monarchy, and if a chain of Slavonic states were established on the Balkan, it would probably not be difficult to seduce discontented Slavs from their allegiance to the House of Hapsburg; and a successful Panslavist insurrection in Austria-Hungary would mean the disruption of the monarchy, for it would deprive her of her richest provinces, and the majority of her population.

Such considerations, notwithstanding the great value justly attached by the Emperor Francis Joseph to the German and Hungarian elements in his empire, naturally led him and his Government to give more attention than had hitherto been the case to the demands of his Slavonic subjects; and the favourable impression produced by the concessions made in this respect by the Ministry was heightened by a series of visits made by the sovereign to the Slavonic provinces. In Bohemia, notwithstanding the feud between the German and Czechish inhabitants, his reception was most enthusiastic, and the two nationalities vied with each other in demonstrations of loyalty. The Emperor, on his side, did all in his power to reconcile and promote peace between them, and was scrupulously impartial in the marks of distinction he conferred upon their leaders and their chief public institutions. After visiting Bohemia and Moravia in June, the Emperor proceeded in the beginning of September to Galicia. That province is inhabited by two branches of the Slavonic race: the Ruthenian, which is the more numerous, and is chiefly prevalent in Eastern Galicia, and the Polish, which is predominant in Western Galicia. Until some twenty years ago the Ruthenians had no distinct political individuality, having for three centuries been part of the Polish kingdom much in the same way as Scotland is part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and, after the destruction of Polish independence, having continued to act with the Poles in all political questions. Their history and literature are Polish, but they have a distinct religion, the United Greek, which, after a union of nearly four hundred years, has divided the Polish and Rutbenian nationalities in Galicia* into two antagonistic elements. In the days when German centralism was predominant in the Austrian Empire, Herr von Schmerling, who was then Prime Minister, attempted to break the resistance of the non-German nationalities by playing them off against each other, and he accordingly encouraged the Ruthenians to send their own deputies to the central Parliament, and to demand similar privileges for their own nationality to those which were enjoyed by the Poles. In a word, Herr von Schmerling, as was wittily said at the time, "invented" the Ruthenian nationality in order to worry the Poles; and what this so-called nationality was composed of was shown by the fact that all the deputies sent by the Ruthenians to Vienna were either peasants or priests-the Ruthenian nobles, professional men, journalists, &c., who abound in Galicia, all

* In Russian Poland no differences exist between the Poles and the Ruthenians, as they are united against their common enemy, the Russian Government.

declaring themselves to be Poles. After the disappearance of the centralist régime, and the establishment of a constitution more in accordance with the position and claims of the various nationalities in the monarchy, the fiction of a distinct Ruthenian nationality was dropped; the Polish language was introduced in the schools, the Government offices, and the courts of justice, a Polish academy of sciences was founded at Cracow under the patronage of the Emperor, and a Polish Minister for Galician affairs was admitted to the Cabinet at Vienna. Never did the Poles, even in the most palmy days of their independence, enjoy more freedom or prosperity than they do now under the Austrian rule in Galicia; and they gladly seized the opportunity of the Emperor's visit to manifest their gratitude for the benefits he had conferred upon them. The festivities which took place on this occasion were on an unprecedented scale of magnificence. The members of the old Polish aristocracy flocked in crowds to Lemberg to do honour to their sovereign, and large sums were subscribed by wealthy Polish citizens to charitable and educational institutions in commemoration of the Emperor's visit. The Emperor responded with his usual graciousness and tact to this striking outburst of national enthusiasm ; and though every care was taken, both by the Government and the people themselves, to prevent the demonstration from assuming an anti-Russian character, the lesson which it taught was undoubtedly such as to impress Russia with a sense of the dangers she might incur if she adopted a policy hostile to Austria. The Ruthenians, whose antagonism to the Poles had long been skilfully worked upon by Russian agents with a view to converting them into the tools of Russian policy, relapsed into complete insignificance before this great manifestation of Galician loyalty; the people of Galicia, four millions in number, rose up as one man to welcome their Emperor; and the contrast of their freedom and contentedness with the despotism under which their countrymen under the Russian rule were suffering could not fail to show the Government of St. Petersburg on which side would be the sympathies of its Polish subjects in the event of an AustroRussian war.

In an empire like that of Austria-Hungary, with populations differing so radically from each other in language, religion, and race, and only kept together by their loyalty to the ruling dynasty, the internal policy of the Government must necessarily be swayed to a very great extent by considerations of foreign policy. Baron Haymerle, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, does not possess the showy qualities of his two predecessors. He is not a brilliant statesman like Count Beust, nor a skilful diplomatist like Count Andrassy; but he is free from the antiquated traditions of statesmanship which somewhat cloud Count Beust's perception of the currents of public feeling, and his industry and business capacity enable him to take a solid grasp of important questions which Count Andrassy was too apt to treat with the levity and inaccuracy

the author of the well-known May Laws, immediately followed, opposing all idea of concession, which he declared would be interpreted by Rome and the Ultramontanes as a victory. The boast would be made that the struggle against the State had succeeded, and that fresh demands would be met by further concessions, and the " taming of Prince Bismarck" would be preached from a thousand pulpits. Herr Windthorst declined to commit his party or the Papal authorities to any final vote, but he protested against the mutilated form in which the negotiations with the Holy See had been published. After two days' debate it was decided to refer the Bill to a Select Committee, composed of twenty-one members, six of whom, including one Pole, belonged to the Centre, eight to the United Conservatives, five to the National Liberals, and two to the Progressists. The committee began by altogether rejecting Article 1, which would, in certain circumstances, admit even foreigners into the Catholic Church in Germany, and greatly relax existing restrictions on the education of the clergy; in Article 3 a sentence was struck out which at once destroyed the sense of the whole; Article 4 was re-worded in a way that was most disagreeable to the Government; Article 7 was rejected; as to Article 8, no agreement could be come to, so that finally not only the paragraph itself, but all the proposed amendments thereof, had to be rejected. Finally, on a division, in consequence of an alliance between the Centre, the National Liberals, and the Progressists, the entire Bill was rejected by 13 votes to 8 in the Committee, although there was a majority in favour of certain individual clauses. Under these auspices it again came before the Landtag a week later (June 18) for second reading. A variety of amendments, the discussion of which occupied a week, were brought forward; one dispensing with the preliminary general education for the Catholic clergy, supported by Herr Reichensberger (Centre) on the ground that, as an aim of the May Laws was to change the convictions of the clergy, the Church could not accept such a prospect. Professor Gneist (Liberal) held that the State could not with dignity make advances to the Church. The Falk Laws were especially directed against the pretensions of the Papacy to make the Roman Catholic dependent on it instead of on the State. Herr von Puttkamer, Minister of Public Worship, combated the notion that the State wished to recede from its position or to ignore its responsibility. The House then voted on the clause, which was rejected by 206 votes against 180. On the following day, Article 2, which proposed to invest the chief civil authorities merely with the right of appealing against ecclesiastical decisions, was rejected; but Article 3, which permits the State to deprive offenders of their salaries without presuming to rescind their appointments, was carried. Article 4, the so-called Bishop's clause, containing the essence of the Bill, as under it the King was to have power to reinstate deposed prelates, gave rise to a long and bitter discussion, but was carried by 252 votes against 150, by the help of the Free Conservatives, who

which they are regarded by their subjects, also did their part towards cementing the alliance between them. At the Court of Vienna the Archduke Albert and some other eminent generals are known to have Russian leanings, but the Emperor Francis Joseph takes every opportunity of expressing his sympathy with Germany and its ruler. The warm congratulations which he addressed to Count Moltke on his birthday gained him much popularity with the German people, and an equally favourable impression was produced in Austria by the hearty reception given in September to the Crown Prince, Archduke Rudolph, by the court and the people of Berlin on the occasion of his visit to that capital. An indiscreet ́remark made by the Crown Prince on this occasion in a conversation with Lord Houghton, to the effect that Austria need not necessarily prevent Russia from going to Constantinople, as in that event she would sufficiently protect her interests by taking Salonica, seems to have been regarded at Berlin as indicating a possible change in Austrian policy, the effect of which might be to isolate Germany as regards Russia and France; but though this produced a slight coldness between the two states, it had no material effect on their mutual relations, which soon again became as friendly as before. Among other signs of the firmness of the Austro-German alliance may be mentioned the fact that while in the budget laid by the Minister for War in November before the delegations large sums were demanded and granted for strengthening the fortifications of Cracow and Przemysl on the Russian frontier, and those of the provinces bordering on Italy, it was at the same time announced that the works of Königgrätz, on the frontier of Germany, are no longer to be kept in repair.

Of the questions of foreign politics which, though possessing a subordinate interest for Europe, were of great importance to Austria, the chief were the Danubian question, and that of the commercial relations of Austria with Servia. The Danubian question arose from the new territorial arrangements made by the Treaty of Berlin. A committee, presided over by the Austrian members of the European Danube Commission, having been instructed by the Commission to draw up, in conformity with the 55th article of the Treaty, rules for the navigation, the police, and the inspection of the river from the Iron Gates to Galatz, the committee prepared a report in which it recommended the establishment at Rustchuk of a mixed Commission of the riparian states, viz., Austria-Hungary, Roumania, Servia, and Bulgaria, to superintend the execution of the rules referred to. The committee further proposed that Austria-Hungary should preside in this Commission, and should have the casting vote in the event of the votes on each side in any question being equal. This proposal seemed at first sight equitable enough, as Austria-Hungary, being more interested than any other Power in removing any impediments to the free navigation of the Danube, would not be likely to vote for any measure not calculated to promote that object. It was

represented, however, in quarters hostile to Austria, that the proposal was really an attempt on the part of that Power to secure the monopoly of the navigation of the Danube, and the other riparian states consequently objected to it. A series of delicate negotiations followed, which were not terminated at the end of the year, but several of the Great Powers have already expressed the opinion that the proposed arrangement would be an advantageous one both for the interests of the riparian states and of Europe generally. In the Servian question a conflict took place between the Cabinets of Vienna and Belgrade which almost produced a diplomatic rupture. The question at issue was whether Servia is bound to extend to Austro-Hungarian importers the same treatment as is secured to English goods by the commercial treaty between Servia and England. By the 37th article of the Treaty of Berlin it was stipulated that until fresh agreements are made, no change is to take place in the commercial relations of Servia with foreign countries, and that the privileges and immunities of foreign subjects shall remain untouched. At the date of the treaty the commercial relations of Servia with Austria were regulated by a commercial convention entered into with Turkey in 1862 on the basis of "the most favoured nation" clause; and Baron Haymerle therefore held that if Austrian traders were less favourably treated by Servia than those of any other country, this would be a breach of treaty obligations. M. Ristics, the Prime Minister of Servia, argued, in opposition to this view, that Servia could not be justly bound by the acts of the Porte, and that, so long as no special convention on the subject existed between Austria and Servia, Austria had no right to claim for her subjects the rights which Servia had agreed by treaty to grant to the subjects of other states. At length, after a long and angry controversy, Baron Haymerle despatched (October 14) a note to Belgrade demanding "a formal and explicit recognition that the treatment on the footing of the most favoured nation belongs, without any restrictions whatever," to Austria-Hungary, and threatening, in the event of non-compliance with this demand, to apply "such other measures as the imperial and royal Government may deem useful for the efficacious defence of their interests." This peremptory despatch speedily produced the desired effect. M. Ristics resigned, a new Ministry was appointed at Belgrade, and on November 10 M. Marinovics arrived at Pesth, as the Servian plenipotentiary, to give the declaration asked for in the note referred to, and to prepare the way for an understanding with regard to the conclusion of a commercial treaty between the two states.

In October the German constitutionalists renewed their attacks upon the home policy of the Taaffe Ministry. After a preliminary conference at Carlsbad, whose proceedings the Ministry imprudently attempted to withdraw from publication by confiscating the newspapers in which they first appeared, a meeting, attended by about 3,000 persons, was held on November 14 at Vienna, to protest