THE AUSTRO-PRUSSIAN WAR. utmost importance in European politics. The old rivalry came to a definite struggle, brought about, as it appeared at the time, by the policy of Count Bismarck, who was bent on the aggraudizement of Prussia. The seizure of the duchies was effected by the two powers, because neither could afford to yield to the other the forward place as the representative of Germany. When they entered on possession disputes became inevitable. Austria could not annex any portion of the conquered territory, and it became a question how to prevent the Prussian minister from taking advantage of the situation. The dispute had been temporarily suspended in 1865, when King William met the Emperor Francis Joseph at Gastein. William was not then ready to commit himself to a high-handed policy against Austria, and an arrangement was made for Prussia to take the provincial administration of Holstein, and Austria that of Schleswig. It was almost impossible that the policy of the two governments would agree, and Austria proposed a settlement by the arbitration of the Diet. Prussia had little regard for the Diet or its decisions, and Bismarck had perhaps foreseen the opportunity for a rupture. Whether he did so or not, it was expedited by the rather ostentatious preparations made by Austria for increasing armaments. When fighting is looked upon as a near and a not very detestable probability, pretexts will not long be wanting. Prussia made the preparations on the part of Austria a reason for demanding of the minor German states that they should determine on which side they would range themselves. Austria, it was alleged, had broken the treaty of Gastein, and it was urgent for Prussia to know on whom to rely for assistance in case of being attacked or forced into war by unmistakable menaces. An alliance was entered into between Prussia and Italy, both to declare war on Austria at the same time should Prussia determine to do so, and to continue it till Venetia should be restored to Italy, and the Prussians be in legal possession of the Elbe Duchies. Austria called upon Prussia to disarm, and the reply was that she would do so when Austria set the example, and that Austria's pro 237 posals for disarmament were nullified by the preparations against Italy. War became imminent, and it was soon useless to disguise the fact. The armies were placed upon a war footing. Saxony made preparations which were denounced by Prussia, and supported by the Frankfort Diet, who determined to ask specific assurances from the Prussian government. Invitations for a conference sent by England, France, and Russia to Austria, Prussia, Italy, and the Diet were unavailing, Austria demanding as a previous stipulation that no territorial addition should be made to any of the contending states; and informing the Diet that no amicable arrangement could be come to with Prussia with respect to the Duchies. On the 12th of June, 1866, diplomatic relations ceased; Prussia declared war, and on the 15th Prussian armies were in Saxony and Hanover. It was at first believed that the Prussian troops would be disaffected, or that the people would be half-hearted because of the dictatorship which had been exercised by Bismarck, and the suppression of popular representation. It was also assumed that the levies which had been taken into the Prussian army were no match for the trained soldiers of Austria, and that their generals were far inferior to those of the Southern forces under Benedek. Never were greater mistakes indulged in. The Prussians were apparently willing to condone past political tyranny for immediate military success, and the elevation of Prussia to the dominant position in Germany. The North German troops had been drilled, trained, and carefully exercised; and not only was that large army excellent in physique, but it was admirably equipped and armed with the breech-loading rifle, which had not at that time been regularly adopted by any other troops in Europe. As to generals, Bismarck had made prompt arrangements, and General Von Moltke had already settled the order of the campaign, as an accomplished chess-player might solve a problematic game against an antagonist with whose method he is well acquainted. Prince Frederick Charles and the Prince of Prussia were ready to lead their troops. It was important to obtain the first move. When the Diet, on the motion of Austria, voted the mo mer years. At Wagram the proportion was one-eighth, at Leipsic one-fifth; at Belle Alliance one-third, the same as at Borodino; while at the battle of Pittsburgh in the American war the loss was represented as a fourth. The victory of Prussia at Sadowa, gave her predominance in Germany. She annexed Hanover, Hesse-Cassel, Nassau, and Hesse-Darmstadt, and the army and foreign representation in the other northern states were transferred to her management, while the southern governments were quickly obliged by pressure from their subjects to apply for consideration and for admission to the new confederacy. We have already seen that by the cession of Venetia Italian freedom from Austrian rule was also completed. bilization of the army, with a view to Federal | large battles that had been fought in forexecution in Holstein,the Prussian government announced that the German confederation was dissolved, and immediately declared war. But its troops had already entered Hanover, Hesse-Cassel, and Hesse-Darmstadt, and three columns were advancing by different routes into Saxony. The Hanoverians, after a short defence, surrendered; Dresden was occupied, Schleswig, Holstein, and all Western Germany north of the Main, were taken with but little opposition. The Saxon forces retired before the larger invading army to join the Austrians in Bohemia, towards which Prince Frederick Charles advanced through Saxony, and by the Bohemian passes; the Prince of Prussia moving in a parallel line through Silesia. The arrangements for the two armies acting in concert were complete. They communicated by telegraph. The best of the Austrian troops, the German soldiers, were, it was said, in Venetia; the Italian and the Hungarian regiments in Bohemia were disaffected. In successive engagements the Prussians were victorious. Not only did they outnumber their opponents, but the rapidity and precision of their fire from the "needle-guns," and the training and regularity of the troops gave them a manifest advantage. At Nachod the Prussians of Steinmitz's corps were near meeting with a serious reverse; but they recovered in time to defeat the Austrian General Ramming, who brought into action 29 battalions, 16 squadrons, and 100 guns, against 22 battalions of Prussians, and lost 6000 men dead and wounded, beside 2500 prisoners, three standards, and six guns; the Prussian loss being 59 officers and 1132 privates killed and wounded. The final great battle of Sadowa or Königgrätz took place on the 3d of July, and at this Moltke and the king were present. The carnage was dreadful, the Prussians losing in dead and wounded, or missing, 359 officers and 8794 men, or one twenty-third of their force; Austrians 1147 officers and 30,224 men, or oneseventh of their force engaged; or taking both sides, one-eleventh of the total force were killed or disabled. This was a much less proportion, however, than that of most of the It may be mentioned that in the AustroPrussian war the ability and energy of the war correspondents of English newspapers became conspicuous. The news of the campaign, together with maps and plans, as supplied by the representatives of the London press, kept the English public almost as well informed of the progress of the war as though they had received intelligence direct from Von Moltke himself. The gloom and foreboding which overshadowed the commercial outlook of 1866 continued to the end of the following year. Some of the great railway companies became embarrassed by serious difficulties, and the conditions which then affected the Brighton, the North British, the Great Eastern, the Great Western, and still more obviously the London, Chatham, and Dover lines, for a time affected the credit even of the more prosperous companies. But even the companies most deeply involved were able gradually to retrieve their position by an increase of traffic which represented the growth of their legitimate business, and by abandoning some of the projected branches and extensions which would have diminished their already insufficient resources. With banks and joint-stock financial enterprises the results were different, some of the former especially, having ruinously speculated in accommodation bills. The most TRADES-UNIONS-OUTRAGES-DISTRESS. 239 of the martyrs of the contest, and said the question was, Would they suffer these littleminded, deceitful, hump-backed, one-eyed scoundrels who sat in the House of Commons, to rob and defraud them any longer of their rights; and were those who had squandered the people's earnings like water, to continue to do so? threatening of the conditions affecting national | oration, in which he spoke of Mr. Beales as one prosperity, however, was the action of some of the trades-unions, not only in organizing strikes and inducing workmen to refuse to work except during hours, and at a rate of wages, arbitrarily settled for them by their alleged representatives, and thus in many instances compelling large firms to close their works, or to reduce their production, because of their inability to compete with foreign rivals; but also in fostering a system of terrorism, for the purpose of preventing workmen from acting independently or accepting employment without the permission of "delegates" and "executives," who were ready to commit outrages upon the life and property of any one refusing to acknowledge the authority of the society. It was of course asserted that such outrages, of which deliberate attempts to maim or to murder formed a part, were not countenanced by the majority of the trades having unions for the regulation of wages and labour; but such particulars as had been made known caused widely spread uneasiness and no little indignation both among the community in general, and the reasonable members of trades associations. We have already seen how large a part these societies took in the reform demonstrations, though it is to be noted that the political ardour of many of the members composing them was of a rather fickle and unenduring kind. On the occasion of a great London trades demonstration, those attending which were to parade at Whitehall and march to Chiswick, the numbers of workmen, which everybody had been assured would be 200,000, did not exceed 30,000. The weather was inclement, and it requires a robust political enthusiasm to march along with a procession, or to take a tramp of five or six miles through the rain and damp for the purpose of demonstrating. At Beaufort House, which was the destination of the men who had been called together by notices sent some days before, only a portion of the assembly remained to hear the speeches of Mr. Beales and others. Some did not arrive till the meeting had begun. It was there that Leicester the glass-blower made his famous Mr. Leicester seems to have travestied Mr. Gladstone's quotation about certain crooked little men. He went on to ask, What had Lord Derby done? and replied by saying, he had translated Homer, but he could not make one of the beautiful specimens of glass-work which had been carried in procession that day; and that there was not a stocking-weaver in Leicester, or a clodhopper in the kingdom, rendering service to the state, who was not quite as useful as Lord Derby. There was, of course, a great deal of rather frothy, and not very significant oratory at that period, but the working-men were in the main loyal to the crown and to the useful institutions of the country. Of their loyalty to the queen a good instance occurred at another meeting at St. James's Hall, where Mr. Ayrton used some words censuring her majesty for not personally recognizing the people when they assembled in such numbers in front of one of her palaces. Mr. Ayrton was a man with a cantankerous twist. If there was an opportunity of saying anything disagreeable he seldom missed it, and he could scarcely ever pay a compliment except in terms which changed it into an imputation. He seems to have been moved more by irritability of temper and impatience with stupid people-which of course often meant people who did not think as he did-than to have displayed calculated denunciation, and he practised the art of taking things by their wrong handles, till his own constituents of the Tower Hamlets could no longer bear with him, and meetings and deputations shunned him. On this occasion,at the meeting at St. James's Hall,-Mr. Bright gave him a reproof which must have burned deep if he had much feeling, and in spite of his truculent disregard to the feelings of other people he was not wholly insensible to rebuke. "I am not accustomed to stand up in defence of those who are possessors of crowns," said Mr. Bright, "but I could not sit and hear that observation without a sense of wonder and pain. I think there has been by many persons a great injustice done to the queen, in reference to her desolate and widowed position. And I venture to say this, that a woman, be she the queen of a great realm or be she the wife of one of your labouring men, who can keep alive in her heart a great sorrow for the lost object of her life and affection, is not at all wanting in a great and generous sympathy with you." These were good words, and the loud and ringing cheers which greeted them were as good a demonstration as could have been gained, that the men of the London trades who had met in the name of parliamentary reform, did not lack genuine loyalty. The general prosperity of the country to which reference has been made was, as we have said, not inconsistent with serious commercial disturbance and ruinous monetary convulsion; nor could it neutralize the temporary effects of that financial panic. Still less could it avert the consequences of strikes and sudden interruptions in the labour market. The effects of the operation of trades-unions was seen in the widely-spread distress of the followers of unskilled labour. In the east end of London, Bethnal Green, Limehouse, and Poplar,-there was great suffering among the poor during the severe winter of 1866-67. At Deptford there were attempts to commence a bread-riot, and large numbers of the dockyard labourers were out of employment. The operations of the poor-law in these districts were insufficient to relieve the daily and increasing wants of the people during the bitter weather, and various organizations were formed for the purpose of providing food, clothing, and shelter for famished and houseless families. Public indignation was excited by the heartless conduct of some of the workhouse officials and poor-law ("relieving") officers at that time; and the vast number of applicants for the shelter and food which the law ordered should be provided at the casual night-wards of the London workhouses, afforded appalling evidence of the reality of the want aud destitu tion among the poorer class. The anomaly-an anomaly not yet rectified-was, that the shopkeepers in these neighbourhoods, though the universal distress had deprived them of their customers, and they were themselves sinking into destitution, were called upon to pay enormous rates for the relief of the poor, while in the parishes of London inhabited by wealthy householders the rate was comparatively inconsiderable. Some expedients were afterwards adopted to approximate to an equalization of the rates, but they were never carried to complete and effectual legislation. Still charitable efforts were not wanting: subscriptions poured in: the local clergy and active permanent committees of relief made arrangements for distributing food, clothing, money, and all kinds of comforts to the starving and the unemployed. This went on for some time till a strange and serious result was observed. The poor from other districts began to seek temporary, if not permanent, dwellings at the east end of London. House-rent and the charge for lodgings rose considerably. Even single rooms were at a premium. The idle and the careless began to take advantage of the reports that Poplar and Limehouse had become a land of plenty. Trades-unionists, whose unions had not supplied them with funds for keeping their families from semi-starvation, saw how to obtain a little further relief. The dock companies found that there was no absolute need to raise the wretched wages of their labourers, since in times of moderate prosperity the parish would give outdoor relief, and so supplement the insufficient wages out of the rates, and in times of scarcity benevolent people would subscribe to make up the want of wages by gifts of meat, coals, soup, and clothing. So the dock shareholders, as well as other employers of underpaid labour, kept up their dividends, so far as they were kept up, by retaining a low rate of payment. It will of course be said that this is inevitable, and that the commodity of labour will necessarily find its price and be quoted according to the laws of supply and demand. Quite so. But the effects of certain side issues as well as of main issues in this scientific way of treating the question were, at that period, very deeply impressed on people's THE SHEFFIELD OUTRAGES-MR. THOMAS HUGHES. minds by what was taking place daily before | the relief committees; and the questions were once more asked, with some emphasis, How are paupers made? and, How are the suffering poor to be effectually relieved by having a share in the world's work found for them? All this time the question was rendered far more difficult by the action of some of those tradesunions, which, being associated with benefitclubs, punished any of their members who consented to work overtime or agreed to take reduced wages, by refusing to give them the advantages to which as subscribers to the clubs they were justly entitled. There were employers of unskilled labour who did not (perhaps could not) afford to pay more than would suffice to support the individual, who was therefore obliged to seek charitable aid for his family; and there were employers of skilled labour who were ready to pay wages that could have enabled the workers to maintain themselves and wives and children, but whose gates were closed because the unions forbade any of its members to accept a lower rate of wages or to work for a greater number of hours than had been decided on at their meetings. At the same time hostile measures were taken against all those workmen who refused to join the unions. They were followed, insulted, and in many instances assaulted. At the gates of builders' yards, of factories, and of large workshops pickets of union men were stationed for the express purpose of dissuading the hands to continue their engagements, or of preventing them from doing so by physical violence. At Sheffield the outrages committed by avowed members of the unions had long been notorious for their diabolical malice. When the Social Science Congress was held in Sheffield in 1865 a great meeting of working men was summoned to meet Lord Brougham and other members, and about 3000 assembled at the Alexandra Music Hall. The veteran addressed them in an introductory speech chiefly concerning the importance of making the homes of working men comfortable to themselves and their families, as a measure lying at the root of all social improvement. Several other speakers followed, mostly in a tone of conciliation and with remarks VOL. IV. 241 adapted to the appreciation of the audience. Mr. Thomas Hughes, however, took the opportunity of speaking some plain and wholesome truths, and with no little daring ventured to say in reference to advocacy of the claims of the working men, that the difficulty which had stood in his way was that this had been constantly thrown in his teeth: "Oh, have you heard of the last trade outrage in Sheffield? Have you heard that a house has been blown up with gunpowder, and that another man's wife and child have been attacked because he did not Did not what? Be cause he did not obey the laws of a union of which he was not even a member? If tradesunions are to fight the battle of the working men they must set their faces against practices such as this." Addressing an audience of Yorkshiremen, he asked them to hear him patiently, and hear what were the reports of the doings in this town; and then, if they could contradict those statements, let them do so. Let them say, "These outrages are things of the past; in the future you shall hear no more of them. We will fight our battles henceforth in an honourable, straightforward, and Christian manner." Well, now, he had heard a few things of Sheffield. The men of this town lived in the very heart, in the midst of the intelligence of England, and, as working men, they received the highest rate of wages; and yet he was told they were opposed to the introduction of machinery, whereby they were driving away from the town a large branch of industry for which they had been celebrated for hundreds of years. Well, he was brought up in an agricultural district, and was just old enough to remember the machine-breaking which took place in that part of the country. Those acts of folly produced a sad amount of destitution and misery; but by-and-by the men found out their mistake, and now there were reaping-machines and thrashing-machines working all through the district; and what was the result? That wages had risen 50 per cent since the introduction of machinery. He would warn the men of Sheffield, if they were opposed to machinery, that there could be only one result-that they would drive the industry of the town into towns where the 79 |