This decision was to lead Austria, in the event, into friendship, and later into alliance, with Germany, but the immediate effect of the outbreak of the war, and of Prussia’s swift and sensational successes in it, was rather to strengthen Francis Joseph’s conviction of the urgency of coming to terms with his Slav subjects. For the foundation of the later Austro-German friendship was Germany’s renunciation of a grossdeutsch policy at Austria’s expense, and in 1870, although Bismarck had already begun dropping hints of his good intentions, no one in Vienna yet felt assured of their sincerity. Kuhn had supported his case for intervention by the prophecy that if Prussia won in the West, she would then turn eastward;18 but even if she did not do so immediately, national feeling of the grossdeutsch type among the Germans of Austria, a potential asset to the Crown so long as the possibility existed of using it to help Austria recover the leadership in Germany, could at best be a potential danger, perhaps a real one, if that leadership passed irrevocably to Prussia.
And perversely, the war had sent an unprecedented wave of that feeling sweeping over Austria’s Germans. While official policy was still uncertain, important bodies, including the Municipalities of Vienna, Brünn and Linz, had, after debates which throbbed with adulation of Prussia, adopted resolutions calling for strict neutrality. Students organized collections for German wounded; some tried to enlist in the Prussian army. The same circles which four years before had taken the defeat of their own country with such indecent composure celebrated the fall of Sedan with bonfires and illuminated windows.
One very well-known Austrian historian tells us that in the spring of 1871 ‘almost all members of the Imperial House, except the Empress Elisabeth, were convinced that the existence of Austria and the rule of the Dynasty depended on dividing the Germans of Austria, so joyfully excited by the German victories, into two halves and entrusting their Sudetic branch to the safe keeping of a Bohemian-Czech State’.19 It may be prudent to take this statement with a grain of salt;20 but the manifestations cannot have failed to aggravate in Francis Joseph’s mind the resentment already inspired in it by the Liberals’ attacks on the Church, and for that matter, by their parsimony over the budget, which was, in the last instance, what had forced John to his admission; and however sincerely he loved peace, it cannot have been easy for Francis Joseph to lay aside for ever dreams so long and so dearly cherished; his disappointment when France was defeated had been deep. And meanwhile, the new situation had boosted the value of Czech national feeling pari passu with its devaluation of German. The opening lines of Rieger’s famous memorandum, with its appeal to France for an ‘independent Bohemia’, read treasonably enough; but words like ‘independence’ and ‘State’ are often, of necessity, used in Austria in senses which lack their full English implications,21 and the end of the memorandum had been entirely Austro-Slav. The Dynasty, it had run, ‘was entering on a false path which might lead to its destruction by sacrificing the Slavs to the Magyars and Germans, so that the injured national feelings’ [of the Slavs], ‘if they erupted during a war, might lead to the dismemberment of the Monarchy. If France wishes to preserve the Austrian Imperial State … it must turn its sympathies to the Austrian Slavs.’
The appeal to France had lost its value in the new situation, but if Austria’s Germans were going to prove unreliable, the argument that the Dynasty had ‘entered on a false path’ by trusting them was cogent indeed.
The August elections, although Potocki had left them entirely free, had already weakened the Liberals’ position. They had split into two mutually hostile fractions of ‘Olds’ and ‘Youngs’, while their anti-Clericalism had mobilized Conservatives and Clericals against them. They had lost considerable ground even in the Alpine Lands, while in Bohemia, the Feudalists had won the first Curia from the Constitutional Landlords, leaving the Czechs in a big majority in the Bohemian Landtag. As the Czechs continued to boycott the Reichsrat, the Liberals still just commanded a majority in that body, which they managed to increase by another twenty-four by insisting on emergency elections in Bohemia. But the establishment of a small Parliamentary majority, thus achieved, for a party which was so obviously in a minority in the country was clearly no solution of the problem. As the Czechs and Poles refused to enter the Reichsrat without further concessions, Potocki resigned on November 24, and even before he had done so, the Emperor had begun looking for a successor to him, this time a man who could hope to reach agreement with the Czechs and their allies. The negotiations were conducted in the deepest secrecy between a handful of men which did not include even Beust22 and the first that the world knew of what was on foot was on 7 February 1871 when the new Ministry took over from Potocki (who until then had remained in charge ad interim).
Potocki’s Minister of Finance, Holzgethan, had, at Francis Joseph’s wish, retained his portfolio. All the other members of the team were new to office. The Minister President, Count Karl Sigmund Hohenwart, who also took over the Interior, had hitherto been known to the public only as the holder of a series of administrative posts (the last of them that of Statthalter of Upper Austria) in which he had conducted himself with moderation and impartiality; but he was at heart an extreme enemy of German centralist Liberalism. He had been offered a post in the Potocki Government, and had declined it ‘because he foresaw the uselessness of further patchwork’;23 and later he was to evolve into the leader of the extreme Conservative-Feudal group. Two of the departmental Ministers were Czechs – the famous historian, Jireček (Education) and Dr Habietenik (Justice), and the list was made up of a professional soldier, General Scholl, for Defence, while the Ministries of Commerce and Agriculture were assigned to the spiritus rector and recognized brains of the whole business, Professor Schäffle, a Württemberger by origin, a Protestant by confession and a man of strongly democratic views which were made palatable to the Emperor by his passionate dislike of Austrian Liberalism and its exponents.
The Government announced itself as non-Party, and in its programme, promised no more than conscientious realization of the principle of equality, but by that it clearly meant changes in the existing system, and in fact, Grocholski was brought into the Cabinet in April as Minister without Portfolio representing the interests of Galicia, and a Bill introduced which would have given Galicia a wide measure of home rule, although less than what the Poles were asking. Another Bill would have extended the competences of all Landtage. The Germans opposed both Bills bitterly, getting the latter defeated outright and the former embogged in Committee.
Meanwhile, negotiations had been going on behind the scenes between the Government and the Czechs, and between the Czechs themselves. Rieger, taking as basis certain proposals made by Adolf Fischof24 (but modifying them substantially), had worked out a draft ‘Nationalities Law’ for Bohemia. This contained one important and constructive proposal (originally Fischof’s25): it divided the Landtag into ‘National Curias’, and laid down that any law containing rules relating to linguistic usage in public life or in educational establishments not serving one nationalitity exclusively was, after its second reading, to be submitted to voting by Curia, and would be taken as rejected if an absolute majority in either Curia voted against it. The budget for cultural purposes was to be divided proportionately to the taxes paid by each Bezirk, and each Curia was to decide the allocation of its own funds. The Landtag was to be bilingual. The official language of each Gemeinde was to be that of its own majority, but in any Bezirk or Gemeinde containing a twenty per cent minority of a second language26 and in any case, in Prague, that language could also be used as a ‘subsidiary language’. Czechs and German were to be used on an equal footing in the central offices. Finally, all members of the provincial Crown (Landesfürstlich) services27 serving in any part of Bohemia were to be able to read and speak both languages.
Meanwhile, Schäffle had been in Prague in May, where he had consulted with the Czech political leaders. They had presented him with their political demands, some of which he had got toned down, while accepting the remainder as a r
easonable basis of discussion. These were then put into the form of eighteen ‘Fundamental Articles’. They accepted the Compromise, with the institution of Delegations, the Cis-Leithanian members of which were to be nominated by the Landtage; Bohemia allotted itself a quota of fifteen. All questions relating to Bohemia and not ‘common’ were to fall within the competence of the Bohemian Landtag. The office of Bohemian Count Chancellor was to be revived, and he, with other Land Chancellors or Ministers, was to form a Ministry to deal with those questions described in the Compromise as best settled on agreed common principles. The quota to be paid by Bohemia towards common expenditure was to be decided by negotiation with the representatives of the other Lands.
Finally, an Address from the Crown to the Bohemian Landtag was agreed. That body was, indeed, asked to work out its proposals for the relationship of Bohemia to the other Lands ‘in a spirit of moderation and conciliation’; but Francis Joseph also declared that ‘he gladly recognized the rights of this Kingdom’ (sc. the Kingdom of Bohemia) ‘and was prepared to renew that recognition in his Coronation oath’.
When all was ready, including the appointment of suitable Statthalters to the difficult Lands, the Reichsrat and the Landtage of Upper and Lower Austria, Salzburg, Styria, Carinthia, Moravia, Silesia and the Tirol (six of which had previously had centralist majorities) were dissolved, and all Landtage required to assemble on 12 September to elect their representatives for the new Reichsrat. Some franchises were manipulated28 and strong pressure applied, with the result that when the elections were over, the Government had secured a comfortable majority (137 to 66) in the Reichsrat. When the Bohemian Landtag met, it was presented with the Imperial Rescript promising coronation, and an agenda which included Rieger’s language law. On 6 October the Landtag was presented with a draft reply to the Rescript, which set out the ‘Fundamental Articles’ as the Czechs’ proposals.
Such was Hohenwart’s famous experiment, and it proved no more successful than any other of Francis Joseph’s attempts to solve the structural problem of the Monarchy – except only Dualism. Schäffle’s memoirs show that he honestly believed, not only that the presumptive opponents of his plan would have no legitimate grounds for objecting to it, but that the opposition to it would not be widespread. He regarded his programme as one of conciliation and justice, and thought that it would be accepted as such by all except a handful of ‘Stock Exchange Kings’. But he overestimated the stocks of reasonableness in Austria. The German members of the Bohemian Landtag had walked out of it when they heard the Rescript. The Liberal members of the Reichsrat announced that they would not attend it. There were riots in German-Bohemia. The Silesian Landtag protested against the idea of union with Bohemia (for prudence’ and correctness’ sake, the Fundamental Articles had confined themselves to Bohemia and had not raised the question of the Böhmisches Staatsrecht, but everyone knew what was behind them). The military feared that the unity of the defence forces would be impaired. Holzgethan himself said that the Fundamental Articles were ‘tantamount to State bankruptcy’. The Poles disliked a plan which would have lessened the contrast between the position in Galicia and that outside it. Beust, who was now advocating friendship with Germany as the best prophylactic against German aggression, feared complications if the Germans of Austria felt aggrieved, and in fact, discreetly disapproving voices came from Germany, Bismarck’s among them, and even the Emperor’s; these, moreover, were coupled with utterances designed to lessen Francis Joseph’s fears of German designs on a well-behaved Austria.29 The most effective opposition of all came from Andrássy, to whose views the Emperor was at the time disposed to pay particular attention, and who was, of course, deeply hostile to any extension of Slav influence in the Monarchy. After first listening to his views privately, Francis Joseph gave him the opportunity to express them constitutionally by inviting him to a Crown Conference on 20 October. There he argued that the Fundamental Articles were, in spite of their careful wording, incompatible with the Compromise as it stood. His opposition seems to have tipped the balance.30
Another Conference of ‘Ministers of the Reich’ drew up a reply to the Bohemian Landtag’s address, inviting it to send its members to the Reichsrat, for discussion of its proposals there. This was tantamount to an intimation that the Fundamental Articles were unacceptable, and the Czech leaders made it clear that they would not modify their terms. The Hohenwart Ministry resigned.31 A search for a new Ministry began, Holzgethan meanwhile holding the fort ad interim. Although Francis Joseph had repeatedly declared that he would never again appoint a Liberal Ministry, it soon transpired that there was simply no alternative, short of suspending the Constitution altogether. Another aristocratic Minister President was, indeed, dug up in the person of ‘Carlos’ Auersperg’s brother, Adolf,32 but his team, except for a politically colourless soldier at the Ministry of Defence and a Moravian landowner (but of a Beamtenadel family) in charge of agriculture, was composed exclusively of Liberals.33
Meanwhile, Beust had resigned (by request) on 6 November. On 14 November Andrássy was appointed to succeed him as Minister of Foreign Affairs.34
The intermezzo was over.
1 It is true that foreign and internal political considerations clashed severely on one occasion after 1871 (1877/8) but the outcome was simple; Francis Joseph simply dismissed from the conduct of internal policy the party which opposed his foreign political concept.
2 Eisenmann, p. 339, finds the explanation for Auersperg’s Liberalism and centralism in family rivalry between the Auerspergs and the Schwarzenbergs, but he surely does too little justice to Auersperg’s genuine convictions. Incidentally, Schäffle has the same jealousy story (op. cit., II. 7), but according to him, it was the Clams of whom the Auerspergs were jealous.
3 Herbst, although born in Vienna, came of Bohemian stock; his grandfather’s name had been Padzinnek, and his parents regarded themselves as Czechs. Hasner, Giskra and Berger were all from Bohemia, Hasner being another nationally ambiguous case (both Germans and Czechs had offered him a mandate). There were no capitalists in the team: they were lawyers, University teachers, or civil servants. Brestel, who had been a Deputy in Kremsier, had since been earning a painful living as a bank clerk.
4 ‘Chiefly’ because they also adopted (with extreme reluctance) the Military Service Law. This received sanction on 5 December 1868.
5 Under the Constitution the Emperor could not sit in Parliament, but could appoint a representative to the Upper House, who voted for him.
6 The procedure was unusual, especially since Potocki refused, out of religious scruples, to counter-sign the document, which was thus couched in the peculiar form of a letter from the Emperor to the Austrian Minister of Education and Cults, instructing him to prepare new legislation to replace the 1855 Patents. Hungary was regarded as released from the Concordat under the ruling that legislation issued during the absolutist period was invalid. Strangely enough, Francis Joseph seems to have acted willingly on this occasion. Cardinal Rauscher had gone down to ask the Pope to consent to revision of the Concordat and had found him quite implacable. Then nearly all the Austrian Bishops, including Rauscher, had spoken against the dogma and had left the Conference before it was accepted. They promulgated it afterwards, in duty bound, but à contre coeur. Francis Joseph wrote to his mother that his action was ‘the best, and also the mildest, answer to Rome’s unlucky decision’ (Schürer, p. 377).
7 Smolka’s group had still wanted a general federalist reconstruction of the Monarchy, to be brought about through alliance with the Czechs. The Conservatives preferred to demand a status for Galicia (such as, they maintained, Beust had promised them) which should differentiate it clearly from any other Land in the Monarchy, but were not agreed what this should be. Goluchowski thought it unsafe to do more than get de facto concessions which would leave the framework of the Constitution nominally intact; but he had few followers. A larger group, led by Ziemalkowski, wanted a status for Galicia within Cis-Leithania similar to Croatia
’s in Hungary; another, headed by Count Borkowski, demanded as much as Hungary itself had got within the Monarchy. Eventually Smolka was shouldered aside and the other groups agreed on the Resolution described.
8 When this Resolution was adopted, Goluchowski resigned, but his disappearance only consolidated the front of the more extreme parties.
9 The ‘outer language’ remained as regulated in 1859 and 1860; Polish and German were treated as landesübliche Sprachen in the four westernmost Kreise, and Polish, German and Ruthene in the other twelve.
10 Military law had to be proclaimed also in Dalmatia, where a full-scale revolt broke out in the Cattaro region in the spring of 1869. This, however, was due to special causes (an order depriving the inhabitants of certain special traditional privileges and making them subject to compulsory military service).
11 Potocki exempted the Bohemian Landtag from immediate dissolution, in the hope of reaching an agreement with it. As the negotiations proved fruitless, this body was dissolved on 31 July, and the Bohemian elections held in August. The other Landtage held their elections in June and July.
12 The French declaration of war was actually delivered on 19 July, but war had been recognized to be inevitable for several days before that.
13 The Archduke Albrecht, as Head of the Army High Command, had interfered so intolerably with John’s work that John, who had also had difficulties with Andrássy, had resigned in January 1868. John’s post had then been given to Kuhn, while Albrecht’s (which had been created for him) had been abolished, and he had been given instead the position, the duties of which were somewhat undefined, of ‘Inspector-General of the Armed Forces’.
14 It has been rightly pointed out that the first purpose of this treaty, for Austria, was to protect her against Russia.
15 The Archduke Albrecht went to Paris with plans for military co-operation, but when the French generals made closer inquiries, they decided that Austria’s mobilization would be too slow for their purposes.
The Habsburg Empire (1790-1918) Page 93
