Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

Art. II. — CAVOUR.

ary 20, 1862.

1. A Discourse on the Life, Character, and Policy of Count Cavour. Delivered in the Hall of the New York Historical Society, Febru

By VINCENZO BOTTA, Ph. D. New York: G. P. Putnam. 1862. 8vo. pp. 104. 2. Cavour, a Memoir. By EDWARD DICEY, Author of “Rome in

1860." Cambridge [England]: MacMillan & Co. 1861. 16mo. pp.

243.

[ocr errors]

It is scarcely a year since the death of Count Cavour, in Turin. There is not time enough yet, of course, for a complete biography of the man. But the two sketches of his life and character which Dr. Botta and Mr. Dicey have produced for us, give us better opportunity than we could expect to trace along the rapid history of his wonderful success, and to estimate the manly qualities by which that success was won. The writers occupy such different positions, nationally and morally, that their different studies give us quite distinct points of observation. For, though each is an admirer of Cavour, and, with but little affectation of indifference, appears as his eulogist, the one is an Englishman, — doubtful, therefore, of the empire of ideas, — whether, indeed, there be any ideas; the other is an Italian Protestant, confident, therefore, in the truth, and believing that Cavour owed his success to the rectitude and certain victory of his cause. Each of them has had good opportunities, and has studied sufficiently the public documents which are necessary for the review of the great statesman's life.

CAMILLO BENSO DI CAVOUR was born in Turin on the 10th of August, 1810. He was a younger son of a noble Italian family, whose traditions, since this century began, were connected with Napoleon's family. His mother was lady in waiting to the beautiful Pauline, the Princess Borghese, and the Prince and Princess acted as sponsors at the baby Cavour's baptism. Such arrangement of artificial memory did History adopt, that any future inquirer in trifles might recollect the Prince Borghese's first name. Count Camillo Cavour, the founder of Italy, was named for him. When the child was ten years of age, they tried to make him page to Charles Albert, then heir to the throne of Sardinia. But the plan did not work well. He was soon dismissed from court livery, or, as he himself expressed it, “he threw off his pack-saddle.” He was sent to a military school, and, at eighteen years of age, after a brilliant school career, he entered the army as a lieutenant of engineers. In this capacity he served for four years; but he had given offence, before he was twenty-two, by the rashness of his liberal opinions, and, after a year of half-exile in the Val d'Aosta, he threw up his commission. For nearly ten years he resided abroad. The following pretty letter from the Director of Police at Milan gives the view which thus early the government of Austria, by its officials, took of him who was to prove its most dangerous enemy :

“Milan, May 15, 1833. “ A young Piedmontese nobleman, Camillo di Cavour, is about to set out on his travels. He was formerly an officer in the engineers, and, in spite of his youth, is already deeply corrupted in his political principles. I lose no time in giving this intelligence to the Commissioners of Police, with instructions not to permit the entrance of the person in question, if he should present himself at our frontiers, unless bis passport is perfectly en règle, and, even in this case, only after the most rigorous investigation into his clothes and luggage, as I have reason to suspect he may be the bearer of dangerous documents.”

In ten years which followed, the young politician, thus tinctured with liberal opinions, travelled over various parts of Italy, — visited Switzerland, Paris, England, and Germany. In 1843 he contributed for a French journal the first of a series of articles on Ireland ; — and there are other evidences to show that he had studied the constitution of England and the practical work of the English system with interest and

He always understood that system. He was devoted thus early to the system of free trade, on which he based his financial and economical system for Sardinia ; and he made some studies of the relation of church and state, which he had ample occasion to draw upon in his contest, almost life-long, with the Papacy. Meanwhile, in these ten years of wandering, he showed none of the characteristics of an ambitious young revolutionist, preparing to strike. He was rather what

care.

no more.

was

is called a man of the world, “not remarkable for excess either in pleasure or abstinence,” says Mr. Dicey. This remark, to an American reader, needs to be qualified by the anecdote which immediately follows it, — that on one occasion he had incurred gambling debts to the amount of £ 8,000. His father paid these debts, but told him that he should pay

True to the “in medio tutissimus ibis," Cavour did not abandon play, but never played for such high stakes again.

In 1843 he returned to Italy. He had learned a good deal of the processes of scientific agriculture in his travels, and he devoted himself to the introduction of improvements, on an extensive scale, on the family estate at Leri. His great compatriot, Ricasoli, — his fellow-workman for the unity of Italy, and his successor at the head of her cabinet, studying men and affairs in a like school. Cavour interested himself in the establishment of infant asylums at Turin, and was elected a Director. But he was still so unpopular at court, that he was requested to withdraw his name from the list, and he obeyed. In the simplicity of the life of a nobleman administering his estates he remained until the wave of popular sentiment which is coeval with the liberal outbreak of poor Pius IX. 'swept over Italy. Under the relaxation of the severity of the laws of the press which followed, Cavour founded the Risorgimento journal in Turin, in company with Balbo, a statesman of reputation, afterwards Prime Minister. He acted at first as editor of this journal, and he wrote for it as late as 1850. The Risorgimento obtained a reputation and influence, which it still holds, in the control of public opinion in Italy. It advocated the independence of Italy, union between princes and people, progressive reform, and a confederation of the Italian states; it pledged itself to advocate free trade, and proposed, indeed, many of the improvements in administration which have since been adopted in Piedmont. Cavour undoubtedly exercised great influence through this journal, and his articles in it show strong good sense, and indeed a frequent prophetic discernment. But it does not appear, either from them or from the passages before us from his more elaborate works, that he spent other effort upon

a

his literary productions than was necessary to express and explain with energy the view which he would enforce. There is nothing careful or condensed in his style. It is businesslike and intelligible, but seldom pointed. Like most great men of affairs, he used the arts of composition as he used that of handwriting, - he cultivated them far enough to make himself perfectly intelligible, but left the elegances and ornaments to people of the grade of writing-masters and other posture-makers. In his speeches we find the same characteristic. He spoke to convince, and he convinced. Yet, unless the subject interests us, his collected speeches are but dull reading. In the midst of the intense and epigrammatic eloquence to which the Italian seems born, and to which his language is so well adapted, the oratory of Cavour in the legislative assemblies of Italy must have seemed singularly cold.

Even in the outset of his career as an editor, he was called to take a more important position in public affairs. Charles Albert was not so quick to take oaths as were Neapolitan and other princes who meant to break them on the first opportunity. He had shown himself, therefore, so backward in that extension of liberty which he had promised in Piedmont, that a general impression gained ground in Turin that he was intending a retrograde policy. A body of the liberals, of every shade of politics, met, in consequence, to address the king in support of an address which had been prepared in Genoa. To the surprise of his colleagues, Cavour, still but little known, opposed the Genoese address, because it did not go far enough. “Let us demand the Constitution,” he said. But his proposal was too far in advance of the moment to secure success, and for the moment it had to wait, and he. He wrote a letter to the king, assuring him that his whole object was to reconcile the dignity of the throne and the authority of the government with the true interests of the country. But the king hesitated, - the aristocratic party of nature hated constitutional government, and the democratic party dreaded the plan, as dictated by an Anglo-mania. Cavour's proposal was not, therefore, immediately accepted, even by the other liberals, much less by the king. But a very short time was enough to bring about the grant of that Constitution which has since proved so important. Under its provisions, Cavour was at once appointed by Balbo on the committee which drew up the fundamental electoral law for the kingdom. The work was done in fifteen days, but it was so well done that it has answered, unchanged, the purposes of the whole Italian nation. It is not based on universal suffrage. The qualification is an assessment of about twenty dollars a year in taxes, the payment of a rent of one hundred and twenty dollars or upwards, or the pursuit of any “liberal trade or profession.”

It must be remembered that all this work in the establishment of constitutional order in Piedmont was completed before the great uprising of the Italian nation in 1848. Cavour's course in the first Parliament of Piedmont during that war is thus described by Dr. Botta :

“During the war of 1848, Turin witnessed the opening of the first Parliament. In that session Cavour sat as the deputy of the first district of his native city, a constituency which, with the exception of one short session, he continued to represent to the last. United to the aristocracy by birth and by early associations, yet separated from that class by his liberal views; tending toward the democratic party in his progressive ideas, yet opposing all radical and visionary schemes, — he at first stood almost alone in the chamber, an isolated, yet remarkable figure. Although he gave his cordial support to the administration, headed by his friend Cesare Balbo, he did not shrink, even in his maiden speech, from rebuking the ministry for their weakness and indecision in conducting the war, at a time when the only hope for its success was in bold and vigorous measures.

“ The course pursued by Cavour during those stormy years exhibits in strong relief that moral courage with which he was peculiarly endowed. Believing the democratic tendencies of the time utterly ruinous to the national cause, he fearlessly threw himself against the prevailing current of opinion, and thus greatly increased his unpopularity. But this could not deter him from performing what he considered his duty; for he did not belong to that class of politicians, to be found everywhere, whose love of country is subservient to self-interest, and whose object is confined to flattering popular passions and prejudices. It was a striking spectacle to see him at that time, from his seat in the chamber, defying the storm of hisses and yells with which he was frequently assailed from the galleries. Often he called them to order, or moved that they should be cleared according to the rules. 'I am not

66

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »