1828
THE time for undisturbed intervention in the East was most auspicious for Russia. Peace with Persia was concluded early in the year. By the treaty of Peace of Tourkmanchay Tourkmanchay, Fet Aly of Persia ceded to Russia the provinces of Erivan and Nakhitchevan and paid an indemnity of 20,000,000 roubles. The river Araxes was recognized as the frontier of both states. England's ascendency in Persia was effectually set at naught. Even in China Emperor Taouk-Wang felt encouraged to issue edicts prohibiting England's pernicious opium trade on the Chinese coast. Russia's armies were now let loose on Turkey.
In the meanwhile, the Greeks profited by the Turkish check at Navarino to Independence of Greece assert themselves as an independent people. On January 18, Capodistrias, the former Prime Minister of Russia, was summoned from Geneva and made president of the Greek republic. His term of office was to last seven Capodistrias summoned years. This eminent statesman justified his selection by immediate beneficent measures. A grand council of state was established and a national bank opened in Athens. With the help of France, immunity from further incursions from the Turks was practically assured. To preserve the status quo in Greece, Russia undertook to limit its single handed war on Russia's double game Turkey to operations on the mainland and in the Black Sea. Within the waters of the Mediterranean the Czar proposed to continue as an armed neutral in harmony with the other Powers under the treaty of London, and, to allay the apprehensions of Austria, the Russian forces in the Balkans were ordered to carry their line of operations as far as possible from Austria's sphere of influence. A still more effectual check on Austria was secured by the Czar's secret encouragement of French aspirations toward the Rhine. Charles X. exposed the plot when he said: "If the Czar attacks Understanding with France Austria, I will hold myself in reserve and regulate my conduct according to circumstances. If Austria attacks, I will instantly march against her." As Prince Metternich put it, "The two powers were at one: France against the European status quo; Russia against that of the Orient."
Although the recent Turkish concessions to Russia left to the Czar no ground for war, a pretext was supplied by Sultan Mahmoud himself. With true Turkish infatuation he chose this moment to issue a direct challenge to Russia. The Czar was denounced as the instigator of the Greek rebellion, Holy War proclaimed in Turkey and the arch enemy of Islam. The treaty of Akerman was declared null and void. A holy war was proclaimed against the Muscovites. "The Turk does not count his enemies. If all the unbelievers together unite against us we will enter on the war as a sacred duty, and trust to Allah for help." This proclamation was followed by the expulsion of all Christians from Constantinople. Unfortunately for the Sultan, his recent massacre of the Janizaries deprived him of the flower of his troops, and the reorganization Russia declares war of the Turkish army, which was the motive of that act, was only under way. For seven years the Russians had been preparing for this war. Nicholas lost no time in answering the Sultan's challenge. He replied with a declaration of war on April 26. Field Marshal Wittgenstein crossed the Pruth, while Paskievitch entered Asia Minor. The Russian troops overran the Roumanian provinces, Wallachia and Moldavia. The Danube was crossed early in June, under the eyes of the Czar. Unable to meet their enemy in the open field, the Turks withdrew into their strongholds, Ibraila and Silistria on the Early success Danube, Varna and Shumla in the Balkans. The Russians besieged and stormed Ibraila, and thence pushed on through the Dubrudsha toward the Black Sea. In the meanwhile Paskievitch in Asia Minor defeated two Turkish armies and captured Erzeroum.
After these early successes the Russian operations began to lag. The Czar's presence at headquarters was a source of embarrassment rather than of strength. Wittgenstein committed the error of dividing his army into three slender columns. Too weak to conduct forward operations, they were held in check before Silistria, Varna and Shumla. The Russian transport service, none too good at best, collapsed under the threefold strain. The ill-fed soldiers wasted away by thousands. At length Homer Brionis, the commandant Brionis victorious of Shumla, took advantage of the weakness of his besiegers. On September 24 he broke out of Shumla and marched to the relief of Varna. The Czar, notwithstanding the evident weakness of his troops, ordered his cousin, Eugene of Wurtemberg, to check the Turkish advance with a frontal attack. The result was a severe defeat. Had Brionis marched onward Varna would have Surrender of Varna been relieved. He clung to Shumla, however, and the Turks at Varna were forced to surrender. It was late in autumn now, and cold weather put a stop to the campaign for the year. The display of military weakness seriously injured the prestige of Russia. The manifold mistakes of this campaign have been unsparingly laid bare in a famous monograph of Moltke. Henceforth the successful prosecution of the war became a sine quâ non for Russia.
During the progress of these events, French forces were landed in Greece. They occupied Navarino, Patras and Modon. The Turks gave in and consented Turks evacuate Morea to evacuate the Morea. In France, the ultra-royalist measures of Charles X. gave rise to an ever growing spirit of dissatisfaction. The death of Manuel, the outcast of the Chambers, was made the occasion of a great public demonstration. The coalition of Liberals with a faction of Royalists opposed to the Ministry had a brilliant triumph. Villèle's Cabinet offered to resign. Instead of that, the King placed Martignac above him. "You are deserting M. Villèle," said the Princess Royal to the King. "It is your first step downward from the throne." The Duc de Broglie wrote: "Should we succeed, after the fall of the present Ministry, in getting through the Vacillation in France year tranquilly, it will be a triumphant success." By way of concession to the Liberals, a royal edict suppressed all the educational institutions maintained by the Society of Jesus. The effect of this measure was offset later in the year by renewed imprisonment and a heavy fine inflicted upon Béranger for writing political songs.
Latin attempts at parliamentary government in America were productive of even more discouraging results. In the Argentine Republic, the army, after defeating the Brazilians, was led against its own government by General Lavalle. The administration was overturned and President Dorrego was shot. South American revolutions General Rosas became the leader of the Federalist forces and took the field against the revolutionists. In Chile, the different parties contending for the government patched up a precarious peace which was not destined to last long. In Colombia, the Nueva Granada of the Spaniards, Bolivar clung to the dictatorship. A new proclamation of dictatorial powers was issued by him on February 10. Soon afterward an insurrection broke out against him led by Peadella. Scarcely had this uprising been quelled when an attempt was made to kill Bolivar at his seat of government. Henceforth the history of Latin America degenerated into an endless series of revolutions and counter-revolutions. The only real strength supplied to the various republican governments, so called, was that derived from strong personal characters, yielding one-man power. General Mitré, the great statesman and Mitré's résumé historian of South America, has drawn up this striking résumé of the fate of the foremost leaders of Spanish American revolutions. Their story is the quintessence of the subsequent turbulent career of Latin America during the Nineteenth Century.
"The first revolutionists of La Paz and of Quito died on the scaffold. Miranda, the apostle of liberty, betrayed by his own people, died, alone and naked, in a dungeon. Moreno, the priest of the Argentine revolution, and the teacher of the democratic idea, died at sea, and found a grave in the ocean. Hidalgo, the first popular leader of Mexico, was executed as a criminal. Belgrano, the first champion of Argentine independence, who saved the revolution, died obscurely, while civil war raged around him. O'Higgins, the hero of Chile, died in exile, as Carrera, his rival, had done before him. Iturbide, the real liberator of Mexico, died a victim to his own ambition. Montufar, the leader of the revolution at Quito, and his The gratitude of republics comrade Villavicencio, the promoter of that of Cartagena, were strangled. The first presidents of New Granada, Lozano and Torres, fell sacrifices to colonial terrorism. Piar, who found the true base for the insurrection in Colombia, was shot by Bolivar, to whom he had shown the way to victory. Rivadavia, the civil genius of South America, who gave form to her representative institutions, died in exile. Sucre, the conqueror of Ayacucho, was murdered by his own men on a lonely road. Bolivar and San Martin died in exile."
In North America, likewise, the radical issues between the Northern and Southern States produced ever more dissensions and discord. The question of Dissension in North America State sovereignty was prominent in the discussion of the tariff law of 1828, and assumed more and more a sectional aspect. The North had grown rich and prosperous; when under free trade her energies were directed to agriculture and commerce. This was the more emphasized when, under a protective policy, her labor and her capital were devoted to the development of manufactures. The Southern States had originally desired a protective policy for their own supposed advantage; now they demanded free trade for the same reason. But the North had put much money into manufactures, and therefore demanded that Congress, which had placed her in this position, should protect her in it. So the tariff of 1828, the highest adopted in the United States up to that time, was a more comprehensive New tariff measure than any which preceded it, and was adjusted throughout to encourage Northern industry. New England was largely at one on this subject, and the Middle and Western States were practically united. Thus it became a question of party politics. From the tariff of 1828 dates a new era in American Federal legislation. The division between the North and the North vs. South South began. Led by Daniel Webster, the New England States became advocates of the protective system. The question, from being a national issue, became distinctly sectional.
State sovereignty was the most important problem that presented itself Injustice to Indians during John Quincy Adams's administration. The trouble with the Creek and Cherokee Indians in Georgia brought this issue to the front. These tribes were now partially civilized, and were tilling their lands in contentment. Although they held their lands under treaty with the United States, Georgia sought to eject them. Instead of protecting the Indians the national State rights precedent government allowed Georgia to have its way and sent them to the Indian Territory. Thus was an individual State permitted to act in defiance of the national government.