402 THE AUSTRIAN DOMINATION IN ITALY. 



dependence he looks back upon his native country with a more un- 

 prejudiced eye and a more unclouded judgment, and embodies the 

 result of his speculations in the pamphlet to which we have attended. 

 The first position of Count Pozzo is a distinct denial of the pos- 

 sibility of Italy's ever acquiring or maintaining an independent na- 

 tional existence. 



" From the destruction of the Roman empire," observes he, " down to 

 our times, her political disunion has ever made Italy a prey to the spoiler. 

 Its physical configuration offering great length with little relative breadth, 

 is in itself no small obstacle to a compact system of operation, and a gene- 

 ral identification of feelings and interests ; hence its unamalgamating races 

 were in turn overrun by the Heruli, Ostrogoths, Lombards, French, Ger- 

 mans, and Spaniards, who successively ruled it for longer or shorter periods. 

 The genius of Napoleon, it is true, could blend various discordant people, 

 a nd found a government on a wider and more extended basis, but when his 

 iron hand was withdrawn it crumbled into atoms." 



Now, though it is true that the past history of Italy confirms these 

 statements, it is by no means fair to allow them to operate against the 

 presumption of the future. Through ages of oppression, Italy has 

 preserved the indestructible feelings of nationality. Animated by 

 this spirit of individuality, she defied, and still defies, the intrigues 

 of partitioning cabinets and the terrors of a perpetually suspended 

 sword. This sense of political existence is alone a presumption of a 

 capacity for national independence. It was, in a great measure, realised 

 through the intervention of Napoleon, and it failed, not as Count Pozzo 

 states, from the withdrawal of his iron hand, but through the direct 

 interference of the partitioning congress of Vienna. 



Having settled this point to his entire satisfaction, the Count next 

 addresses himself to destroy the prejudices existing against the Aus- 

 trian dominion, and to show that its rights are as well founded as 

 those of any other government. 



" Conquest, or the right of the most strong, has been the origin of almost 

 every government ; hereditary right springs collaterally : from this circum- 

 stance length of possession and the consent of the governed may add 

 strength and stability, but they are not absolutely necessary." 



This being granted, the Count asks, triumphantly, 



" What is wanting to Austria that any other nation in Europe or in the 

 -civilized world can allege in its favour, to prove her right to her Italian do- 

 minions just and well founded. The emperors of Germany were lords of 

 Lombardy from the tenth century ; the viscoiiti were no more than per- 

 petual lieutenants of Milan under the emperor. After the death of Sforza, 

 the last duke of Milan, without issue, Charles V. invested his son, Philip 

 the Second, with the dukedom of Milan, which remained a Spanish province 

 until it was transferred, in 1706, to the Austrian branch of the family of 

 Spain." 



The inference from all this is that the House of Austria is not only 

 legitimate sovereign of its Italian possessions, but that it was the 

 fountain of legitimacy for the other princes of Italy. But then, say 

 the Italians, this government is not national, it is foreign. 



" The Emperor Francis," retorts the Count, " sovereign of the Lombardo- 

 Venetian kingdom is most Italian, for he was born at Florence, not acci- 



