6.-Der rechte Augenblick, von CAMEO. (The right Moment, by CAMEO.) Vienna, 1848. 7.-Was ist, and was enthält eine Constitution? Von EMERICH, VON LEGRADY. (What is a Constitution, and what is comprehended by it? by E. von LEGRADY.) Vienna, 1848. 8.-Des Constitutionellen Oesterreichers politischer katechismus. (The Political Catechism of a Constitutional Austrian.) Vienna, 1848. N the month of September, and in the year 1838, the writer of this article was present in the cathedral of Milan when the brows of Ferdinand, emperor of Austria, were bound with the iron crown of Italy, as supreme sovereign of the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom. Ten years had not passed away, although their course was nearly completed, when the same writer stood on the ramparts of Vienna, and saw the revolted, or rather revolutionized subjects of the same emperor, with arms in their hands, practising the trade of soldiers, and as civic recruits reviewed by a field-marshal of the empire. At that moment the soldiers of the emperor had been driven from Milan, and the emperor himself was contemplating a flight to Innspruck from the citizens of Vienna. The coronation of Ferdinand at Milan, was not a mere emblem of the downfall of the French principles that had at one time prevailed in Lombardy; it was a fact which every concurrent circumstance corroborated-not less proved by the fifteen thousand Austrian troops, who were reviewed in front of the Porta Orientale, than it was testified in the loyalty, the love, and affectionate demonstrations of the people towards every member of the imperial family, with the exception of the archduchess-empress, Maria Louisa, whose presence upon that, as upon every other occasion of a similar kind, proved that her attachment was with her family, and never had been with that gigantic parvenu to whom a political necessity had wedded her. The coronation at Milan, and under the same sacred roof where Napoleon had been crowned, was not less a demonstrative proof of the annihilation of the usurper, than the review of the national guard of Vienna by field-marshal Hoyos, was incontrovertible evidence, that the lustre of the imperial diadem had been dimmed by coming in contact with the rude hands of insurgent citizens. Of all the revolutions of modern times, the most important as well as the most interesting, the most strange as well as the most unexpected, was that which took place in Vienna in its "three days of March" of the present year. Paris made vacant with a brief struggle the crown of an usurper; Berlin relied more upon its arms than the word of its monarch, and therefore it had a blood-stained revolution; but Austria, whose sovereigns have ever had loving subjects, destroyed in a moment a system which had been settled for ages, and that required all the sagacity of the wisest.statesman of the century to preserve in its pristine strength, when the customs, manners, and even thoughts of all other portions of Europe were undergoing a change. Austria was revolutionized because the sovereign of Austria preferred the lives of the the citizens of Vienna to his own prerogatives, and because he willingly sacrificed his interests to their wishes. What a pity it is that the people did not prove themselves more worthy of so good a king, or that they should have so conducted themselves as to afford to future tyrants the pretence for affirming, that it is more prudent for a sovereign to resist than to yield to popular demands, that the revolted subject cannot safely be treated with tenderness, and that there is danger to the monarch who concedes what is just, when the concession may appear as a submission made from fear, and not from the conviction that it has been too long refused. There is much instruction for the rulers and the ruled in the history of the revolution of Vienna; but the attention which the event merits has not been bestowed upon it, because there was not much blood shed on the occasion. Its apparent peacefulness has doomed it to an undeserved obscurity; for the readers of English journals are in one respect like to the readers of the French feuilletons-they take no pleasure in perusing over details which are not dabbled with human gore; they regard that as a dull political event which narrates nothing more than the parental virtues of a monarch; they wish for accounts of battles, they revel in a carnage, they are only contented when they have before them the most minute particulars of a popular massacre, like that of Paris last June. Their hero is a Robespierre or a Cavaignac, and their favourite author the "great unknown," who does "executions" for the morning papers! All that a nation could demand, all that a people could require, all that a monarch could concede, except his crown, were not merely yielded, but bestowed upon his subjects by the Austrian emperor. He gave all these, on condition that he should obtain peace--that the rights of others should be respected-that the power yielded to the populace should not be exercised for the purposes of persecution. The conditions were not fulfilled-the violators of the compact were the enfranchised populace. Those who had been apparently contented, and certainly were tranquil, when they had neither liberty of speech, nor freedom of the press, nor trial by jury, nor a constitution, became riotous, discontented, persecuting, tyrannicalrebellious even in their bearing to their sovereign. These are strange facts-they are not creditable to the subjects of the Austrian emperor; but still they can be accounted for, and an explanation of them may tend to make us wiser-perhaps better men. What we have to state may not be popular, but it is true, and therefore deserves to be known. There was a time when the fault to be remarked in literary men, was, that they flattered kings, and shrunk from the exposure of their vices. Modern literature errs in the opposite way. It flatters popular passions, and succumbs to popular prejudices, and is reluctant to laud kings, when those kings are so far removed, that they may be equally unconscious of what is, to them, alike useless praise and ineffective censure. Having no object in view but the promotion of the cause of truth, and no purpose to serve but in its promulgation, we wish now to draw the attention of the reader to the most remarkable of all the wonderful revolutions of the year 1848-the Viennese Revolution of March-its causes and its consequences. The latter we have seen, not merely in Vienna, but in Berlin, in Prague, and in the metropolis of the German parliament, Frankfort-on-the-Maine. When we know why revolutionary liberty has not given peace in Vienna, we have the explanation afforded why revolutionary liberty has not diffused the blessings of peace, contentment, and happiness, in any part of Germany. The form of government that prevailed in all parts of Germany, previous to the revolutions of 1848, was that which can alone be designated a pure despotism. Each sovereign, whether kaiser, king, or grand duke, was, in strict accordance with Doctor Donnegan's definition of the word Δεσπότης, one who rules as a master over his slave 66 with uncontrolled power. 99% As it is not permitted to the slave to murmur against his master-as the slave is not permitted to hold any species of property, but with the approval or connivance of his master-as the slave is not permitted to depart from the farm which he cultivates, or the burgh he inhabits, but with the sanction of his masterso were the Germans treated, and so ruled by their several governments; and therefore the liberty of speech, the freedom of the press, the enjoyment of property, and even the capability of locomotion were restrained or enlarged, modified or abolished, in accordance with the will of the rulers, and not because it was either admitted or supposed that there was an inherent right in the ruled to exercise as they wished, such privileges. The despotism might be, as it was in many places, a mild despotism, or it might be a harsh, cruel, teasing, and pedantic despotism as it was in Prussia; but in the former cases it was mild, because the despot chose to make concessions; or it was a harsh despotism, because the despot chose to strain his power to its utmost limits: "Alii enim liberiori, alii adstrictiori nexu obligantur." In Germany, where the name of "slave," as applied to a degraded race of men, first originated, the harshness of slavery has been for the longest period most rigidly maintained, even though its bitterness might occasionally be disguised beneath the forms and the courtesies of civilized society. It was easily perceivable in the uncompensated and forced labour of the peasant, although it might not, at first sight, be distinguished in the towns, in such places, for instance, as Vienna, which, so long back as the year 1230, was recognized by Frederick II., as a permissible home or refuge for runaway serfs and slaves. *Greek and English Lexicon, p. 407. Edition 1842. Potgessier, De Statu Servorum, Lib. v. c. ii. p. 824. The Slavi first defeated by Charlemagne, were subsequently conquered by Otho, Henry the Lion, and Albert the Bear, and such numbers dispersed as slaves over the different parts of Germany, that the name which first distinguished a nation, at length was used as the denomination of class. The proofs are a forded by Potgessier that it was the practice amongst the ancients, both Greeks and Romans, to retain the name with their slaves of the nations to which those slaves had formerly belonged. See Potgessier "de variis servorum speciebus eorumque nomibus," in "Statu Servorum," Lib. i. c. iv. p. 286. note b. It was in Vienna that despotism was to be found in its most agrecable form, and slavery in its least repulsive aspect; for there the despotism was, in fact, that of a truly kind, tender-hearted, and affectionate sovereign; it might be termed that which is an indispensable despotism; the despotism of a good father over a large family of children, as yet incapable of guiding and governing themselves. 66 6 In short," (says a modern traveller who visited Vienna when it was thought the system he described was to be for ever preserved,) "there is not the slightest appearance of despotism, save the censorship and the unjust restrictions on foreign literature, together with the rigour with which political babblers are punished. The code of laws deserves the most attentive study; impartial justice between man and man is its distinguishing feature, and mercy characterises all its enactments; hence, the punishment of death is only inflicted in aggravated cases of murder. The fine arts, commerce and agriculture, are encouraged; the landsman is rich, and the peasant can live comfortably; the taxes are moderate, property is protected by the strong arm of government, and crime, in its revolting forms, is nearly unknown. In short, the whole legislative system tends to the maintenance of public order, and the most paternal solicitude is constantly manifested for the comfort and happiness of the public. However, we must admit that the exterior forms are but little calculated to please the passing stranger; the system of espionage, which places every traveller on his arrival under the surveillance of the police; the list of tiresome queries he is obliged to answer, such as, What is his object in travelling? How long he intends to remain? If he has sufficient fortune to support himself? If he has letters of recommendation? and to whom? His profession? Religion,' &c. The search after books, papers, &c., through his baggage the despotic manner in which they are seized and read; and then, if found to contain anything that the chef de police may deem revolutionary, the unlucky owner is conducted most unceremoniously across the frontier: the repeated demands for his passport, and a hundred similar disagreeables, all tend to impress the traveller with the conviction that he has entered a country groaning beneath the iron rod of despotism; let him, however, patiently surmount these obstacles, and establish a character as a good citizen, who has not the most remote intention of attempting to subvert the established order of things, and every annoyance will disappear, and he may afterwards live quite as free under the despotic rule of Austria, as in the home of liberty itself, old England; he may become a member of club-houses, in which the liberal papers of France and England are allowed admission. During my residence, I have frequently had liberal publications transmitted to me without being once opened by the police. However, I would recommend every |