But no less typically, the day on which the popular Germanic demonstrations began was that on which the news of the King of Prussia’s famous ride through Berlin, draped in the German colours, had reached Vienna. There was in the whole Austrian movement a strong element of rivalry to Prussia. The republican element was very small. When they came to debate the matter, the Austrian Germans divided into the partisans of a confederation, and of a federation. A confederation would have left the sovereignty of its component members intact, while most even of the federalists assumed as a matter of course that the capital of the federation would be in Vienna, and its head, a Habsburg.
All of them, moreover, were acutely conscious of the special problem presented by Austria’s largely non-Germanic character. Many of them agreed with the Liberals of central Germany, and of Prussia itself, in wishing to exclude from the future Germany those lands which had not belonged to the old German Bund, or its predecessor, the Reich. They would not have minded seeing Austria renounce her rule over Galicia and Lombardy-Venetia (there were some doubts about Dalmatia) and letting Hungary make what terms she would and could. But for all of them it was axiomatic that the Lands of the Bohemian Crown and the Slovene South would have to remain inside the new formation. Indeed, the federalists were particularly strong precisely among the Germans of the Bohemian Lands, who saw in Austria’s adhesion to Germany an additional safeguard of their own position against the Slavs.
It was a move by the Vorparlament that made the question actuel. On 2 April it adopted Gagern’s proposal to entrust the framing of the future German constitution ‘solely and entirely, without any consent from the Governments’ to be organized by a Committee of Fifty; and then decided to increase its meagre quota of Austrians in that body by six more, and sent invitations to the Viennese Bach, von Schwarzer and Schuselka,63 the Tiroleans Baron Adrian Warburg and Schuler and the Czech Palacký. It was to this invitation that on the 11th Palacký made his famous reply, in a letter which was printed in all available newspapers, and also in pamphlet form. ‘I am not a German,’ he wrote; ‘at least, I do not feel myself to be one … I am a Bohemian of Slavonic stock.’ Bohemia, he went on, had never been an integral part of the Reich. Moreover, he was convinced that if the labours of the Frankfurt Parliament succeeded, the result of them would be to weaken Austria irremediably, indeed, to make its existence impossible; whereas, in his view, the ‘preservation, integrity and reinforcement’ of Austria were necessary – in view, he alleged, of the danger from Russia’s ‘natural’ expansive south-western urge. ‘Truly, if it were not that Austria had long existed, it would be necessary, in the interest of Europe, in the interest of humanity itself, to create her.’64 Vienna, not Frankfurt, was the centre ‘suited and called by destiny to assure and protect the peace, freedom and rights of my people’. The solution was a united Germany without Austria, a united Austria without Germany, the two linked by a perpetual offensive and defensive alliance and perhaps a customs union.
It was an open bid, which was backed by the Slovenes,65 to get the Crown to rest its power on its Slavonic subjects. The time was, however, not yet ripe for the Crown to accept ‘Austro-Slavism’ as the basis of its rule. It could, after all, still hope to do better for itself in Germany than accept an alliance and a customs union with a Germany under Prussian hegemony, nor was it yet prepared to antagonize its German subjects. It did not even wish to do so. When a deputation came to Ficquelmont to ask him what the Government’s line was, he told them that: ‘The Government of Austria has always been a German one; it is not to divest itself of that character.’ Only, the Austrian body politic was something quite peculiar, and therefore ‘In the changes imminent in Germany the Government must see to it that the political agreement with Germany does not endanger the Emperor’s position in his own dominions. We should remain Germans without ceasing to be Austrians.’
The Government would, in fact, really have preferred to see the whole Frankfurt business dropped, but since it could not stop it and dared not boycott it for fear of being outdistanced by Prussia, it could do no more than let the delegation go, while reserving its rights. In fact, a delegation of relatively sober Liberals went off,66 whose subsequent attitude their colleagues on the Committee themselves described as ‘wondering how they can unite with Germany without uniting with Germany – like trying to kiss a girl with your back turned to her’.
The Committee decided that the elections for the Parliament itself should be conducted ‘through constitutional channels’; the Parliament would then ‘agree the German Constitution with the Governments’. The Federal Diet abandoned the struggle, gave up its plan of holding its own elections and agreed to recognize those organized by the Committee, which would thus have the recognized character of a Constituent, although still without legal power to enforce its decisions. The Austrian Government made sundry more attempts to get the elections postponed, but finally acquiesced in their being held at the end of April, making, on the 21st, a last statement to the effect that, while anxious ‘to take every opportunity of expressing her attachment to the common German cause’, Austria could never agree to ‘a complete renunciation of the special interests of those of her territories which belonged to the German Bund, a complete subordination to the Bundesversammlung, a renunciation of the independence of her internal administration’. The primary elections were held on 26–7 April, the secondary on 3 May, and the delegates elected on the latter occasion then set out for Frankfurt. The party was, indeed, composed exclusively of Germans, the Slavs having boycotted the elections. This, however, was no loss to Austria, for the result was that most of the men who went were solid men and good Austrians, some of them men of much distinction.67 One said that the purpose of this journey was to check the revolutionary tendencies of the West and South Germans, and the instructions agreed between the Viennese delegates contained the sentence: ‘The sovereignty and integrity of Austria cannot and must not be sacrificed by adherence to Germany.’
The opening of the Vorparlament also elicited a move from Hungary. Up to that date the Hungarian Government had made no motions to carry out any independent activities abroad, although in April Batthyány had tried (unsuccessfully) to persuade the Foreign Office to recognize the Hungarian Government and to send a diplomatic representative to Buda-Pest. On 14 May, however, two Hungarians, László Szalay and Dénes Pázmándy, were instructed to go to Frankfurt, where they were to ‘work towards the maintenance and reinforcement of friendly relations between the German and Hungarian States’ and to convince the Germans ‘that they could find in Hungary and in a strong Hungarian people their best and most reliable ally’. They were also to warn the Germans of the danger to Germany of allowing those Provinces of Austria which had previously belonged to the Bund ‘to become a Slav State’.68
*
Meanwhile, for nearly a month after the issue of the Patent of 15 March, only one person had made any motions at all towards implementing it, and he was not a member of the Government, but Count Montecuccoli, the Landmarschall of Lower Austria, who, apparently on his own initiative, had sent out invitations to all the ‘Austrian’ Lands to send representatives to Vienna for preliminary discussions on the modernization of the Estates. Galicia and Bohemia ignored the invitation, but all the other Lands invited sent representatives, and the discussions opened on 10 April. Meanwhile, however, the Viennese reformers were clamouring with increasing impatience for a Constitution, and it seemed unlikely that they would be satisfied with a sort of Estates General modernized by ‘increased representation for the burghers’. The delegates themselves decided that a full-dress Constitution, with a Parliament, would be needed, and said as much to Pillersdorf, who then sat down and compiled his own draft, taking as models the two most liberal Constitutions of the day, those of Belgium and Baden, but adding certain provisions to meet the special conditions of Austria. This was shown to various experts, including the Ministerial Council, the representatives of the Estates, and a number of Archdukes, among the
m Francis Joseph,69 and revised in the light of their comments.70 It was fully expected, and even intended, that the Reichstag, when it met, would make further changes, and some questions were even left open altogether, for the Reichstag to fill in the answers, but it was decided that in view of the urgency, the best course was to begin by publishing this first draft, really as a basis of discussion, as an octroi. It was first hoped to publish it on the Emperor’s birthday, 19 April, but as that date fell that year in the last week of Lent, publication was postponed to the day after Easter Monday, 25 April, when the document was issued as an Imperial Patent, but counter-signed by the entire Ministry.
The first paragraph laid down that ‘all Lands belonging to the Austrian Imperial State form an indivisible constitutional Monarchy’, but the second recognized the separate positions which had already been granted, or were to be granted, to Hungary and Lombardy-Venetia by laying down that the provisions which followed applied only to the Lands belonging to the German Bund, Galicia-Bukovina, and Dalmatia. ‘The existing territorial division of the Provinces’ (die bisherige Gebietseintheilung der Provinzen) was not to be altered, and there were to be provincial Landtage (the Parliament, when it met, was to decide on the composition of these bodies), which would ‘take account of provincial interests and meet requirements arising out of those interests’, but the key position in the structure was held by a single Parliament, which was to consist of two Houses: a ‘Senate’ composed of the members of the Imperial House who had completed their twenty-fourth year, an (unspecified) number of life-members nominated by the Emperor, and 150 members elected for the lifetime of the Parliament (five years) from among their own members by the largest landowners71 of each Land; and a Lower House of 383 members (the franchise law was to be enacted later). The legislative competence was divided between the Parliament and the Emperor, who was given an absolute veto on any legislation, and had the right to dissolve the Parliament or to prorogue it, but not indefinitely. The question of Ministerial responsibility was to be settled by the Parliament.
The later paragraphs enumerated the conventional civic liberties which the peoples of Austria were to enjoy. The list, which was a comprehensive enough one, need not be enumerated here; but it may be mentioned that it included the phrase that ‘all peoples of the Monarchy are guaranteed the inviolability of their nationality and language’.
Several points in this field, including that of just how much religious equality Austria was prepared to allow, were among those which the Reichstag was asked to settle for itself.72 It was also to enact the definitive franchise for its successors; a provisional law for the elections to the first Parliament was promised for the near future.
The Pillersdorf Constitution has been dismissed too contemptuously by many writers. It had been compiled hastily, under the pressure of popular impatience, but it was by no means an incompetent piece of work, nor an illiberal one. The catalogue of popular rights and liberties was as full as any known to the Europe of the day. It was centralist in the sense that the competences of the Landtage, although not very exactly defined, were clearly subordinated to those of the central Reichstag, but in this respect it did not differ from the system under which Austria settled down twenty years later. Nevertheless, like all attempts to solve the Austrian problem, it found more critics than admirers. The Polish deputation, which was still in Vienna awaiting the answer to its petition, entered a formal protest against the disregard of their claim for a separate status. The Czechs took exception to the general centralist tone of the document, and entered, in particular, a strong caveat that it could not be taken as over-riding the Rescript of 8 April, which the draft had passed over in silence, as though it had never been issued. The same centralism satisfied most of the Germans, but the extreme chauvinist party which was now beginning to raise its head objected to the exclusion of Hungary and the Italian Lands; and others took offence at the omission of any reference to a possible union with Germany, while the radicals of Vienna, headed by the students, found the document too conservative, especially in respect of the two Houses and the Crown’s veto. They also objected to the octroi of a Constitution from above-innocent as Pillersdorf’s decision had been, and taken only to avoid delay; in their view it should have been born of the deliberations of a Constituent Assembly.
The publication of the document was therefore followed in Vienna by a renewal of the disorderly scenes of March: the processions, the deputations, the Katzenmusik under the windows of individuals who found disfavour in the eyes of the students, and now events in the capital succeeded one another with dizzy rapidity. On 4th May Ficquelmont resigned, under the threat of actual violence,73 whereupon fairly extensive changes were made in the Ministry. For his new ‘Head of Chancellery and Minister of Foreign Affairs’ the Emperor fell back on Freiherr von Wessenberg, a retired diplomat who was then passing the evening of his days in Freiburg in Breisgau, a man of courage, integrity and intelligence, and no ultra-Conservative, but of advanced years (he was then seventy-five years old) and frail health. Pending his arrival (he was not even consulted before his appointment), Pillersdorf acted as President of the Ministerial Council. Freiherr von Doblhoff, a liberal and popular member of the Lower Austrian Estates, was brought into the Ministry in charge of trade and industry (this being the first Ministerial appointment made from outside the ranks of the regular State services), and A. Baumgartner, Director of a State tobacco factory, became Minister for State Enterprises and Public Works,74 with the special charge of doing something to relieve unemployment. At the same time, several personal changes were made outside the Ministry; a number of persons were replaced or retired, including some figures suspected of exerting an undue influence behind the scenes.
The Radicals were not satisfied with this victory, and on 10 May formed a new ‘blanket organization’ in the shape of a ‘Political Central Committee of the whole National Guard’, a body which, in fact danced to the students’ piping. Then on 11 May an Imperial Rescript announced the convocation of the Reichstag for 26 June, and published the franchise law for it. The Upper House was to be composed as previously announced, but its total membership was not to exceed 200 – a provision which left the big landowners, who were still to contribute 150 members, constituting an overwhelming majority in it. The elections to the Lower House were to be indirect, the primary electors choosing a smaller number of secondary electors, who then chose the members of the Reichstag, and the primary franchise excluded workers paid by the day or week, domestic servants, and persons in receipt of public assistance.
The Central Committee promptly protested against this franchise, whereupon Hoyos ordered the members of the National Guard not to participate in the Committee’s proceedings. When they objected, he suggested that the Committee should dissolve itself. Instead, the students, National Guard and workers held a mass meeting on 15 May. The streets were packed as not since the March days. Crowds besieged the Palace, in which the Ministers happened to be assembled, demanding the cancellation of the dissolution of the Committee and the withdrawal of the draft Constitution and franchise in favour of a single-chamber Constituent Assembly elected on a popular franchise. The unfortunate Government did not dare refuse, and the next day posters appeared, bearing an announcement, which was signed by Ferdinand and counter-signed by the entire Ministry, that these wishes were granted. Another Rescript, issued the following day, promised specifically that the Reichstag should be uni-cameral and that there should be no property qualification for the primary vote. After the 18th the National Guard was even to share with the military sentry duty at the Palace itself.
*
The concessions of 15 May constituted the biggest victory yet achieved in Austria by the vox populi; but they proved also to be the high watermark of its success. They resulted directly in a move which, while looking at the time like another retreat by the Court and its supporters, can be seen today, in its historical context, as powerfully facilitating the course of the reaction, and even as constituti
ng an important, if unintended, move in it. The tumultuous scenes, and perhaps still more, the prospect of having National Guards watching outside their doors, threw the ladies of the Palace into a panic. They decided to take Ferdinand, to whom they communicated their fears, to safety. Hurried preparations were made, in the deepest secrecy; only a handful of trusted men and women in the Palace were initiated. On the afternoon of the 17th the Emperor and Empress set out as though for an ordinary drive, allegedly to call on the Palatine’s wife, but instead drove all night and all the next day, arriving late in the evening of the 19th in Innsbruck, where they were joined, a few hours later, by Franz Karl and his wife and two younger children.75
From this place of safety the family sent back a defiant proclamation saying that Ferdinand had been forced to leave Vienna because ‘an anarchical faction, supported chiefly by the Academic Legion, which had been led astray by foreigners, and by certain detachments of the Citizens’ and National Guards, had, wavering in their accustomed loyalty, wished to deprive him of his freedom of action’.
The ladies’ motives in compassing the abduction of the Emperor had been simply those of panic, which they had communicated to Ferdinand himself,76 but the political effects of the coup were enormous. In Vienna the news of it produced an extraordinary succession of moves and counter-moves the immediate outcome of which was another advance, in the capital itself, for the Left. The initial effects of the news, even here, had been to sober spirits. While extremists had raised jubilant voices that this was Austria’s flight to Varennes, which would have the same sequel in Austria as it had had in France, and had fêted the coming of the republic, these extravagances only intensified the widespread consternation and fear which the flight had produced among the more sober elements in the capital. There was another heavy run on the banks and savings-banks, and the citizenry rallied to defend itself. The Central Committee transformed itself into a ‘Central Association of the National Guard for the preservation of security and order’, under Montecuccoli. All the armed formations of the capital, the National Guard, the Civic Guard and the Academic Legion, promised to place themselves under the orders of the commander of the Garrison, F.M.L. Auersperg, in the event of disorders breaking out.
The Habsburg Empire (1790-1918) Page 56
