No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 13 October 2009
I found on arriving here the general opinion to be that the Declaration of the Duke of Brunswick, although tardy and ungracious, and although couched in such obscure terms as to be hardly intelligible, would nevertheless be accepted. The Hanoverian Minister spoke to me in this sense, and the Committee which is to report to the Diet on the Declaration and which consists of the President, the Prussian, the Bavarian, the Saxon, and the Baden Ministers, has determined by three against two to recommend that the satisfaction be deemed sufficient. The minority, however, (Prussia and Baden) are very strong in their sense of the insufficiency of the atonement, and I was informed last night by the Hanoverian Minister that he had received fresh instructions directing him to require a more complete and less exceptionable submission on the part of the Duke of Brunswick to the sentence of the Diet. Before my conversation with Baron Stralenheim had ended, we were joined by the Baden Minister who expressed strongly his opinion of the insufficiency of the satisfaction, and stated his intention and that of more who thought with him to urge their view of the subject on the Diet. He ended by saying: ‘We are now going to put ourselves forward in opposition to Austria and to draw upon ourselves her ill will for you and for your cause. Will your Government support us and see us through?’
I replied ‘I am in this affair the Auxiliary of the Hanoverian Minister, and therefore to him I must refer you.’
1 In the Declaration of 22 April 1830, to which this dispatch refers, Duke Karl II revoked a patent which he had issued on 10 May 1827. In this patent he had declared invalid all the resolutions and decrees issued during the period of his minority until 1832. The Declaration of 22 April, however, did not establish whether the 1820 constitution was valid or invalid, and this was the subject of a dispute with the Brunswick diet. This issue was never finally clarified by the Federal Diet because the Brunswick diet revolted, and Duke Karl was deposed in September 1830.
2 Karl Friedrich Freiherr von Stralenheim.
3 President: Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen; Prussian minister: Karl Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler; Bavarian minister: Maximilian Freiherr von Lerchenfeld; Saxon minister: Georg August Ernst Freiherr von Manteuffel; Baden minister: Friedrich Landolin Karl Freiherr von Blittersdorf.
4 Resolution of the Confederation, 20 August 1829, which had forced Duke Karl II to revoke the patent of 10 May 1827.
5 The British envoys to Frankfurt were in a special position because George IV acted as regent during the minority of Duke Karl II from 1815 to 1823. George regarded the revocation in 1827 of the constitution promulgated in 1820 as a contempt of his regency, and this led to the quarrel between Brunswick and Hanover at the Federal Diet which is the subject of this dispatch.
6 As King of Hanover, William IV was a member of the German Confederation. Britain's representation at the German Confederation through the legation in Frankfurt was strictly separated, formally and in terms of staff, from Hanover's.
7 The Treaty of Einbeck was an attempt by the contracting states, which had already come together to form the Central German Trade Association in 1828, to develop their own, independent, customs area in opposition to Prussia's attempts to expand its customs policy. The treaty did not come into force because of the lack of an implementing regulation. However, the Treaty of Einbeck was an early stage of the North German Tax Association which was founded in 1834; cf. p. 277 in Hanover Section.
8 For the constitutional struggle in Brunswick and Duke Karl II's proclamation cf. p. 3 in this section.
9 Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen.
10 Karl Friedrich Freiherr von Stralenheim, Karl Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler, Friedrich Landolin Karl Freiherr von Blittersdorf. These envoys put forward formal reasons against accepting the Duke of Brunswick's explanation.
11 Lippe-Schaumburg and Lippe-Detmold. The two Lippes, plus Hohenzollern, Liechtenstein, Neuβ and Waldeck made up one vote between them in the Federal Diet.
12 Hesse-Darmstadt joined the Prussian customs union on 25 August 1831.
11 Ludwig II.
14 Karl II.
15 Duke Karl II's refusal to convene the Estates set off the unrest in Brunswick. Initial disturbances took place on 6 September, and on 7 September the ducal palace was stormed. After Karl had Hed, his brother Wilhelm assumed the regency in September 1830.
16 Chad here refers to the discussion about Baden entering the Prussian customs system. Baden did not join the Zollverein until 12 May 1835.
17 The battle cry ‘Hep-Hep, Jud verreck’ (Hep-Hep, Jews die), which was heard among the urban underclasses and in some artisan circles in a number of towns in 1830, had already been a feature of the Germany-wide pogroms as early as 1819. The ‘Hep-Hep riots’, which were repeated in 1834 in the Rhineland, interrupted the process of Jewish emancipation in Germany.
18 After his return from Vienna, Prince Elector Wilhelm II was forced by increasing public pressure to convene the Estates in September 1830 and to recognize the citizens' guards formed in the towns. These successes encouraged large sections of the population to join the revolutionary movement in Electoral Hesse in order to pursue their own economic and social goals.
19 Wilhelm II.
20 The main feature of the constitution of Electoral Hesse, which was promulgated in January 1831, was the unicameral system modelled on the French one. A long list of basic rights and the far-reaching rights of the Landtag (full legislative powers, the right to grant the budget and taxes, the right to accept petitions and pass them on, and the right to impeach ministers) made the constitution of Electoral Hesse the most radical in the German Confederation so far.
21 Inspired by the French revolution of July, the Belgian revolution took place on 25 August 1830. It resulted in Belgium seceding from the Netherlands. From 23 to 26 September fierce fighting, in which 1,200 people were killed, took place between the Dutch crown and the Belgian revolutionaries in Brussels.
22 On 5 January a revolutionary common council and a citizens' guard were formed in the town of Osterode. The aim of this movement was to strengthen the rights of the urban middle classes vis-à-vis the government of Hanover. Intervention by the police and the army quickly put down this movement in Osterode.
23 The ringleaders were Gustav König and August Freitag. The latter, however, evaded arrest.
24 Three university teachers, Heinrich Ahrens, Ernst Johann von Rauschenplatt, and Theodor Schuster, led an assault on the Göttingen town hall on 8 January 1831, forcing the army to withdraw. Until the Hanoverian army intervened and took Göttingen without a struggle on 16 January, a common council and national guard drawn from the ranks of the rebels had control of Göttingen.
25 Name not traceable.
26 Friedrich August Philipp Freiherr von dem Bussche-Ippenburg.
27 Cf. pp. 407–409 in Bavaria section.
28 The conflict between the Bourbon royal house and the liberal majority in the chamber climaxed in a revolt by the people of Paris from 27 to 29 July 1830. The revolution led to the abdication of Charles X and the installation of Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans, as ‘King of the French’. In the aftermath of the revolution there were revolutionary risings and constitutional demands all over Europe.
29 The measures taken by Ludwig I included reducing the price of bread in order to pacify the population in September 1830, dealt firmly with the students of the university of Munich, and banning students' associations in December 1830.
30 Enclosures: 1. Edict issued by The King of Bavaria on 28 January relative to the regulation of the Press; 2. Petition addressed by the Citizens of Würzbourg to The King of Bavaria, praying for the admission of the Burgomaster Behr in to the Assembly of States; 3. Answer of The King of Bavaria to the Petition addressed to His Majesty by the Citizens of Würzbourg; 4. Answer of The King of Bavaria to a Petition addressed to His Majesty by the Citizens of Bamberg.
31 The Bayerisches Volksblatt, founded in 1828 by Gottfried Eisenmann, was a forum for patriotic liberalism and constitutionalism, This typically southern German political movement was more interested in progress for Bavaria than in German national unity. The Volksblatt was banned in 1832.
32 Wilhelm II.
33 Friedrich Wilhelm.
34 Gertrude Falkenstein.
35 Georg August Ernst von Manteuffel.
36 Cf. p. 300 in Saxony section.
37 Wilhelm.
38 The constitution of Hesse Nassau was drawn up in 1814. However, the two chambers of the Landtag were not convened until 1819.
39 In the period 1803 to 1806 many of the numerous smaller rulers in the German empire were subordinated to the larger territories. The majority of the imperial towns plus the duchy of Arenberg and the principalities of Salm, Isenburg, Leyen und Fürstenberg were mediatized. Although the Congress of Vienna conceded the mediatized princes a number of privileges in 1815, they were unable to regain their old positions.
40 Enclosure: Translation. Extract from a letter dated Berlin 8 October 1831.
41 In the London Protocol of 21 January 1831 Austria, Prussia, Russia, Britain, and France recognized Belgium's independence from the Netherlands. ‘Neutrality in perpetuity’, modelled on that of Switzerland, was imposed on the new state.
42 The Grand Duchy of Luxemburg was bound to the Netherlands in a personal union and was a member of the German Confederation. The Belgian revolution of 1830 (cf. p. 10 in this section), also affected Luxemburg. After the Netherlands had appealed in vain to the German Confederation for help, the Five-Power Conference in London on 15 October 1831 resolved to divide Luxemburg into a Walloon western part and a German eastern part which, including the town and the fortress, would continue to be the property of the Dutch crown. The quarrel about this act of separation, which was the subject of a complaint by the Netherlands to the German Confederation, was not settled until the London Conference of April 1839.
43 In the years 1830–1831 Austria saw its dominant position in Italy threatened by the revolutionary crisis. Pope Gregory XVI's request for assistance gave Austria a pretext for military intervention in Italy in March 1831.
44 The events were triggered by the fact that the city gates had been closed early on 24 October, the first day of the festivities held to celebrate the end of the grape harvest in the area around Frankfurt. On the following evening, several hundred people gathered at the Allerheiligentor to protest against this. After fire had been exchanged with the units on watch, the military was called in to restore the peace.
45 Carlsbad Conferences, 6–31 August 1819; Vienna Conferences of Ministers, 25 November 1819 – 24 May 1820, cf. vol. 1, pp. 113–123, 493–499.
46 Deutsche Tribüne, founded on 1 July 1831 by Johann Georg August Wirth in Munich, is an early example of the German party press. It belonged to the decidedly liberal opposition. In order to avoid censorship, from January 1832 the Deutsche Tribune was published in Homburg, in the Bavarian Rhine Palatinate. Even before the publication of its final issue on 21 March 1832, the Deutsche Tribüne had been banned by a resolution of the German Confederation dated 2 March 1832. The Hochwächter, Volksblatt für Stuttgart und Württemberg was founded in 1830 in Stuttgart as the daily newspaper of the democratic movement; from 16 January 1833 it appeared as Der Beobachter. The newspaper Der Verfassungsfreund, eine Wochenschrift für Staats- und Volksleben, which had grown out of the Hessische Blätter für Stadt und Land in 1831, was published in Kassel, not Karlsruhe. This weekly paper ceased publication in 1834.
47 Constitutionelles Deutschland was initially a supplement to the Strasburg paper Niederrheinscher Courier, from May 1831 it was published independently. On 19 November 1831 its distribution on the territory of the German Confederation was prohibited.
48 Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler.
49 Johann Georg August Wirth, editor ofDeutsche Tribüne (cf. n. 46 in this section) and Philipp Jakob Siebenpfeiffer, editor of the daily Der Westbote, which had been published since April 1831. The Federal Diet's decree of 2 March 1832 affected both papers as well as the Neue Zeitschwingen. Wirth und Siebenpfeiffer were banned from working for five years.
50 Friedrich Landolin Karl von Blittersdorf.
51 The Press Law of 28 December 1831 fundamentally abolished censorship in Baden; it was in future to apply only to reports concerning the business of the Confederation and other German states.
52 The journal Deutschland was the continuation of the newspaper Rheinbayern, which had been edited in Zweibrücken by Phillipp Jakob Siebenpfeiffer since October 1830, and not of the Westbote.
53 The Hambach Festival described here took place from 27 to 30 May 1832. It was held on the Hambacher Schlossborg near Neustadt in the Bavarian Palatinate.
54 The Strasburg delegates from La Société des amis du peuple brought an address of greeting and solidarity to participants in the Hambach Festival. It was read out on 27 May by Lucien Rey, an advocate from Alsace.
55 The Press- und Vaterlandsverein, founded on 29 January 1832 on the initiative of Philipp Jakop Siebenpfeiffer and Johann Georg August Wirth in the Bavarian Palatinate on the left bank of the Rhine. Within a short time it was joined by a large number of local associations which called for individual liberties and freedom of the press in the whole of Germany. After it was banned in 1832 the Pressverein was continued clandestinely.
56 Not traceable.
57 Zweibrücken.
58 The colours black-red-gold were first used by Lützow's volunteer corps in the wars of liberation of 1813–1814. Germania was the name of a student group which operated clandestinely after the Burschenschaft (student movement) was banned in 1819.
59 Deutsche Tribüne, cf. n. 46 in this section.
60 Cf. pp. 23–26 in this section.
61 Cf. n. 58 in this section.
62 The Bavarian constitution had been ratified on 26 May 1818.
63 After the Warsaw Rising was put down in 1831 about 10,000 Poles fled abroad. Most of the refugees crossed the states of the German Confederation en route to France. The south-west of Germany, in particular, became a temporary gathering point. German opposition circles provided material and moral support for the Polish freedom fighters there. The Hambach Festival in 1832, in which about twenty Poles participated, marked the climax of the German liberals' enthusiasm for things Polish.
64 Ferdinand von Würtemberg.
65 Enclosures: 1. Translation. Six articles to be proposed in the Diet; 2. Translation, Extract of a Protocol of the Diet of 26 April 1832 ‘Introduction of general Regulations with respect to the Press’.
66 Article 1 of the Six Articles confirmed the sovereignty of the monarchs vis-à-vis the Landtage with reference to Article 57 of the Vienna Final Act of 1820. Article 2 limited the rights of the Landtage to control budgets while also expanding the Confederation's right to intervene, as provided for in Articles 25, 26 and 58 of the Vienna Final Act. Article 3 restricted the legislative powers of the Landtage with reference to Article 2 of the Act of the Confederation of 1815 and Article 1 of the Vienna Final Act. Article 5, building on Article 59 of the Vienna Final Act, restricted the parliamentary freedom of opinion and report by obliging state governments to prevent any attacks on the Confederation in their Landtage. In Article 6, finally, with reference to Article 17 of the Vienna Final Act, the Landtage were deprived of the right independently to interpret the laws of the Confederation.
67 For the Confederation's control commission cf. pp. 38–39 in this section.
68 Maximillian Freiherr von Lerchenfeld and Friedrich Landolin Karl von Blittersdorf.
69 Bavaria's insistence on its sovereignty in relation to the decisions of the German Confederation is illustrated in, among other things, Bavarian press policy. Thus in March 1832, Bavaria on principle delayed implementing the publication bans imposed by the Confederation. Bavaria gave in to pressure exerted by Austria and Prussia and dealt more severely with the press only after the Hambach Festival of May 1832 (cf. pp. 23–26 in this section).
70 That is, the Baden press law of 28 December 1831 (cf. n. 51 in this section) and the constitution of Electoral Hesse, 5 January 1831 (cf. n. 20 in this section). On the basis of the constitution of Electoral Hesse, the Landtag of Electoral Hesse also drafted a press law in April 1832, but it was never passed.
71 Cf. pp. 23–26 in this section.
72 Bavaria minus the parts of the Palatinate on the left bank of the Rhine, which were territorially separate.
73 Cartwright refers to the tardy implementation of the Confederation's resolution against the liberal press in the southern German states, and Bavaria's inadequate (from Austria's and Prussia's point of view) response to the Hambach Festival; cf. pp. 23–26 in this section.
74 Maximilian Freiherr von Lerchenfeld.
75 Cf. pp. 23–26 in this section.
76 The Six Articles (cf. n. 66 in this section) were unanimously accepted by the Federal Diet on 28 June 1832 in the Resolution of the Confederation Concerning Measures for the Re-establishment of Legal Order and Tranquillity in Germany.
77 Act of the Congress of Vienna, 9 June 1815.
78 The Act of the German Confederation of 8 June 1815 was formally a part of the Act of the Congress of Vienna, 9 June 1815.
79 Vienna Final Act of 1820.
80 For the constitution of Electoral Hesse cf. n. 20 in this section.
81 For Article 6 of the Six Articles cf. n. 66 in this section.
82 In conversation with Cartwright, Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen referred to Palmerston's dispatches to Frederick Lamb and the Earl of Minto; pp. 123–128 in Prussia section.
83 Article 13 of the Act of the German Confederation reads: ‘All stales of the Confederation will have a constitution based on the provincial Estates’. The 1815 Act of the German Confederation does not go beyond this vague statement to specify the type of provincial Estates to be set up, or to set a date by which the states were to have implemented a constitution.
84 Cf. pp. 28–30 in this section.
85 Johann von Seuffert.
86 The initially successful attack on the Frankfurt main guard means that the attempted putsch described here is well known as the Storming of the Frankfurt Guard House.
87 Andreas Quante.
88 Andreas Quante was not a burgher of Frankfurt, but a travelling salesman from Würzburg.
89 Friedrich von Guaita und Johann Kappes.
90 Enclosure: extract from the Journal de Francfort, 4 04 1833.Google Scholar
91 Fifty participants were known by name. In addition to students from Heidelberg, Erlangen, Würzburg and Göttingen, all of whom were members of the clandestine student movement (Burschenschaft), there were a number of older academics who had been involved in earlier unrest and attempted revolutions in Brunswick, Hanover, and Electoral Hesse, and some Polish emigrés. The ringleaders were Rauschenplatt, a former lecturer at the University of Göttingen, Gustav Körner, a lawyer, and Gustaf Bunsen, a doctor from Frankfurt.
92 In response to the Storming of the Frankfurt Guard House on 3 April 1833 (cf. pp. 41–45 in this section) the Federal Diet resolved to station confederal troops in Frankfurt on 12 April. The occupation of Frankfurt lasted from 15 April 1833 to 1 September 1842, when it was lifted by a decree of the Confederation.
93 The Federal Diet's resolution of 12 April to occupy Frankfurt with confederal troops was based on the Military Commisson's declaration.
94 In the proclamation of 13 April, the Senate communicated the Federal Diet's decision of 12 April to the Free City of Frankfurt, and made it clear that Frankfurt had been occupied against the Senate's wishes. The proclamation ended by declaring that ‘the Senate hopes the present misfortune will pass over and that the Free City of Frankfurt will maintain itself’.
95 Cf. pp. 41–45 in this section.
96 The Six Articles of 28 June 1832 (cf. n. 66 in this section) and the Ten Articles promulgated on 5 July 1832 (Measures for the Re-establishment of Legal Order and Tranquillity in Germany), which further limited the freedom of the press, freedom of association, and freedom of assembly. In addition, a number of oppositional newspapers and journals were suppressed in 1832, and their editors banned from working.
97 Cf. n. 94 in this section.
98 Frankfurt owed its independent status as a Free City to Prussia and Austria, which had prevented the Kingdom of Bavaria from incorporating Frankfurt during the territorial reorganization of Germany in 1813–1816.
99 Friedrich von Guaita und Johann Kappes.
100 For Britain's and France's intervention against the occupation of the Free City of Frankfurt by confederal troops cf. pp. 133–135 in Prussia section.
101 Johann Smidt.
102 A part of Frankfurt on the south side of the river Main.
103 Cf. pp. 41–45 in this section.
104 Anton Wiesend.
105 Enclosures: 1. Translation. Protocol, Würtzburg, 6 June 1932; 2. Copy of a Letter addressed by Mr Mackenna to Lord Erskine, 9 June 1833.
106 On 20 June 1833 the Federal Diet set up a Central Authority for Political Investigations whose purpose was to pursue the political opposition. This central commission, which existed until 1842, was based in Frankfurt. A comparable institution had existed in Mayence from 1819 to 1828.
107 Ludwig II.
108 Cartwright refers here to the Ten Articles of 5 July 1832, cf. n. 96 in this section.
109 Deutsche Tribüne; cf. n. 46 in this section.
110 On pain of withholding the budget, the Landtag demanded a judiciary that was independent of the government, universal and free suffrage, greater local self-administration, and complete freedom of the press and of petition.
111 Enclosure: copy of an Edict issued by the Grand Duke of Hesse-Darmstadt in original: Edit concernant la dissolution de l'assemble des Etats et les disposition relatives á de novelles élections pour la deuxième Chambre des Etats, 2 11 1833Google Scholar; Publication relative à la dissolution de l'assemblée des Etats, 11 1833.Google Scholar
112 Cf. pp. 28–30 in this section.
113 Political conflicts in Electoral Hesse started in May 1832, when an ultra-conservative, Ludwig Hassenpflug, was appointed head of the government. Under Hassenpflug, the government took rigorous action against the liberal majority in the Landtag of Electoral Hesse. Although the landtag was dissolved twice, on 26 July 1832 and again on 18 March 1833, this did not have the calming effect that the government had hoped for.
114 The Prince Elector was Wilhelm II; his son Friedrich Wilhelm was co-regent from 1831 to 1847.
115 For the constitution of Electoral Hesse cf. n. 20 in this section.
116 Since the Tariff Agreement of 25 August 1831, Electoral Hesse had been a member of the Prussian Customs Union.
117 On 13 August 1832 Frankfurt had concluded a Treaty of Commerce and Navigation with Britain for a period of ten years which, under the terms of international law, made it impossible for Frankfurt to join the Zollverein without cancelling the treaty.
118 Bavaria and Württemberg joined the Zollverrein on 22 March 1833, Saxony on 30 March 1833.
119 Wilhelm.
120 Baden joined the Customs Union on 12 May 1835. Nassau, which had been one of the most obstinate opponents of the Prussian trade system, joined the Customs Union on 10 December 1835 after its trade alliance with France was dissolved.
121 These were among the oldest and most established trading and banking families in Frankfurt.
122 A port, city, or other centre to which goods are brought for import and export, and for collection and distribution.
123 Enclosure: Translation. Reflexion upon the position of the Free City of Frankfurt with reference to its accession to the German commercial Union.
124 Cf. pp. 41–45 in this section.
125 The students were Eimer, Obermüller, Handschuh, Alban and Rubner. Rubner died during his escape attempt.
126 After confederal troops were stationed in Frankfurt on 15 April 1833, the Federal Diet resolved on 3 April 1834 to place the troops of the City of Frankfurt under the command of the Confederation as an additional security measure.
127 Ludwig Freiherr von Piret de Bihain.
128 Enclosure: newspaper clipping from Journal de Francfort, no date.
129 Vienna Final Act of 1820.
130 Despite the City of Frankfurt's resistance, the Federal Diet's resolution of 12 April 1834 (cf. n. 93 in this section) was implemented. The troops of the City of Frankfurt were forcibly integrated into the Confederal Security Corps.
131 The articles of the Vienna Final Act of 1820 listed here regulated the right of the German Confederation to intervene in the affairs of a member state. Article 28, which specified when the Confederation could intervene, was especially significant as its general provisions could he interpreted in different ways and gave the Confederation far-reaching rights vis-à-vis the respective individual states.
132 The term for the law of a sovereign state, which came into force when the relevant state was acting independently and not in its capacity as a member of the Confederation.
133 Act of the German Confederation, 8 June 1815.
134 Original in FO 208/20.
135 During the absence of Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen, the Prussian envoy, Karl Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler, was acting president.
136 The Act of the German Confederation of 8 June 1815, which was signed by the member states of the German Confederation, was integrated into the Act of the Vienna Congress of 9 June 1815. The issue in the present case was what consequences the contractual linking of the two documents had under international law.
137 Contracting partners to the Act of the Vienna Congress of 9 June 1815 were the eight Congress powers: Austria, Prussia, Britain, France, Portugal, Russia, Sweden, and Spain.
138 Articles 25, 26 and 32 of the Vienna Final Act of 1820 stipulated regulations governing exceptional cases in which the Confederation had the right to intervene in an individual state. The Free City of Frankfurt did not constitute such a case.
139 Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen.
140 Resolution of the German Confederation Concerning the Inadmissibility of Intervention by Foreign Powers in the Internal Affairs of the German Confederation, 18 September 1834. In this Declaration by the president, Britain's and France's intervention against the Confederation's actions in Frankfurt were decisively rejected. The right of objection that Britain and France claimed as signatory powers of the Act of the Congress of Vienna of 1815, and which encompassed the Act of the German Confederation, was not recognized by the German Confederation.
141 Not included in this volume.
142 On 21 and 24 May 1834 respectively, the French envoy, Baron Alleye, and Cartwright had expressed their concerns to the German Confederation about what had happened in the Free City of Frankfurt in the form of a note verbale. When the Federal Diet rejected these objections, France and Britain responded by sending detailed notes of protest on 30 June and 13 July respectively (cf. p. 68 in this section).
143 Act of the German Confederation, 8 June 1815.
144 Article 58 of the Act of the Congress of Vienna of 9 June 1815 (corresponds to article 6 of the Act of the German Confederation of 8 June 1815) specifies the conditions regulating the drafting and changing of the Basic Laws of the German Confederation.
145 Article 54 of the Act of the Congress of Vienna of 9 June 1815 (corresponds to article 2 of the Act of the German Confederation of 8 June 1815) defines the purpose of the German Confederation as to maintain the external and internal security of Germany, and the independence and invoilability of the individual German states.
146 Declaration of the president, 18 September 1834 (cf. n. 140 in this section). The president. Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen, was replaced by the Prussian envoy, Karl Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler.
147 Enclosure: Extract of the 34th Protocol of the Diet of the 18th of September 1834, § 455.
148 Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen, replaced by the Prussian envoy, Karl Ferdinand Friedrich von Nagler.
149 The refugees included were oppositional journalists and writers, members of the banned student movements (Burschenschaften) and participants in the revolutionary uprisings of 1830–1831, the Hambach Festival of 1832 and the Storming of the Frankfurt Guard House.
150 Name of the alternative site for meetings of the Tagessatzung, at which deputies from the Swiss Cantons conferred on the concerns of the Swiss Confederation.
151 From 1833, German travelling apprentices held regular meetings and set up associations in Biel, Zurich, Geneva, Berne, Lausanne, and St Gallen. These were closely allied with the clandestine organization Junges Deutschland (Young Germany), which was established in 1834 by German exiles as a branch of the Young Europe, led by the Italian revolutionary Giuseppe Mazzini.
152 Federal law of 30 October 1834; concurring with articles 3–14 of the Sixty Articles of the Vienna Conference of Ministers of 12 June 1834, cf. pp. 136–137 in Prussia section.
153 In the assemblies of the Confederation, the larger German states (Austria, Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony, Hanover, Württemberg, Baden, Electoral Hesse, the Grand Duchy of Hesse, Holstein, and the Grand Duchy of Luxemburg) had one vote each. The rest of members (in 1817 this was thirty sovereign states) shared a total of six votes.
154 Cf. pp. 28–30 in this section.
155 Enclosure: Supplément au No 313 du Journal de Francfort.
156 Cf. n. 122 in this section.
157 Cf. pp. 61–62 in this section.
158 The literary movement Junges Deutschland (Young Germany), which had come into being in 1830, aimed to overcome classicism in German literature. Politically, its adherents supported anti-feudal and social ideas, and aspired to a republican German nation-state. Junges Deutschland bore no direct relation to the secret society of the same name established in Switzerland in 1834. Its main members were, in addition to the writers named in this dispatch, Christian Dietrich Grabbe, Heinrich Heine, Theodor Mundt, and Ludwig Borne.
159 Resolution of the German Confederation of 10 December 1835 (Prohibition of the Writings of Junges Deutschland).
160 This Hamburg publishing and bookselling company, founded in 1808 and directed by Julius Campe since 1823, published the works of Heinrich Heine and Ludwig Börne among others. The resolution of the German Confederation of 10 December instructed the City of Hamburg to warn the publisher.
161 Aestetische Feldzüge (Esthetical Campaigns, 1834). Printed version of a series of twenty-four lectures given by Wienbarg as a Privatdozent at the University of Kiel from 1833.
162 Wally, die Zweiflerein (1835)Google Scholar; banned by the Prussian censor in the summer of 1835.
163 Enclosures: Translation. Extract of the 30th Protocol of the Diet of the 3rd of December 1835; Extract of the 31st Protocol of the Diet of the 10th of December 1835.
164 Friedrich Landolin Karl Freiherr von Blittersdorf had been Baden's foreign secretary since October 1835.
165 Blittersdorf had taken a leading part in framing the resolution of the German Confederation which, in July 1832, declared invalid the Baden press law which Welcker and Rotteck had initiated (cf. n. 51 in this section).
166 Blittersdorf had been chargé d'affaires at the Baden legation in St Petersburg in 1818.
167 Baden joined the Zollverein on 12 05 1835Google Scholar, Nassau on 10 December 1835 and Frankfurt on 2 January 1836.
168 Only those areas of Prussia which had previously been part of the German Empire belonged to the German Confederation; that is, the provinces of Posen, and East and West Prussia were excluded.
169 Since 1815 Germany had been divided into two currency zones, one based on the Taler (north Germany and Prussia) and the other on the Florin or Gulden (south Germany and Austria). The Dresden Coinage Convention of 1838 (cf. pp. 315–316 in Saxony section) simplified payment transactions between the two zones for the states of the Customs Union by fixing exchange rates.
170 The Akzise was an indirect consumption tax levied in the larger Prussian towns.
171 This statement refers to Austria's leading role in the reordering of Europe and Germany at the Congress of Vienna (18 September 1814 to 19 June 1815).
172 Enclosures: 1. Copy, Observations relatives au commerce des produits de Manufactures Ablaises en Allemagne, 01 1836Google Scholar; 2. Copy, Return of the population of the States composing the Prussian Commercial Union and of the other States of Germany.
173 For the Storming of the Frankfurt Guard House cf. pp. 41–45. in this section.
174 In Frankfurt, as in numerous other smaller states of the German Confederation, it was the usual practice to call upon the law faculty of a German university to act in judicial proceedings. As in this case, the court of the first instance as a rule accepted its judgement.
175 The ten condemned to life imprisonment were the students Heinrich Joseph Freund, Ignatz Satori, Wilhelm Zehler, Herrmann Friedrich Handschuh, Eduard Fries, Ernst Matthiae, Hermann Friedrich Moré, Heinrich Eimer, August Ludwig von Rochau, and Wilhelm Obermüller.
176 August Ludwig von Rochau.
177 Enclosure: Sentences pronounced by the Court of Appeals in the Free City of Frankfurt on the 19th of October 1836, after previous concert with the Law Faculty, against the individuals who on the 3rd of April 1833 took part in the Storming of the Frankfurt Guard House.
178 Those who escaped were the students Eduard Fries, Herrmann Friedrich Handschuh, Ernst Matthiae, Wilhelm Obermüller, Ignatz Satori, and Wilhelm Zehler. For the events of 3 April 1833 cf. pp. 41–45 in this section.
179 Johann Geiger.
180 For the military occupation cf. pp. 45–48 in this section.
181 For the constitutional conflict in Hanover cf. dispatches in the Hanover section for the years 1838 to 1840.
182 For the Osnabrück petition cf. pp. 253–254 in Hanover section.
183 The conflict was the result of the wish expressed by the Chambers of the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein for a joint Landtag to be convened and for their old constitution, which had never formally been revoked, to be reinstated or updated. Both demands were rejected by the Danish King, Frederik VI, who was also Duke of Schleswig and of Holstein. His intention to prepare a constitution for Holstein alone was interpreted by Schleswig and Holstein as violating the indivisibility of the two duchies, which had been guaranteed in the Ripen Treaty of 1460, and as pointing to the future integration of Schleswig into a Danish state.
184 For the Brunswick constitutional conflict cf. p. 3 in this section.
185 The conflict in the principality of Waldeck, which had been gathering pace since 1834, climaxed in the petition to the Federal Diet. Citing numerous examples, the Estates, in their petition to the German Confederation, accused the government of having disregarded their rights of participation. They argued that as the government did not react to the petition, Waldeck's 1816 constitution was de facto invalid.
186 Enclosure: extract from the Hanoverian Vote on the subject of the complaint of the States of the Duchy of Brunswick respecting the constitutional Charter of 1820.
187 Austria and Prussia.
188 The Archbishop of Cologne, Clemens August Freiherr von Droste zu Vischering, was removed from office on 15 November 1837. Ordered to leave the diocese, he was first placed under house arrest in Minden on 22 November and then, on 31 December 1837, taken to the fortress in Magdeburg.
189 ‘Prussia Proper’ denoted those contiguous provinces which, unlike the Rhine Province and the Province of Westphalia, formed Prussia's integral territory.
190 The question of mixed marriages was the subject of protracted negotiations between Prussia and the Vatican lasting from 1828 to the compromise achieved by the Berlin Convention of 1834. In 1836, one year alter Clemens August Freiherr von Droste zu Vischering became Archbishop of Cologne, the conflict flared up again because Droste disregarded the convention.
191 During Ludwig I's reign, about eighty new monastic institutions had been set up by 1837. However, contrary to what is suggested in the dispatch, none of them were Jesuit colleges. Unlike his interior minister Abel, Ludwig opposed any such plan.
192 The Rhine Province and the Province of Westphalia were still under the Code Civil (French Civil Code). This had been introduced in most of the German states of the Confederation of the Rhine between 1806 and 1808 as an expression of French hegemony.
193 For the Hanoverian constitutional conflict cf. the dispatches in Hanover section for the years 1838 to 1840.
194 Following the French revolution of July 1830 there had been open conflicts between the liberal opposition and the governments in many German states. After a number of successes in individual states, such as the introduction of a constitution in Hanover in 1833, the conservative governments became increasingly hostile to the liberal movement.
195 Cf. n. 83 in this section.
196 On 6 September the Federal Diet rejected the constitutional complaint lodged by the city of Osnabrück in March 1838. In its petition, Osnabrück had argued that the abrogation of the constitution of 1833 by Ernst August in 1837 was illegal. On the petition of the city of Osnabrück cf. pp. 253–254 in Hanover section, and pp. 85–88 in this section.
197 On the instructions of the Federal Diet, the Hanoverian embassy to the German Confederation sent a letter, dated 29 October 1838, to all the other embassies to the German Confederation reaffirming Ernst August's actions without bringing forward any new arguments.
198 On the Court of Arbitration cf. pp. 73–74 in this section, and pp. 136–137 in Prussia section.
199 Arnold von Mieg.
200 On the Hanoverian constitutional conflict, which Bavaria and Baden called on the Federal Diet to deal with in the sitting of 26 April, cf. the dispatches in Hanover section for the years 1838 to 1840.
201 Act of the German Confederation of 8 June 1815.
202 Württemberg's envoy was August Heinrich Freiherr von Trott zu Solz; Baden's envoy was Alexander von Dusch; Hesse-Darmstadt's envoy was Peter Joseph Freiherr von Gruben.
203 Rules of procedure.
204 Enclosure: Translation. Regulations respecting the presentation of petitions to the Diet (Geschäftsordnung vom 14. November 1816; Geschäftsordnung vom 29. April 1819).
205 For the petitions to the Federal Diet cf. pp. 253–254 in Hanover section, and pp. 85–88 in this section.
206 Georg August Ernst Freiherr von Manteufel.
207 Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen.
208 The sum of 20 million Francs was part of the reparations for which France was liable under the terms of the Second Peace of Paris, 15 November 1815.
209 For the discussion concerning the building of a fortress for the Confederation cf. pp. 377–379 in the Württemberg section.
210 In 1840, after the diplomatic defeat of France's Middle Eastern policy, the French people and French foreign policy focused more on reconquering the Rhine frontier, which had been lost in the territorial reorganisation of 1814–1815. The Rhine frontier became a matter of national prestige for France also because weakness in foreign policy was directly linked to France's domestic stagnation.
211 For the Rhine crisis cf. n. 210 in this section, and pp. 192–193 in Prussia section.
212 For the occupation of the Free City of Frankfurt by confederal troops cf. pp. 45–48 in this section.
213 Article 1 of the Ten Articles of 1832 (cf. n. 96 in this section) made the federal Press Law of 1819 more stringent by subjecting the German-language press abroad to the need for a licence. After consultation on measures to be taken against German-language publications in France and Switzerland, the Federal Diet re-endorsed the 1832 regulations on 18 January 1844.
214 Königsberger Zeitung (Königlich Preussische Staats-, Kriegs- und Friedenszeitung). As Königsberg was not on the territory of the German Confederation, the strict censorship laws did not apply there. The content and orientation of the Königsberg newspapers was connected with the political life emerging in the town in the 1840s.
215 The Leipziger Allgemeine Zeitung had been published since 1837. Its liberal orientation ensured that it was disseminated throughout Germany, but it was suppressed in Bavaria in 1842 and in Prussia in 1843.
216 For Herwegh's letter to the Prussian king cf. pp. 204–205 in Prussia section.
217 The first issue of the Rheinische Zeitung für Handel, Politik und Gewerbe came out on 1 January 1842. From September 1842, Karl Marx was its editor-in-chief. The staff included important members of the German opposition movement such as Friedrich List and Georg Herwegh. On 31 March 1843 the Rheinische Zeitung was suppressed because of its radical politics.
218 Cf. pp. 76–77 in this section.
219 Cf. pp. 324–325 in Saxony section.
220 The princes named in the dispatch had expressed a desire for their formal titles to be Hoheit (Highness), rather than Durchlaucht (Serene Highness).
121 The liberal and patriotic newspaper Sächsische Vaterlandsblätter was published in Leipzig under the direction of Robert Blum. In 1845–1846 it was banned by the Saxon government.
222 In his article ‘Rome and the Cathedral of Breslau’, Ronge criticized the resignation of the Prince Bishop of Breslau in 1840, which had been forced by the Curia. The background to the resignation was the conflict about the issue of mixed marriages (cf. p. 89 in this section). As a result of his article, Ronge was suspended from the priesthood on 31 January 1843. His open letter to Arnoldi, Bishop of Trier, published in October 1844, led to his excommunication.
223 About 1 million believers took part in the pilgrimage to see the relic of the ‘seamless Holy Garment’. This pilgrimage was perceived as a symbol of a renewal of German Catholicism.
224 Offenes Glaubensbekenntnis in ihren Unterscheidungslehren der roemisch-katholischen Kirche das heisst der Hierarchie, 1844.
225 Leipzig Council, 23–26 March 1845, cf. pp. 328–331 in Saxony section.
226 Peter Joseph Freiherr von Gruben (Grand Duchy of Hesse).
227 The fortresses were the permanent military installations of the German Confederation. They were located in Mainz, Luxemburg, Landau, Ulm, and Rastatt.
228 Since the accession of Christian VIII in 1839, the issue of the succession had dominated the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein. As Christian's son Frederik (VII) was childless, and there were two different laws of succession in Holstein and Schleswig, the guaranteed indivisibility of the two duchies, which had been in force since 1460, was in doubt. The German side upheld this guarantee (principle of undivided succession), which would have separated Schleswig and Holstein from the Danish crown. When Christian VIII rejected this interpretation, the Holstein Estates made a complaint to the Federal Diet in August 1846. The German Confederation was reticent in its resolution of 17 September 1846, and tried to mediate with the Danish King.
229 Joachim Graf von Münch-Bellinghausen.
230 The Kingdom of Galicia had belonged to the Austrian Empire since 1815, but it was not a member of the German Confederation. Its population was predominantly Polish.
231 The Kingdom of Bohemia, which was bound to the Austrian Empire by a shared ruler, was part of the German Confederation.
232 The Free Republic of Cracow had been created at the Congress of Vienna by the treaty of 3 May 1815, and was placed under the protection of three powers, Austria, Russia, and Prussia. After a revolt, which occupying Austrian troops finally put down in March 1846, the three protective powers agreed to implement a secret agreement which had been reached as long ago as 1835. Under the terms of the Protocol of 6 November 1846, Cracow lost its sovereignty and was integrated into the Austrian monarchy as part of the Kingdom of Galicia.
233 Austria and Prussia.
234 The Kingdom of Bavaria wanted to integrate Frankfurt into its territory within the framework of the territorial reorganisation of Germany which took place in 1814–1816. Denmark had similar plans vis-à-vis the Hanseatic towns of Lübeck and Hamburg.
235 The Anglo-French relationship was burdened by the rivalry of the two countries in the western Mediterranean. In October 1846 the marriages of the Spanish Queen and the Spanish Infanta to two members of the French royal house led to a break between Britain and France.
236 Ludwig August Freiherr von Blomberg zu Sylbach.
237 The Texas Company (Texasverein) was founded in 1842 by members of the German nobility. From 1844 German emigrants were sent to settle in Texas in order to earn longterm profits for the company's members and shareholders (in particular, by the proceeds of mining). However, organizational mistakes and a lack of funds, which was the subject of the meeting described here, meant that the Texas Company was dissolved in 1847, and re-founded under the new name of German Colonization Company (Deutsche Colonisationsgesellschaft) in 1848.
238 Adolf.
239 Ernst II.
240 Victor von Leiningen-Westerburg.
241 Bernhard II.
242 This was the pilot issue of a journal which, for financial reasons, was never established. It was edited by the Bildungsverein für Arbeiter, a workers' educational association founded in London in 1840 by German emigrants and artisans which later became the Communist Workers' Educational Association. The motto: ‘Workers of the world unite’ was first published here.