vances to which they have been arbitrarily and unjustly subjected." § 21. Alliance of the five great Europe We have already seen in what degree the deliberations of the congress of Vienna were affected by the preponderance of the four great powers, Austria, Great Britain, Prussia, an powers. and Russia, who had reserved to themselves, by the treaty of Paris, in 1814, the disposition of the territories, the title to which was renounced by France in the same treaty. The efforts of the successive coalitions formed by the great European monarchies against France since the revolution of 1789, were finally crowned with success, and resulted in the formation of an alliance, intended to be permanent, between these four powers, to which France subsequently acceded at the congress of Aix-la-Chapelle, in 1818, constituting a sort of superintending authority in these powers over the international affairs of Europe, the precise extent and objects of which were never very accurately defined. As interpreted by those of the contracting powers who were also the original parties to the compact called the holy alliance, this union was intended to form a perpetual system of intervention among the European states, adapted to prevent any such change in the internal forms of their respective governments as might endanger the existence of the monarchical institutions which had been reëstablished under the legitimate dynasties of their respective reigning houses. This general right of interference was sometimes defined so as to be applicable to every case of popular revolution, where the change in the form of government did not proceed from the voluntary concession of the reigning sovereign, or was not confirmed by his sanction, given under such circumstances as to remove all doubt of his having freely consented. At other times, it was extended to every revolutionary movement pronounced by these powers to en a Mr. Secretary Clay's letter to Mr. Gallatin, American minister in London, June 19th, 1826. Session 1827-1828, No. 43. vention of sia in the af 1820. danger, in its consequences, immediate or remote, the social order of Europe, or the particular safety of neighbouring states. § 22. Inter- The measures adopted by Austria, Russia, and Prussia, Austria, Rus- at the congress of Troppau and of Laybach, in respect to sia, and Prus- to the Neapolitan revolution of 1820, were founded upon fairs of Naples, principles adapted to give the great powers of the European continent a perpetual pretext for interfering in the internal concerns of its different states. The British government expressly dissented from these principles, not only upon the ground of their being, if reciprocally acted on, contrary to the fundamental laws of Great Britain, but such as could not safely be admitted as part of a system of international law. In the circular despatch addressed on this occasion, to all its diplomatic agents, it was stated, that though no government could be more prepared than the British government was, to uphold the right of any state or states to interfere, where their own immediate security or essential interests are seriously endangered by the internal transactions of another state, it regarded the assumption of such a right as only to be justified by the strongest necessity, and to be limited and regulated thereby; and did not admit that it could receive a general and indiscriminate application to all revolutionary movements, without reference to their immediate bearing upon some particular state or states, or that it could be made prospectively, the basis of an alliance. The British government regarded its exercise as an exception to general principles of the greatest value and importance, and as one that only properly grows out of the special circumstances of the case; but it at the same time considered, that exceptions of this description never can, without the utmost danger, be so far reduced to rule, as to be incorporated into the ordinary diplomacy of states, or into the institutes of the law of nations." Lord Castlereagh's circular despatch, January 19th, 1821. Annual Register, vol. lxii, pt. ii. p. 737. The British government also declined being a party to the proceedings of the congress held at Verona in 1822, which ultimately led to an armed interference by France, under the sanction of Austria, Russia, and Prussia, in the internal affairs of Spain, and to the overthrow of the Spanish constitution of the cortes. The British government disclaimed for itself, and denied to other powers, the right of requiring any changes in the internal institutions of independent states, with the menace of hostile attack in case of refusal. It did not consider the Spanish revolution as affording a case of that direct and imminent danger to the safety and interests of other states, which might justify a forcible interference. The original alliance between Great Britain and the other principal European powers, was specifically designed for the reconquest and liberation of the European continent from the military dominion of France; and, having subverted that dominion, it took the state of possession, as established by the peace, under the joint protection of the alliance. It never was, however, intended as a union for the government of the world, or for the superintendence of the internal affairs of other states. No proof had been produced to the British government of any design on the part of Spain to invade the territory of France; of any attempt to introduce disaffection among her soldiery; or of any project to undermine her political institutions; and so long as the struggles and disturbances of Spain should be confined within the circle of her own territory, they could not be admitted by the British government to afford any plea for foreign interference. If the end of the last, and the beginning of the present century, saw all Europe combined against France, it was not on account of the internal changes which France thought necessary for her own political and civil reformation; but because she attempted to propagate, first, her principles, and afterwards her dominion, by the sword.P P Confidential minute of Lord Castlereagh on the affairs of Spain, com § 23. Intervention of France in the tion, 1822. Both Great Britain and the United States, on the same occasion, protested against the right of the allied powers to interfere by forcible means in the contest between Spain and her revolted American colonies. The British government declared its determination to remain strictly neutral, should the war be unhappily prolonged; but that the junction of any foreign power, in an enterprise of Spain against the colonies, would be viewed by it as constituting an entirely new question, and one upon which it must take such decision as the interests of Great Britain might require. That it would not enter into any stipulation binding itself either to refuse or delay its recognition of the independence of the colonies; nor wait indefinitely for an accomodation between Spain and the colonies; and that it would consider any foreign interference by force or by menace, in the dispute between them, as a motive for recoguizing the latter without delay. The United States government declared, that it should consider any attempt on the part of the allied European powers, to extend their peculiar political system to the American continent, as dangerous to the peace and safety of the United States. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power, they had not interfered, and should not interfere; but with the governments whose independence they had recognized, they could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them; or controlling in any other manner their destiny, in any other light than as manifestations of an unfriendly disposition towards the United States. They had declared their -- municated to the allied courts in May, 1823. Annual Register, vol. Ixv, (Pub Doc.) p. 93. Mr. Secretary Canning's letters to Sir C. Stuart, 28th January, 1823, and 31st March, 1823, Ib. pp. 114, 141. a Memorandum of Conference between Mr. Secretary Canning and Prince Polignac, 9 Oct. 1823. Annual Register, vol. lxvi. (Pub. Doc.) neutrality in the war between Spain and those new governments at the time of their recognition, and to this neutrality they should continue to adhere, provided no change should. occur which, in their judgment, should make a correspondent change on the part of the United States indispensable to their own security. The late events in Spain and Portugal showed that Europe was still unsettled. Of this important fact no stronger proof could be adduced, than that the allied powers should have thought it proper, on any principle satisfactory to themselves, to have interposed by force in the internal concerns of Spain. To what extent such interpositions might be carried on the same principle, was a question, in which all independent powers, whose governments differed from theirs, were interested; even those most remote, and none more so than the United States. The policy of the American government in regard to Europe, adopted at an early stage of the war which had so long agitated that quarter of the globe, nevertheless remained the same. This policy was not to interfere in the internal concerns of any of the European powers; to consider the government de facto, as the legitimate government for them; to cultivate friendly relations with it, and to preserve those relations by a frank, firm, and manly policy; meeting in all instances the just claims of every power,submitting to injuries from none. But with regard to the American continents, circumstances were widely different. It was impossible that the allied powers should extend their political system to any portion of these continents, without endangering the peace and the happiness of the United States. It was therefore impossible that the latter should behold such interposition in any form with indifference." Great Britain had limited herself to protesting against the § 24. Inter r President Monroe's Message to Congress, 2 Dec. 1823. Annual Register, vol. lxv. (Pub. Doc.) p. 193. |