Palmerston: A is for Austria

This week’s blog, the second in our P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N series, will be on Austria. We will be focussing on the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire.

Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston

In discussing the revolutions, we will be highlighting the memoranda relating to Foreign Affairs, the drafts of despatches to British diplomats, and correspondence between Lord Palmerston and Lord Ponsonby (British ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at Vienna at the time) and Lord Abercromby (British envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Piedmont-Sardinia).

The 1848 revolutions in the Austrian Empire

The foundations of the causes of the revolution can be identified by the opposition to the regime of Prince Clemens von Metternich, who was Austria’s Foreign minister from 1809 and Chancellor from 1821. His secretive and arbitrate system of government supported by the most repressive and inquisitorial police methods in Europe could not last forever.

Vienna’s revolution began in March, with liberal lawyer Baron Alexander von Back petitioning the Lower Austria Diet, which requested public accountability for state finances and support for the establishment of an imperial parliament. Students petitioned for complete press freedom, freedom of expression, the establishment of militia and other basic rights. Writers and academics joined some 400 students on a march to the seat of the Diet in order to emphasise the seriousness of their demands. They then moved to the Hofburg, seat of the Imperial Court. Outside the city walls, workers attacked tax offices, police stations, factories and new machinery. Hearing news of the march to the Hofburg, they moved towards the inner city, demolishing gas lamps and igniting the escaping gas to create a ring of fire around the city. Numerous speeches by leading demonstrators were taken up by the protesting crowds; all demanding Metternich’s resignation, the expulsion of Jesuits, the formation of an armed Civil Guard and the establishment of a constitution.

Archduke Albrecht, who still supported Metternich, employed troops to clear the streets, supported by a contingent of the newly formed National and Civil Guards. In the ensuing violence, 48 demonstrators were killed, a majority of them workers. This led to further uproar and a solidarity between students, craftsmen and the industrial proletariat to present a united front against Metternich. Under pressure from the city authorities, the army withdrew and a University-based Academic Legion was formed, which together with the Civil Guard took control of the city. With even his closest allies turning against him, Metternich resigned his position on 13 March 1848, only minutes before the ultimatum issued by the Civil Guard expired. He left the city secretly the next day and went into exile in London.

“News arrived of Metternich, resignation on the 14^th” Palmerston’s political diary entry MS62/PP/D/10, 18 March 1848

Metternich’s departure was greeted with jubilation but led to widespread looting and rioting in the city outskirts, where the Civil Guard and the Academic Legion were employed to restore order. On 14 March a constitution was promised and a new government was established serval days later led by Prime Minister Karl Ludwig Ficquelmont with Branon Franxz Xaver Pillersdorf as Minister of the Interior, both liberal opponents of Metternich. The new government was met with a great deal of opposition; by 4 May Ficquelmont was forced to resign, making way for the more accommodating Pillersdorf.

Pillersdorf began work on the promised constitution, which involved people being represented by an Imperial Diet and a second chamber, the Senate, consisting of members of the imperial family, imperial nominees and the landed gentry with the aim of upholding their historical privileges in Austria and Bohemia but not in Hungary and Italy. This constitution included an ‘agreement’ clause, which granted special privileges on the emperor, including his inviolability, sole executive power and supreme command over the armed forces and remained unclear on a number of other constitutional details, such as the relationship between the central government and the provinces. While the nobility and the more prosperous bourgeoisie approved of it; the Academic Legion, the Democratic Club and other radical associations rejected it, leading to the May revolution.

On 15 May violent disturbances ensued, which led to the second chamber being abolished and the court fleeing for Innsbruck on 17 May. While petitions created by citizens’ groups, such as the National Guard were dispatched to Innsbruck, begging the emperor to return, a virtual collapse of the banking system ensued, as customers withdrew their savings, threatening financial insolvency.

When matters reached a climax on 26 May, 160 barricades were constructed in the inner city and regular troops found themselves in armed conflict with students, workers, and the National Guard. Fewer than 12,000 troops in the Vienna garrison faced nearly 40,000 student legionaries and national guardsmen, as well as thousands of workers streaming into the city to support them.

The democratic victory led to the formation of a Security Committee, consisting of members from a Citizens’ Committee, the National Guard and the Academic Legion. One of the new Committee’s first demands was the removal of all ‘unnecessary military forces’ from Vienna and the surrender of Count Hayos, former Commander in Chief of the Vienna National Guard, as a hostage to the students. It also urgently attempted to persuade the emperor to return to Vienna.

With eruptions further ensuing in August and September 1848, October saw the final act. As political pressure increased, poor leadership and increasing divisions led to defeat. The ‘October’ revolution began when Count Theodor Baillet Latour, Minister of War, ordered troops to be transferred from Vienna to Hungary to assist Jellaĉić’s army in its campaign against the rebellious Magyars. This led to the Academic Legion, supported by crowds of angry Viennese workers and the more radical elements of the National Guard preventing regular troops from leaving Vienna. During an exchange of fire several people were killed, including the general in charge of the operation. Inspired by their success, the revolutionaries marched on the Ministry of War, intent on overthrowing the government. Prime Minister Wessenberg and his Minister of the Interior, Bach, managed to escape, but the despised Minister of War, Latour, was seized by the crowd and brutally murdered. The crowd then stormed the armoury in an attempt to secure the city against military attack and declared a provisional government. The court fled once more and Vienna was besieged by the armies of Windischgrätz and Jellaĉić.

Memoranda relating to Foreign Affairs

Palmerston’s years as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs from 1846 to 1851 involved dealing with brutal political disruption all over Europe. The memoranda relating to Foreign Affairs for Austria contains insightful information on the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire, including “answers to Lord Palmerston’s queries respecting special missions to announce accessions of Emperors of Austria & Russia”, as well as an explanation by Palmerston on Count Ladislas Teleke’s memorial on the system of Austrian government and the feelings of Hungarians:

“The maintenance of the Austrian empire is an object of first-rate importance to Europe at large, as this statement points out internal dangers which threaten the unity of that Empire, & which not withstanding Count Teleky’s opinion to the contrary might surely be diminished if not averted entirely by an improved system of administrative government”

Note written by Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston on Count Ladislas Teleke’s memorial  submitted to the French Government [MS62/PP/MM/AU/5/enc1]

MS62/PP/BD/AU Drafts of despatches to British diplomats abroad

The drafts of despatches to British diplomats abroad include despatches to Lord Ponsonby from Lord Palmerston which contain valuable information on the context of the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire. Revelations include questions sent to Count Dietrichstein from Prince Metternich on whether His Majesty’s Government admit the principle that the state of possession established in Italy by the Treaty of Vienna ought to be maintained, and the wish of the Emperor of Austria to defend his station territories against any attack. Lord Palmerston also reveals his own thoughts on such revelations, stating:

 “the stipulations and engagements of the Treaty of Vienna ought to be adhered to in Italy as well as in all other parts of Europe to which they apply, and that no change can be properly be made in the territorial arrangements which were established by that Treaty without the consent and concurrence of all the Powers that were partied to it.”

Memorandum from Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston to Lord Ponsonby, 12 Aug 1847 [MS62/PP/BD/AU/55/1]

MS62/PP/GC/PO Letters from Lord Ponsonby

As British ambassador extraordinary and plenipotentiary at Vienna from 10 August 1846 to 31 May 1850, Lord Ponsonby’s general correspondence to Lord Palmerson provide a vital insight into the state of play in Austria during the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire, revealing that “chief movers of the revolution are on the brink of ruin” and that “people hope for moral support from England” [MS62/PP/GC/PO/568].

Lord Ponsonby ensures that Palmerston is kept up to date on all affairs in Vienna, reporting when the Emperor has left, and when Pillersdorf gave up the idea of a second chamber following the demands of the students [MS62/PP/GC/PO/571]. He also provides his opinions on Palmerston’s plans, warning him that “if you do not take care you will produce a war” and that “it not possible to bully Austria into concessions.”

Letter from Lord Ponsonby to Henry John Temple, Third Viscount Palmerston, 15 Sep 1848 [MS62/PP/GC/PO/579/1]

MS62/PP/GC/AB Letters from Lord Abercrombie

The last section of material we will discuss in the Palmerston Papers in connection to the revolutions in 1848 in the Austrian Empire is correspondence from Ralph Abercrombie, British envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Piedmont-Sardinia, Turin. The letters predominantly discuss the need for care to be taken with future actions to avoid a general war in Europe, and the state of affairs between Italy and Austria.

In the following letter, Lord Abercrombie explains that the Marquis Ricci from Paris has taken steps “to apply to the French government for their guarantee of the King’s Dominions, should the Sardinians be forced to advance into the Duchies for the protection of their inhabitants against the vexations and oppressions of the Austrians, who according to the armistice of the 9th August have no right to occupy the Territories.”

Letter from Ralph Abercrombie, British envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Piedmont-Sardinia, Turin, to Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston, 11 Dec 1848 [MS62/PP/GC/AB/177]

Do look out for our next blog post, where we will be continuing our journey through places beginning with the letters of Palmerston’s name, which will focus on L for London!

Palmerston: P is for Paris

This is the first post in a new series from Special Collections on Henry John Temple, third Viscount Palmerston: P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N.

This week it’s P for Paris, a city whose fortunes were at the centre of early nineteenth-century European politics and, therefore, Palmerston’s political career. Developments in Paris often feature in the Palmerston Papers, held at the University of Southampton’s Special Collections. The city acts as a useful lens, focusing attention on his career at distinct points in time.

The Right Honorable Henry John Temple, Lord Viscount Palmerston, G.B.C. Painted by J.Lucas; engraved by H.Cook. [Cope Collection cq 95 PAL pr 102]

Palmerston was Secretary at War from November 1809 until May 1828; Foreign Secretary on three occasions between 1830 and 1846; Home Secretary from 1852-5; and finally Prime Minister for two non-consecutive terms from 1855-8 and again from 1859 until his death on 18^th October 1865.

Political developments at Paris were intertwined with Palmerston’s career from the earliest days of his public service, but even in his childhood, as evidenced by the diaries of his parents – the second Viscount Palmerston and Mary Mee. Their diaries tell the story of an anxious carriage ride (which included a young Harry, future third Viscount) through the unhappy crowds and revolutionary streets of Paris in 1792.

As Secretary at War from 1809 Palmerston was in correspondence with Arthur Wellesley, first Duke of Wellington, on the progress of the campaigns of the Napoleonic War and the management of the army, as seen in this letter on the formation of a garrison company for hospital purposes, dated 26 May 1815.

In August 1815, a few months after the decisive battle at Waterloo, Palmerston left England to visit a recently defeated France. At this time Palmerston’s politics were closer to the Tory ministry of William Pitt the Younger and he was caught up in the patriotic fervour that overtook Britain, after years of war against the French. Palmerston kept a journal of his visit to France in 1815 and in it he describes the countryside and towns on the journey from Le Havre to Paris, passing through Rouen, Vernon and Nantes.

View of the Pont au Change and the Palais de la Cité, Paris from Prince Louis of Battenberg’s postcard album of the French Revolution [MS62/MB2/A19/93]

As Palmerston entered Paris he was overwhelmed by the imperial grandeur of the public architecture, as revealed by his diaries:

“Everything is upon a great scale and is evidently the result of a well directed but over whelming authority […] the public enjoy everything, individuals nothing: the strong arm of power has made the will of the few bend to the convenience of the many.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, pp.30-1, 2 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

Whilst in France Palmerston watched the reviews of the allied armies of occupation, in the company of the Emperor of Russia, the King of Prussia, and the first Duke of Wellington. Palmerston’s interactions with a defeated French people generally reinforced his sense of English cultural superiority. He even preferred the style of marching used by the British soldiers, compared with the Prussians and Russians. When describing the look of the British soldiers encamped outside Paris, Palmerston cannot help but impute a politically meaningful attribute of rugged individualism to the British infantry, whose untidy shabbiness Palmerston contrasted positively with the machine-like comportment of the foreign troops:

“Our men certainly do not look so smart and uniform in a body as the Russians and Prussians but still they have a more soldier-like air, they look more like business and fighting: the foreign troops look like figures cut out of card, ours like a collection of living men […] their men seem to depend entirely on each other, ours look as if they moved independently and yet with equal uniformity as a mass: there is a character of individual energy about our people which one does not see in theirs.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.44, 5 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

On 4th September 1815 Palmerston attended a mock battle staged by the Prussians on the Plain of Grenelle near Paris. Here they recreated their recent march on Paris and the Duke of Wellington was apparently well pleased with the Prussian manner of deploying from column.

“I was observing to him [the Duke of Wellington] the different practice of our army and those of other nations in their manner of advancing to an attack. They always advancing in column, we in line. He said he was satisfied that this was one reason why we had always beat the French, that if troops are steady and the line is well formed the line will always have an advantage over the column from presenting so much larger a front of fire, and that by attacking the column rapidly they are prevented from deploying, which is an operation that cannot be performed under a close fire.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.35, 4 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

Palmerston also discusses the repatriation of artwork from the Louvre, amidst the French defeat and much Napoleonic pilfering:

“The Louvre has not as yet been deprived of any pictures of importance but Ld Clancarty [Richard Le Poer Trench, second Earl of Clancarty, British plenipotentiary to the Congress of Vienna] has marched above a hundred which are claimed as the property of the King of the Netherlands and Cannova is arrived from Rome to claim both the pictures and statues that belong to the Pope; the Venus di Medici is also preparing to return to Italy.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.42, 4 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

That evening Palmerston also made a visit to the Théâtre Feydeau and took in a performance. Henry the Fourth was the subject of their representation and, as only royalists went to the theatre, the audience received with unbounded applause every thing that could be applied to the restoration of the Bourbons.

Palmerston also frequented the houses of the well-to-do and even went to a dance. This is how he describes the French interiors he encountered:

“The French theatres are small and dirty beyond description, whether from economy or from an idea of producing greater effect they keep the body of the house very dark and the gloom adds to the dirty appearance of the house; the heat of the houses in this weather is most oppressive and the atmosphere of the audience more pungently offensive than the exhalations of a British mob in Palace Yard.”

Journal of a tour of France in two volumes, Vol.1, p.45, 5 Sep 1815 [MS62/BR23A/3/1]

Unfortunately for poor Palmerston, he would have to endure another month of such terrible conditions before he returned to England via Calais in early October 1815.

After almost twenty years as Secretary at War, Palmerston left the post in the spring of 1828 when he resigned from Wellington’s Tory government along with his ally William Huskisson. At this point, the more liberal wing of the Tory party, which included George Canning, William Huskisson and Palmerston, found themselves closer to the Whigs and Palmerston joined the opposition. 

In January 1829 Palmerston travelled to France and his diaries reveal the behind-the-scenes machinations of French government circles, with conflicts between the liberal and conservative factions around King Charles X. Palmerston predicted that when the legislature met there would be considerable change in the liberal direction:

“[…] and thus matters will remain until the chambers meet – when it is far from improbable that a considerable change will take place, and if there is change it must be towards the Liberal side, the King is quite satisfied with the present state of things; but would wish any change to be towards Toryism. He was uneasy last summer about his disputes with the Bishops on the subject of the schools. But was satisfied by the report made by Chateaubriand of his conversation with the Pope; who said “What a troublesome lot of Bishops you have in France, they are the most so of any in Christendom […]”

Palmerston’s Political journal, 1828-9, pp.95-6 [MS62/PP/D/2]

Palmerston continues by stating that “constitutional principles have made great advances in France and public opinion is acquiring considerable force”. He would return to France later the same year when he visited the court of the Bourbon King Charles X, made his way to a lecture by François Guizot (a historian in favour of constitutional monarchy and later a government minister under the Duke of Orléans), dined with Jules de Polignac (prime minister under Charles X, just before the July Revolution in 1830 that overthrew the senior line of the House of Bourbon) and attended many soirées.

Portrait of Charles Maurice de Talleyrand-Périgord, Prime Minister of France in 1815 and Ambassador to the United Kingdom, 1830-34, from Prince Louis of Battenberg’s postcard album of the French Revolution [MS62/MB2/A19/88]

Palmerston disliked the French ultra-conservatives of Charles X’s regime and predicted, correctly, that the regime was unpopular and would not last long. In July 1830 the French rose up against the increasingly reactionary King Charles X, the French Bourbon monarch, whilst his cousin Louis Philippe, Duke of Orléans, was established as a new constitutional monarch; the principle of hereditary right was replaced by that of popular sovereignty. Charles X had become increasingly unpopular for many reasons but two of the main grievances were the imposition of the death penalty for anyone profaning the Eucharist and the payment of indemnities to anyone who had previously been declared “enemies of the Revolution” under Napoleon.

Developments in France must have reinforced Palmerston’s increasingly liberal, or Whiggish, views: by 1829 he was in favour of parliamentary reform and supported the 1832 Reform Act (although he was opposed to any subsequent extension of the franchise); he recognised the importance of constitutional limits on the power of the monarchy; and although in favour of maintaining the established position of the Church of England he became a consistent advocate of toleration, especially for Roman Catholics.

It was through his criticism of the Tory government in the Commons from a Whiggish perspective in 1830 and his celebration of the July Revolution in France that year that he found himself nominated as Foreign Secretary when Wellington’s resistance to all parliamentary reform led to the creation of a Whig-Canningite coalition under Earl Grey.

Events at Paris were instrumental in shaping the political discourse and the worldviews of many contemporaries, not just Palmerston. If the horrors of the French Revolution, the rise of Napoleon and the subsequent defeat of France in 1815 had prompted a conservative and patriotic reaction amongst many Britons, then the political instability caused by the reactionary politics of Charles X had inspired a Whiggish turn towards constitutional monarchy, religious toleration and reform of the franchise. Palmerston’s travels to Paris demonstrate his transition from a Tory-sympathetic Pittite to a Whiggish liberal, for the sake of British political stability and possibly his own future political fortunes.

Our next post in the P-A-L-M-E-R-S-T-O-N places series will focus on ‘A’ for Austria…