CAVITE, a fortified seaport, the capital of the province of Cavite, Luzon, Philippine Islands, and the seat of the principal Asiatic naval station of the United States, on a forked tongue of land in Manila Bay, 8 m. S. of the city of Manila. Pop. (1903) 4494; with the barrios of San Roque and Caridad (on the main peninsula), which are under the municipal government of Cavite (15,630). Cavite is the terminus of a railway which follows the shore of the bay from Manila. The northern part of the town, Sangley Point (one of the two forks of the main peninsula), is the principal coaling station of the U.S. fleet in Asiatic waters. The naval station proper and the old town of Cavite are on the south fork of the peninsula. Cavite’s buildings are mostly of stone, with upper storeys of wood; its streets are narrow and crooked. It has five churches (one of these is an independent Filipino church), and is the seat of a provincial high school. Cavite has long been the principal naval base of the Philippine Islands, and one of the four Spanish penitentiaries in the Islands was here. During the 19th century Cavite was the centre of political disturbances in the Philippines; in 1896 on the parade ground thirteen political prisoners were executed, and to their memory a monument was erected in 1906 at the head of the isthmus connecting with the main peninsula. The town was nearly destroyed by an earthquake in 1880. It was taken from the Spanish by an American squadron under Commodore George Dewey in May 1898.


CAVOUR, CAMILLO BENSO, Count (1810-1861), Italian statesman, was born at Turin on the 1st of August 1810. The Bensos, who belonged to the old Piedmontese feudal aristocracy, were a very ancient house, said to be descended from a Saxon warrior who settled at Santena in the 12th century and married a Piedmontese heiress; Camillo’s father, the marquis Michele, married a noble Genevese lady, and both he and his wife held offices in the household of Prince Borghese, the governor of Piedmont under Napoleon, and husband of the latter’s sister, Pauline Bonaparte. Being a younger son (his brother Gustavo was the eldest) Cavour was destined for the army, and when ten years old he entered the military academy at Turin. On leaving the college at the age of sixteen he was first of his class, and received a commission in the engineers. He spent the next five years in the army, residing at Ventimiglia, Genoa, and various Alpine fortresses to superintend defence works; but he spent his leisure hours in study, especially of the English language. He soon developed strongly marked Liberal tendencies and an uncompromising dislike for absolutism and clericalism, which, as he had not acquired the art of reticence, made him a suspect in the eyes of the police and of the reactionaries; at the same time he does not seem to have joined any secret society, for he was too loyal to conspire against the king whose uniform he wore, and he did not believe that the time was yet ripe for a revolution. But after the accession to the throne of Charles Albert, whom he always distrusted, he felt that his position in the army was intolerable, and resigned his commission (1831). From that moment we find him in the ranks of the opponents of the government, although his was always a loyal and straightforward opposition which held aloof from conspiracies. During the next few years he devoted himself to the study of political and social problems, to foreign travel, and to acquiring a thorough knowledge of practical agriculture. Cavour’s political ideas were greatly influenced by the July revolution of 1830 in France, which proved that an historic monarchy was not incompatible with Liberal principles, and he became more than ever convinced of the benefits of a constitutional monarchy as opposed both to despotism and to republicanism. But he was not affected by the doctrinaire Liberalism of the time, and his views were strengthened by his studies of the British constitution, of which he was a great admirer; he was even nicknamed “Milord Camillo.” He frequently visited Paris and London, where he plunged into the political and social questions of the day, and contributed among other essays two admirable and prophetic articles, one on the Irish question, in which he strongly defended the Union, and another on the Corn Laws. He applied his knowledge of agriculture to the management of his father’s estate at Leri, which he greatly improved, he founded the Piedmontese Agricultural Society, and took the lead in promoting the introduction of steam navigation, railways and factories into the country.

Thus his mind gradually evolved, and he began to dream dreams of a united Italy free of foreign influence, but owing to the reactionary policy of the Piedmontese government he was unable to take any active part in politics. In 1847, however, the psychological moment seemed to have arrived, for the new pope, Pius IX., showed marked Liberal tendencies and seemed ready to lead all the forces of Italian patriotism against the Austrian domination. The hopes of the Italian Liberals rose high and the so-called neo-Guelph party, represented by such men as Vincenzo Gioberti and Cesare Balbo, believed that an Italian confederation might be formed under the presidency of the pope. Cavour, although he realized that a really Liberal pope was an impossibility, saw the importance of the movement and the necessity of profiting by it. Together with Balbo, P. di Santa Rosa, and M. Castelli, he founded a newspaper at Turin called Il Risorgimento, which advocated the ideas of constitutional reform in Piedmont, with a view to preparing that country for an important role in the upheaval which seemed imminent. In January 1848 the revolution first broke out in Sicily. Cavour, in a speech before a delegation of journalists, declared that the king must take a decided line and grant his people a constitution. Strong pressure was brought to bear on Charles Albert, and after much hesitation he was induced to grant a charter of liberties (February 8, 1848). Cesare Balbo was called upon to form the first constitutional ministry; but Cavour was not offered a seat in it, being suspected by Liberals and Conservatives alike. He continued his journalistic activity, and his articles in the Risorgimento came to exercise great influence both on the king and on public opinion. When the news of the revolt of the Milanese against the Austrians, known as the Five Days, reached Turin on the 19th of March, Cavour felt that the time for Piedmont to act with energy had come, and advocated war against Austria. “After deliberately weighing each word,” he wrote, “we are bound in conscience to declare that only one path is open to the nation, the government, and the king: war, immediate war!” Piedmont was the only part of Italy enjoying a government at once national and independent, and if it did not hasten to the assistance of the Milanese in their desperate struggle, if possible before the Austrians were expelled, the monarchy could not survive. The situation was most critical, and even the British government was not friendly to Piedmont; but Cavour was prepared to face any danger rather than see his country inactive. In an article in the Risorgimento he declared that, while he never believed that material help was to be expected from England, he was convinced that she would not actively help Austria to crush the revolution, but that if she did “she would have against her a coalition not of princes, but of peoples.” Cavour’s article made such an impression that it put an end to the king’s vacillations, and a few days after its appearance war was declared (March 25).

For a few months patriotic and revolutionary enthusiasm carried all before it. In Hungary, in Germany, in Paris, in Vienna itself the revolution was triumphant; constitutions were granted, dynasties tottered and fell, and provisional governments were set up. In all parts of Italy, too, revolts broke out against the established order. But the Piedmontese army, although the troops behaved with gallantry, was no match for Austria’s veteran legions, and except in a few minor engagements, in one of which Cavour’s nephew Gustavo was killed, it was generally unsuccessful, and an armistice was concluded in the summer. In the meanwhile the elections were being held in Piedmont. Cavour himself was not returned until the supplementary elections in June, and he took his seat in parliament on the right as a Conservative. His parliamentary career was not at first very successful; he was not a ready speaker; his habit of talking French made Italian difficult for him, and, although French was at that time allowed in the chamber, he preferred to speak Italian. But he gradually developed a strong argumentative power, his speeches became models of concise reasoning, and he rose at times to the highest level of an eloquence which was never rhetorical. After the dissolution in January 1849, Cavour was not re-elected. The new parliament had to discuss, in the first instance, the all-important question of whether the campaign should be continued now that the armistice was about to expire. The king decided on a last desperate throw, and recommenced hostilities. On the 23rd of March the Piedmontese were totally defeated at Novara, a disaster which was followed immediately by the abdication of Charles Albert in favour of his son Victor Emmanuel II.

Although the new king was obliged to conclude peace with Austria and the Italian revolution was crushed, Cavour nevertheless did not despair; he believed that so long as the constitution was maintained in Piedmont, the Italian cause was safe. There were fresh elections in July, and this time Cavour was returned. He was still in the difficult position of a moderate Liberal at a time when there seemed to be room for none but reactionaries and conspirators, but by his consummate ability he convinced men that his attitude was the right one, and he made it triumph. His speech on the 7th of March 1850, in which he said that, “Piedmont, gathering to itself all the living forces of Italy, would be soon in a position to lead our mother-country to the high destinies to which she is called,” made a deep impression, for it struck the first note of encouragement after the dark days of the preceding year. He supported the ministry of which Massimo d’ Azeglio was president in its work of reform and restoration, and in October of the same year, on the death of Santa Rosa, he himself was appointed minister of agriculture, industry and commerce. In 1851 he also assumed the portfolio of finance, and devoted himself to the task of reorganizing the Piedmontese finances. By far the ablest man in the cabinet, he soon came to dominate it, and, in his anxiety to dominate the chamber as well, he negotiated the union of the Right Centre with the Left Centre (a manoeuvre known as the connubio), and promoted the election of Urbano Rattazzi to the presidency of the chamber. This, which he accomplished without d’ Azeglio’s knowledge, led to a split between that statesman and Cavour, and to the latter’s resignation. Cavour has been blamed for not informing his colleagues of the compact, but for public reasons it was not desirable that the connubio should be discussed before it was consummated. D’ Azeglio indeed bore no malice, and remained Cavour’s friend. Cavour made use of his freedom to visit England and France again, in order to sound public opinion on the Italian question. In London he found the leaders of both parties friendly, and Lord Palmerston told him that if the constitutional experiment in Piedmont succeeded the Italian despots were doomed. At this time Sir James Hudson was appointed British minister at Turin, where he became the intimate friend of Cavour and gave him valuable assistance. In Paris, Cavour had a long interview with Prince Louis Napoleon, then president of the republic, and he already foresaw the great part which that ruler was destined to play in Italian affairs. He also met several Italian exiles in France.

On Cavour’s return he found the country in the throes of a new cabinet crisis, in consequence of which, on d’ Azeglio’s recommendation, he was invited to form a ministry. By the 4th of November he was prime minister, a position which he held with two short interruptions until his death. He devoted the first years of his premiership to developing the economic resources of the country; but in preparing it for greater destinies, he had to meet the heavy expenditure by increased taxation, and some of his measures made him the object of hostile demonstrations, although he soon outlived his unpopularity. Cavour’s first international difficulty was with Austria; after the abortive rising at Milan in February 1853, the Austrian government, in addition to other measures of repression, confiscated the estates of those Lombards who had become naturalized Piedmontese, although they had nothing to do with the outbreak. Cavour took a strong line on this question, and on Austria’s refusal to withdraw the obnoxious decree, he recalled the Piedmontese minister from Vienna, thus by his very audacity winning the sympathy of the Western powers.

Then followed the Crimean War, in which Cavour first showed his extraoidinary political insight and diplomatic genius. The first suggestion of Piedmontese co-operation is usually believed to have come from England, who desired the Italian contingent, not only as material assistance, but also in order to reduce the overwhelming French preponderance. From the Piedmontese point of view there were several reasons why Cavour should desire his country to participate in the campaign. Firstly, it was advisable to use every opportunity of making the Italian question an international one; secondly, by joining the alliance Piedmont would place the Western powers under an obligation; thirdly, Cavour, like Balbo, believed that the Italian question was bound up with the Eastern problem, and as Austria was demanding the permission of the powers to occupy Alessandria, as a guarantee that Piedmont would not profit by the war in the East to create trouble in Italy, Piedmontese participation would in itself prove the best guarantee; and finally, as he always looked to Italy and not merely to Piedmont, he felt that, having proved to Europe that Italians could combine order with liberty, it remained to show that they were capable of fighting as well. But there were serious difficulties in the way. Had Austria joined the allies, as at one time seemed probable, Sardinia’s position fighting by her side would have been an impossible one. On the other hand, Piedmont could not demand definite promises of future aid from the Western powers as some politicians desired, because these would never have been given, lest Austria should be offended and driven into the arms of Russia. Then, both the extreme Conservatives and the extreme Radicals were opposed to expenditure on foreign adventures for which they could see no use. In all these difficulties, however, Cavour was loyally supported by the king, who saw the advantages of Piedmontese participation, even if unattended by definite promises. General Dabormida, the minister of foreign affairs, disapproved of this policy and resigned. The vacant portfolio was offered to d’ Azeglio, who refused it; whereupon Cavour assumed it himself. On the same day (January 10, 1855) the treaty with France and England was signed, and shortly afterwards 15,000 Piedmontese troops under General La Marmora were despatched to the Crimea.

Events at first seemed to justify the fears of Cavour’s opponents. Cholera attacked the Piedmontese soldiers, who for a long time had no occasion to distinguish themselves in action; public opinion became despondent and began to blame Cavour, and even he himself lost heart. Then came the news of the battle of the Tchernaya, fought and won by the Italians, which turned sadness and doubt into jubilation. Joy was felt throughout Italy, especially at Milan, where the victory was the first sign of daylight amid the gloom caused by the return of the Austrians. Everyone realized that the Piedmontese contingent was fighting Italy’s battles. But to Cavour the announcement that Russia had accepted Austrian mediation (January 16, 1856) was a great disappointment. He had always hoped that if the war continued Austria would be forced to side with Russia in return for the aid given by the emperor Nicholas in suppressing the Hungarian revolt in 1849, and the Western powers would then have an opportunity of helping the Italian cause. He sent a memorandum, at Napoleon’s request, to Count Walewski, the French minister of foreign affairs, setting forth a kind of minimum programme of Piedmont’s claims. On the summoning of the congress of Paris at the conclusion of the war, Cavour first proposed that d’ Azeglio should represent Piedmont, and on the latter’s refusal decided to go himself. After much discussion, and in spite of the opposition of Austria, who as mediator occupied a predominant position, behaving “as though she had taken Sevastopol,” Cavour obtained that Piedmont should be treated as one of the great powers. Although he did not expect that the congress would liberate Italy, yet by his marvellous diplomatic skill, far superior to that of his colleagues, he first succeeded in isolating Austria, secondly in indirectly compromising Napoleon in the Italian question, and thirdly in getting the wretched conditions of Italy discussed by the representatives of the great powers, who declared that some remedy to that state of things was necessary, not in the interests of Italy alone, but of all Europe. A scheme of reform proposed by Count Walewski gave Cavour the opportunity to plead the Italian cause, and from that moment it was manifest to all that the liberation of Italy was personified in him, the statesman who came to hold all the strings of European politics in his hands.

Cavour’s chief measure of internal reform during this period was a bill for suppressing all monastic orders unconnected with education, preaching or charity; this aroused strong opposition from the extremists of both parties and also from the king, and led to the minister’s resignation. But he was soon recalled, for the country could not do without him, and the bill was passed (May 29, 1855).