[Forum Game] - World in Revolution: 1861 Mk. IV

[99KingHigh]

The Anti-Slavery Convention of 1865
The Triumph of the Pro-Southern Abolitionists

​

The position of the British establishment throughout the American Civil War—aside from the predominating apathy to the former Colonies—was dictated by a general sympathy to the cause of the Southern Republic. Aside from commercial interests, which were decidedly with the Union, the raw material Industrialists of the British Isles, and the landed aristocracy, found themselves amicable in interest and principle to the concept of a free and independent Confederacy. The emissaries of the South, and the clumsy diplomacy of the North, had succeeded in convincing the British Empire that the 'Second War of Independence,' as it was now known in the academic halls of Oxbridge, was a conflict for sovereignty of the national variety, and that the matter of Slavery was an important, if not ancillary, component. By this approach the country convinced itself that the preservation of the Southern Republic was no stain on the reputation of Britain and France; it also ensured that if the South was to prove triumphant, which all expectation was convinced, the waves of energetic British abolitionism would crash down on the American continent. The victory of the Confederacy retired the restrictions placed between the United Kingdom and the American Republics; the withdrawal of these measures gave all power to civil society; greatly encouraged by the ascension of the Lord Derby as Prime Minister, who had been a vigorous co-sponsor of the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 in the House of Commons.
​

The famous depiction of the World Anti-Slavery Convention (1840),​

The last proper convention of abolitionist forces in Britain had been conducted by the British and Foreign Anti-Slavery Society, founded on 17 April 1839, at the famous World Anti-Slavery Convention. It was therefore only natural that the Anti-Slavery Society convention be convened from across the British Empire and amicable populations. This society had evolved, however, into something somewhat particular; the British society was decidedly at odds with William Lloyd Garrison's American Anti-Slavery Society, preferring peaceable and moderate anti-slavery campaigns. The BFASS's intrinsic hostility to America led it to chamption the cause of the southern secessionists, with Lord Brougham denouncing Abraham Lincoln's mob rule. The Society was challenged by a more radical "Union Emancipation Society" that gathered cotton workers and Garrisonians to fill the gap of the mainstream anti-slavery society left when it failed to champion Lincoln's emancipation. [1] But the failure of the Emancipation Proclamation and the military victories of the Confederate States emboldened the position of the BFASS; the old society came into the doctrine that the Abolitionist movement would only be satisfied once the sentimental attachment to national liberty (Southern Nationalism) was confirmed, and the people exposed to civil humanism. By this approach, the BFASS secured itself as the preeminent abolitionist organization in the Home Isles; they viewed peace and good relations as the only possible way to reform the considerations of the Southern Republic.
​

Depiction of the Second World Anti-Slavery Convention (1865).
​

The second secretary of the Anti-Slavery Society, appointed under the honorary secretaries Joseph Cooper and Edmund Sturge, was the Rev. Aaron Buzacott, who sought to organize the instruments of the BFASS into a new Convention, whereupon the BFASS would herald its timely victory over the violent abolitionists. In October 1865, the Convention was held in the famous Exeter Hall where many of the great public meetings of general opinion had been arranged. The BFASS attempted to entice American abolitionists, such as Fredrick Douglas, but the Americans refused; partially out of contempt for the principles of the BFASS, and partially out of spite for British intervention in the American Civil War. "No matter," cried Aaron Buzacott in his famous speech, "the Abolition of the Negro from his captivity has always been the Solemn duty of the White man!" The Convention opened on October 16 1865 to much fanfare and public attention, and it was in these proceedings that a general declaration of principles was agreed; the independence of the South was to be acclaimed by the institutional body, and several groupings of emissaries would be dispatched to the Confederate States to begin their activism on abolitionism and to disseminate the position of the BFASS. The first mission departed on December 18th, 1865 to Richmond, CSA. ​

​

[1] Hilariously, also totally historical. Easily WOAT abolitionist society of all time.

​

 

[Noco19]

Society of the Sons of Liberty
Convened at the Stewart-Lee House​

"In the nobles hearts of the Southron Man lie the very same flames which fueled that of our First Founding Fathers..." began the formal proceedings, as lead by General James Longstreet, who spoke before an assembly of the finest officers in the Confederate States of America, gathered under the hospitality of the Lee household in Richmond.

Standing at the head of the table was Longstreet, and like his fellow officers, he wore his uniform adorned with the various honors acrued over his long service in both the U.S. and C.S. armies. To his immediate right sat Robert E. Lee, a smile on his face for having finally received callers to his door that weren't fawning fans; he now was among his own people. Directly across from Lee sat "Stonewall" Jackson, enjoying a fine, Georgian peach. Prominent faces further down the table - Bedford Forrest, Richard Taylor Patrick Cleburne, Jubal Early, Raphael Semmes, and many others. Taking a seat in the corner was General P.G.T. Beauregard, conversing with Edmund Kirby Smith. Even Braxton Bragg stood among them, though bristly in his demeanor, having received the bare courtesies from certain other men. He stood vigil near the doorway, leaning upon the wall and surveying the room with a dark eye.

As to the circumstances of this grand meeting of the minds, it had long been apparent that among the supporters of the Southern Cause was the notion that the Confederacy followed the path of the original Founding Fathers of the United States; figures such as George Washington were just as prized in the South as they were in the North. Among the officers was held the same belief, thinking themselves the direct analogues of the brave commanders of the Revolutionary period.

And so it was that officers such as James Longstreet, James Kemper, and Daniel H. Hill began postulating the formation of a society, one mirroring the historic Society of the Cincinnati that bound together the officers of the American Revolution so as to maintain camaraderie, instill unity in their new nation, and offer a constant reminder of the efforts employed to secure liberty from tyranny. In truth, while Longstreet is included as a primary instigator, it was the younger officers primarily of the Army of Northern Virginia who first pushed for such a creation, the distinguished gentleman of Lee and Jackson and Longstreet too humble, too noble, and too concerned with other affairs to devote themselves towards initiating a large meeting. For both Kemper and D.H. Hill there was the underlying principle that such a society would bind their service to those above them which received quite more praise, as well as the desire to extol honor from besting the Yankees. They had such notions first during the 1864 election, regarding the war won despite the continued Union presence in the South.

Thus, Kemper and D.H. Hill were quick to propose the concept to Longstreet who held a position of great authority despite being junior to men such as Beauregard, and it was through Longstreet's correspondences to the other officers that the true planning came together. Robert E. Lee graciously offered his residence in Richmond as the first meeting grounds, for it was quite convenient for the Confederate pantheon of generals - Longstreet and Lee were in Richmond already, whereas Jackson was given charge of a post in Lynchburg, Virginia - a camp named Stuart in memorial to the fallen cavalryman - where he was able to easily transit between the Virginia Military Institute and Richmond.

With the pieces in place, the meeting began with all due reverence. Crowds inevitably gathered in Richmond to see about congratulating the many officers, and even prior to this, Robert E. Lee had long been the recipient of numerous house calls by Southerners seeking to drop off food, well-wishes, and prayers to the Hero of the South. Ironically, it was the Fourth of July when all the officers had arrived, and thus the meeting began on what Longstreet described as "a day well suited for our own adoration of Independence".

Beginning with Longstreet's aforementioned opening address, wherein he outlined the role of the Army and Navy in securing liberty, both historically and today, and then went on for the need of an organized society to keep unity between the officers, just as was needed in the Revolution. Following his words and acclaim by the various officers, Longstreet opened the floor to a vote, on who would be the presiding officer over such a club. By unanimous, if not begrudgingly by some figures, vote, Robert E. Lee was elected president of the society, the modern Washington.

Following this, the group formally decided upon the name of the Society of the Sons of Liberty, a blatant connection to the original Revolutionary Sons of Liberty. Among the talks, it was evident that the officers wished to hearken to the legacy of the Sons of Liberty, bandying around such names as the Second Sons of Liberty, the Sons of Second Liberty, and so om, before deciding on direct connection. Still, references to the "Second Liberty" of America were abundant in discussions, and it was clear that the Society held great respect for the First Founding Fathers as the original Sons of Liberty.

Regarding membership, admission would be set to require at least two years of service as an officer within either the Army or Navy, and given posthumously to those killed in the line of battle, Polk being the first inducted posthumously. Likewise, admission would be hereditary, passed according to primogeniture, the very same system as held by the Society of the Cincinnati - Robert E. Lee was such a member, his father, Lighthorse Harry, being an original member). The stated goal of providing for widows and descendants was of immense importance to the Society, and it was resolved to contact members of the Polk family and others to be provided proper respect.

Of particular note from the Society's inception was the rise of a new symbol in Confederate symbolism. Whereas the American Society of the Cincinatti promoted the use of the Bald Eagle for American nationalism, made popular by its usage in a society decoration, the Confederates likewise sought to uplift a fearsome animal. Talks ranged the gambit, from the turkey as proposed by Franklin when he heard of the Society of the Cincinnati's very use of the bald eagle, to the beloved horses of Jackson and Lee. Beauregard put forward his proposal to use the Battle Flag as a pin, which was supported by a good number of officers. With humor, Dorsey Pender suggested the use of Robert E. Lee's pet hen because "Her service was invaluable to the morale of our Army of Northern Virginia's leadership."

Ultimately, the victor was the red-tailed hawk, for while Beauregard's suggestion was acclaimed, many sought to use the society's first chosen symbol to begin the promotion of a proper replacement for the bald eagle. Kemper would state, "We must provide the foundation for which our Southron Republic can express its own unique brand of patriotism, stripping away the creatures given to us by the Union." The red-tailed hawk, fierce and impressive, was seen as an improvement over the bald eagle, as it came from Southern stock, and so it was put down that the red-tailed hawk would be used to create the first decoration of the society. In popular vernacular, the use of this bird did have the unintended consequence of earning the society membership the nickname of "The Chicken-Hawks", although some officers took it with good humors and admiration.

With business in order, the first meeting of the Society of the Sons of Liberty concluded, its members resolved to sponsor local chapters in each state and to remain in constant contact. Society President Robert E. Lee set about the task of organizing the membership himself, dispatching a letter to such figures as the beloved "Prince Polecat" to inquire about their desire for a foreign chapter. As 1865 went on, many signed onto the Society, and soon enough its chapters blossomed in the wave of Confederate patriotism across the nation.

 

[Cloud Strife]

An Empire Under Siege:
The coming elections of 1866
and Localism in Austrian Italy

"Hungarian Dance No.5" by Johannes Brahms.​

With 1866 around the corner preparations began in earnest for the coming elections to fill the two-fifths of seats in the Imperial Diet determined by universal male suffrage. Local Diets would also be holding elections--with all seats for local Diets determined by universal male suffrage--and their composition would define the selection of delegates to fill another two-fifths of the Imperial Diet. The remaining fifth would be comprised of delegates appointed by the Kaiser personally and Franz Joseph had indicated he would leave the selection of these delegates to those individuals who could command a working majority of the Diet. Thus, functionally these delegates appointed by the Kaiser would be a "winner's bonus" to avoid a deadlocked parliament.

Agenor Gołuchowski
​

Under the Premiership of Agenor Gołuchowski Graf von Gołuchowo the Imperial ideology of Localism had become the driving force of Austrian government. In exchange for local autonomy each region affirmed the primacy of the federal government in military affairs, international trade, and general policy relating the entire Empire. The electorate was heavily Liberal in political orientation but two strains of thought broke this overwhelming Liberal majority into two parties, the Constitutionals and the Federalists. The Constitutional Party was the party of the educated middle class, anti-clerical, and bourgeois in character. The Federal Party was rural, religious, and pluralist by nature. As the decade moved forward both parties transformed from impromptu coalitions into organized machines, with regional and local chapters in each constituent part of the Habsburg Monarchy. As de facto Prime Minister, Gołuchowski had straddled the line between both factions and was popular with the broad spectrum of political opinion. He was the Kaiser's favorite and due to the nature of Austrian politics he would remain in office no matter which faction took power. Yet, in the context of Austria's emerging parliamentary system he would have to tailor his polices to the platform of whichever faction came out on top the following year.

From left to right: Hohenwart, Palacký, Potocki, and Andrássy​

Karl Sigmund Graf von Hohenwart would lead the Federalists on the floor of the Diet and František Palacký of Bohemia, Alfred Józef Potocki of Vistulan Poland, and Gyula Andrássy of Hungary helped to organize the party at the regional level. The Federalists strongly supported the autonomy of each region of the Monarchy and stressed the unique characteristics of each constituent nationality of the Habsburg Empire. They sought to reconcile each region and nationality of the Empire by creating a framework where each region and nationality's class of elites could guide the nation by consensus. This integrated ruling class would then serve as a bulwark against aggressive social change. To this end the Federalists supported a welfare state guided by principles of Christian charity to care for the needs of the masses, as well as a strong military force to guard against foreign interlopers, and government financing of "Judaeo-Chrsitian" religious institutions to weave a measure of morality into the current social fabric they thought lacking.

From left to right: Auersperg, Taaffe, Schmerling, and Tisza​

Karl Fürst von Auersperg was Graf von Hohenwart's counterpart for the Constitutionals in the Federal Diet, with Eduard Franz Joseph Graf von Taaffe of Bohemia, Anton Ritter von Schmerling of Lower Austria, and Kálmán Tisza of Hungary as regional organizers. The Constitutionals were devotees of a centralizing version of Localism. While the Federalists sought to create a "Danubia of the Nationalities" the Constitutionals wished for a "Danubia of the Danubians." They saw themselves as the vanguard of an emerging Danubian cultural nationalism and worked to create a common thread woven from the cultures of the Habsburg Empire. They were dismissive of the concept of the nation-state emerging in the countries bordering Austria and defined the concept as a threat to domestic tranquility. In general the Constitutionals were the party of commerce and trade and were more vocal on matters of foreign policy as a result.

"Va, pensiero" from Nabucco by Giuseppe Verdi.​

While the Constitutionals and Federalists battled for influence among the many ethnicities of the Empire, one region remained outside the Empire's two-party system because of local unrest. In Austrian Italy the old patterns of Terrafirma verses the old Venetian city-state were being replaced by a new division based on sympathy for or resistance against Italian nationalism. The cites and lands of the Veneto were reluctant participants in Federal politics due to Verona and Venice's role as centers of Italian intellectualism. This was in contrast to territory of Friuli where the Empire's great seaport at Trieste and ironworks at Udine were profiting off the growth of the Habsburg Navy, with wealth flowing into their pockets the desire of people of Friuli to expand their voice at the Federal level grew. The divide had become so pronounced by the middle of the decade that the Imperial government contemplated dividing Austrian Italy into two parts to allow the people of Friuli their desire to participate in national politics, while leaving the people of the Veneto with a heightened form of autonomy--verging on benign neglect--in an attempt to manage local pressures. While there was a temptation to decree a division immediately, the Kaiser feared that removing the most loyal parts of the Kingdom of Venice would only strengthen the hand of forces of division in the remainder.

For the moment the division of the Kingdom of Venice would be placed on hold but Archduke Max, fond of the people of Friuli due to his long service in the Habsburg Navy, began to gather evidence and formulate arguments in favor of a division. If indeed the Veneto wanted to go its way, surmised Max, better to let it go its own way now rather than tempt the irreconcilables to drag the people of Friuli down with them in the future.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Localism in Hungary in the first-half of the 1860s

Ferenc Deák de Kehida ​

The largest of all local Diets was the Hungarian General Assembly; a full third of the country was subject to its authority. The Magyars who dominated the Crown of St. Stephen were a minority within their own nation. As of the last census taken in 1850 only 41.4 percent of the population of the Kingdom of Hungary was Magyar. Curiously, for a generation of politicians so devoted to gaining autonomy or independence for Hungary, the current leaders of Hungary were unsure of how to preserve Hungary's newfound local autonomy that had been won from Vienna. A fringe group of politicians led by Menyhért Lónyay wanted to pursue the complete Magyarization of the country. The majority of Hungarian leaders were wary of an aggressive policy of Magyarization as at its core it would be copying the Germanization polices of Bach's regime of the 1850 that had caused much social unrest throughout the Habsburg Empire. It was fortunate for minorities in Hungary that authentic Liberals like Ferenc Deák dominated the local political scene and were close with the Kaiser and his advisors. Having no wish to undo their hard won autonomy by sparking domestic unrest, leaders such as Deák spent the majority of the first half the decade consolidating political opinion, driving forward infrastructure development to tie the lands of the Crown of St. Stephen closer, and promoting a common Hungarian identity separate from "personal nationality."

The crowning achievement of Deák's faction was the Nationality Ordinance which declared that, "all subjects living in Hungary are part of a Hungarian nation, of which every citizen of the country, whatever his personal nationality, is a member equal in rights." Each minority nationality--Croat, German, Slovak, Serb, Romanian and Ruthene--had cultural and linguistic autonomy in matters of education, in the areas where they formed a significant majority of the population, and were allowed local councils that were subject to the Hungarian Diet's ultimate authority. The Croats further had their own local Diet, the Sabor, which they maintained due to historical rights. It was not a smooth compromise as electoral districts in the Hungarian Diet favored Magyar areas and local councils had to be careful in avoiding the pursuit of policies that impinged on the Magyar nationality's belief in its status as 'primus inter pares' among the peoples of Hungary.

Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski​

Growing alongside local councils were various "Matica" or Foundations devoted to cultural studies. Each was a bastion of Austro-Slavist thought and due to political requirements were each chartered by the Kaiser himself. Within Hungary the most prominent were the Matica srpska for Serbs, the Matica slovenská for Slovaks, and the Matica hrvatska for Croats. As with many institutions that arose or were revived in the aftermath of the Basic Law, these foundations were populated by converts to the Habsburg cause attracted by Localism. The Croat, Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski, like many of his generation of leadership had spent most of his youth fighting the Habsburgs. Now he found himself in a leading position in the Matica hrvatska and was also the prefect of what was becoming the largest Croatian city, Zagreb. His writings would adapt the Illyrianism of his youth to new ideas of Austro-Slavism and Danubian cultural nationalism. While he was most proud of his works dealing with Croatian historiography and developing new techniques to approach Croatian history from a socio-cultural perspective, Kukuljević was best known among contemporary Austrians for his work Skanderbeg, a historical novel on the life of the Renaissance-era Albanian lord based on the poems of the 18th century poet and Franciscan, Andrija Kačić Miošić.

Ulászló at the Battle of Varna, by Jan Matejko ​

Ardent proponents of Magyarization saw the Matica as threats to their dream of a single people populating Hungary, the more keen among Magyar politicians saw opportunities to employ culture and the historical record to justify a united Hungarian nation comprised of many personal nationalism. Ljudevit Gaj, the acknowledged father of Illyrianism, published an epic poem on the life of King Ulászló, who fell at Varna in a Crusade against the Ottomans. The poem emphasized Hungary's status as the bulwark of Christendom and the role Slavs played alongside Magyars in maintaining the united front for Western civilization. King Ulászló's Slavic origins--his Jagiellon dynasty was of Lithuanian and Polish extraction--served to underline Gaj's premise for a natural role for Slavs in the life of the Hungarian Kingdom. That the acknowledged heirs of the Jagiellons in Hungary were the Habsburgs also made his poem a patriotic work appreciated by a wider audience of Austrians. For Gaj and others the dream of true autonomy for all nationalities within a federation of Danubian peoples seemed to have honest potential. Realistically it would take perhaps a generation or two before the ideology of Localism could be fully integrated into the body politic of the Habsburg Empire. Until that day came, works such as Ulászló of Varna and Skanderbeg would advance the popularity of the "Danubian Ideal" in the years to come.

 

[Dadarian]

Alfred Waddington

The Chilcotin Incident
Prologue
​

Whilst modern lenses and interpretation of the Canadian and proto-Canadian interactions with the First Nations of British North America were defined by white supremacy, colonialism, and imperialism, this is due to the overly restricted lenses used throughout most of modern Canadian Aboriginal studies. Comparing and contrasting with the United States, Canada is a beacon of understanding and virtue in a dark age of genocide and massacre. Indeed, had it not been for the reports of American atrocities against the noble Navajo or the pastoral Dakota, the Tsilhqot'in Incident (hereafter Chilcotin [Anglicised] Incident) might have erupted into a much greater issue costing both the British colonial government as well as the people of British Columbia needless time, energy, funds, and emotional hardship.

An Englishman by the name of Alfred Waddington had long lobbied the press and the special interests of the colonial government to give him a commission to build a road from Bute Inlet to Fort Alexandria, allowing another source of immigration to transverse British Columbia safely and easily on their way to strike gold in Cariboo. Waddington himself boasted of the road that it would "reduce land travel from 359 miles to 185 miles and the total days consumed in packing freight from 37 days to 22", besting the road favoured by Governor-General James Douglas. The permit for Waddington was issued in 1862, and construction began.

Two years later, in 1864, when members of the local Chilcotin band made a stand against Waddington. Led by a man named Tsunyuset [Anglicised Chuny Uset], a war party was organised and a ferryman by the name of Timothy Smith was murdered. When the authorities arrived, almost a half ton of provision had been looted, Smith's body thrown into the river, and the party found shortly before it reached a labour camp. The Legislature was in an uproar over what happened, until the unchristian happenings of the Waddington workcamp were made apparent. This, combined with a desire to not look like their barbaric southern neighbours, gave the Legislature enough pause in order to make a fair investigation into what happened.

It became obvious that the Chilcotin were in a crisis, and Chuny Uset had acted out only in desperation. Waddington had paid his Aboriginal workers the barest for their work and often denied them food as a punishment for real or imagined misdoings. Furthermore, it became obvious that Waddington's men had been untowards with the youth women of the Chilcotin, sparking further anger. Timothy Smith was killed as a result of his refusal to sell food to the Chuny Set due to they being Aboriginal.

The investigation's findings left immense shame onto the government, which is most likely why there was a surprisingly lenient sentence. Solely Chuny Uset, who struck the killing blow, was hanged at the neck until death while his two bandmates who were with him were sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. The leader of the local band of Chilcotin, Chief Lhats'asʔin [Anglicised Klattasine] paraded the peace as a just one, and in the place as a member of the colony of British Columbia, launched a civil suit against Waddington in a landmark case of Aboriginals against settlers.

 

[Julius Maximus]

Kingdom of Prussia

The Technological Revolution​

The US Civil War had come and gone, the way war was waged there was much different than the last major conflict in Europe being the Crimean War. The strategic use of railroads to transport both men and goods by both the Union and Confederate Armies was a foreign concept not well known or defined within the military minds of Europe. The Prussian General Staff and War Ministry had taken keen interest in it's use as battles were decided by who could move more resources to the front, the control or cutting off of rail lines were of paramount importance in order to succeed on the battlefield. ​

Europe was slow to catch on from the lessons across the Atlantic, only Italy truly showing effort to implement a system similar to the Union and Confederates along the Austrian border to aid their forces in a potential conflict. The Prussians took notice, quietly documenting and calculating potential movement timetables of Italian troops to the front, and beginning their own plans to implant within Prussia a rail system to funnel troops and goods across the country for the purpose of rapid deployment. This effort was driven by Prussian Chief of Staff Helmuth von Moltke, the man credited for the complete overhaul of Prussia's mobilization system that could be said to be the best in Europe if not the world. In regards to the rail proposal he was heavily aided by Minister of War Edwin von Manteuffel, who closely watched the US Civil War and had received consistent reports from the Prussian Military Delegation observing the Union's Army of the Tennessee in battle and behind the lines.​

From Left to Right; Helmuth von Moltke, Edwin von Manteuffel

These two men had the ear and attention of Minister-President Otto von Bismarck, who saw a dual benefit to what was shown before him. Bismarck's "Big Brother" policy was being implemented within the German Confederation, closer relations with the German states was paramount to stave off foreign encroachment and consolidate Prussia's position within Northern Germany. This was not by use of military intimidation, but by guarantees to defend them from the outside influences which only sought to use them as pawns and puppets. Bismarck had accomplished his first objective to revive the Royal Prussian Army to allow for force projection against it's enemies, his next goal was to show Prussia's economic might and share it's benefits for all Germans to enjoy.

Bismarck had called representatives of all German states north of the river Main to secret meetings to discuss his proposal, the secrecy was to remove any ability by outside powers to disrupt negotiations. He came to the assumption that a majority would accept the offer made, the only "wildcards" being Hanover and Saxony, Hanover for it's unknown position after the end of the Second Schleswig War and Saxony for it's close and historical ties to Austria.

Another matter that was discussed between Bismarck, Moltke and Manteuffel was a secret addition to the rail proposal that was only known between the German representatives and Bismarck, it's implementation would be a massive boon for both military and non-military application if accepted. Bismarck was putting his mark on Prussia and that of Northern Germany while others were occupied elsewhere, he had a window to consolidate his gains and would not squander what was left upon his lap.​

 

[Mikkel Glahder]

Chile, and the Spanish admiral gone rogue

When the news arrived to the Chilean government that the Spanish admiral Pinzón had seized control of the Chincha Islands off the coast of Peru, the government was confused and bewildered, as they honestly did not believe the Spanish government would be so brave to launch an expedition. They didn’t become less confused when there was no input or otherwise proof that it was a scheme devised by the Spanish government. The Chilean government, and people had no interest in conflict with Spain, even if severely weakened by civil war, and even if an anti-Spanish sentiment was growing in some parts of the population, the government made no official ruling upon the subject of Admiral Pinzón. They did send an official complaint to the Spanish government, but knew that they could do little against their rouge naval commander. As it became clear that the Peruvians could indeed not force the Spanish vessels to leave the islands, the Chilean government made it clear that it supported the Peruvian government in their struggle against the rouge Spaniard, but made no moves to aid, as they were sure in their belief that the Peruvians would eventually beat the hostile fleet.

This showed, not only, the general apathy that the Chilean government had towards the northern Pacific nations, but also the lack of willingness to expose its navy, and to an extent its population, to the dangers of conflict, even if only against a rouge admiral. In early 1865, the Chilean government did however make clear that if Admiral Pinzón did not remove himself, his men, and his ships away from the Chincha Islands, the Chilean government would act against him. How they would act, and when remained a mystery.

 

[MastahCheef117]

NEW-YORK, THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1865.
PRICE FIVE CENTS.
​

A LETTER OF OPINION.
on the Natural Course of Republics, with regard to Standing Armies and Navies.
​

I wished to write in this esteemed and noteworthy publication so that, like Mr. Lloyd Garrison, my voice shall be heard throughout the great Union, from every hamlet-hill and snow-capped peak to every packed fishing-wharf and carriage-corner, so as to better enunciate my beliefs, repeated my some, and disparaged and mocked and misrepresented by many others, in a most clear and delicate way, and to plant firmly on all the maps of political persuasion in this great Union my own person and position on the matter of Republicanism, good government, and the exceptional place this Union holds in the world.

As learned and cultured a people like the citizenry of the Republic of the United States are, I shall make no presumptions as to the place of birth, or luck, of the readers; in a word, I wish not to play the good and loyal supporters of this publication as idiots or, in more general terms, simpletons, yet I shall wish to avoid all misrepresentations of my beliefs and my arguments, and shall therefore explain, as best one as myself is able, the background of my belief, and a most basic understanding of which I speak.

The people of Rome some two millennia ago threw down the tyrannical King Tarquin and, with it, the great institution of the Roman monarch. Rome then was but a small parcel of land, a small urban area and the surrounding farmlands, constantly vying for the power and wealth of central and southern Italy with the warrior-kingdoms of the Etruscans, the Umbrians, the Samnites, and the other minor petty kingdoms and fiefdoms of the day. The Roman Republic persisted for several centuries in this state; and as it began to expand ever outward, claiming lands, annexing rival Powers, and acquiring more wealth for its people and its state coffers, the senate and people of Rome found themselves encumbered by the necessities and realities of empire, of conquest, and of growth. For many centuries of the Roman Senate had relied solely on armies of pure volunteers; men who, in times of peace, would spend some time out of their year to train together as a militia, to prepare themselves for any potential conflict; so that when war broke out, the men of the Republic could quickly be mustered, armed and equipped, and marched out to campaign against their foes. The concept of a standing and professional army, existent in peacetime, was utterly rejected, or even unknown to them; it is indeed a far-cry from all the empires and monarchies and republics of this day, where the realms of Europe and their respective petty monarchs maintain at all times grand armies of half a million men, who have done nothing all their adult lives but train with musket and sword and cannon and spear, coming at a great expense to those States, particularly those who lack the industrial means and capabilities to maintain an expansive and modern military. The same can be said of two millennia ago, when most monarchies and tyrannies in Italy and elsewhere enjoyed large standing armies of many thousands of souls. Perhaps only Greece mirrored Rome in this way, as all her armies, until the days of Philip II and Alexander the Great, the two monumental kings of Macedon of the era, were levied from peacetime farmers in time of national emergency.

After Carthage, that great and noble empire which had challenged Rome for control of many lands and most of the Mediterranean for centuries, had been reduced to just one city and the surrounding lands on the coast of North Africa, the Roman senate and people began to consider the benefits of a standing army; as the Republic expanded ever outward, it became more and more difficult to raise legions from farmers, equip them, and march them hundreds, if not thousands, of miles abroad; these soldiers had less to concern themselves with, as they were no longer protecting their families and neighbors and properties from harm against neighboring tribes and Italic kingdoms, but rather the exotic peoples of Spain, Anatolia, the Danube, and the Levant. And by the time of Caesar this great and noble Republic, seeking to defend its prosperity and power in a time of great strife, within and without, resorted to a great reform of the military, conducted under the brilliant mind of Marius the Great. Marius indeed foresaw the uses of a large and professionally-trained standing army composed of men who would dedicate their lives to the art of making war on other peoples and of defending the farthest reaches of the Republic's influence from encroachment and invasion.

The natural course of Republics, as they grow in wealth and prestige, is to shift away from a reliance on militias and levies -- increasingly dangerous as the Nation expands, grows, and increases in prosperity, particularly when faced against much mightier foes with a much firmer military tradition and a professional force at their disposal -- and to rely increasingly on the lifelong warriors. The immediate criticism comes from those students of history who would intelligently note that it was the adoption of these standing armies that collapsed both the Republic and, some five centuries later, the Empire, too; and I cannot find them at fault for making such an astute remark. I can but only render unto them my reply, which cannot also be refuted: that there must always be ingrained in the citizenry of a Republic a fear of monarchy, of tyranny, of the abuse of powers by the men of the State and the military. It must be codified in the national charter: the document must read that the military may never usurp the authority of the State, that the general shall have no more power than the civilian, that the undeniable Rights of the citizenry cannot ever be eroded or revoked by the authority of a grand decree of the military. In a word: that the military is, and must always remain, under the absolute bootheel of a civilian regime. No exceptions can be made, or the Republic would be undone quicker than a man made dead by decapitation.

Where, then, does this leave the Union? We find our country at a most precipitous point in its life: in the days of our grandfathers and great-grandfathers, they would not dare ever contemplate the concept of ever adopting a peacetime army. To do so would be tantamount to revoking the Constitution and introducing British tyranny to our shores once more. But the United States of today -- that noble Union which so defends the rights of all Men under the Lord -- is not the United States of 1789, nor even of 1812, nor of 1846. This is a Union that has realized that a volunteer army of militiamen cannot properly supplant a strong standing army in the first place. Is it folly to suggest that the Union would be whole today if not for a strong standing army in 1860? It cannot be denied by any sane man ever born onto God's earth. We have entered unto the stage of the world politic; we must therefore act as any other proper nation, lest we be left behind and tossed aside and forgotten to the fading pages of history.

​

A GENTLEMAN OF MASSACHUSETTS.

​

________________________

LOUISVILLE, MONDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1865.
PRICE SIX CENTS.
​

A LETTER, OPENLY PUBLISHED.
TO THE GENTLEMAN OF MASSACHUSETTS.
​

Released recently in the pages of that famed publication of merit and integrity, the New-York Tribune, in recent weeks was an open letter dedicated to "all good Patriots who yearn for a strong and prosperous Republic", delivered to their office and editor by a "gentleman of Massachusetts." I see fit to respond to the claims made in that letter for the betterment of the public Discourse and to encourage the continued growth of the body politic -- not by expansion, but by peace and principle alone.

The principle of a Republic is one oft-repeated but so sadly and dangerously little-understood. It is a Government which is ruled not by tyrants, but by those chosen by the people to rule. In many places the ruler, oft a tyrant, does not chafe under the restrains of a republican constitution; instead it is the people which chafe under the autocratic despotism of the monarch. This Republic is such that no other like it exists or has ever existed in all of Man's history. The people of this Republic have always prided themselves on the nature and words of the national Constitution; that the people cannot be restricted in their thought, belief, word, or action, so long as it does not break the reasonable Laws passed by the state and national legislatures; that the people and states have more rights than are enumerated in that Document; that the national government in the Capital District is restricted in its constitutional actions, so as to maximize the freedoms and liberties of all the people under it. It is the purpose of a constitution to limit the possibility and reach of tyrannies and would-be tyrants; it is not the purpose of constitutions to maximize the power of the government and minimize the rights of the people, for they are one and the same. For I have heard said!: if Men were angels, no Government would be necessary.

It is inevitable that some will argue for greater Government power -- that a modern world calls for modern thought. In a word: adaptation to the rest of the world, or perish amid the obsolete traditions of old. But this presents a false facade of reality. Would the good Gentleman of Massachusetts argue for American empire? Would he argue for the national Government of Washington to give in to the earthly vice of worldly possessions -- of gold and of money and of land -- for the sake of it? A Republic does not seek conquest of new territories at the expense of other peoples. It does not seek the exploitation of other peoples and their wealth and mineral resources. A Republic seeks to enjoy its own prosperity, and to avoid all conflict altogether. Mr. Paine did write that it was Common Sense -- that a Republic exists chiefly for commerce and for liberty. It is the monarchs who must maintain their grip on power through conquest and subjugation of their enemies. A Republic that seeks conquest is no longer a Republic; and thereafter its people should abandon the facade altogether and instead crown their consul or their president or their chief magistrate instead as King of the Land.

Then we shall attack the notion that a standing army may be contained in its excesses and its rebellions, as one is wont to do, by a strict constitution strictly upheld. This too is poor thought; for though I hold no ill will toward the good Gentleman, I cannot but wonder as to his knowledge of the history of the Roman people, from their birth to their terrible decline. The Romans did not enjoy their constitution in a single document; instead they enjoyed it as a great series of laws and traditions passed down through the generations over the course of centuries. By the time of Caesar there were a great many laws and traditions codified and respected by even the most devilish would-be tyrants. Sulla Felix, who had his enemies exiled and executed and who crossed the Rubicon before Caesar had ever dreamed of conquest, began the trend that led to the collapse of the Republic in the face of the son of Minerva, the son of a god, and the senators who, so bound and dedicated to the Republic that they loved, would do anything to defend it -- and would therefore usurp its laws and effect its ultimate destruction alongside their own. The people of Rome had, throughout their ages, always preferred the Cincinnatus to the Tarquin; the duty-bound republican to the inept tyrant who lusts after power and the worldly pleasures. Why, then, with such traditions, did they so quickly ensnare themselves in the politics of the loyalties of the armies? How, then, did Caesar inaugurate war on the Republic? His men ultimately came to love him more than they loved their own country. They would rather see the Republic dissolved in a great sea of blood if it meant that Caesar would rule the ruins unopposed for all time.

Tradition and patriotism gave way too quickly to greed and arrogance.

So too are we faced with that threat today. If "Marius Magnus" had been a genius, he could have seen, like Prince Belshazzar before him, the writing on the wall: that his actions, devoid of God and of humility, were dooming his country to destruction. As it was Belshazzar's gluttony and blasphemy which proved to be Babylon's undoing, so too was it Marius' greed for power which was Rome's.

A DEMOCRAT AND A PATRIOT.​

 

[Nax24]

Miguelism and the Spanish Civil War​

(Miguel, Duke of Braganza and former King of Portugal, circa 1848)​

In Spain, Carlism was the absolutist movement aimed at putting an absolutist and devout Catholic King on the throne of Spain. While many people usually use the fight between the Carlists and the descendants of Isabella II as the prime example of absolutism vs. constitutionalism on the Iberian peninsular, there is a similar fight going on in Portugal between Miguelists and the constitutional government.

Miguelism is similar to Carlism in many regards. Both wish to see the return of what they considered to be the rightful line to the thrones of their respective countries, both support traditional ideas contrary to Enlightenment thinking, both are devout to the Roman Catholic church, and both support the idea of a monarch having absolute authority. But while the Carlist claim lies in the fact that Ferdinand VII disqualifed his absolutist brother, Carlos, to inherit the throne with the repeal of Salic succession, the Miguelist claim lies in the fact that the current line gave up the right to be rulers of Portugal, and that their line is the legitimate one.

Miguelism gets its name from Miguel I, the King of Portugal from 1828 to 1834. Miguel was the younger brother of Pedro IV (or Pedro I if you are Brazilian). When Pedro split Brazil off from Portugal in 1822, a succession crisis emerged. When Joao VI died, would Pedro become both King of Portugal and Emperor of Brazil? This question stirred in the minds of absolutist nobles across Portugal, for they felt that because Pedro declared himself Emperor of Brazil, he forfited his claims and the claims of his line to the throne of Portugal. Yet, when Joao VI died in 1826, Pedro became both Pedro I of Brazil and Pedro IV of Portugal. This did not last, for in order to prevent this situation from developing into a crisis and a civil war, Pedro abdicated the throne in favor of his daughter, Maria II. Of course, again, the absolutists still believed that Maria II had lost her claim to the Portuguese throne when her father decided to stay in Rio. Fortunetly for the absolutists, they found an ally in the newly appointed regent, Don Miguel.

(Miguel, circa 1827)​

It was clear that Miguel had absolutist tendencies. His father had exiled him from the country in 1824 after Miguel attempted a coup to defeat liberal elements in his father's government. His tendencies only grew during his time as regent. He cleaned house of liberal ministers, officers, and bureaucrats, replacing them with known absolutists. It was clear to many that these nobles wanted to make Miguel king, and while there were attempts to stop his ascension, none proved to be effective. In 1828, Don Miguel dissolved the Chambers of the Portuguese Cortes, and did not call for new elections. Instead, Miguel called for the meeting of the old Cortes, the one that represented the three estates. It was a very traditionalist move, and one that was opposed unilaterally by liberals across the country. At this Cortes, the representatives ask Miguel to assume the throne of Portugal, which he agreed. As such, Miguel was crowned Miguel I, King of Portugal and the Algraves. From there, he began to push forward absolutist policies, purging liberals whenever he could.

Liberal forces rose up as soon as the Cortes declared Miguel king. Miguel I's ascension to the throne was what led to the start of the Liberal Wars. Emperor Pedro I would abdicate his throne in Brazil to the current Emperor, Pedro II, and sail back to Lisbon to aide the liberals in the fight against his younger brother. The war went poorly for Miguel. Though he did receive support from the Spanish for a bit, the liberals received aide and ships from Great Britain, and eventually received aide and volunteers from the new Kingdom of Belgium and the July Monarchy in France. When Ferdinand VII died in 1833, the new liberal government withdrew aide from Miguel and instead supported the liberal cause. By 1833, the liberals had taken Lisbon and Porto, and were defeating Miguel's forces at every turn. Finally in 1834, Miguel sued for peace, abdicated in favor of Maria II, and left Portugal in exile.

Miguel would the next 31 years of his life in exile. The new government made sure that Miguel's line lost all its claims to the Portuguese throne. In 1837, Miguel would lose his claims to the Spanish throne on the grounds that he was colluding with Carlos and the Carlists. As such, Miguel would travel across Europe in destitution. He would marry in 1851, and have seven kids.

However, the flames of Miguelism still run high in Portugal. Miguelists have helped topple governments by aiding Cartists and Septembristas at crucial times. Yet now, as the Carlists reign triumphant in Madrid, Miguelism has optimism that their absolutist could one day return to Lisbon. The Miguelists have forced the Portuguese government to make a decision on the matter of the Spanish Civil War between Juan III and his son. Miguelists have already agreed to aide Carlos "VII" in his quest to become King of Spain, favoring his absolutist and traditional tendencies. The Portuguese government, fearful of the Miguelists using a Carlos victory to rise up against Luis I, would have to either support Juan III, or stay neutral in the whole affair. Both have their own risks and set of consequences, but the Portuguese government must choose one...

 

[KeldoniaSkylar]

The Appointment of Mehmed Fuad Pasha

You are hereby appointed to the position of Grand Vizier of the Ottoman Empire, We hope you will prove able to continue the reforms of the Tanzimât and modernization of the Empire. We also hope that you continue to achieve the successes in diplomacy that you have previously achieved. We hope that with your experience you can make the Empire great again.

~Sultan Abdülaziz

 

[Arrowfiend]

​

[Private Communique to the Austrian Kaiser]​

To his Imperial Majesty Kaiser Franz Joseph,

We regretfully wish to inform you that His Majesty Prince Cuza cannot make the journey to Vienna at this time. The flurry of events in recent months have boded ill for the Prince's constitution and he is currently not well enough to make such a lengthy journey. Should the Prince's health improve, we hope for him to be able to make the journey next year. Currently, in his place shall be dispatched Prime Minister Mihail Kogălniceanu to discuss the relationship between the Romanian and Austrian governments. Our greatest desire is for the continued stability of southeastern Europe and we hope to maintain the peaceful relations between our two countries that have been commonplace since your country recognized ours at the Treaty of Vienna in 1856.

Sincerely,
Nicolae Rosetti-Bălănescu, Minister to the Prince of the United Principalities of Romania​

 

[etranger01]

Joint Statement from
the Emperor of the French, the King of Italy, and the Emperor and Autocrat of all the Russias
​

We, the undersigned, ardently wishing closer fraternal bonds between Our persons and Our nations,

Sincerely desirous of peace between Our realms and between all the nations of Europe,

Gravely concerned with the rise in tensions and bellicosity within the European continent, to the detriment of the general prosperity,

Hereby state the following:

That the French Empire, the Kingdom of Italy, and the Russian Empire shall commit to the furtherance of closer ties of amity and friendship, and that their crowned heads and their ministries shall work to ensure that good relations are maintained at all times between those nations and peoples,

That the aforementioned nations are firmly committed to the maintenance of stability and the balance of power within the European continent and, seeking the continuation of a general peace, shall strive to uphold that balance against those who would seek to destabilize it,

And that the aforementioned nations shall work to establish closer commercial and economic ties, to promote friendly interaction between their citizens and subjects, and to uphold all relevant treaties and agreements.

Agreed to in the eyes of Almighty God in the Year of Our Lord Eighteen-hundred and sixty-five,

- NAPOLÉON III

- VITTORIO EMMANUEL II​

- ALEKSANDR II​

 

[Cloud Strife]

​

[Private Communique to the Austrian Kaiser]​

To his Imperial Majesty Kaiser Franz Joseph,

We regretfully wish to inform you that His Majesty Prince Cuza cannot make the journey to Vienna at this time. The flurry of events in recent months have boded ill for the Prince's constitution and he is currently not well enough to make such a lengthy journey. Should the Prince's health improve, we hope for him to be able to make the journey next year. Currently, in his place shall be dispatched Prime Minister Mihail Kogălniceanu to discuss the relationship between the Romanian and Austrian governments. Our greatest desire is for the continued stability of southeastern Europe and we hope to maintain the peaceful relations between our two countries that have been commonplace since your country recognized ours at the Treaty of Vienna in 1856.

Sincerely,
Nicolae Rosetti-Bălănescu, Minister to the Prince of the United Principalities of Romania​

Minister,

It is regrettable that Prince Cuza indicates he cannot make a journey to Vienna at this time and we pray for his quick and speedy recovery. We would be happy to have Mr. Kogălniceanu take the necessary oaths on the Prince's behalf or send the High Commissioner to your Prince's bedside to hear the oaths, on behalf of the Kaiser, that he is owed. We ask that the Prime Minister for the Two Principalities is authorized to hold talks and make agreements on behalf of the Prince on all issues, particularly those related to matters of national defense, the ability of the prince to conduct foreign relations independent of the Kaiser, commercial relations, and fate of the annual tribute from each of the principalities that the Kaiser has inherited through agreement with the Ottoman Sultan.

Sincerely,
Agenor Gołuchowski, Chairman of the Minister's Conference

 

[Luftwafer]

The Reform of the Riksdag

The reform of the riksdag had been seen as the ultimate goal of the liberal minded De Geer government. However these noble goals had been slowed by foreign policy adventures in Denmark and the slow movements of the 'Riksdag of the estates' meeting only a single time every two years with a focus more on pageantry and less on efficiency.

There had been previous ideas for reform however these had come to nothing. This time around however there were two competing ideas. One a qualified unicameral system similar to the Norwegian Storting. The other was the proposal endorsed by De Geer, a bicameral system. The lower body would be elected directly by the people.

There would be 250 seats elected by popular vote, with seats divided among each county based upon the population of eligible voters.

To be an eligible voter you had to be:
​

• Over 21 years of age
• Be of the male sex
• Have a yearly income of at least 500 riksdaler.
• Own property that is taxed at over 799 riksdaler each year or lease property over 4500 riksdaler.

There were flirtations with making membership of the national church a requirement to be a voter. However this was felt to be a complication that was unneeded and archaic.

The Upper house would be elected indirectly. With local municipal governments electing members on a county basis. With each municipality sending a delegate in order to elect a members for the house. They were to be of the 'professional and intellectual elite' however this in practice meant little. The upper house would comprise of 150 members split between the counties and based upon overall population.

The Lower house would be elected every 4 years, while the upper house would be elected every 9 years. With the opportunity for the king to dissolve the riksdag and call another election for either house independently.

It's success in the current riksdag was yet to be seen, however with popular support it was hoped that it would be ultimately successful.

 

[Harpsichord]

"To rule is to populate"
Juan Batista Alberdi

Limited immigration had occurred for some time in Argentina, but it was only beginning in 1853 and the establishing of 'constitutional' government that immigration started to gain the focus of government; indeed, the constitution obliged the Federal government to support European immigration without restriction. The leaders of Argentina (in both Rosario and Buenos Aires) realised that a vast increase in population was necessary to fully utilise the potential of their nation; some intellectuals (including Juan Alberdi and Domingo Sarmiento) also sought to specifically increase the 'European' stock of the nation, believing their influence would work to civilise and modernise the county. Early immigration was often organised by private agents, contracted by the government to seek out potential immigrants for pre-arranged plots of land set aside for settlement in the for of agricultural colonies. Such plots were at this time mostly located in the Littoral, as Buenos Aires was under an opposing government and the Pampa still frequented by natives that would raid any settlement seen as pro-Mitre. In each of these instances families were provided with thirty to forty hectares of land. In some the land was provided freely, in others a years rent paid in advance with the title acquired after several years. These early migrants hailed from across Europe; Switzerland, France and Germany providing the majority, with others mainly from Belgium and Italy.

Aarón Castellanos, one agent, entered into contract with the government of Sante Fe in 1853 alongside Eduardo Vionnet, a French Basque settle and recent migrant to Argentina. Between them, the two acquired agreements with a few hundred settlers to establish a settlement at Esperanza. With time allowed for the arrangements to be finalised, proper settlement began in 1856. The town was provided with ample land, tools and livestock to establishment a prosperous community. This pattern was replicated in Corrientes, which signed a contract in 1855 with Auguste Brougnes (a French physician oversaw the arrival of one-thousand families into the province over the following decades) and also by Justo José Urquiza personally sponsored several settlements in his home province.

In Entre Rios these early settlements were San José (1857), Villa Urquiza (1860), and Colon (1863). The first of these was supported by Jhon Lelong, an Anglo-French settler who had initially entered into agreement with Corrientes before said agreement broke down and instead the families were brought to Entre Rios where Urquiza sponsored their settlement. The second, Villa Urquiza, was initially founded in 1853 by the families of German soldiers that fought under Urquiza at the Battle of Caseros; that colony quickly failed, prompting the Federal government to re-establish a settlement on the site in 1856 with migrants from Germany and Belgium. Finally, Colon was founded by Urquiza at the site of a natural port on the river Uruguay to improve control of the frontier.

To the far south, a migration of an altogether different kind was being planned. For some time Michael D Jones, a Welsh minister and nationalist, had been in correspondence with the Argentine government in order to acquire land for a Welsh settlement. His aim was to acquire land for Welsh speakers where their language and culture would not be diluted by proximity to the English. These efforts led to an offer by the Federal government of one-hundred square miles of land along the Chubut River, and the publication of 'Llawlyfr y Wladfa' in Liverpool to publicise the scheme. In 1862 Captain Love Jones-Parry and Lewis Jones sailed to Patagonia to locate a suitable landing; after seeking harbour from a storm the two decided a nearby bay would be a suitable location for their settlement. Satisfied with their trip, the two returned to Liverpool to oversee the final preparations for their journey.

 

[Harpsichord]

Native Indians in the Pampa and Patagonia

Since the declaration of independence Argentina has had a fraught relationship with its native population, at times cordial and at others openly hostile. The desire of the Argentinian's to civilise and Christianise (as recently as 1860 President Derqui had written to Pope Pius IX and the head of the Jesuit Order, requesting "twelve or more Fathers" to civilise and educate the "savage Indians") conflicted with that of the natives who were more interested in the everyday concerns of food and wealth. The great chieftain Juan Calfucurá is perhaps the best example of this relationship.

Born in the early 18th century, Calfucurá's father Jasmina was one of the natives that helped José de San Martín's famous crossing of the Andes at a time when his people still lived to the east of that great range. It was in the early 19th century that Calfucurá led his people west seeking new lands and wealth; his arrival caused great upset to the eastern natives, whom he defeated in a series of battles earning him the nickname Emperor of the Pampas. Yet despite early conflicts with the Argentinians, Calfucurá later entered into alliance with de Rosas (at the time governor of Buenos Aires and effective dictator of Argentina), gaining the rank of Colonel in the Argentina army but moreover establishing a mutually beneficial friendship. Warriors of Calfucurá fought alongside de Rosas at Caseros yet two years later Calfucurá sent his son, Namuncurá, to Paraná to meet with the victorious Urquiza. There, Namuncurá took the Christian name Manuel, converting to Catholicism and swearing loyalty to the Argentine Constitution and even going so far as to accept Urquiza personally as his godfather. Yet this should not suggest that Calfucurá had in any sense taken to peace; twice in 1855 he is known to have raided the State of Buenos Aires (no doubt to seal his new alliance with the Confederation) killing hundreds and taking tens of thousands of cattle. In both these raids the natives were able to beat Argentine soldiers in pitched battle; it was estimated that at his peak Calfucurá could raise six thousand warriors, including men from tribes west of the Andes. Such numbers could be raised by virtue of Calfucurá's pre-eminent position among the tribes, particularly those of the Pampas.

The natives were by no means a united people. Vague periods of peace would often break into open warfare at the mildest slight, many tribes resentful at having to travel long distances to trade with the Argentinians. It was those closest to civilisation, the Ranqueles that Calfucurá hailed from, that delighted most in fighting with the whites. Those further afield, the Huilches and Pehuelches in Patagonia were considerably less war-like, and noticeably more interested in the benefits of trade. Those in-between, the Pehuenches and Puelches, were known to fight from time to time but were also found to be reliable once treaties were established and generally enjoyed the advantages that trade brought. It is important to note that the ultimate strength of Calfucurá in his most important raids represented perhaps a significant majority of the male native population of the Pampa region; estimates suggest that the total native population north of the Rio Negro was little more than twelve-thousand, indicating that even the greatest native chief relied on his western cousins to bolster his strength. Even moderate defeats to the natives could prove crippling for a generation or more, and thus raids of any magnitude were handled with the utmost care. More commonly raids might number somewhere from three to five hundred warriors, relying on surprise to achieve victory.

A key dispute between the natives of the Pampa and those of Patagonia was access to trade. The closest factory to many was at Patagones at the mouth of the Rio Negro, near for the Pampa natives but prohibitive for those further afield; trade between the Patagonian tribes might occur only once every three years or so. Thus the interests of the Argentina government in the plans of 'Y Wladfa' were not purely politically, but also economic. There existed a concept such that through the development and consolidation of trade the Argentine government might gain influence with (if not the allegiance of) the southern tribes, using the Welsh colonists as intermediaries. To allay the concerns of Captain Jones-Parry and Lewis Jones, the Argentine government offered to the natives a considerable sum in return for the protection of the fledgling colony. Such fears are likely to be unfounded, however. Casimirio Buguá, principle leader of the Tehuelche people (a large Patagone tribe which dominated the land south of the Rio Negro), has since 1859 engaged in limited correspondence with private representatives of the Argentine government.

The efforts of Luis Piedrabena, an Argentine sailor, convinced Buguá to accept baptism for himself and his eldest son by two Anglican clerics (Teófilo Schmidt, a German, and Juan Federico Hunziker, a Swiss), and in 1864 to travel to Buenos Aires where they were entertained by President Derqui. Other leaders, such as Calfucurá and Sayhueque (a notable leader based near the Rio Neuquén) were also invited to Buenos Aires. It was hoped that such meetings in the coming months would lead to lasting relations between the natives and Federal government, and that in return for trade and provisions the natives might formally recognise the sovereignty of the Argentine Confederation.

 

[Cloud Strife]

The electoral structure of Localism

Cracow, capital of Vistulan Poland.​

The highest legislative body of the Austrian Empire was the unicameral Imperial Diet, which sat 500 members drawn from the entire empire. On paper 2/5ths of the membership was directly elected through universal male suffrage, a further 2/5ths nominated by Local Diets for appointment by the Emperor, and a further 1/5th directly appointed by the Emperor. There was no fixed term of office for delegates and the Kaiser could dissolve the legislature at will and call fresh elections. The Imperial Diet mostly concerned itself with domestic matters and would leave foreign and defense policy largely in the hands of the Kaiser, the Foreign Ministry, and the Imperial General Staff. Consequently the Kaiser deferred to these elected representatives on domestic matters and chose Ministers who could command voting majorities in the legislature.

The Local Diets were on the whole smaller than the Imperial Diet. The Local Diets of Carniola, Dalmatia, Bohemia, Bukovina, Venice, Vistulan Poland-Galicia, and the Unified Diet of Arch-ducal Austria all had a membership of 150 and were all unicameral. Continuing a tradition of Hungarian peculiarity, the Diet of Hungary was bicameral and consisted of a House of Magnates which was entirely appointed by the Kaiser, in his role as King of Hungary, and would have no fixed number of members; its membership currently hovers around 380 members. The lower house of Hungary was the House of Representatives comprised 453 members, of which 413 were elected within Hungary and 40 were appointed by the Sabor of Croatia. Below and subject to the Hungarian Diet were various councils for minorities and the Croatian Sabor which sat 100 members and held more autonomy than the ethnic councils.

The Imperial Diet and every other Local Diet provided remuneration for delegates tied to the salary of a senior magistrate, in Hungary there was no such encouragement for any but those members of the magnate class--those rich enough to afford to participate in politics without benefit of a salary--to participate in legislative matters. The Kaiser also would allow his Ministers use of his right to appoint 1/5th of the legislature to reward supporters and maintain healthy majorities to pass government business.

All the Kaiser's subjects above the age of 25-or in the case of those living in Hungary, 30--without a criminal record were permitted to sit in the Federal and Local legislatures after presenting themselves for evaluation by their local prefect to verify their moral fitness. The vast majority of candidates were aligned with one of the two major parties of the Empire, the Federal Party and the Constitutional Party. At the local level each party had various regional and ethnic affiliates that fed names of potential candidates forward for endorsement by party leadership and their backers. While independents in theory could run and win--and in some cases they did--only those endorsed by the major parties had the benefit of money, officials close to the Kaiser, and a national network of support. This ensured the presence of two-party system complete with a hierarchy of leadership that marginalized radicals and reactionaries and encouraged the development of a cross-class political elite.

Elections for federal and local legislatures were conducted through a first-past the post system which winnowed the number of candidates for the general election down to the top two vote getters through a large primary. While there were theoretically limits on spending in place to prevent wealthy candidates from sucking up all the oxygen, in practice the established party networks spent lavishly to butter the electorate up. Very little attention was spent by the electorate on notions of candidate qualifications, policy positions, and experience. Without any real democratic tradition of elections the people of Danubia tended to be swayed more by great shows of charity and fêtes than fiery rhetoric or carefully crafted policy positions. This reinforced the the role of the well heeled political elite in the decision making process and gave elections a more festive than contemplative atmosphere.

Once elected most Deputies would join the masses of the backbenches, to be called upon to vote when required and mostly keeping to advancing constituent business. Under the Basic Law any legislation had to be introduced by Executive Councils attached to each Diet, federal and local. Appointment to the councils was quite coveted and required support from power-brokers to give their blessing before the Kaiser would give him approval. In Local Diets the language of the floor was always whatever tongue prevailed in that part of the Empire, at the federal level business was usually transacted in German as a political convention but prepared remarks in other languages with written translation were not uncommon, as well as maiden speeches which were usually given in the delegate's mother tongue.

Delegates were encouraged to become an expert in something in order to catch the eye of the Kaiser and his advisors. They regularly drew upon the advice of delegates in informal, ad hoc meetings called by an advisor close to the throne. It was expected that delegates would display both knowledge, tact, and respect for social conventions. The Archduke Maximilian was especially critical of elected representatives who failed to meet his exacting expectations. While onerous, surviving these sessions ensured the delegate the prospect of further advancement in the ladder of influence and his introduction to the decision makers that surrounded the Kaiser. With luck, one day these greenhorns would take their place as a new generation of decision makers and help to further a meritocratic succession of authority to temper the democratic nation of free and open elections.

 

[Cloud Strife]

The High Commissioner to Moldavia and Wallachia delivers a message to Government of the United Principalities and ensures that the same message is published in the major newspapers of the region. (@Arrowfiend, @Frymonmon)

​

We, Franz Joseph, Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary, Vistulan Poland, Bohemia, Venice, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, and Illyria; King of Jerusalem etc., Archduke of Austria; Grand Duke of Tuscany and Cracow, Duke of Lorraine, of Salzburg, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola and of the Bukovina; Grand Prince of Transylvania; Margrave of Moravia; Duke of Upper and Lower Silesia, of Modena, Parma, Piacenza and Guastalla, of Auschwitz, Zator and Teschen, Friuli, Ragusa and Zara; Princely Count of Habsburg and Tyrol, of Kyburg, Gorizia and Gradisca; Prince of Trent and Brixen; Margrave of Upper and Lower Lusatia and in Istria; Count of Hohenems, Feldkirch, Bregenz, Sonnenberg, etc.; Lord of Trieste, of Cattaro, and over the Windic march, Lord of the Danubian Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia, etc., acting upon Our new role as liege lord over the United Principalities, We hereby dismiss Alexandru Ioan Cuza from his service as Our vassal Prince of the Danubian Principalities on account of his illness and continued defiance against the Throne, thus making him unfit to lead Our subjects of the United Principalities during this crucial time.

We have consulted with Our subjects Ion C. Brătianu, Lascăr Catargiu, Constantin Alexandru Rosetti, and Ion Ghica on a proper course of action for the United Principalities and We have decided to direct Our subjects in the forenamed principalities to form an interim government while We investigate candidates under Our prerogative for appointment as new Prince of the United Principalities.

All of Our subjects in the United Principalities are enjoined to deliver their obedience to the interim regime for it is most pleasing to Us and we gurantee that all who obey Our lawful authority will be granted the manifest blessings of Our mercy and Our temperance.

Given at Cracow,

[OOC n.b. This also has the effect of removing Arrow as player for Romania according to my understanding of the rules regarding vassal states.]

 

[Arrowfiend]

The following declaration is made in person by the Domnitor outside Cuza's palace in Bucharest. Copies of the declaration are spread across Romania by sympathetic newspapers and word-of-mouth alike.

I, Alexandru Ioan Cuza, Prince of Romania, hereby declare independence from the Austrian Empire on account of the illegal and tyrannical measures taken by the Austrian Emperort and declare the permanent, irrevocable union of the Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia into the Principality of Romania. As a nation founded upon the ideal of Romanian nationalism and self-determination, I hereby call upon all Romanians, within and without the borders of the Principality, to take up arms against the criminal actions of the Kaiser; indeed, in my authority as Commander-in-Chief of the Romanian Armed Forces, I enact a full mobilization of the Romanian military.

In addition, I call upon our Russian brethren in faith on the other side of the Prut, requesting that they, in their authority as Eastern Europe's last legitimate power and authority, mediate on our behalf against the treachery and barbarity of the Austrians.

May Austrian saber be met likewise by Romanian sword, and may God almighty show mercy upon us all.

Alexandru Ioan Cuza, Prince of Romania

​

​

 

[jacob-Lundgren]

​

The Russian Empire has been following the events regarding the growing crisis to our south. The issue that ha sprung up as a result of the treaty between the Austrians and the Ottomans. It should be clear that treaties involving major issues done in haste with few consultations of other major parties are going to cause problems. However problems can often be solved through peace negotiation and through using outside mediators. This is a situation where that proved not to be.

The Tsar and all related ministers for a crisis as this have discussed the problem. We believe there is one ideal solution that will help guarantee peace as well as security for the people of the principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia. We call upon the soldiers and officers of the united principalities to arrest and overthrow Domnitor Cuza. We request that he be given safe passage to an outside land of his choosing. We request that the Austrians act as a responsible force and take care to avoid harming civilians.

It is our firm hope that this matter end in little to no bloodshed. The Russian government understands the goal of independence, but to do so in this manner serves only the interests of the Ottoman Empire. We implore the people, leaders and officers to do what is right. We plead for you to not give your former oppressors ones last chance to watch you suffer through their actions. Do not act as the Sultan would wish you to act. The Russian government and military will not act on behalf of the Ottomans and slaughter Christian soldiers to serve the desires of the muslim turks, and neither should any other. We will not see our men dead in a war that benefits the Ottomans. We will not be intervening at this time.

​

Alexander Gorchakov ~ Foreign Minister of the Russian Empire