Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Don Francisco de Paula. We neither propose nor prohibit any one of them. He who may be acceptable to Spain will be acceptable to us, provided he be within the limits of the House of Bourbon. This is for us a French question of the highest importance. We have no right and no pretension to impose a husband on the Queen of Spain, or to interdict one; she is at perfect liberty to choose whom she pleases. We have a profound respect for the independence both of the Crown and the people of Spain; but we have in our turn a right to think and to say that such or such an alliance would appear to us so contrary to the interests of France, that if it took effect it would place us in a hostile position with regard to Spain. This is the object, and it is certainly a very legitimate one, of our declarations, and in making it openly beforehand we are acting honourably towards Europe, as well as prudently with regard to ourselves. If the choice of the Queen of Spain falls on one of the descendants of Philip V., we shall have nothing to say, even though we may think that, within those limits, another alliance might have been more for the interest of Spain herself."

In February of the present year we find M. Guizot holding the following language, in a memorandum communicated by M. de St. Aulaire, the French Ambassador in London, to Lord Aberdeen :

[ocr errors]

The principle we have maintained, and which the English Cabinet has accepted, as the basis of our policy respecting the marriage of the Queen of Spain, is become one of very difficult and uncertain application.

descendants of Philip V., and actual or possible suitors for the hand of the Queen of Spain, is as follows:

"The Prince of Lucca is married.

"The position of the Count of Trapani is rendered very unfavourable; 1st, by the violent expression of public opinion against him; 2nd, by the fall of General Narvaez.

66

The sons of the Infante Don Francisco de Paula are subject to grave objections; viz., 1st, the false steps they have taken; 2nd, their intimacy with the Radical party, and the consequent antipathy with which they are regarded by the Moderate party; 3rd, the ill-will of the Queen Mother, and of the young Queen herself.

"The sons of Don Carlos are, for the present, at least, out of the question; 1st, in consequence of the often and declared opposition of all parties; 2nd, in consequence of their formal exclusion by the constitution; and 3rd, of the dispositions manifested in their own conduct, which is at variance with any that could afford them the smallest chance.

"The situation of the descendants of Philip V. with relation to the marriage of the Queen of Spain, is, therefore, become very unfavourable.

*

"Whatever be the causes, the fact that the difficulties of the marriage between one of the descendants of Philip V. and Queen Isabella are greatly aggravated, is incontestable.

66

And, at the same time, great and redoubled efforts are at this moment making to bring about a marriage between the Prince "The situation of the Princes, Leopold of Saxe Coburg and

either Queen Isabella or the Infanta Donna Fernanda.

"The Court of Lisbon is the centre of these efforts. This is obvious from the tenor of private letters, and of the Portuguese and Spanish journals.

"It is affirmed that Prince Leopold of Coburg, who was to leave Lisbon on the 24th February, for Cadiz, Gibraltar, Algiers, Malta, and Italy, will proceed secretly or openly to Madrid. This report is corroborated by many circum

stances.

"We have been, and we shall continue to be, true to the policy which we have adopted, and to the engagements we have entered into, respecting the marriage either of Queen Isabella or of Donna Fernanda.

"But if the existing state of things should continue, or should lead to any further results, we may be placed abruptly in a contingency, in which we shall be

1. Subjected to the absolute necessity of preventing our policy from receiving, by the marriage either of the Queen or the Infanta, a blow to which we could not consent to submit.

"2. Released from all engagement, with respect to either marriage.

"Which would be the result, in case the marriage, either of the Queen or of the Infanta, with Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg, or with any other Prince not descended from Philip V., should become probable or imminent.

"In that case we should be released from all engagement, and free to act immediately in our own defence, by demanding the hand, either of the Queen or the Infanta, for the Duke de Montpensier."

The passage which we have

marked in italics is the masterkey to all the intrigue and diplomatic trickery which followed. M. Guizot assumed that the English Government was exerting itself to bring forward as a candidate a Prince of the House of Saxe Coburg; and seizing upon that pretext, he held his Government absolved from all its previous professions and engagements, and free to act exactly as was most conducive to the interests and aggrandizement of France. But the fact was not as M. Guizot stated. The British Government did not favour the pretensions of any Prince, and we believe it to be an entire mistake to suppose that they interfered in the slightest degree to ad vance the claims of Prince Leopold of Saxe Coburg.

The views and conduct of our Government are explained in a note addressed by Lord Palmerston to Lord Normanby, the British Ambassador at Paris, and dated September 22, 1846:

"What I understood to have been the ground taken by Her Majesty's late Government was, that unless the Queen of Spain were likely to marry a French Prince, to which the British Government would, upon political grounds, have an unquestionable right to object, the marriage of the Queen of Spain was a Spanish question, with which no foreign Government was entitled to interfere, so as to control Queen Isabella's choice, whether that choice might fall upon a Bourbon or upon any other Prince. That the British Government would make no objection, therefore, to her selecting a descendant of Philip V., although it did not join in endeavouring to impose any such restriction upon her;

[merged small][ocr errors]

With reference to the engagements which France had entered into with England on the subject, Lord Palmerston says, in another despatch to Lord Normanby, dated October 31, 1846:

66

They were, first the engagement, originally and spontaneously made by His Majesty the King of the French, that no son of his should marry the Queen of Spain; and secondly, the engagement, also spontaneously taken by His Majesty and by his Minister, in September 1845, at Eu, that in no case should the Duke of Montpensier marry the Infanta until the Queen of Spain should have been married; and until, by her having had children, the prospect of a direct succession to the Spanish Crown should have been assured."

Whatever promises may have been made, and whatever expectations may have been raised, the result was, that in the course of the autumn of the present year it was made known throughout Europe that the Queen of Spain was about to marry her cousin, Don Francisco d'Assis, the eldest son of her uncle, Don Francisco de Paula, and that her sister, the Infanta, would at the same time bestow her hand upon the Duke of Montpensier, the youngest son of the King of the French.

The announcement of this dou

ble and simultaneous marriage was received with loud indignation by the press of England, but we think that the ground of opposition which was chiefly insisted upon will on examination be found untenable. It was declared to be a direct violation of the treaty of Utrecht, and contrary to the renunciations therein made by the Orleans branch of the French Bourbons of all future right and title to the Spanish Crown. But we think this is a mistaken view of the question. It appears to us to be clear that the great and main objects of the treaty of Utrecht were twofold. 1. To secure the Throne of Spain to Philip V., the grandson of Louis XIV. and his descendants. 2. To prevent the possibility of the union of the Crowns of France and Spain on the same head. Now neither of these objects was defeated by the Montpensier marriage. It cannot with any fairness be contended, that by the treaty of Utrecht all intermarriages were interdicted between the Royal families of France and Spain, for several such alliances took place during the last century without opposition or remonstrance. Let us take the three following instances:

mar

1. Louis I., King of Spain, the eldest son of Philip V., ried, in 1721, Louisa Elizabeth of Orleans, Mademoiselle de Montpensier, fourth daughter of the Regent Duke of Orleans.

2. The Infant Don Philip, Duke of Parma, son of Philip V., married, in 1739, Louisa Elizabeth of France, eldest daughter of Louis XV.

3. The Dauphin, son of Louis XV., married, in 1745, Maria Teresa Antonia, Infanta of Spain, daughter of Philip V.

The only contingency arising from the Montpensier marriage, which could militate against the object and intention of the treaty of Utrecht, would be the case of any issue of that marriage becoming entitled to the crowns of both France and Spain, through failure of any nearer claimants. This might happen, if all those who now stand between the Duke of Montpensier and the throne of France, as well as their issue, were to become extinct, and if the Queen of Spain were to die childless, or her issue were likewise to become extinct. In such an event a descendant of the Duke of Montpensier and the Infanta of Spain would become heir to both thrones. But then the treaty of Utrecht would at once come into operation, and effectually prevent such an union of the two crowns; and the proper time for discussing the provisions of that treaty will be when the contingency has arisen which it was framed to meet. The probabilities are at present too great against its occurrence to render it worth while to agitate the question.

There is no doubt, however, that public opinion in Europe was outraged by the mode in which this double marriage was brought about. It was universally believed that the Queen was not a free agent in a matter so deeply involving her future happiness; and that the husband provided for her was neither the object of her choice, nor likely to conciliate or deserve her love and esteem. That French influence was actively at work admits of no doubt; and in the anxiety to secure the hand of the Infanta for the Duke of Montpensier, neither Louis Philippe nor M. Guizot appears to have considered the feelings of the

youthful Queen. Indeed it is too obvious to require comment, that the less chance there was of a happy union between the Sovereign and her cousin, the more likelihood there was of the throne being eventually filled by the Duchess of Montpensier or her offspring. But we forbear to dwell on this the darkest side of the picture.

The Count de Montemolin (the son of Don Carlos, in whose favour his father abdicated his claim to the throne, as detailed in our last volume) had for some time been living at Bourges, in France, under a kind of surveillance. But thinking that the Queen's marriage afforded a favourable opportunity for once more appealing to the Spanish nation, he made his escape from Bourges in the evening of the 14th of September, and succeeded in reaching England soon afterwards. At the same time he caused the following proclamation to be issued:

"Spaniards,-My dignity and my sentiments render it my duty to await the result of events which I see without astonishment about to accomplish themselves in Spain; I could have wished to hold to what I announced to you in my manifesto of May 23, 1845. I then made known my principles; I told you I had no other desire than to draw our country from the abyss into which she is plunged, to bring about a lasting reconciliation between all parties, and to give you the peace and happiness of which you have so much need, and which you so well merit. The results have not responded to my efforts, and your hopes have been deceived.

"Your duty, and my word of honour, impose on us new efforts to fulfil our mission.

"Spaniards, the moment which

I have sought to avoid with so much care, at the price of your sacrifices and my own-that moment is at last come; it would be a disgrace for you, and a stain on me, to show ourselves less to-day than we have been up to this time in the opinion of Europe.

"I know no parties, I only see Spaniards, all capable of contributing powerfully along with me to the success of the great cause for which Providence reserves me. I therefore call you all to me; I hope in you all, and I have no fear of any one.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

Two days afterwards, the Count de Montemolin issued another proclamation, addressed especially to the Basques and Navarrese, exhorting them to rise and rally round the standard of their lawful prince. Not the slightest movement was occasioned by these manifestoes.

About the same time, Don Enrique, who was at Ghent, transmitted to the Spanish Cortes a public protest against the Queen's intended marriage with his brother; but soon after the event had happened, in a letter addressed to Her Majesty, he stated that he formally annulled his protest.

The announcement to the Cortes of both the intended Royal marriages took place on the 14th of September. Senor Isturitz made the official communication to both Chambers; and in the Senate no questions were asked by any of the members; but in the Congress, Senor Orense, one of the Progre sista party, who were supposed to be strongly opposed to the French alliance, rose and asked, "whether it was the determination that the marriage of the Infanta, the immediate successor to the Crown, should take place as soon as her Majesty should have issue? or whether it was to take place at the same time?" Senor Isturitz replied "The marriage of her Royal Highness the Infanta, the immediate successor to the Crown, will take place simultaneously with that of her Majesty." Senor Orense then said, that he would reserve what he intended to say until the

« AnteriorContinuar »