suspicion by the Washington Cabinet. We may now consider some hitherto unpublished evidence of the dangers which confronted the young Republic in formulating a policy with respect to European affairs. The secret dossiers of the Russian Foreign Office offer proofs that the trained diplomacy of Adams and Monroe, in clinging to the policy of isolation set forth by Washington and refusing their adhesion to this earlier League of Peace, adopted a course in accord with the best interests of the whole American Continent. The Russian plan of mediation (complementary to the above) is a highly interesting document. It brings to the attention of the European Powers the importance of a new factor in international affairs: the growing power of the young American Republic. The original is marked "Confidential," and "Submitted by the Plenipotentiaries of France and Russia to their colleagues as wholly confidential and reserved for their own information." It was also further stated that this document is "in no case to be inserted in the Protocols of the Conference." 1 A cautious preamble set forth the Tsar's views of the attitude to be adopted by the Powers of Europe towards America. The general line of policy thus laid down was probably no secret to the Washington Cabinet. It was a policy which, as the Russian Memorandum admits, was more suitable for "verbal communication" than for written notes: Spain's confidence must be gained, not forced. This is indispensable because she alone has the power to act directly . . . An event which would cause irremediable differences in the development of the situation would be the recognition by any power of the government set up by the insurgents. Unfortunately, this is not an improbable event. The popular party in the United States, much strengthened of late, is preparing to make a strong effort to secure the recognition of the independence of Buenos Aires during the next session of Congress. Consideration of their actions reveal their ambitions to make of the American Continent one Grand Confederated Republic at the head of which will be found the United States. In the actual state of affairs, the United States centralizes all its efforts in developing its resources and population. It is directed by a moderate policy and does not offer a menace to Europe. This would not continue to be the case should a large portion of South America adopt its institutions. A whole republican world, young, ardent and enriched by the production of every climate, will then set itself up in opposition to an old monarchical Europe, overpopulated and shaken by thirty years of revolution. This is a perspective worthy 1MS. Aix-la-Chapelle, Russian Foreign Office, Petrograd. of the earnest consideration of all European statesmen. The consequences of all this might be incalculable. The Russian Memorandum then proceeds to prove with what care Europe should seek to prevent, or at least retard, the growing relations between North America and the new states formed in the south: The essential point is to gain time; a united representation by the Powers of Europe would undoubtedly have a great effect on the American Government... It is believed that the Plenipotentiaries of the Five Powers at Washington should take the steps necessary to persuade public opinion in the United States, as well as the Executive, to adopt their point of view. This delicate negotiation should be conducted with much care. Verbal communication would be preferable to written notes-in order to avoid giving ammunition to the opposition, who would seize upon the idea of foreign influence as contrary to American institutions. ... The closing paragraph of this extraordinary diplomatic document is not without a certain enduring significance: It would be advisable that these overtures be made only with the intention of examining more carefully-before taking action-the results which might follow an intervention in America. These results would probably be obtained most easily should the United States finally be invited to send a Plenipotentiary to confer with the other Powers. They could be told they were themselves a European people, Christians, and, therefore, like Europe, interested in questions of a general nature. 1 As will later appear, the terms of the Russian secret "Memorandum" present a startling contrast to the tone subsequently adopted by Polética in his renewed negotiations to induce the Government at Washington to accede to the "Holy Alliance." Had the invitation to form part of the European system (already conveyed through Capo d'Istria at St. Petersburg and Dashkov at Washington) been accepted, the envoys of the United States would have found themselves at Aix-la-Chapelle either in a minority with Great Britain, opposing the mediation asked for by Ferdinand, or else (as Alexander hoped) throwing the weight of their influence in support of the Russian proposals. To accede to the latter would have ended in limiting the action of the United States in America, while the Powers of the Holy Alliance imposed their own policy through "concerted action." 1MS. Aix-la-Chapelle, Russian Foreign Office, Petrograd. 2 See supra. Early in the sessions of the Congress (October 24) Castlereagh had cleverly annexed to the Spanish colonial questions (by a reference to Ferdinand's promise to end the traffic in negroes in the year 1820) the whole matter of the slave trade. This was placing the negotiations on a new footing, wherein sentiment rather than expediency determined the issue. Realizing the danger of this line of conduct, the Russian envoys attempted to have the slave trade made the object of a "Special Association," in which all the states would have a part. In this connection they suggested a central international rendezvous for an Allied fleet on the African coast. This proposal for forming an International Maritime Police naturally brought up the matter of the general safety of the seas, and notably the vexed question of the Barbary pirates. In view of the English policy in the Mediterranean, there was a return to debatable ground. The European Powers found it convenient to overlook their own particularistic interests and to join once more with cheerful unanimity in renewed admonitions to the United States. 1 In the meeting of November 11 the conference took cognizance of a Memoir drawn up by Count Palmella, the Portuguese envoy, concerning "the piratry's exercise by a band of scoundrels navigating under unrecognized flags." By this term was intended not only the insurgents of South America but also alleged privateers fitted out in North American ports to aid the revolutionists. Palmella proposed "that the Ministers of the Five Powers in Washington should be instructed to act in accord with the Ministers of His Most Faithful Majesty (the King of Portugal) in order to obtain the renewal of the Act of August 3, 1793, by which the arming of corsairs in the United States was forbidden, and that such clauses necessary to secure the execution of this act should be added." He also proposed "that all colonial powers of America should take steps to forbid the equipment of corsairs in their ports, the sale of prizes illegally detained," etc. On November 13 the Duke of Richelieu, to whom Palmella's memoir had been referred, reported that the "United States shou'd be included in the proposed League of International Maritime 1MS. Aix-la-Chapelle, Russian Foreign Office, Petrograd. Police." "But such an invitation," he continued, “could not be well extended until Spanish America was pacified."1 On November 14 the League to Suppress Piracy was considered a proper subject "for a general treaty of alliance, which should determine the ports to which each contingent should be assigned." The latter, it was proposed, should each have a separate cruising ground, which was to be changed at frequent intervals. As a measure of precaution "the whole strength of the squadron should never be united unless necessary for action against the Barbary States." 1 Great Britain's reluctance to lend the support of her sea power to these "international" naval measures ended in their abandonment. Upon her jealously guarded "hegemony" turned, moreover, the whole success or failure of an armed intervention in South American affairs. The "League to Suppress Piracy" was indeed but the Armada of Legitimacy and monarchical solidarity. Had Britain not curtailed the theoretical "freedom of the seas," there can be little doubt that the fleets of the Holy Alliance would have sailed unhampered upon a crusade chiefly aimed at upholding the "European principle" and extending its benefits to the Latin-American Continent.2 1MS. Aix-la-Chapelle, Russian Foreign Office, Petrograd. As part of the same debates, Metternich now proposed to restore their island fortresses to the Order of the Knights of Malta as a nucleus of the international fleet operating against the Barbary States. "Such an institution of permanent police," he maintained, "is preferable to a political and military combination." The Emperor of Austria offered the port of Lissa as a base of operations for the Order. Under Metternich's scheme, the old order of Knighthood was to be accessible, not alone to members of the nobility, but also to "youths of good family." It would thus become a school for young sailors and a place where veteran seamen could be usefully employed. "Placed under the protection of a permanent neutrality, the flag of the Order would be respected by all of the other fleets." See supra, p. 91, Mr. Campbell to the Secretary of State, April 21/May 3, 1819. Disappointed in his efforts to challenge and control Great Britain upon an element she had made her own, the Tsar nevertheless pursued his intention to open the debates of the Congress to all matters of international concern. The meeting of November 21 was entirely devoted to another question of abiding interest at the present day. This was a communication of a report by Mr. Way "On the wrongs and political disabilities of the Jews in the different nations of Europe." Here again particularistic interests interfered and no practical steps to ameliorate the postion of this unfortunate people appear to have been proposed. THE UNITED STATES AND THE POLITICAL "Some days before he left Paris he said to us: 'I am about to quit France, but I wish, before I go, to render by a public act the homage which we owe to God .. and to invite the nations to devote themselves to the obedience of the Gospel. I have brought with me the outline of this act, and I wish you would examine it attentively. . . You will join with me a prayer to God that my Allies may be disposed to sign it.'" Tsar Alexander to Empaytaz, 1815. The Tsar's gratification with respect to the accomplishments of the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle was complete and openly expressed. A document preserved in the files of the Russian Foreign Office contains the following summary of the results obtained: The conferences of Aix-la-Chapelle have beyond the power of any denial added to the progress of the European system. This system is now based upon existing common transactions, and the Cabinets of Europe have been able to recognize and appreciate its governing principles. In the future no questions of a general nature can be too difficult or complicated for its application. Precedents for the treatment of such questions will be found in the Acts and Transactions of the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle. The Grand Alliance, therefore, has gained in two ways: First, a fresh proof has been given of its solidarity, and, secondly, new rules of conduct applicable to the future have been deduced, ensuring the maintenance of peace and union between the Allied Powers.1 It is doubtful, however, whether even at this time Alexander's optimism was wholly justifiable. Once the question of readmitting France to the councils of Europe had been decided, the arguments of the Tsar's representatives had aimed to secure from their reluctant colleagues of Prussia, Austria and Great Britain some formal recognition of the principle of international duty and solidarity. This policy was viewed with suspicion by the other signatories of the treaties forming the System of 1815. Castlereagh's "reservations" held England obstinately apart from any Alliance Solidaire. Metternich's grudging recognition of the advantages of such a pact were of little practical value. A platonic "mediation,” not an “intervention," had been the only form of "concerted action" approved by the Powers in the ques Contained in the "Report to the Emperor," MS. Aix-la-Chapelle, 1818, Russian Foreign Office, Petrograd. |