19 c Europe, session 2.10; The Reorganization of Europe, 1866-1871

Nineteenth Century Europe
PART 2
session 10
THE REORGANIZATION OF EUROPE,
1866-1871

Major Themes of This Session
Great Britain from Palmerston
to Gladstone
NONINTERVENTION AND COLONIAL
PROBLEMS
PARTY POLITICS
THE REFORM ACT OF 1867
GLADSTONE’S REFORMS
GLADSTONE AND IRELAND
Russia under Alexander II
NONINTERVENTION AND IMPERIAL
EXPANSION
THE GREAT REFORMS
The Showdown between
France and Germany
NAPOLEON III AND THE GERMAN
QUESTION
THE HOHENZOLLERN CANDIDATURE
THE FRANCO-PRUSSIAN WAR
THE REORGANIZATION OF CENTRAL
EUROPE

“While these tremendous events [the birth of two Great Powers and the diminution of
a third] were taking place in central Europe, the rest of the continent and its neighboring
islands remained uninvolved. Only the French government seriously considered
intervening in the armed rivalry of the German powers, and, in the end, Napoleon III
decided that neutrality offered more tangible advantages—an expectation that was not, as
we shall see, fulfilled in the sequel. The attention of the other Great Powers was absorbed
by pressing domestic problems, and the lesser states had neither the interest nor the
power to be other than neutral.”
Gordon A. Craig, Europe Since 1815, Third Edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. 1971. p. 221.

Great Britain from Palmerston to
Gladstone
Nonintervention and Colonial Problems
Sepoy Mutiny or

Indian War for

Independence?

1857

“The English appetite for foreign involvements for foreign involvements had been
thoroughly sated by the unhappy experience of the Crimean War. In the years that
followed that conflict, Britain was considerably less active in continental affairs than
she had been in any time since 1815. The desire for peace was so strong in both political
parties that, when British governments wished to take a stand or express an opinion on
foreign problems, they could never be sure of parliamentary or popular support….
“…in July 1864, speakers on both sides of the House [of Commons] called for…a return
to the principle of nonintervention—by which was meant, apparently, a policy of leaving
Europe strictly alone. In any case, that is the policy that was followed by all parties after
1864; and Britain had nothing to say about the great decisions of 1866 and 1870.
“It was, of course, not only the reaction to the debacle in the Crimea that produced
this result. Unlike the states in central Europe, Britain possessed important territories and
interests overseas, and these were constantly demanding attention. In the years of
European transformation, problems arose in India, in the Far East, in the southwestern
Pacific, and in North America; and these absorbed some of the interest and energy that
might in other times have been turned across the Channel.”
Craig, op. cit.,, pp. 221-22.

I want to suggest a novel genre for the study of Britain’s 19th century colonial problems
Historical fiction is a “mixed bag” as to the accuracy of the setting into which the author injects
his fictional characters
The novels which I will recommend have much accurate information about the historical figures
and the situations where the fictional protagonist finds himself.
Consider good historical fiction as a treat to give yourself after wading through difficult
“scholarly” tomes.
jbp

“…the Civil war in the United Sates….aroused much deeper passions in the British Isles
than any of the wars that took place in Europe, partly because it had a direct impact upon
the British economy by sharply reducing the imports of raw cotton to the mills of
Lancashire and Yorkshire and thus affecting the livelihood of the mill operatives in those
districts, and partly because it raised political, ideological, and moral issues of the gravest
importance. The question of the advisability of recognizing the Confederacy as a nation
divided the government and the country. A man’s stand upon it was as apt to be
determined as much by his views on the relative merits of aristocratic and democratic
forms of government or the moral justification of slavery as it was by his calculation of
the political results of recognition.
“In the end, the government followed what it believed to be the will of the people,
which was predominately pro-Northern in sympathy, particularly (and this defied all
theories of economic determinism) in those areas hit hardest by the cotton shortage. Even
so, there were sharp crises between Great Britain and the Union government—over the
boarding of a British ship by a Union commander (the notorious Trent affair of 1861),
over the depredations of commerce raiders built in British yards and sold to the
Confederacy, and over other issues—and sometimes war between the two countries
seemed not very far away….”

“…The British government was well aware that such a conflict would almost certainly
lead to an American attack upon Canada. Concern for Canada continued, indeed, even
after the American Civil War came to an end. In May 1866 a band of Irish nationalists,
most of whom had fought in the Union army and were now organized in a society known
as the Fenian Brotherhood, attempted a raid across the Canadian border. It was easily
broken up, but it appeared to indicate that Canadian security could not simply be taken
for granted.
“All of these events across the seas are important in helping to explain Britain’s
relative abstention from European complications after 1856. But they do not stand alone.
There was much going on in England itself in these years.”

Gladstone
Party Politics

“In the field of politics the most important single event, and the one that aroused the
greatest amount of popular passion, was the passage of the second Reform Bill of 1867.
But this was preceded, and in an important sense made possible, by a change in the
leadership of the political parties.…”
Craig, op. cit.,, p. 224.

But this was preceded, and in an important sense made possibly, by a change in the nature
and leadership of the political parties.
“For some years after the end of the Crimean War, the confusion that had been
introduced into British politics by the debate over the repeal of the Corn Laws in the
1840s was perpetuated. The parties had become loose coalitions without internal
cohesion and with a continually shifting membership. On the one side, the aristocratic
Whigs and the Manchester radicals made very strange bedfellows; on the other, the Tories
had not made up their quarrel with the followers of Peel, who wavered between the two
groupings. It has been said that it was almost impossible until the first Parliamentary vote
after a general election to tell what the exact state of the parties was. In the
circumstances, it is apparent that they would not have sharply differentiated programs.
Indeed, one can almost say that they had no programs at all and did nt feel any need for
them. Constant legislative activity was not yet considered a necessary or desirable aspect
of governing the country. The leader of the Tories, Lord Derby,…”

of governing the country. The leader of the Tories, Lord Derby, was more interested in
racing and Homer than in political issues; and Lord Palmerston,…”

of governing the country. The leader of the Tories, Lord Derby,• was more interested in
racing and Homer than in political issues; and Lord Palmerston,• the Whig chieftain,
devoted himself to foreign policy almost to the exclusion of everything else.”

“This situation began to change in the 1860s, largely as a result of the rise and
acceptance of new leaders. The emergence of a modern Conservative party that would
appeal to urban voters as well as to the agricultural interest became possible only after the
Tory party had accepted Benjamin Disraeli (1804-1881) as Derby’s successor….”

“For all his great gifts, Bright was not the man to lead a modern political party;
he held extreme views on too many subjects for that, and his doctrinaire pacifism
alone made him seem, to many people, to be impractical. The man who became the
first leader of the new Liberal party and who continued in that position until almost
the end of the century was Gladstone, who possessed as much eloquence as Bright on
the hustings and in Parliament and as highly developed a sense of responsibility and
passion for improvement, but was generally considered to be steadier and more
reliable.…His prestige and popularity were so great by this time that there was little
question that he would become leader of the party after after Palmerston and Russell
had passed from the scene.”

Gladstone
The Reform Act of 1867

"Dishing the
Whigs," Punch
cartoon. Lord
Derby and
Benjamin
Disraeli "dish"
their Whig
opponents by
introducing
more liberal
reforms than
they had
contemplated;
their heads are
presented on a
platter to
Queen
Victoria..—
Wikipedia

“The new spirit that Gladstone and Bright brought to the Liberal coalition was
shown in the campaign that culminated in the passing of the Reform Act of 1867.
That there was need for a new law governing the franchise and the allocation of
parliamentary seats had been painfully clear for years.…”

Disraeli Defeats the Liberals’ 1866 Bill
he skillfully withdrew support from the reactionary-conservative
wing of the Liberals, led by Robert Lowe
June 28-when the bill failed, Lord Russell’s ministry was replaced
by a Conservative one; Lord Derby as PM, Disraeli as Chancellor
of the Exchequer
they were challenged to revive conservatism. Lord Palmerston, the
great Liberal leader, was dead
Disraeli offered his own version of reform under the banner of
“Tory Democracy”
his bill attempted to include only the “better sort” of artisans

“But the real authors of the bill—which started Britain on the road to democracy
by doubling the electorate—were Gladstone and Bright. Their efforts inspired the
popular demonstrations that persuaded Parliament that further delay would be
unwise; and the details of the bill passed were based on features of Gladstone’s
earlier schemes. The new electorate seemed to realize this, for, in the elections of
1868, it returned the Liberals to power with a commanding majority; and Gladstone,
for the first time, became prime minister.”

Gladstone
Gladstone’s Reforms

“Gladstone’s first term of office, the so-called Great Ministry, lasted from 1868
to 1874 and was characterized by a burst of legislative activity. This was least
notable in the area of factory regulation and labor relations, for governmental
intervention in this field was contrary to liberal principles and working class
organizations were not, in any case, actively pushing for reform in these years. But
elsewhere the government tried earnestly to supply needs and correct grievances.…”

“Two measures that were typical of the Liberal spirit of reform were the civil
service reform of 1870 and the Education Act of the same year. The first of these
made appointments to most positions in the civil service departments dependent upon
open competitive examinations. The second gave a tremendous stimulus to popular
education, although it did not provide the kind of free, compulsory elementary
education already available in some continental countries. The voluntary principle
was so strong and the fear of state dictation so much a part of the liberal tradition that
the Education Act was a tissue of ingenious compromises. It divided the country into
school districts, which were treated according to their nature and needs. In those in
which adequate elementary school facilities existed, no change was made, except that
existing schools had to submit to government inspection and could apply for
parliamentary aid. Districts without schools were provided with local school boards,
which organized and supervised new schools and levied local taxes to support them.
In districts where there was exceptional poverty, the school boards could set up free
schools or pay fees for poor students; but, in general, it was expected that parents
would pay for their children’s tuition. Elementary education was not to become free
until 1891.”
Ibid.

“If the Education Act of 1870 showed the old Liberal faith in private enterprise and
the traditional distrust of extending government power, it was also characterized by
the suspicion of established religion that was part of the philosophy of liberalism.
Although religious instruction was to be permitted in both voluntary and board
schools, in the latter it was to be undenominational; and in either case, parents could
request that their children be excused from religious instruction on grounds of
conscience. Another victory over denominationalism was recorded in 1870, when
English universities were made truly national for the first time by the abolition of the
religious tests that had reserved them for members of the Church of England.
Ibid.

Gladstone
Gladstone and Ireland

“The energies of the first Gladstone ministry were concentrated primarily, however,
on the problems of Ireland. That unhappy country’s grievances against England were
religious, political and economic.• Predominantly Catholic, the Irish objected to
having to pay tithes to the Anglican Church in Ireland and resented the fact that there
was no Catholic university in the country that was qualified to grant degrees.
Politically, they opposed the Act of Union of 1800 and were not at all grateful for the
belated Act of Emancipation of 1829 which had given Ireland parliamentary
representation by permitting Catholics to sit in the House of Commons.
Economically, they were the victims of a situation in which there was not enough
land to support a rapidly growing population and no appreciable industrial
development to absorb excess population. Those Irish who did not seek escape by
emigration subsisted on the yield of minuscule subdivisions leased to them by
tenants of English [often absentee] landlords. Most of them lived on one crop, the
potato; and, when that failed, as it did in 1845 and 1846, their plight was pitiful in the
extreme and deaths from starvation staggering in number….”
Ibid.

The population of Ireland since 1603 showing the consequence of the Great Famine (1845–52)
(Note: figures before 1841 are contemporary estimates)—Wikipedia

“…These economic ills could not fairly be laid at the doors of the English, but they
were, simply because the English held most of the land; and these grievances were
aggravated by others, such as the fact that most tenants had no security of tenure and
could be evicted at a moment’s notice without any compensation for improvements
made during their possession.• From the landlord’s point of view, the right of
eviction without compensation from protected him from seeing his land subdivided
indefinitely and covered with hovels for which he had to assume ultimate
responsibility; but the Irish could not be expected to see things in the same way.•
“When Gladstone came to office in 1868, he had said, ‘My mission is to pacify
Ireland!’ and his first step in this direction was to call for the disestablishment and
disendowment of the Anglican Church in Ireland. In winning support for this, the
widening franchise in 1867 was important, for a good proportion of the new
electorate was Nonconformist [i.e., not members of the C of E] and not disinclined to
measures calculated to weaken the established church. The supporters of the church
were wise enough to realize this and, although they fought for generous
compensation for the property lost by the Irish church, they permitted the passage of
the Disestablishment Act in 1869.”
op. cit., pp. 229-30.

“The prime minister turned immediately to the more difficult question of land
tenure and, in 1870, secured parliamentary approval for an act designed to give
justice to the Irish tenants. The Land Act of 1870 protected them from arbitrary
eviction by providing for payment of damages to the tenant in all cases of eviction
except when it was the result of nonpayment of rent and by stipulating that
compensation must be paid for all improvements. This effected some amelioration of
the Irish situation, although loopholes and inequities were soon discovered in the
working of the act. At the same time, the act did not go to the root of the Irish
difficulty. The tenants wanted security of tenure and fair rents. Gladstone did not
satisfy these demands and could not have done so without interfering with the rights
of property, which the Liberal party would not have condoned.
Neither these reforms nor Gladstone’s avowed intention of giving adequate
facilities to Ireland for higher education, therefore, appeased the Irish people; and
their agitations continued to be a source of British governments until World War I.
op. cit., p. 230.

Nonintervention and Imperial Expansion

Stretching one third of the way around the world (eight of the twenty-four time zones)

“The economic promises sometimes made to justify this expansion were never
fully realized. Even so, expansion in central Asia, like that in the Far East, was
popular in court circles, among the military (for obvious reasons) and among the
informed public, to many of whom it appeared to offset the humiliation caused by the
Crimean defeat. Its very popularity reinforced the tendency of the country to remain
aloof from European affairs.”
op. cit., p. 231.

The Great Reforms

“While these important territorial conquests were being made, the social and
political structure of Russia was being profoundly affected by a series of reforms
even more comprehensive than those introduced in England. After the Crimean War,
Russia seemed—as the anarchist Prince Kropotkin…”
op. cit., p. 231.

“While these important territorial conquests were being made, the social and
political structure of Russia was being profoundly affected by a series of reforms
even more comprehensive than those introduced in England. After the Crimean War,
Russia seemed—as the anarchist Prince Kropotkin • was to write in his memoirs—to
‘awaken from the heavy slumber and the terrible nightmare of Nicholas I’s reign.’
The new ruler, Alexander II (1855-1881), could hardly be described as a liberal or a
believer in reform for reform’s sake, but he was shrewd enough to realize that there
are times when change is imperative. He knew that the imperial regime had lost
prestige as a result of the recent military defeat; and he feared that this might
encourage groups with grievances to think that the time had come for them to take
matters into their own hands and seek redress by revolutionary means. In particular,
he seems to have feared that this might be the attitude of the peasants, and it was his
hope that action by them might be forestalled if the government took the initiative in
reforming the conditions of their lives.”
op. cit., p. 231.

“The promise inherent in all this was never fully kept. For one thing, the
simplification of the court system was handicapped by the continued existence of
military, ecclesiastical, and (for peasant affairs) township courts. For another, the
individual legal rights so proudly announced were vitiated to some extent by the
crown’s retention of the right not only to pardon but to increase sentences and to take
executive action to prevent crime or illegal activities. Finally, the system was
operated by ministers of justice who were opposed to the spirit that animated the
reform and who had no great respect for the principle of independence of judges.
Despite these faults, however, the new system was superior to the old.”
op. cit., p. 234.

France and Germany
Napoleon III and the German Question

“While the two great powers on the periphery of Europe busied themselves with
domestic reforms and the Austrian empire underwent a fundamental reorganization
as a result of the defeat suffered in 1866, relations between France and Prussia
deteriorated rapidly. This was understandable. The Prussian victory over Austria and
the subsequent establishment of the North German Confederation had simultaneously
electrified advocates of German unification and dismayed French patriots, who
regarded a united Germany as contrary to the interest of their country. It was unlikely
that Prussia would refrain from attempting, sooner or later, to complete the process
so far advanced in 1866; it was inevitable that French public opinion would oppose
further increases of Prussian strength.”
op. cit., p. 234.

“This does not mean that Bismarck was planning a move south or a war against
France at this time. For one thing, he was still too uncertain of the state of South
German opinion to force the pace of German unification. For another, he had some
hopes, as he saw the French government being liberalized, that the new ministers in
Paris would eventually reconcile themselves to the inevitable and greet German
unification with no more than verbal protests—again, provided that he did not force
the pace unduly.
“Bismarck’s willingness to wait, however, was shaken by the French plebiscite
of May 1870. This gave the emperor such a resounding majority that the North
German chancellor feared the results might encourage the imperial regime to be
more, rather than less, intransigent. If this were so, nothing was to be gained by a
policy of patience. Bismarck decided to go on the offensive.”
op. cit., p. 235.

France and Germany
The Hohenzollern Candidature

Emser Depesche (Ems Telegram)
July 13, 1870
earlier in July Count Benedetti convinced Leopold
to refuse the offer
the French foreign minister, unwilling to accept
victory, wanted to humiliate Prussia
he told Benedetti to demand a pledge from the
kaiser that there would never be an acceptance
Benedetti accosted Wilhelm on his walk at the spa
at Ems with this demand
Wilhelm felt insulted but politely declined to give
such an assurance
he then telegraphed Bismarck a description of the
incident and suggested he share it with the cabinet
and the press French diplomat Vincent Benedetti (1817-1900).

Ambassador to Berlin, (1864-1870)

Photograph, 1856—Wikipedia

France and Germany
The Franco-Prussian War

“In his memoirs Bismarck claims that he had always believed ‘that a Franco-
German war must take place before the construction of a united Germany could be
realized.’ If he had in fact believed this—and one cannot always trust the veracity of
Bismarck’s recollections—he was proved right even before the firing began, for the
first result of the French declaration was the decision of the South German states to
throw their lot in with Prussia and to send troops against France.”
op. cit., p. 236.

A mitrailleuse (French pronunciation: [mitʁajøz]; from French mitraille, "grapeshot") is a type of volley gun with multiple barrels
of rifle calibre that can fire either multiple rounds at once or several rounds in rapid succession. The earliest true mitrailleuse was
invented in 1851 by Belgian Army Captain Fafschamps, 10 years before the advent of the Gatling gun. It was followed by the
Belgian Montigny mitrailleuse in 1863. Then the French 25 barrel "Canon à Balles", better known as the Reffye mitrailleuse, was
adopted in great secrecy in 1866. It became the first rapid-firing weapon deployed as standard equipment by any army in a
major conflict when it was used during the Franco-Prussian War of 1870–71.—Wikipedia

Drawing by Carl Röchling "Erstürmung des Roten Berges”—Wikipedia

Von Bredow’s Death Ride—of 800 Prussian cavalry 420 returned

The Battle of Gravelotte (or Gravelotte–St. Privat) on 18 August
1870 was the largest battle during the Franco-Prussian War, named
after Gravelotte, a village in Lorraine between Metz and the former
French–German frontier. It was fought about 6 miles (9.7 km) west of
Metz, where on the previous day, having intercepted the French
army's retreat to the west at the Battle of Mars-La-Tour, the
Prussians were now closing in to complete the destruction of the
French forces. The combined German forces, under Field Marshal
Count Helmuth von Moltke, were the Prussian First and Second
Armies of the North German Confederation numbering about 210
infantry battalions, 133 cavalry squadrons, and 732 heavy cannons
totaling 188,332 officers and men. The French Army of the Rhine,
commanded by Marshal François-Achille Bazaine, dug in along high
ground with their southern left flank at the town of Rozerieulles, and
their northern right flank at St. Privat.—Wikipedia
The "Rifle Battalion 9 from Lauenburg" at Gravelotte, 1910 painting by Ernst Zimmer—Wikipedia

Spicheren, 6 Aug
Mars-la-Tour, 16 Aug
Sedan, 1 Sept
Gravelotte & St. Privat, 18 Aug

An accurate depiction
A mural painted in 1884 by Carl Steﬀeck depicts General Reille delivering Napoleon III's letter of surrender to
King William I at the Battle of Sedan on 1 September 1870. It was at the former Ruhmeshalle in Berlin and was
destroyed by bombs during World War II.--Wikipedia

The departure of Leon Gambetta 7 Oct 1870.—Wikipedia

Prussians pull down the Tricoleur
after the surrender of Paris
28 Jan 1871
Boundary of the territory occupied

by the Germans

Territory acquired by Germany by

the Frankfurt Peace Treaty of 10

May 1871

France and Germany
The Reorganization of Central Europe

“The battles in France settled more than the fate of the Bonaparte dynasty; they
completed the unification of both Italy and Germany. The fellowship in arms
between the northern and southern German states was given political substance in
January 1871 when the king of Bavaria was persuaded by Bismarck to urge the king
of Prussia to revive the German empire [Reich] and assume its crown. King William,
Prussian to the very marrow, acted as if he resented the suggestion and was
conspicuously cool for some time toward its real author; but he gave way and, on
January 18 in the Hall of Mirrors in the Palace of Versailles, was proclaimed emperor
of a Germany that now stretched from the Baltic to the Inn.”
op. cit., p. 238.

Die Proklamation des Deutschen Kaiserreiches by Anton von Werner (1877), depicting the proclamation
of Kaiser Wilhelm (18 January 1871, Palace of Versailles). From left, on the podium (in black): Crown
Prince Frederick (later Frederick III),• his father Emperor Wilhelm I,• and Frederick I of Baden,• proposing
a toast to the new emperor.• At centre (in white): Otto von Bismarck,• ﬁrst Chancellor of Germany,
Helmuth von Moltke the Elder,• Prussian Chief of Staff.

"The Black Stain": In France, children were taught in school not to forget the lost provinces, which were coloured in black
on maps. Painting by Albert Bettannier, a native of Metz who ﬂed to Paris after the annexation of his hometown.

“The Apotheosis of Prince Bismarck” lithograph by Ludwig Rudow (1890)

Victory
Germania
Clio
Happy uniﬁed Germans of every age and class

“Meanwhile, the Italian government had taken advantage of the war to send their troops
into Rome…The pope, who retired behind the walls of the Vatican, refused to recognize
the pretensions of the Italian government, which meant that in the subsequent period Italy
had to contend with the hostility of ardent Catholics at home and abroad as well as with
all its other problems.
“Back in the days when he first came to power, Napoleon III had dreamed of redrawing
the map of Europe on national lines. That had now been done; but, although he had
contributed strongly to the final result, he had gained none of the profit he thought would
accrue from this accomplishment and had, instead, lost his throne. The new Europe was
in any case different from the one he had imagined. Its reorganization along national lines
had not increased the the interdependence and harmony of nations as Mazzini and other
nationalists of an earlier age had believed. The methods used to effect the changes in the
map had left a heritage of bitterness between the continental states, while simultaneously
showing the inadequacy of the European Concert and throwing doubt on the validity of
international treaties and public law. Nothing better demonstrated the disrespect with
which international obligations were now held than the unilateral abrogation of the Black
Sea clauses of the Treaty of 1856 by the Russian government, an action taken in the
middle of the Franco-Prussian war and accepted by the other powers because they were
powerless, or disinclined, to forbid it.”

Craig has chosen to divide the “ Long Peace” into three parts in his narrative history.
We have reviewed the middle act of this three act drama; from the aftermath of the failed liberal
revolutions to the conclusion to the unification struggles of Italy and Germany.
The last act, chronologically the longest, will offer a description of the events which will
introduce what some have called the Long War.
As I write the final conclusion to this session we have just marked the centennial of the First
World War .
The story of Europe’s rise and fall—to and from world dominion—is full of lessons for those
who choose to study and reflect upon it.
jbp

19 c Europe, session 2.10; The Reorganization of Europe, 1866-1871

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to 19 c Europe, session 2.10; The Reorganization of Europe, 1866-1871

Similar to 19 c Europe, session 2.10; The Reorganization of Europe, 1866-1871 (16)

More from Jim Powers

More from Jim Powers (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

19 c Europe, session 2.10; The Reorganization of Europe, 1866-1871