Sidor som bilder
PDF
ePub

Essai de Statistique générale de la Russie. Par M.J H. Schweitzler. Paris et Strasbourg, 1829.

THE want of a good geographical and political manual of the present state of Russia has been long sensibly felt. The works of Leclerc and Tooke make us very imperfectly acquainted with the actual state of that country under the reign of Catherine II.; and those of Raymond and Lesur, composed at the period of the French invasion, and, according to all appearance, by order of Napoleon, have not only a slight tint of that colouring, but are besides not very exact, and are formed of materials of the date of Paul I. The description given of Russia in the geography of Malte-Brun was more satisfactory as regards its geology, agronomique, and the comparative study of languages; but the topographical information was not always exact, nor did the author draw a picture applicable to the general character of the empire. A similar work, by M. A. Babbi, is executed with more care; but its form (that of one large sheet) does not admit of the insertion of a number of indispensable details, and has beside the effect of rendering the use of it extremely difficult to all, who are not fortunate enough to possess the eyes of a lynx.

A residence of four years in the country, and a perfect knowledge of the language, have enabled M. Schweitzler to gain possession of a multitude of documents inaccessible to most of our geographical writers; and these he has carefully compared with those published by the most celebrated statiscians of Germany, and has composed an excellent work, which, under the modest title of an Essay on Statistics,' contains not only a good geographical and statistic account of Russia, but a well-digested view of the actual state and history of that immense empire. The plan of his book is well chosen, and the reader will find in it a multitude of ideas, and information, which he would vainly search for elsewhere.

[ocr errors]

With regard to the surface of the country, Schweitzler has adopted the calculations of M. Hassel as approaching nearest to truth; and it appears that this empire consists, exclusively of Poland, of 372,636 square miles, of fifteen to the degree, and 54,323,507 inhabitants, of whom 45,000,000 are slaves! So that there are in Russia 145 inhabitants to the square mile. The sum total of the known revenue amounts to 312,197,000 roubles in paper, about 11 d. each English money, of which 90,000,000 are produced by the monopoly of brandy alone; and it is sad to see that almost a third of the receipts of government is founded upon encouragement given to the disgusting vice of drunkenness. The annual expenses of Russia amount to about 300,000,000 of roubles, consequently the state would be in continual pecuniary embarrassments, if it did not possess other secret revenues, which are indeed hinted at in M. Schweitzler's. book.

The national debt bearing interest amounted, in the year 1824, to 847,341,010 francs. A commission, instituted in 1817, laboured at the gradual reduction of this debt, and also the abolition of paper money, the amount of which in circulation was about 600 millions of francs, a sum which made just double the value of all other sorts put in circulation during a century, viz. from 1718 to 1818.

The absolute sum total of the forces is 650,300 men, to which must be added about 20,000 officers of all ranks. The fleet is composed of 34 vessels of the line, 19 frigates, 9 corvettes, and as many brigs.

In Russia, as is well known, all power emanates from the sovereign, whose authority is without participation or control, and which no charter or capitulation has ever attempted to moderate. Formerly, however, the great lords or 'Boyards' were not without influence at the court of the czars, and their

ordonnances

ordonnances commenced by this form, The Grand Duke has ordered, the Boyards have approved, &c.' At all times, however, this voice was rather nominal than real, and Peter the Great had little trouble in suppressing it altogether. This reforming monarch rid himself likewise of another trammel more embarrassing, that of the patriarchal chair; and since his time the imperial power has been truly unlimited, and the Russian monarchy the most despotic and absolute in Europe, although the determinations of the monarch may sometimes be influenced by traditions and ancient usages. Far from being hurtful to the liberal developement of the nation, this absence of all restriction to the sovereign will may be regarded as a benefit in Russia, without which the aristocracy would press more heavily than they do upon the mass of the population. Unity and power are there, as they once were in France, the only condition of the possible emancipation of the people. In a country where there is no other fundamental law than the will or caprice of him who governs, there will naturally occur many and great abuses of power-less, certainly, under an enlightened prince than others, yet nothing can entirely prevent them; and where despotism is so deeply rooted in the administration, the best intentions of the monarch remain often without effect. In 1814, Alexander astounded his allied brethren by loudly proclaiming the principle that law is stronger than the sovereign; but it is impossible to believe with M. Schweitzler that since then justice has taken the place of despotism in Russia: indeed he is obliged to confess himself that it not unfrequently strikes even the ministers and courtiers.

The nobility were always numerous in Russia, being generally in possession of the various offices of the state. They formed also the base and the principal element of the armies of the grand dukes. Although bending under the weight of a despotic sceptre, and always humble in the presence of the czar, never was a nobility more urgent or presuming on their birth or acquired rights; from which continually resulted, amongst the most illustrious families, the most serious disputes and rivalries. Before taking office or entering any service, every nobleman examined most particularly what were the pretensions of those from whom he was to take orders, comparing those of his future chief with his own. This was a state of things which gave rise to disputes and discussions to which there was no end.

Feodor, in 1681, put a stop to these disorders, by declaring that merit alone was eligible to honours and employments, and he caused all the old documents relating to the ancient nobility of the empire to be burnt. Peter the Great finding his nobility unmanageable, and opposed to his system of reform, set himself the task of subduing them by competition. He created, therefore, a second order of nobility, besides the counts and barons of the empire, to which merit and services only could gain access, and which he raised even above the old hereditary nobility. A new hierarchy of rank was also introduced in 1721, and all officers, civil and military, were included in fourteen classes, of which the first eight conferred hereditary, and the others personal nobility. This important measure is at the present moment in full force, with some slight modifications made by Catherine II. It was excellent for the times of Peter; but offers now several serious inconveniences, and visibly hurts the progress of civilization. It increases, in the first place, the nobility almost to infinity, and strips the middle class of all its most distinguished members, or rather prevents entirely the existence of it, by taking from the arts and industry men who would have contributed to their success, were they not thus forced to support a rank which has generally no accordance whatever with their fortune.

The central point of all administration in Russia is the monarch himself, and it is to his sanction that all measures of importance must be submitted. Three other bodies, however, take also a leading part in the administration, and

these

these are, the council of the empire, the senate, and the holy synod. To the first every affair of consequence connected with internal policy is referred, and to it the Emperor himself refers those things which he does not choose to decide upon. The senate is usually considered as the first body of the state; and, although it has in fact lost much of its influence, its ordonnances have the force of law, and only the emperor has the power to arrest their effects. It would exercise an authority much more salutary, however, if the formalities were simplified, and if, instead of a pretended gratuitous procedure, it was permitted to put an end to the gross corruption of the inferior judges. The holy synod is the supreme authority of the Greco-Russian church; the executive power, nevertheless, is, like all other, in the hands of the sovereign, and by him confided to his secretaries of state, the union of whom forms a sort of fourth body, but subordinate to the great bodies of whom we have just spoken. At all times the authority of ministers is special and individual; and certain measures only are submitted by them to the discussion of the committee. They make their reports to the emperor, who forwards them, as well as the annual accounts, immediately to the senate, one of whose attributes is to control the ministers.

The local administration is confided to governors, general and civil. The first, amounting to the number of fourteen, comprehend three or four governments, and are generally held by military officers of the rank of at least lieutenant-generals, who command at the same time all the troops stationed in their different districts. Besides being endowed with great power, these governors general enjoy exclusive rights. The senate may demand an account of their actions; but the emperor alone can reprimand them, or inflict on them any punishment. Russia contains fifty-one of these governments. In its original extent one government comprised 300,000 or 400,000 miles; but at present this rule admits of numerous exceptions, there being a variety of subdivisions, created or altered according to circumstances.

Histoire de Philippe Auguste. Par Monsieur Capefigue. 4 vols. 8vo.

Paris, 1829.

MR. CAPEFIGUE is truly a man of talent. It is no easy matter now-a-days to conciliate critical favour. The claimants are too numerous and the journalist too much occupied-his pages or columns too crowded-and sometimes (rarely of course) His Sublimity himself too indolent for the favourable notice of any but ready-made reputations, and such rising ones, as advance under the sheltering wing of a very particular friend of mine. Mr. Capefigue, however, had no sooner published the work under consideration, than the critical among his countrymen were loud in their praises of the depth of his historical views and the elegance of his style.

I have been reproached,' says the author in a note, p. 185 of the third volume, with having too frequently quoted the poet-biographer of the king. This observation argues an ignorance of the historical importance of the poem. Guillaume le Breton is full of details of great value concerning the events which he narrates. He followed the king, and was present in all the wars undertaken,' &c. But what are these so precious details? Sometimes they tell us how the moon rises, at others how the sun sets, with all the pomp of poetic description; now the humid earth evaporates; now the barons, embarked for Palestine, cast their riches into the sea to escape from shipwreck; here the Count of St. Paul, like to the sparrow-hawk which disperses the affrighted canarybirds-there a Homeric battle, in which the reader is regaled with the complimentary salutations addressed to each other by the combatants.

If we follow the historian in his description of the plunder to which the warriors

warriors of the time were addicted, we are astonished and not a little fatigued with the paintings of Guillaume le Breton. It will perhaps be more interesting to take a view of the history of Enguivrand, whose shoulders were lofty like

towers :

'From the size of his shoulders it is evident that he was of gigantic stature : listen to his sad and pitiable case. He assisted at the siege of a town-I do not know which; and, like a true Goliah as he was, he had the temerity to insult the besieged on the ramparts. Great was the rage of the enemy; but a large buckler, borne before him by a man at arms, defended him against the arrows of the archers, and the poor townsmen were fain to take his injuries in patience. Then a very short dwarf took it into his head to play him a trick in his way. He ge's possession, by means of a strong cord and a stone-bow, of the buckler, and bears it off. The giant is left exposed, and falls under the darts of the enemy.'

This twaddle is, as Shylock saith, 'sufficient.'

The historian, who discharges his duty properly, will surround himself by all the documents relative to the period of which he writes. Possessing these indispensable originals, he makes them the subject of long and severe study. By careful examination and collation, he separates the true from the false, the certain from the doubtful; and at length, after having long reflected on men and things, he proceeds to make known his results and decisions. No obscure chronicler, from whom he has shaken off the dust of ages, can rise against him, and exclaim, 'Give me back my own!'

Such is not the course pursued by Mr. Capefigue. Guillaume le Breton, Matthew Paris, the chronicle of St. Denis, and some other annalists of that period, have been subject to his historic shears, and the harlequin dress of his own work,

'A work of shreds and patches,'

is made up of pasted pilfering.

It is true that a reader, who seeks only for amusement and instruction, will trouble himself but little how these have been procured, so that they be in the book which he peruses. But Mr. Capefigue has evinced no taste in his larcenies-they are petty enough, but extremely clumsy, and manifest to every eye. So ridiculous and extravagant are some of the useless details which he has borrowed to make up his volumes, that we are astonished at the mental constitution of him who could have put them forth at this time of day. What amusement or instruction is obtainable from a perusal of such lucubrations? Is it indispensable, when writing the history of the eleventh century, to adopt the barbarous style and pitiful philosophy of that dark period-looking on the events of the time with the narrowest views of the contemporaneous mind? Assuredly not.

We do not deny that Mr. Capefigue occasionally frees himself from the trammels of chroniclers-nay, in some instances, he displays a talent capable of attaining the true historical dignity;—but a culpable negligence pervades the principal portion of his work. The most important episode of the period, and that deserving of the most careful treatment, is the sanguinary crusade directed against the Albigenses. Mr. Capefigue has been particularly careless on this subject. Not content with according the epithet pious to the cruel and bloodthirsty fanatic who was the prime mover of this crusade, he collects, seemingly with delight, all the ridiculous accusations brought forward by the clergy in order to kindle the pile of intolerant and murderous bigotry. 'These new puritans,' says the author, without being aware of the anachronism, 'maintained an equalization of property, and laid it down as an article of faith that every man who believed himself inspired might speak the word of heaven and teach the faith of Christ."'

It was at length discovered that the wives of the perfect, when pregnant, destroyed their children, to avoid procreation."

At this period the Albigenses had a superior clergy-and a supreme pontiff of heresy was even talked of.'

'I have drawn all these details from the register of the Inquisition at Toulouse.' A rare authority, truly, this-the Dominicans ! And Mr. Capefigue, thus supported, comes forward to palliate the barbarity of those hooded butchers.

It is somewhat remarkable that Mr. Capefigue, in describing the ceremony which consecrated the usurpation of Simon de Montfort, has not a word of indignation against that feudal brigand whose ferocity strewed the fairest, and before his time the happiest, provinces of France with the bones of the slain. He coldly recounts the treachery to which the noble Vicomte de Beziers fell a victim. The Duke of Burgundy and the Count of Nevers had refused the investiture of the vanquished provinces. We will not have them,' they said, 'for we can by no means rob a man of noble race, so treacherously.' And when in the army of the Croises a man is found base enough to accept what was so nobly refused by others, the only reflection it elicits from Mr. Capefigue is, that Every one remarked his stately appearance under the ducal coronet and robes; he was very tall; with fair and flowing hair, which proved his Franc origin; and his body graceful, active, and firm in all its movements.' Verily these be rare qualifications for a viscount-—or a life-guardsman.

We need make no comment on this preposterous passage. The contemptible views of the writer in all matters relative to religious and political freedom, are every way worthy of his indolence, unblushing negligence, and bungling attempts at the now fully matured art of book-making.

Rome, Londres, et Paris. Par M. de Saint Maurice. 1 vol. 8vo. 1830. THIS title would seem to announce a work, descriptive and comparative of the state of the three capitals. Nothing, however, can be further from the wish of the lively author than to weary the joyous public with statistical speculations. His book contains a gallery of portraits, of which the originals cannot be doubted and these being no less than the actual ministers, the said portraits are circumstantially very important. The author takes, as he has a right to do, the station of showman to his own gallery, and, selon les règles, he thus addresses the curious:- Walk in, ladies! walk in, gentlemen! and see these wonderful and interesting creatures, all alive: they speak, for all the world, like natural persons; they have teeth and they have hands, with which they do most surprising things! Some of them can read and write. They are of all countriesEnglish, Italian, French, and Portuguese. The collection is complete, and is specially deserving the attention of connoisseurs by its singular variety.'

Although the author has occasionally borrowed from the journals, he is not liable to a charge of plagiarism on that account. The personages of whom he writes being public men, it was necessary that he should look at the daily sources of political information. The two first pieces, Rome and London, are but a preface in dialogue to the third-a prelude to the late ministerial changes in France. As to the unity of design, the author gives himself but little trouble about it. His purpose being to show up'certain noble contemporaries, he brings them on the scene just as it suits him, and leaves them to speak for themselves. At Rome we are introduced to a deliberative assembly of Jesuits, who are engaged in discussing the merits of Prince Polignac. In London the said Prince gives a promise of unqualified submission to our own Premier; and in Paris we are present at the ministerial enthronement of Polignac. This is all very cleverly managed; but we think that giving detached passages from certain scenes would scarcely be doing the author justice. We therefore prefer giving one entire, in which the Duke of Wellington and Prince Polignac are the acting characters.

[blocks in formation]

SCENE

« FöregåendeFortsätt »