778 



HOLY ALLIANCE. 



members of the Holy Alliance. We do not believe 

 tltat Alexander foresaw to what violations of justice 

 iliunce would lead; but he is, nevertheless, 

 reprehensible for the consequences of a union founded 

 on principles so indefinite. The sovereigns were 

 soon obliged, by the course of events, to become 

 more precise ; and what was at first merely an act of 

 weakness, soon became a conspiracy of the govern- 

 ments against the nations. It was distinctly under- 

 stood, tluit the sovereigns became members of the 

 league personally, and, therefore, no counter-signature 

 of ministers was necessary ; no guarantees were 

 stipulated. This personal union of princes is either 

 a contradiction in terms (for what is the monarch 

 personally, as distinguished from a chief magistrate, 

 and considered with reference to his own private 

 disposition, but a simple individual ?) or it implies 

 that the sovereign is a ruler in his individual capacity, 

 constituted by divine right, so that he never can be 

 separated from the idea of a state or government ; 

 but behind this notion lurk all evil and tyranny, an 

 entire contempt of the principles of justice and sound 

 sense. What, then, did these monarchs personally 

 pledge themselves to do ? To rule according to the 

 principles of justice and charity. How charity can 

 be made a principle of political relations, it is difficult 

 to say j and as for justice, a compact to be governed 

 by it in future would seem to imply that it Jiad not 

 been their rule in times past. It had been generally 

 conceded, even by the supporters of despotic govern- 

 ments, that rulers were established for the good of the 

 people ; only the people were to be regarded in the 

 light of school-boys, who should submit implicitly to 

 their teachers. The members of the holy alliance, 

 however, thought it necessary to make a formal com- 

 pact, to act justly towards their subjects. As regarded 

 the subject of international relations, the sovereigns 

 showed very little political wisdom when they sup- 

 posed that a personal pledge could withstand the 

 strong current of events. The name of this league, 

 too, was well chosen, besides being arrogant ; since 

 an institution with a similar name the holy office 

 (and not entirely different, in respect to religion, 

 from what the holy alliance turned out to be in 

 respect to politics) had drawn upon itself the ab- 

 horrence of mankind. 



As the founders of the holy alliance were a Rus- 

 sian and two German princes, the nations directly 

 interested in it said little against it. In Russia, of 

 course, nothing was permitted to be said ; and the 

 Germans are so little versed in politics and public 

 right, that, far from seeing through the league, they 

 were misled by their natural bonhommie, to consider 

 it as indicating the approach of a new era of Christian 

 government, or were led to praise it from habits of 

 obsequiousness. Some writers, whom we can hardly 

 suppose to have been actuated by servile motives, 

 and among them even professors in the universities, 

 suffered themselves to fall into a strain of extravagant 

 panegyric, in speaking of the holy alliance, which is 

 quite unaccountable; while others immediately de- 

 nounced it. One writer* says, that only since the 

 establishment of the holy alliance, can we speak of 

 Christian politics, whilst history would designate all 

 former politics as heathenish, because derived from the 

 Greeks, Romans, and barbarians. Another writerf 

 says, " Jealousy, ambition, passion, intrigue, will be 

 banished from the circle of the sovereigns and their 

 cabinets, and Christian charity will take their place. 

 The rulers have united to rule according to the 

 principles of love, of justice and peace, and to act 



The article Holy A lliance, in the Conversations - Lexicon. 

 t The article Holy Alliance, in the Rhenish Conner sations- 



towards each other accordingly. A union of crowned 

 Friends, united by the ties of a noble confidence, will 

 watch for the happiness of nations, and, by united 

 efforts, remove every tiling hostile to their repose, 

 particularly the fanatical spirit of revolution, which 

 has for years disturbed the peace of nations, and 

 arrayed them against each other on the field of 

 battle," &c. These sentiments were adopted and 

 echoed by a large party. 



Let us see, then, how these crowned frie 

 watched over the happiness of nations. As early as 

 in 1818, a congress was held at Aix-la-Chapelle, in 

 which the holy alliance came out more distinctly 

 with its intentions. A Declaration des Monarques 

 (Nov. 15, 1818), signed by eight ministers was issued 

 by five powers (the kings of Britain and France 

 having acceded to this alliance as individuals, though 

 not in their official capacity, not being able to blend 

 the two characters with the same ease as the three 

 other monarchs). The declaration stated that peace 

 was the object of the alliance, and the system of 

 legitimate stability was announced. The Conserva- 

 teur Imperial, at Petersburg (March 14, 1817), had 

 already given the views of the monarchs in regard to 

 what they thought to be justice and charity. From 

 this congress dates the beginning of those congres- 

 sional politics, of which we have spoken in the 

 article Congress, and the great conspiracy of kings to 

 subdue the liberal spirit then breaking out all over 

 the continent of Europe. All the European sove- 

 reigns finally became members of the holy alliance, 

 except the pope, who, of course, could not be a 

 member of a religious league, without being at its 

 head. The German princes, soon after the congress 

 of Aix-la-Chapelle, began their persecutions ot the 

 liberals, and, in November, 1819, a German congress 

 was held at Vienna, at which Metternich presided, 

 and which lasted until May, 1820. In the autumn of 

 the same year, the holy alliance, at least several of 

 the powers as members thereof, held a congress at 

 Troppau on account of the disturbances in Spain, and 

 when the revolution in Naples broke out, the con- 

 gress was transferred to Laybach, in Carniola, where 

 the right of armed intervention (i. e., a forcible 

 interference in the internal affairs of any nation, whose 

 condition is not agreeable to the views and Christian 

 intentions of the crowned friends), already agreed 

 upon at Troppau, was diplomatically admitted into 

 the international law of the powers of the European 

 continent. After the Austrians had, as the phrase 

 was, restored quiet in Italy, Austria, Russia, and 

 Prussia, issued a proclamation, that the justice and 

 disinterestedness which had hitherto guided the coun- 

 cils of the sovereigns, would always be the rule of 

 their politics. In 1822, the chief powers and their 

 adherents held a new congress at Verona (see Con- 

 gress), on account of the insurrections in Spain and 

 Portugal, and the political state of Italy and Greece. 

 The war of France, or rather of the Bourbons, 

 against Spain, in 1823, was a consequence of this 

 congress. We all know the deplorable consequences 

 of tnis invasion. Spain was thrown back into bar- 

 barism. For the Christian views of the holy alliance 

 respecting Greece, see Greece; and as to Italy, no 

 unprejudiced visitor of that country will assert, that 

 it is happy under the watchful care of the holy 

 alliance. 



As the views of the holy alliance became more 

 decidedly manifested, Britain drew off from it, and, 

 after Canning's appointment as secretary of foreign 

 affairs, she refused to interfere with the internal affairs 

 of Spain, through the duke of Wellington, the Bri- 

 tish minister at Verona. The manner in which the 

 principles of the alliance were viewed by the United 

 States of America, appears from the message of 



