Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

In the meanwhile, the other question which was agitating Central and Northern Europe—the connection of the Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein with one another, with Denmark, and with Germany-was becoming acute.

The two Duchies of Schleswig and Holstein lie to the south of modern Denmark. Holstein, the more southern of the two, is exclusively German in its population. Schleswig, the more northern, contains a mixed population of Danes and Germans. In the course of the fourteenth century Schleswig was conquered by Denmark, but ceded to Count Gerard of Holstein-the Constitution of Waldemar providing that the two Duchies should be under one Lord, but that they should never be united to Denmark. This is the first fact to realise in the complex history of the Schleswig-Holstein question.

The line of Gerard of Holstein expired in 1375. It was succeeded by a branch of the house of Oldenberg. In 1448 a member of this house, the nephew of the reigning Duke, was elected to the throne of Denmark. The reigning Duke procured in that year a confirmation of the compact that Schleswig should never be united with Denmark. Dying without issue in 1459, the Duke was succeeded, by the election of the Estates, by his nephew Christian I. of Denmark. In electing Christian, however, the Estates compelled him in 1460 to renew the compact confirmed in 1448. And, though Duchies and Crown were thenceforward united, the only link between them was the sovereign. Even this link could possibly be severed. For the succession in the Duchy was secured to the male heir in direct contradiction of the law of Denmark.1

Thus while the fourteenth century declared that Schleswig

1 In the whole of this account I have followed, and occasionally copied, the remarkable article on the constitutional question in Schleswig-Holstein which was published in the Home and Foreign Review of January 1862. The student, however, will do well to compare this account, written from a German point of view, with Denmark and Germany since 1815, by Charles A. Gosch (London, 1862). This book contains the Danish side of the question in a convenient form.

and Holstein should be joined together and separate from Denmark, the fifteenth century placed Duchies and Kingdom, still organically distinct, under one head, uniting them in fact by the link of the Crown. It would complicate this narrative if stress were laid on the various changes in the relations between Kingdom and Duchies which were consequent on the unsettled state of Europe during the three succeeding centuries. It is sufficient to say that, by a treaty made in 1773, the arrangements concluded more than 300 years before were confirmed. Schleswig-Holstein reverted once more to the King of Denmark under exactly the same conditions as in the time of Christian I., who had expressly recognised that he governed them as Duke, that is, by virtue of their own law of succession.

Such an arrangement was not likely to be respected amidst the convulsions which affected Europe in the commencement of the present century. In 1806 Christian VII. took advantage of the disruption of the German Empire formally to incorporate the Duchies into his Kingdom. No one was in a position to dispute the act of the monarch. In 1815, however, the King of Denmark, by virtue of his rights in Holstein and Lauenburg, joined a Confederation of the Rhine; and the nobility of Holstein, brought in this way into fresh connection with Germany, appealed to the German Diet. But the Diet, in the first quarter of the nineteenth century, was subject to influences opposed to the rights of nationalities. It declined to interfere, and the union of Duchies and Kingdom was maintained.

Christian VII. was succeeded in 1808 by his son Frederick VI., who was followed in 1839 by his cousin Christian VIII. The latter monarch had only one son, afterwards Frederick VII., who, though twice married, had no children. On his death, if no alteration had been made, the crown of Denmark would have passed to the female line-the present reigning dynasty while the Duchies, by the old undisputed law, would have reverted to a younger branch, which descended through males to the house of Augustenburg.

VOL. II.

2 B

With this prospect before them it became very desirable for the Danes to amalgamate the Duchies; and in the year 1844 the Danish Estates almost unanimously adopted a motion that the King should proclaim Denmark, Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg one indivisible State. In 1846 the King put forth a declaration that there was no doubt that the Danish law of succession prevailed in Schleswig. He admitted that there was more doubt respecting Holstein. But he promised to use his endeavours to obtain the recognition of the integrity of Denmark as a collective State. Powerless alone against the Danes and their sovereign, Holstein appealed to the Diet; and the Diet took up the quarrel, and reserved the right of enforcing its legitimate authority in case of need.

Christian VIII. died in January 1848. His son, Frederick VII, the last of his line, grasped the tiller of the State at a critical moment. Crowns, before a month was over, were tumbling off the heads of half the sovereigns of Europe; and Denmark, shaken by these events, felt the full force of the revolutionary movement. Face to face with revolution at home and Germany across the frontier, the new King tried to cut instead of untying the Gordian knot. He separated Holstein from Schleswig, incorporating the latter in Denmark, but allowing the former under its own constitution to form part of the German Confederation. Frederick VII. probably hoped that the German Diet would be content with the halfloaf which he offered it. The Diet, however, replied to the challenge by formally incorporating Schleswig in Germany, and by committing to Prussia the office of mediation. War broke out, but the arms of Prussia were crippled by the revolution which shook her throne. The sword of Denmark, in these circumstances, proved victorious; and the Duchies were ultimately compelled to submit to the decision which force had pronounced.

These events gave rise to the famous protocol which was signed in London, in August 1850, by England, France, Austria, Russia, Sweden, and Denmark. This document settled the question, so far as diplomacy could determine

it, in the interests of Denmark. The unity of Denmark, Schleswig, Holstein, and Lauenburg was secured by a uniform law of succession, and their internal affairs were placed, as far as practicable, under a common administration.1

The protocol of 1850 was signed by Lord Palmerston during the Russell Administration. It was succeeded by the Treaty of 1852, which was concluded by Lord Malmesbury. This treaty, to which all the great powers were parties, was the logical consequence of the protocol. Under it the succession to Kingdom and Duchies was assigned to Prince Christian of Glücksburg, the present reigning King of Denmark. The integrity of the whole Danish Monarchy was declared permanent; but the rights of the German Confederation with respect to Holstein and Schleswig were reserved. The declaration was made in accordance with the views of Russia, England, and France; the reservation was inserted in the interests of the German powers; and, in a manifesto, which was communicated to the German Courts, the King of Denmark laid down elaborate rules for the treatment and government of the Duchies.

Thus, while the succession to the Danish throne and the integrity of Denmark had been secured by the protocol of 1850 and the Treaty of 1852, the elaborate promises of the Danish King, formally communicated to the German powers, had given the latter a pretext for contending that these pledges. were at least as sacred as the treaty. And the next ten years made the pretext much more formidable than it seemed in 1852. For Denmark, aiming at the consolidation of her administration, showed an increasing disposition to ignore her pledges; while the German powers, irritated at the attitude of the Danes, protested against this policy. The Danes endeavoured to extricate themselves from a constantly growing

1 In a remarkable passage in his Diary, Count Vitzthum (St. Petersburg and London, 1852-1864, vol. ii. p. 221) declares that this protocol was the price which Lord Palmerston consented to pay for Russian acquiescence in the Greek policy of 1850. But, from Lord Palmerston's point of view, the integrity of Denmark was quite as much a British as a Russian interest; and the supposed concession, therefore, could not have caused the Minister much compunction.

embarrassment by repeating the policy of 1848, by granting, under what was known as the Constitution of 1855, autonomous institutions to Holstein, by consolidating the purely Danish portions of the Monarchy, and by incorporating Schleswig, which was partly Danish and partly German, in Denmark. But the German inhabitants of Schleswig resented this arrangement. They complained of the suppression of their language and the employment of Danish functionaries, and they argued that, under the engagements which had been contracted between 1851 and 1852, Holstein had a voice in constitutional changes of this character. This argument added heat to a dispute already acute. For it was now plain that, while the German Diet' claimed the right to interfere in Holstein, Holstein asserted her claim to be heard on the affairs of the entire Kingdom.

Lord Russell, from the first, thought that both parties to this unfortunate dispute were to a great extent to blame; and from the beginning strove to induce both of them partially to give way. Thus, early in August 1860, he supported a proposal of Denmark for regulating the powers of the Holstein assembly, and for fixing once for all the definite or maximum contributions which should be made by Holstein and the other constituent parts of Denmark to the national expenses. But, at the same time, he pointed out that the proposal failed to satisfy the just claims of Schleswig, whose people, he suggested, might be allowed legislative and administrative independence, and be suffered themselves to determine the language to be used in their churches and schools. No decision, however, was adopted on this suggestion. For the next two years and a half, diplomacy continued to exchange notes and despatches, till at last, in September 1862, Lord Russell, who had enjoyed opportunities of discussing the subject with foreign statesmen while he was in attendance on the Queen at Gotha, made a formal proposal for settling the whole of the differences which had arisen.

Lord Russell commenced this despatch by assuming that there was no longer any doubt (1) that in Holstein and

« EdellinenJatka »