« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
report; and therefore, if the case rested here, we should credit the Prince's denial, confirmed as it appears by Mr. Fox's deliberate concurrence : but there is another circumstance of great and contrary weight. Lord Holland states the circumstances of the supposed ceremony as he heard them from a friend of Mrs. Fitzherbert's :
• It was at the Prince's own earnest and repeated solicitations, not at Mrs. Fitzherbert's request, that any ceremony was resorted to. She knew it to be invalid in law; she thought
nonsense, and told the Prince so. . . . It was performed by an English clergyman. A certificate was signed by him and attested by two witnesses, both, I believe, Catholic gentlemen, and one a near relation of Mrs. Fitzherbert, Mr. Errington. Mrs. Fitzherbert, from mixed feelings of fear and generosity, tore off the names of the witnesses at some subsequent period, lest they should by possibility be involved in any legal penalties for being present at an illegal transaction. Before George the Fourth's accession to the throne, or, as I believe, his appointment to the Regency, the clergyman was dead (for it was not, as often surmised, Parson Johnes who married them): and his name, I understand, remains annexed to the instrument purporting to be a register or certificate of the ceremony.'--pp. 140-142.
This relation of Mrs. Fitzherbert's also at second or third hand—is full of inconsistencies : how can we imagine her indifference to a point which was to quiet her conscience ?-and what value could she place on a ceremony performed by a Protestant clergyman?-and if she thought it nonsense, why was she provided with two witnesses of her own sect? It would, therefore, add little to the rumours which were long ago
the subject, but to which we did not then, and should not now, give any serious credit but for the following material fact, now distinctly stated by Lord Holland, and which alters very decidedly the complexion of the case :
'In truth, that there was such a ceremony is now (I transcribe* my narrative in 1836) not matter of conjecture or inference, but of history. Documents proving it (long in the possession of Mrs. Fitzherbert's family) have been, since June, 1833, actually deposited by agreement between the executors of George IV. (the Duke of Wellington and Sir William Knighton), and the nominees of Mrs. Fitzherbert (Lord Albemarle and Lord Stourton), at Coutts's bank, in a sealed box bearing a superscription of “ The property of the Earl of Albemarle: but not to. be opened by him without apprising the Duke of Wellington," or words to that purport.'-pp. 123, 124.
* Here, again, we have another of Lord Holland's supplementary interpolations, which leave us in doubt as to how much was his original impression, and wbat he may have added from other sources and with subsequent views. The use of the word transcribe is remarkable; for it seems from the context that there was here no transcription at all, but the addition of some pages.
This assertion—as we cannot question the substantial fact as to the existence of some such deposit
thertainly corroborates Mr?" Pitzherbert's statement that something in the nature of a cetéthony had passed, and that she Chowever: inconsistently with her declaration that she thought it nonsense) had preserved some documentary elidence fit. We must also confess that to thoge who knew George IV, and his habit in conversation always most idexteriously ruhining Off' from disagreeable subjectsoo tue short and general terms of his answer Fox s remonstrance, and theibaste witk Iwblicto be starts wholly different mattersto a suspicion that there was more ground for Fox's alarm than the Prince chose de admit even to that dear Tiend. On the other hand, Mr. Fox's earnest derlialı bf why asucht transaction two years later than his first anxious consideration of the subject, during which tipe helback abundant, appertunities
and a great personal interest stor getting at the truth, skems tdiotweigh-ahhe dther evidences-except the existence of the swaldd, bowdeposited in the joint, custody of the nominees of Mrs: Fitzhephers, and then Kibag.it&Believing that litet,' we'afe' PdYced to conjecture that somel ceremony, like thiul tekkand 'Mattiages of the German Courts and of whicts there were Holistaht'examples in the House ofie have taken plaed; it at art, met the Prince was about three-andHanoret, rhagl in the key Juhty Ceorge Tui pouti 100 twentohu been adopted to wití the compliance or quiet the scruples
. Mr86 thbdadly sought to Hongense antr tiid Periode knew that Practically is
NAS air it was 110tling do the question as 476 whether any
deception practisad bns the lady Seems sufficiently ahswered herbert's sowahilstatemwerel that she heitller. desired nor relied on.
ahswered by Mrs. Fittard the supposed'i ceretikony, but if there was any ceremony at allows Georyell Vireannbo be acquitted fadipable levity in the firstds instanto, laindo ofs shališetruént liisincérity to Fox and Luse otherly friends who had levetyl reason to believe that the denial, meant.dt that no formlofomartinyrer had ever been gone throughand now mereky odhad no watu marriage had been botly i knew talt ber Vegally impossible. On the whole, we are i
i coniraçtad: Which Xeryadi obliged to stispender Anal Judgment of the subject 19 further.de informatibndifrom the contents"Ufʻthe sealed box, which, that its existencer i isilskevealed; wil hou, we suppose Blond 0072 inquisitivellimes;rheimthuchi torpelers Winneta. would deprecatedly such discussions that we aret and to years old is wmnost' inhoeuous, and in ki treningamal sevention wholly soy unit, after what has passed, we do not foresetan seriouslimischiety frøinihdetarling the whole Frutti,
fruth, whatever its may be. .92169 lovgl bas 1216 ni balonul lo nontoPo29P9SXSHI 19W0q loven has vitilio di ml 229972_1916979 steqioins 9w ob
26 t56 loitastadua 9dt noidegop tong 9W 26- --Moit19226 aidT ABts I Mor+b) Etudes Far tú"Såndtidn'Intérieure, la vie, Nationalen vodex Haxthausen ri3id Wolameda Berlin,"1853 de noitsistosh 1911 seti des Institutións Rurales de IdRussie Paple Baron Auguste Bdinburgh, 1893,03 Obdavca, vBy Lawrence Oliphant, Esopub 3. The Russians of the Southuid fit, aid, bos, VI 991091) wanil odn
. bŁA Rússie Contemporaine, v Ray Les Loutah ile Ducy 91Patislt
2920141 P40206_aid to am 19 lg 19099 bas tróda norysle a zo I not bauorg 9TOM 26W 919dt fodt noivique 6 of
her Ruysşisch-Türkische fieldzugrino der Europæiseren Turkeelt 1928. und 18280s Dargestellt durch Freiherme Feil Mbicheed
Berlin, 1848ra odt to noitsiobienos zboixas teid aid godt 1916! 6. Ichheiu$peeeltoof
, thens Faili wohi Shaftesburyuun the House of Lords P741Fridays Mareku i dotkut on the Minifesto of the Empero?
Russihtoq Hondoh, hb854.9dt to swasteize 9d8 1999z9THE He present aspect : 91.aliaisin, Eugpengivas v the Britishi
strongi, interest in peasuring the foscles and they enery to 3f, sida capital the antagonista Xhose duplicity and aggressis sida call forth the fleets and armies oli Englandı toi battle after an! ! opinion Orike country and Supported by i theslynanimousi
country, and by the assentpfathelmost-conservavit at the hearing and persentaiherali Permore lig armsjahdels that of Paris time na yuthe courtenfi Vienna,clas kell as było
a combination scarcelx less, formidable than that ti basit in 181599, the packagffwrope.92 4. cfirms and lastingia
Yet it has seldom happened to anyonation dood engage in hostilities with, 3rfareign poweFowll9se reakstrength.ft
urces are so imperişuly knownNe othersempire but? gldBeta secret and a mystery
ever succeeded in keeping sexdste a pontion of thieni that she
possesses territories wider than the realm of Tamerlane sdt
Changing i nystery from the rest of mankind. We khoniit we ate told
that the troops under her banners are as countless m the hosts
followed Napoleon, when he wasd the master dfod Európe." But so little can be
bsar, the Pqyers of Russia desanibadiasıthetai scourge crumpled up by the mountebanks of the bustingsom Thereventpai
terror of Europese as g46 Puhlişiimposture, toi basdt
Sotely dangofnoddled with gertaintydeathese facts do of line toining year will determine with greater saecurady blueow truth of these conflicting
statements. Already we have seenotzat97
Warfare the bpasteg infpgnag, of Russiace yer ovenfw her Heatest?
iş no match, for the straightforward vigilance19a and' Hanešt tesolution of England in a just and legal cause. Nopm do we anticipate greater success for the military and naval power тяА
of the Russian empire. The true source of national greatness, in a contest like that in which we are about to engage, lies in the social condition and political institutions of an empire, since they supply that vigour and bottom by which the efforts of military power can alone be sustained.
It is, therefore, to these questions that we propose at this time to direct our attention; and we have placed at the head of the works now before us the third volume of Baron von Haxthausen's elaborate survey of the social condition of Russia, although the former volumes of this publication have already been noticed at some length in this Journal. But, upon the whole, this book is, in spite of its partiality and its defects, the most complete account we have met with of the condition and resources of the Russian empire, and more especially of the peculiar institutions and character of the Russian people. Although the Baron more than once expresses surprise in the course of his labours that no natural born Russian should have attempted the task which he has executed, he supplies this deficiency by a warmth of Russian feeling which is not common to the west of the Vistula. He assures us that he spent his time in Moscow, with the cream of Muscovites, and drank his notions of Russian policy and administration from the well of Russia undefiled. His work is, in fact, an elaborate panegyric on the empire and the people of Russia; and though we are not displeased to learn all that can be said on this subject by so favourable a witness, we are not very powerfully affected by the picture he attempts to draw of the strength of the Imperial Government. It is evident, however, that the broad propositions for which our author contends are regarded in Russia as fundamental truths, and are supposed to establish a sort of superiority and ascendancy in the political relations of the empire over other nations. No such propositions can, in our judgment, be consistently maintained. They are unsupported by facts, and they will not sustain argument. They are the offspring of a state of society in which public discussion is unknown; and whengver Russian institutions are brought into more direct contrast or connexion with those of Europe, we have very little doubt that the superstitious veneration of their admirers, and the exaggerated apprehensions of many of their antagonists, will be alike dispelled.
According to Baron von Haxthausen, 'the historical mission of the Russians is to serve as mediators between Europe and Asia, and to transmit to the East the civilisation of the West.' He compares the position of the Russian empire to that of the Roman empire in the early ages of the Christian era, when the propagation of Christianity was assisted by the universal domi
nion of the imperial power of Constantine and Justinian. He contends that it is impossible to deny that, in the present state of Europe, the Russian empire does really represent the Empire of the East, and the Russian Church the Church of the East. And he attempts to show that the political and military organization of the empire are precisely the conditions requisite for the maintenance of this position, and the accomplishment of these designs. We shall examine, with the assistance of this author and of one or two other witnesses, the accuracy of these startling propositions; and we think it may be shown that Russia is as ill prepared to transmit to the East the civilisation of Europe as she is to crush the liberties of Europe by the barbaric hordes of the East. Her distinguishing characteristics are still Asiatic, and the efforts she has made to engraft her influence on the ancient states of Europe have borne only crude and imperfect fruit.
The primary condition of the political and social institutions of Russia is the doctrine of passive obedience which pervades all the relations of the people to the state, in domestic life, and even in the avocations of daily business. Military organization is the form in which this passive obedience of the nation has been armed for the purposes of aggression or of defence. To this principle every institution or usage of the country seems to be referred or resolved.
• The feeling of the Russians is not so much one of deep attachment to their country as of ardent patriotism. Their country, the country of their ancestors, the Holy Russia, the people fraternally united under the sceptre of the Czar, the communion of faith, the ancient and sacred monuments of the realm, the tombs of their forefathers—all form a whole which excites and enraptures the mind of the Russians. They consider their country as a sort of kinsmanship to which they address the terms of familiar endearment. God, the Czar, and the priest, are all called “Father,"—the Church is their “ Mother," and the empire is always called “Holy Mother Russia.” The capital of the empire is “Holy Mother Moscow," and the Volga“ Mother Volga.” Even the high road from Moscow to Vladimir is called “Our dear mother the high road to Vladimir.” But above all, Moscow, the holy mother of the land, is the centre of Russian history and tradition, to wbich all the inhabitants of the empire devote their love and veneration. Every Russian entertains all his life long the desire to visit one day the great city, to see the towers of its holy churches, and to pray on the tombs of the patron saints of Russia. * Mother Moscow” has always suffered and given her blood for Russia, as all the Russian people are ready to do for her.'-p. 151.
Such is the national sentiment of the Russians, but their social unity must be described in greater detail. We insert, in a