« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »
4th. It met again on October 4th. The Government sent in the budget, and several plans for an intended revenue reform were submitted to the House. The Czechic deputies early in the session repeated their old tactics of having an address read refusing to take part in the proceedings. The President, Dr. Rechbauer, thereupon declared their seats vacant. The Eastern question kept the Austrian diplomatists very busy during the year, Austria being, by its position and the composition of its population, one of the nations of Europe most interested in the struggle. Even during the rebellion in the Herzegovina, the Slavic population of the Austrian Empire very plainly expressed their sympathies for their struggling brethren in Turkey. After Servia and Montenegro had taken up arms in the movement for a union of all the Slavic tribes, the situation became critical for Austria, as her slavic population appeared to be eager to join in the war. On the other hand, the Government endeavored to preserve the strictest neutrality,
completely blockading the Turkish border. In the negotiations which ensued between the Turkish Government and the great powers of Europe, Austria took a prominent part. In the middle of September it declared its concurrence in the Anglo-Russian peace proposals to be submitted to Turkey. At the close of September the Czar Alexander of Russia addressed along autograph letter to the Emperor, after having previously (in June) had a conference with him at Prague. Both the contents of the letter and the proceedings of the conference remained a secret, although it was generally surmised that in his letter the Czar proposed the joint occupation of the Christian provinces by the two powers—Bulgaria by
Russia, and Bosnia and the Herzegovina by Austria—in order to secure in this manner proper guarantees for the reforms to be proposed. The Emperor of Austria, in his answer to this letter, which also remained a secret, is supposed to have stated that every step taken in this matter must be characterized by the same unity which had marked the previous steps of the great powers, and that it therefore depended upon the consent of all the powers whether the Porte should be proceeded against in such a manner, and to whom the execution of this plan should be committed. In October the Czar sent another letter to the Emperor, which was believed to renew his former propositions. A strong party, led by the Archduke Albert, was working for the same end in Austria. Immediately after the assembling of the Reichstag in October two interpellations were addressed to the Government, one from the Germans and one from the Slavi. On October 27th Prince Auersperg, the president of the ministry, replied to both. In answer to the Germans, he stated that, although the Constitution contained no clause regarding the interference of the cisLeithan Government with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, still such interference was warranted by the reaction of the foreign policy upon home affairs. The Government had always fulfilled its duties in this respect, and received most willing information from the Minister of Foreign Affairs on every phase of the political situation. A more direct interference had not been warranted, as the ministerial
rogramme, repeatedly approved by the cis
eithan Government and the delegations, had been strictly carried out. The cis-Leithan Government would also state in the present phase of the Oriental question that the Minister of Foreign Affairs had, by a firm peace policy, done much to preserve the peace of the empire and of Europe in general. The policy of the empire was, above all, the preservation of peace, which in itself excluded the idea of annexation of new territory. No one could appreciate the blessings of peace more than the Government. The entire foreign policy of Austria was a proof of the consistency of this desire. The Government, therefore, was in a position to declare that the Minister of Foreign Affairs, in full accord with the Government, would also, under the circumstances mentioned in the interpellation, strive in the first place to secure peace, and would use every means to preserve it for the empire. At the same time no doubt need be entertained but that these attempts would find their natural limit in the duty to guard the safety and the interests of the empire at all times and under all circumstances. A programme which would demand peace without this natural limitation would expose the interests of the monarchy in advance, and would be least adapted to secure peace. This was the idea on which the foreign policy of the empire had been and still was based, and which the Government approved. In conclusion, he (Prince Auersperg) wished to add that the Minister of Foreign Affairs was determined not to let himself be deterred from the course once taken by any warlike demonstrations, or any manifestations which might injure the authority of the empire. In answer to the Slavic interpellation, he stated that it was not the business of the Minister of Foreign Affairs to consider the interests of different races, but to keep in view the interests of the whole monarchy, particularly as the interests of the whole were also the interests of each member of the monarchy. From the beginning of the Oriental difficulties the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had had, in full accord with the Government, two objects constantly in view: the preservation of European peace, and the improvement of the condition of the Christian population of Turkey. This policy, which sought to give to the Christians of the East peace and civilization, was in the interest of the entire monarchy. The Government had heretofore pursued this policy, and would continue it in future. TÉ. speech created great excitement in the House, as many of the deputies thought that the Government also considered the interpellation of the deputies as one of those manifestations by which it would not let its policy be influenced. Prince Auersperg in consequence made the declaration, on October 30th, that he had only referred to demonstrations like those of the students of Hungary (see HUNGARY). A spirited debate followed from November 4th to November 7th in the House, in which the policy of the Government was defended by two speakers only, the deputy Plener, of the Constitutional Party, and the most bitter opponent of the entire Constitution, Count Hohenwart, formerly President of the ministry. The opposition had *host of speakers, most of whom, however, difsored in the policy they wished to see pursued. Some proposed to join Russia against Turkey, some wished to aid Turkey against Russia, and others advocated peace at any cost. M. Fanderik, the leader of the Slavi, demanded of the Government that it should take the part of the oppressed Slavi in Turkey, and even went *far as to say that the Austrian Slavi would never fight against Russia. Count Hohenwart in his speech declared himself satisfied with the declaration of the Government that it would protect the interests and honor of Ausoia with the entire force of the Government is necessary, and laid particular stress upon the fact that the Government must consider the interests of the entire monarchy only, and not of any particular race. In June the Minister of War, Baron von Roller, resigned his office. The Emperor, in *pting his resignation, conferred upon him to grand cross of St. Stephen in recognition of his eminent services. The Emperor apPointed in his place Count Bylandt-Rheidt.
The Minister of Finance, Baron von Holzgethan, died June 20th, and was replaced by Baron von Hofmann, who had occupied the position of chief of a section in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The seventeen provincial Diets of cis-Leithan Austria met on March 1st. In none of them was any business of importance transacted, with the exception of the Tyrol. This Diet, in which the Catholics have a decided majority, protested against the encroachment upon the religion of the province on the part of the Government, by authorizing the organization of Protestant congregations. This demonstration was immediately answered by the Government by the closing of the Diet. The Liberal members of the Diet also drew up a document protesting against the clerical demonstration. At the elections for the Diet in Galicia, held in October, the Ruthenians, forming the Constitutional party in that province, were completely defeated by the Poles.
During the month of February the provinces of Upper Austria and Moravia were visited by most disastrous floods, in which a large number of houses were destroyed. A severe shock of earthquake was felt on January 17th, through a large part of the empire, affecting the Danube basin from Passau in Bavaria to Presburg in Hungary. The shock was felt at Wittingal, in Bohemia, Scheletau in Moravia, Budweis, Trebitsch, Tischnowitz, and Prerau, and elsewhere to the north, while the southern limits were marked by Odenburg, Kindberg, and the Noric Alps. Rents were visible in many houses in Vienna. Several chimneys had fallen. The river Danube receded from the right bank and passed in a great wave to the other side.
The negotiations with Hungary continued during the year. On January 24th the House resolved to request the Government “to protect with firmness and decision the interests of Austria proper in the negotiations; ” while the Herrenhaus, on two different occasions during the same month, resolved “not to sanction any further loosening of the union of the two parts of the monarchy, nor anything that would cause a further taxation of cis-Leithania, or an injury to the credit system. A new commercial treaty with Roumania was passed on February 27th. In the beginning of October the Emperor created the following new life-members of the Herrenhaus: The former Minister of War, Baron von Koller; ex-Governor Mamula, of Dalmatia; M. Moser, the Governor of the “Boden-Credit-Anstalt; ” the Prelate Charles, of the Stift Mölk; two chiefs of sections, Wehli, of the Ministry of the Interior, and Wesque von Püttlingen, of the Foreign Office; Ståhlin, the President of the Court of Administration; Napadievitch, the Ruthenian President of the Senate of the Supreme Court; and Apfaltern, Count Thun, and the Italian Pace, to represent the large real-estate owners.
The delegations of the two parts of the em. pire met on May 15th, in Pesth. The Govern. ment introduced the budget for the entire monarchy for 1877. On the 18th the Em. peror received the delegations in Pesth, and in his answer to the addresses of the two presidents stated that the events in the Eas had shown him clearly the necessity of strength ening the bonds of union between the two part of the empire. He also expressed the hop that the efforts of the Northern powers fo peace would be crowned with success. Thi Government had proposed an additional item of 7,000,000 florins in the budget of the Min istry of War. This latter proposition met with considerable opposition, but the entire budge as proposed by the Government was finally passed. The delegations adjourned on thi 2d of June.
BAER, KARL ERNst voN, a Russian naturalist, born in Esthonia, February 17 (29), 1792; died November 29, 1876. His father wished him to prepare himself for a military career, but in 1810 he went to the University of Dorpat, where he studied medicine, and graduated in 1814. He soon after set out on a scientific journey through Germany, and in Würzburg devoted himself to the study of zoötomy. In 1819 he was appointed Extraordinary and in 1822 Ordinary Professor of Zootomy in Königsberg, where he also formed the Zoological Museum. In 1829 he went to St. Petersburg as member of the Imperial Academy and Professor of Zootomy, but returned to Königsberg in 1830, where he remained until 1834, when he again went to St. Petersburg. In 1837 he was commissioned by the Imperial Academy to make a voyage of exploration to Lapland and Nova Zembla. From this journey he brought home a large number of plants, but owing to various causes he was unable to execute his original project of visiting the icebergs on the northern coast of Nova Zembla. The results of this journey he described in the Bulletin Scientifique of the Imperial Academy. In 1851–56 he was commissioned by the Government to examine the fisheries in Peipus Lake, in the Baltic and in the Caspian Sea, on which examination he ublished a work of four volumes. In 1861 e and Rudolf Wagner called a meeting of anthropologists in Göttingen. In 1862 he resigned as a member of the Academy, but was immediately elected an honorary member. He was the author of a large number of works, of which the following are the most important: “De ovi mammalium et hominis genesi" (1827); “Untersuchungen über die Gefässverbindung zwischen Mutter und Frucht in den Säugethieren” (1828); “Ueber die Ent
wickelungsgeschichte der Thiere, Beobach, tungen und Reflexionen” (2 vols., 1828–37. this work remained unfinished ; Baer re. ceived for it, in 1831, the golden medal of the Academy of Sciences in Paris); “Historisch: Fragen mit Hülfe der Naturwissenschafter beantwortet” (1874); and “Studien auf dem Gebiet der Naturwissenschaften" (1874). He also contributed a large number of articles to Pander's Beiträge zur Naturkunde, Burdach's Physiologie, Meckel and Müller's Arehiv für Physiologie, and to the publications of the Academy of St. Petersburg. The “Kaspisch: Studien,” which appeared in the latter, were published separately, and are particularly re. markable as the best description of the Caspian Sea. He published, together with Helmersen “Beiträge zur Kunde des Russischen Reichs' (vols. i.-xvi., 1889–73). See his “Autobiogra. phy” (1866). BAKUNIN, Michael, a Russian politicial and agitator, born in 1814; died July 1, 1876. He was educated in the School for Cadets in St. Petersburg, and, having passed his exami nation, received an appointment as ensign in the artillery. . He soon resigned this position in order to devote himself to philosophica
studies. In 1841 he went to Berlin, where ht
became a pupil of Hegel. The following yeal he went to Dresden, where he continued li studies under Arnold Ruge, and contributed philosophical essay under the nom de plum of Jules Elisard to the Deutsche Jahrbücher In 1843 he went to Paris, where he kept up in timate relations with the Polish refugees. H. then passed to Switzerland, where he came into connection with the communist and socialis societies. This caused the Russian Governmen to order him to return home, but he declined to obey. In 1847 he delivered in the Polish ban quet in Paris a speech, in which he propos
the simultaneous rising of the Russians and the Poles against the authority of the Emperor. In consequence of this speech the Russian Government succeeded in obtaining his expulsion from France. Having fled to Brussels, he found himself in great danger in consequence of a reward of 10,000 rubles offered for him by the Russian Government. He returned to Paris after the Revolution of February, 1848, and in June of the same year took part in the Slavic Congress at Prague, and the revolutionary movements succeeding it. He then went to Berlin, but soon was ordered to leave the Prussian dominions. In March, 1849, he went to Dresden, where he became one of the organizers and leaders of the riots of that year. After their suppression he was compelled to flee, and on May 10th was captured in Chemnitz, together with Heubner. He was brought to the fortress of Königstein, and in May, 1850, was sentenced to death. His sentence was, however, commuted to imprisonment for life, and in June of the same year he was delivered to Austria. Here he was also sentenced to death, which was again changed to imprisonment for life, and he was then handed over to Russia, there to be again tried for political of. fenses. After having spent several years in the fortress at St. Petersburg, he was transported to Eastern Siberia. Here he spent several years as a penal colonist, and then received permission from the Governor-General Korsakoff to settle in the Russian territory of the Amoor. From there he succeeded in escaping to Japan on an American vessel, and thence he went by way of California to London. He immediately resumed his political activity, inciting the Russians and the Poles in numerous addresses and pamphlets to rise against the Government and the nobility, and to form a large Slavic federal republic. He entered into communication with Alexander Herzen and Ogarev, and took part in the publication of the journal Kolokol; but in the end even fell out with his own party by the excess of his radicalism. In 1863 he went to Stockholm, to aid the expeditions against the Baltic provinces, fitted out by Russians and Poles. After the failure of this plan he went to Switzerland, where he for some time took part in the work of the “International.” His attempt to create in this union of working-men a secret society with the object of bringing about a general anarchy brought him into conflict with the other leaders of the union, and in the Congress of Hague, in 1872, he was with a large number of his friends formally expelled from the "International,” since which time he has been bitterly attacked in the radical press. His influence on the young men of Russia continued for some time, but was also gone at the time of his death. In 1873 a iń. arose between him and Marx, and since then he ceased entirely to labor for the “International,” and retired to private life. BALARD, ANToINE JérôME, a French
chemist, born September 30, 1802; died at the close of March, 1876. He was successively professor at the Royal College, at the School of Pharmacy, and finally at the Faculty of Sciences, in Montpellier. The discovery of bromine, in 1826, gained for him great reputation. He was soon after called to Paris to take the place of Thénard as Professor of Chemistry in the Faculty of Sciences. In 1844 he was elected a member of the Academy of Sciences. He was soon after appointed Master of Conferences in the Normal School, and in 1861 succeeded M. Pélouze as Professor of Chemistry in the College of France. Besides his discovery of bromine, he made other useful and interesting discoveries, as extracting the sulphate of soda directly from the sea-water. He did not write any books, but furnished a large number of articles to the Annales de Physique et de Chimie and to the Mémoires of the Academy of Sciences. He exhibited chemical products at the Universal Exhibition of London in 1851, and was one of the jurors in the Exhibition of Paris in 1855, and at London in 1862. In 1868 he was appointed Inspector-General of Superior Instruction, and Honorary Professor in the Faculty of Sciences in Paris. He was decorated with the cross of the Legion of Honor in 1887, was created an officer in 1855, and a commander in 1863. BALDASSERONI, GiovaNNI, an Italian statesman, born in Leghorn in 1790; died October 19, 1876. After holding several offices in the customs service in the grand-duchy of Tuscany, he was appointed administrator of finances. In this position he gained the confidence of the grand-duke to such a degree that in 1845 he was appointed councilor of state, and was intrusted with the actual direction of the finances of the country, although he was not created director of the finances until 1847. In the ministerial crises of 1847 and 1848 he retained his position under all the varying governments. After having been appointed senator, he was compelled to retire with the ministry of Ridolfi by the republican demonstration of July 30, 1848. For a time he did not take part in public affairs, but on May 24, 1849, Leopold II. appointed him president of the new conservative ministry, while at the same time he took charge of the ministry of finance. In this position he remained until the overthrow of the grand-duke in 1859. He wrote a biography of the Grand-duke Leopold II. (1871). BANDEL, Joseph ERNst von, a German sculptor, born May 17, 1800; died September 25, 1876. He received his first instruction in art in Nuremberg, and subsequently attended the Art Academy in Munich. As early as 1820 he began to furnish for the Art Academy of Munich well-executed works, among which a statue of Charitas in marble attracted special attention by its delicacy and artistic beauty. Among the marble busts made by him, that of King Maximilian of Bavaria was noticeable. But the great work of his life was the colossal statue of Arminius, or Hermann, the Deliverer of Germany, on the Grotenburg, near Detmold. It was begun as early as 1835, but suspended in 1841, in consequence of the exhaustion of his funds. In spite of frequent and bitter disappointment, Bandel never lost the hope of completing a work which he looked on as the first national monument of the great battle in the Teutoburg Forest. After sacrificing his entire private property in the prosecution of his labors, he saw at length, in 1871, his work nearly finished. Then the Imperial Government of Germany made an appropriation of 10,000 thalers for its entire completion, and on August 17, 1875, the statue was unveiled in the presence of the German Emperor, a number of German princes, and a vast concourse of people from all parts of the empire. Simultaneously with the unveiling of the statue on the Grotenburg, enthusiastic meetings in commemoration of the event which this statue was to celebrate took place in all the large cities of Germany. Even in foreign countries, as in the United States, the German population took part in the celebration by sending telegrams to the Emperor and Bandel, and by apo: addresses. The whole statue weighs 6,570 kilogrammes (one kilogramme = 2.20 lbs.), of which 10,588 kilogrammes are copper, 63,076 wrought-iron, and 2,906 cast-iron. The height of the statue is 17.3 metres up to the top of the helmet, 19 metres to the end of the extended right hand, and 26 metres to the end of the uplifted sword. The entire monument, therefore, inclusive of the foundation, 31.4 metres high, will attain the extraordinary height of 57.4 metres, or 183 feet. (For a full account of the statue, and the ceremony of unveiling it, see ANNUAL CycloPAEDIA for 1875, page 355.) Among the other works of Bandel, the following are particularly noteworthy: “Amor and Psyche,” “Venus,” and the monument on the grave of Herr von Langer, the Director of the Royal Art Academy in Munich. Bandel was peculiarly noted for his works in marble, in the artistic finish of which he is ranked by critics among the best sculptors of modern times. In 1846 he published, with Massmann, “Der Exsterstein in Westfalen.” BAPTISTS. I. REGULAR BAptists IN The UNITED STATEs.-In the following table is given a summary of the statistics of the Baptist churches in the United States for 1875, as they appeared in the American Baptist Year-Book for 1876 (published in January, 1876). The decrease from the previous year which is apparent in some of the items is explained by the fact that the anti-mission Baptists, included in the tables of the previous years, were omitted in the present one. They number 41,454 members. Had they been included, the table would have shown an increase of 95,583 members. The number of additions by baptism during the year was 32,515:
The annual meeting of the American Baptist Publication Society was held at Buffalo, N. Y., May 25th. The report stated that the total receipts of the society for the year ending March 1, 1876, had been $564,064.05. Of this, $78,699.42 were received in the Benevolent Department, leaving $490,364.63 as the amount received in the Business Deartment. Of the latter sum, $180,203.57 ad been given specifically for the publication building, leaving the actual ordinary business receipts of the year, $310,161.06. The new building for the publication-house in Philadelphia had been finished, at a total cost for ground, building, and furniture, of $258,586.68. all of which was either paid or provided for and was formally opened February 29, 1876. Eighteen new publications had been added to the list of the society, of which 57,300 copies had been printed. The total number of publi: cations on the catalogue of the society, March 1, 1876, was 1,174. The Missionary Department of the society had continued the Bible and Sunday-school work at Rome, Italy, and had sustained a general Sunday-school secre: tary and State Sunday-school missionaries an colporteurs in different States and Territories.