That portion of the demonstration which went to the French consul-general's house, and which was, we must say, the greatest portion, had also its flags with the same inscriptions; it traversed with a band at its head the entire Toledo, and stopped at the square of the Plebiscite before the Foresteria Palace; there the usual cheers, the same acclamations, but the prefect not appearing at the balcony, the crowd went towards St. Lucia and stopped under the windows of the French consulate. To the reiterated cries of "Long live the Emperor!"

66

Long live France!" "Long live the French people!""Long live Victor Emmanuel in the capital!"" Down with the Pope-King!" the French consul appeared at the window to thank the people; as the crowd stopped there some time shouting, so the consul courteously went out on the balcony many times also with his lady.

After the manifestation at the French consulate had terminated, the crowd also went to the house of the British consul; there were also clamorous and continuous cries of "Long live England!" Afterwards the demonstration returned towards the Toledo, and dispersed tranquilly little by little, so that not the slightest accident was to be deplored. In the moment in which we write the most perfect tranquillity reigns everywhere. Moreover, as an appendix to the imposing demonstration, the following protest is circulating in our city: it is already covered with thousands of

« ПретходнаНастави »