EASTERN EUROPE.
TEE concluding volume of this work is devoted to a continuation of the character of the Emperor Nicholas and the Russian officials, (or rather to a defence of the author's account of them,) and to a further exposition of his theories upon Eastern Europe, by a review of the Governments of Prussia and Austria. The character of Nicholas and his system is for- tified by fresh evidence, drawn from foreign writers who have mostly published since the two previous volumes of Eastern Enrope appeared, or by new reports which the author has picked up. His reviews of the Prussian and Austrian Governments look less systematic and searching than his former account of Russia ; the writer giving more general and condensed sketches. His picture is also more favourable. The Prussian rule is less oppressive, debasing, and cruel than Russia's, or even Austria's, and far better for a man to live under ; though the "enlightened despot- ism " which doctrinaires of all kinds have written and talked about is mere fudge, and political liberty or independent feeling sought to be crushed as much by Prussia as by Russia herself. So far as her German pro- vinces are concerned, Austrian despotism is paternal in mere material at. tendons ; and in her foreign dominions—Galicia, Hungary, the Tyrol, and Italy—her tyranny is better than that of Russia, because circumstances are different. Opposing bodies exist in her dominions—" an independent church, an aristocracy, a burgher class, and a host of distinct nation- alities," all of which have been destroyed in Russia : If not a part of Western Europe, she is influenced by its spirit : in short, the tyranny of Austria is European, that of Russia Asiatic—Mongolian in its brutality, Chinese in its pedantry. As far, however, as spirit and system are con canned, the author asserts that there is no difference between the govern- ment of Vienna and that of St. Petersburg; and the late shocking events in Galicia go somewhat to confirm his view. The difference between the governments and the peoples, -which the writer dwelt upon in the former volumes, be continues in this; pointing out the countless varieties of the Austrian subjects ; and though those of Prussia are not so opposite in blood and language, they are still opposite in the feeling of nationality. We must not, however, place too much re- liance on differences of this kind. France is made up of various elements; the inhabitants of the Northern and Southern provinces, of Brittany and Normandy, differ perhaps as much from one another as any subjects of Prussia, and more so if we put aside the Poles. Within the present cen- tury, and indeed later, this country consisted of three nations, and per- haps more races. Even now we have several languages—Welsh, Irish, Gaelic—so different as not only to be popularly unintelligible to English- men but even to the respective tribes themselves ; and if the Orangemen and true Milesians could be let loose at each other, we fancy they would exhibit as intense a hatred as any Sclavonic or German. We must not therelbre jump rashly to conclusions of dismemberments, revolutions, and nobody knows what, from mere differences of race, or even of lan • guage. Could these things alone have prevented consolidation, neither England nor France could be what they are. On the other hand, they are elements of danger, as we sec in the case of Holland and Belgium, and of difficulty, as we feel with Ireland. With Prussia, no doubt, there is a further element of risk—that her Polish subjects are part of another nation whose dismemberment is within the memory of living men, and whose rulers have been so foolish as to keep the sense of that nationality alive by cruel persecutions. Still, the danger to Prussia- is ratherfrom constitutional demands followed by revolution, than from what may be called blood uprisings, such as the Anglo-Saxons planned against Danes and Normans, and the Sicilians executed in their celebrated Vespers.
To national wars Austria would seem obnoxious both from Italy and Hungary, should circumstances favour, their. development. The whole of Europe beyond the Carpathian Mountains ia evidently thickly sown with the seeds of revolt ; not so much from nationality, (though that may have its influence, and serve readily tbr a war-cry and mark for mas- sacre,) but from brutal and mad oppression. The worst symptom in the Russian tyranny as depicted by late writers is the base and slavish cha- racter which it imparts. In every tyranny, or for that matter in every court, or every democracy, men have risen by pandering to the vices of power but all other tyrannies have bad some latent principle which produced resolute opposition. The stoic philosophy and the legal profes- sion under the Roman empire—the sense of law and moral duty in China—the Koran, or a patriarchal idea of duty to God, or even a per- sonal attachment, under Mahometan tyrants—have all produced open opposition or plain-spoken appeal, which has sometimes been successful. These, no doubt, are exceptions; . but in Russia there would appear to be no exceptions. The system is one which a man cannot be connected with and retain a character for even personal respectability, much less for political independence. From highest to lowest, the crawling servility of the courtier seems combined with the abject baseness of the slave and the implicit.obedience of the soldier, without any of that tempering which Western public opinion exacts not only in the mode of orderingrbutin the orders themselves; and as for, venality, every one is of necessity cor- rupt, since no man receives a sufficient salary. These opinions, though they may be deduced from this volume, are not altogether drawn from it, but are founded upon the very nature of the service, and the character of the acts required from those engaged in it. According to this writer, there are but three living persons with any pretensions to character in the Russian service; and one of them, Tchor- nichef, the Minister of War, is suspected of having poisoned a rival in the Emperoes favour, and caused the exile of a wealthy relation in order to get his estates : but as, he does not descend to littlenesses, he passes for a man of honour in popular opinion. Admiral Greig and Count Woron- sow are in disgrace, when necessity does not compel their employment. Two others are also mentioned as men of reputation ; but both dead,— Pomo di Borgo, and a sporting character well known in this country, Count Idatutsewicz. Of the latter our author gives this sketch. "There was another individual, Count Slatutsewiez, of whose character and talents honourable mention should'be made. -Better known in this country than even Pozzo di Borgo, he, like Pozzo di Borgo, has been gathered to his fathers, diminishing by his decease the number of those skilful diplomatic agents selected by Alexander, and subsequently employed by the present. Emperor; who, when trusting to his own judgment, has been invariably unfortunate in every choice he has yet made, of civil, military, or diplomatic servants. "Mat utsewicz, as his name Indicates. was a Pole, from the province of Mazovia, the cradle of the Polish aristocracy. His father, if the author remembers right, was one uf the ministers of the independent Grand Dutchy of Warsaw. His son, the personage in question, belonged to the same dashing school of diplomacy as Tchonachef, the Minister of War, before he abandoned that career. Eschewing the pedantry of his profession, under an appearance of frivolity he was a keen ob- server and a sagacious politician. Many of his despatches, written after a hard day's hunting, when those who had been his companions across the fields of Leicestershire and at the table had retired to rest, are said to be models of po- litical penetration and lucid exposition. "The urbanity of his manners made him a general favourite, whilst hi a Eng- lish tastes and habits rendered him peculiarly and deservedly popular in this country. He was considered to be the only foreigner who had ever shone in the -fleld, and acknowledged even at Melton to be a crack rider. "His English predilections are said to have given umbrage to theEmperor; and were carried so Eir, that on returning to St. Petersburg, for the purpose or being surrounded by English people, be Would take up his abode at an hagfish boarding- house; though the establishments of that description are of very secondary order in that city. His knowledge of the state of parties and of public opinion in England rendered his services, however, too valuable to be dispensed with by Ids Sovereign. " Maiutsewicz, like Pozzo di Borgo, was one of those men who, with a profound disgust for Russia, remained voluntarily more ignorant of its internal condition than it' employed by another court; but who, seduced by the attractions of wealth and station which were to be enjoyed out of it, consented to serve its Cabinet."
The following strange specimen of Russian behaviour is in keeping with what others have described, whether this story be true or false. 'The anecdote refers to the present reigning favourite.
"This General Kleinmichel served in the office of Arakcheieff (Alexander's sanguinary favourite, the founder of the military colonies,) doing duty as his private secretary, with the rank of Colonel.
"Mr. Alexander Smith, who recently met with an accidental death in St. Pe- tersburg, was in the habit of relating, that he had once occasion to seek an inter- view of this Minister; whom he described as a violent and irritable but well- intentioned man. During the course of it, he begged this personage to refer to a memorial which he had forwarded to him. Arakcheieff desired his Secretary, the Colonel Kleinmichel, to bring it. Through some accident or negligence, it bad been placed where it could not be found till he had exhausted Aralscheieff's pa- tience; which was very seedily the case. To the surprise of his visiter, the Russian Vizier commenced abusing.Kleinmichel in the most violent manner' and, bidding him approach, spat full Into his face. The Colonel bowed his head, wiping off the spittle, and saying in a humble voice, Vinabat, I am in error.'".
There are sketches and stories of a good many other personages, which we will pass for a couple of traits of Austria and Prussia respectively.
AUSTRIAN PRISONS.
The fortresses of remote districts are commonly filled with political prisoners; and wherever the mountain fastnesses and the rifles of the Tyrolese, or the insur- rection (general rising) of the fiery Hungarian Magyars is not dreaded, all oppo- sition or reflection on the conduct of the Government, or the rapacity of its agent!, is punished by the career, eqrcer durus, or career durissimus; the three modes of punishment which in the paternal government replace degradation to the ranks, the knout, and Siberia, in the Russian despotism; and which, except in favoured localities, are freely administered. The career is confinement during which the very name of the victim is often forgotten, so that he remains like the prisoners found in the Bastile, and by the Poles in the Russian prisons, till his name and case are lost and forgotten by the death of his successive jailors. The career darns is attended with hard-labour; and the career durissinaus, from which death soon relieves the prisoner, is distinguished by the administration of the lash twice a week for life.
PRUSSIAN SUPERVISION.
Even in the Rhenish provinces, no one can either be christened, brought up, live, or be buried, without the interference of that bureaucracy, with its complex regulations, which has flourished for ages in all its glory in China, and having attained a rapid growth in the contiguous Russian empire' has taken vigorous root in the proximate state of Prussia; being apparently transmitted, like the Cholera, Westward from the-far East, diminishing in energy as it travels, though still abundantly pernicious. Under the rule of the enlightened government of Prussia, a child could not have been christened by such names as Lytton Bulwer or Sydney Smith; the authorities objecting to patronymics as Christian names: whatever agreement may have been made ,between its parents, it must be brought tip, if a male, in the religion of the father; and when it dies, whether in infancy or manhood, it must be buried in a coffin of the Government regulation size.
Previous page
