of the legitimists abstained from voting on the ground that the right of the Grand Duke to the throne could not be affected by the vote of a popular legislature. Groundless fear on the part of others kept them from the polls, or, if they voted, led them to do so against their convictions. But, he concludes, as far as can be ascertained the vote of union represented the desire of the overwhelming majority of the inhabitants of the Duchy.1 Even the officers of the Tuscan army appear to have been wholly against the restoration of the Grand Duke.2

In other duchies the Sardinian commissioners, on retiring, had been appointed by the provisional governments as dictators or governors, and decrees convoking the primary assemblies had been at once issued. Everywhere perfect order was enjoined in order that nothing should detract from the authoritative character of the vote and its effect on Europe. Throughout Italy the elections were orderly and decisive. While there were Sardinian troops in Modena, placed there by Boncompagni to maintain order, there were no charges of coercion or disorder. Everywhere the victory of the Sardinian party was unquestionable.

In Tuscany the delegates, through birth, scientific, literary or industrial pursuits, were among the chief citizens of the province. The Tuscan Assembly thus elected considered itself a representative rather than a deliberative body, the deputies having been elected on the platform of union. The assembly of 171 delegates met on August 11. After high mass in Santa Croce where divine inspiration was invoked for the deliberations of the assembly, the delegates marched to the Palazzo Vecchio where the Hall of the Cinque Cento had been prepared for their sittings. The crowds collected in the streets greeted them with wild enthusiasm as they passed, preceded by ministers of state, and followed by the Municipal officials of Florence. Bands played, cannon boomed. The session opened at 10 A. M. with an address read by Ricasoli as President of the Council of Ministers, explaining the political situation. The eldest member was elected president, the four youngest members were named secretaries 5 and the usual formalities of verification of powers and adoption of rules were carried out.

The method of voting was as follows. Each deputy was given two small

1 The Grand Duke had abdicated in favor of his son on August 4, but it was too late to affect the result.

2 Corbett forwarded a letter signed by them protesting against charges of attachment to the old dynasty. Parliamentary Papers [2609], p. 270.

8 Corbett to Russell, Parliamentary Papers [2609], p. 54.

Their names are given in full in Le assemblee del risorgimento, vol. 5, p. 657, “To Florentines ever mindful of their glorious past, it seemed as if three centuries and a half had been bridged; for when the clerk read the rolls, name after name rang out of the men who had made Florence great." Thayer, vol. 2, p. 132.

Corbett to Russell, August 11, Parliamentary Papers [2609], p. 55.

balls; one black, the other white. The black signified approval. As their names were called in alphabetical order, each deputy advanced to the urn, dropped in the ball representing his vote and dropped the discarded ball into another urn. The counting was done in public.

On the fifth day of the session a resolution for the dethronement of the House of Lorraine was introduced and referred to all the committees into which the assembly was divided. Each committee named a representative to confer upon the resolution, which was adopted. The assembly, after a detailed indictment of the misrule of the dukes and a statement of the absolute incompatibility of the Austrian House of Lorraine, and the Italian desires of Tuscany, unanimously decreed the Austro-Lorraine dynasty to be deposed, and declared that the dynasty could never be either recalled or received to reign again over Tuscany.1

At this same session of August 16 a resolution was introduced for the annexation of Tuscany to the Kingdom of Victor Emanuel II. It was reported on August 20, and was adopted without a dissenting voice.2 In the duchies of Parma and Modena each assembly as it met passed similar decrees dethroning their dukes and asking for union with Sardinia.

The attitude of Napoleon had not been changed by the vote. Unable to attack the principle of popular sovereignty, he alleged that the vote had been due to pressure from Sardinia,3 to the momentary enthusiasm of the emotion accompanying war, and was not the cool expression of the popular will. He further asserted that there was ample reason to believe that Tuscany really wished independence, and that the vote had been due not to desire for union with Sardinia, but to fear of the return of Austrian domination. Although the British representatives in Italy refuted these allegations, in

1 Documents, post, p. 457.

2 There were two abstentions, one being due to a desire for a Bonapartist kingdom. The ducal party asserted that the whole movement had been directed from Turin; that Boncompagni, the Sardinian commissioner, although sent for purely military purposes, had at once become the chief figure in the provisional government, had fomented the revolt against the Grand Duke and had tried to win over the Tuscan troops to the Italian cause through gifts of money and free quarters. The initial revolt, however, appears to have been spontaneous and Boncompagni, instead of falling in with the original purpose of Ricasoli to effect an immediate union with Sardinia, appears to have exerted every effort to force delay, a course in which he was supported by the Sardinian government, which on his inquiry, instructed him that the initiative should not come from the Tuscan government when the royal commissioner was at its head. Le Assemblee del risorgimento, vol. 3, p. lxii. For a presentation of the other side, and especially the Sardinian plot in Parma, see Marquis of Normanby, A vindication of the Duke of Modena from the charges of Mr. Gladstone. Normanby was the British Minister at Florence.

* Russell on December 12 wrote to Hudson at Turin asking for the truth of the charges of terrorism and Sardinian agency in the duchies and Romagna, and for proofs, further than the recorded votes of the assemblies, of the satisfaction of the people and the tranquillity of the country (Parliamentary Papers [2609], p. 252). To this Hudson answered on December

the face of Napoleon's opposition Victor Emanuel was forced to delay the union to an indefinite future. The provisional governments of the duchies endeavored to cement the union by forming a League of Central Italy composed of Parma, Modena, and Romagna, which were henceforth united under the name of Emilia and, by electing as regent a prince of Savoy, Eugene of Carignano. He, too, was forced to refuse by the opposition of Napoleon, who was still hoping for the establishment of the provisions of Villafranca, which had now been embodied in the Treaty of Zurich.

THE ITALIAN PLEBISCITES OF 1860-1870

Tuscany and Emilia, 1860

Napoleon was busily endeavoring to secure a European Congress to settle the question of the method of restoring the dukes and the Pope to their dominions. This did not satisfy the British Cabinet. As a solution of the difficulty presented by Napoleon's attitude, Lord John Russell, on January 15, 1860, proposed that the matter be settled by another vote of the Italians themselves, and presented his proposal of the "Four Points" to the French Government.1 By this plan Great Britain and France were to invite the King of Sardinia to agree not to send troops into Central Italy "until its several states and provinces had, by a new vote of their assemblies, after a new election, solemnly declared their wishes as to their future destiny." Thus did Russell corner Napoleon who could do no less than accept the proposal with the reservation, however, that the vote should be by universal suffrage.2 The British proposal had left the matter of suffrage vague and Russell had recommended that the Government of Tuscany ascertain the views of France on the point.3 Russell made no objection to the French stipulation of universal suffrage but was content to leave it to the states themselves to decide, the matter of first importance being, to his mind, that the elections should be carried out under circumstances free from any reproach of intimi25 that the imputation of terrorism by Sardinia was purely gratuitous and imaginary, that the Tuscan vote had been clear and explicit, that the Piedmontese troops had been scrupulously recalled from the duchies and Romagna, and that the Piedmontese party had thereupon greatly increased. He attributed the vote for Sardinia directly to popular indignation at the terms of Villafranca. If all the supporters of annexation had been paid, Piedmont would now be insolvent, he added. Ibid., p. 444.

1 Documents, post, p. 499.

2 Thouvenel declared that the French Government could not divest itself of the moral responsibility arising from the treaty of Zurich unless the principle of universal suffrage, which constituted its own legitimacy became also the foundation of the new order of things in Italy. Annuaire des deux mondes, 1860, p. 103.

3 Russell to Corbett, February 6, Parliamentary Papers, Affairs of Italy, 1860, vol. 67 [2636], p. 36.

dation or emotion.1

Cavour, who had resumed office as Prime Minister of Sardinia, had been inclined towards an assembly elected by qualified franchise as in Sardinia, but at once perceived the value of basing the vote on the broadest sanction possible and gladly acquiesced in Napoleon's views.2 On February 24, he wrote to La Farina, his chief coadjutor in the work for annexation, recommending that he propose universal suffrage as his own idea, and show at the same time that it would not have all the drawbacks generally feared." 3

66

The chief objection to holding the new vote came from Ricasoli, the head of the Tuscan government. Ricasoli asserted that the first election had been legal and decisive. To hold another election would, in his opinion, serve to strengthen the argument against the former one. Russell answered with a warning that any reluctance would, on the contrary, amount to admission that the allegations against the first vote were true.

While this discussion was going on, Napoleon, repenting of his assent, again proposed a plan of federation under the presidency of the Pope, the Grand Duke to be restored as ruler of Tuscany, Romagna to be a vicariat under Piedmont, and Austria to act as suzerain over Venetia. The French note ended with a veiled threat in case this arrangement was not adopted, a threat doubtless used to introduce a new mention of Savoy and Nice as compensation for such union as was granted by the scheme of federation. Cavour consented to communicate the proposition of the federation to the several States, but with the comment that although Sardinia would do its utmost to meet the views of Napoleon "it could not, even at the risk of being abandoned by France, deny the principle of popular will on which the Italian throne reposes." The people of Tuscany and of Emilia, into which the former duchies of Parma, Modena and Romagna had united, must decide

1 Russell wrote to Hudson on February 6, "So far as Her Majesty's Government is concerned, our views would be satisfied if the actual law or practice of Tuscany, Modena, Parma and Romagna were observed. We have never adopted universal suffrage for ourselves . . . if that suffrage is proposed by France we should leave the different states and provinces to decide for themselves, both as to who should be electors and as to the mode of election. We have chiefly in view an election not carried by intimidation nor partaking of the excitement of the first outburst of the national feeling for independence." Ibid., p. 36.

2 On February 19 Cavour had written "We believe the better way of arriving at the true sentiment of the Tuscan people would be to convoke an assembly elected by classes which represent wealth, intelligence, and property. But if the Emperor is unwilling to recognize any authority save that of universal suffrage, we would also agree without hesitation, since, after all, we do not wish to have Tuscany united to us, if the majority of all classes, rich and poor, rural and urban, do not definitely wish it." Cavour to Arese. Translation. For original text see Chiala, vol. 3, p. 211.

Translation. For original text see Zini, vol. 2, part 2, document no. 260. February 29, Cavour wrote to Nigra "they will, perhaps, adopt the means of universal and direct suffrage as the one of which the result may be least contested." Translation from Parliamentary Papers [2636], p. 31.

for themselves; whatever their decision, Cavour promised, it should be respected.1

To block any further diplomatic manœuvres of Napoleon, preparations for the vote were now hurried. The elections were called in both Tuscany and Emilia for March 11 and 12. The preamble of the Tuscan decree of convocation recites that although the Tuscan Assembly had, on August 20, voted unanimously for union, it was found expedient to consult the Tuscan people directly, with full legal forms, and in this way dissipate the doubt in Europe as to the complete freedom of the former vote and the firmness of the national will. Absolute manhood suffrage for all over twenty-one, whether literate or not, who were in enjoyment of civil rights and had resided in the commune for six months, was established.

The voting, as in 1859, was to be by secret ballot, cast in the comizi.2 The polls were to be opened in the chief town of each district for the two days, from 8 A. M. to 6 P. M. The mayors and aldermen were put in charge of the drawing up of the electoral lists, which were to be based on the parish registers but were to include those non-Catholics who should go in person to register themselves. The voting was to be presided over by five common councillors, two of whom were always to be present. The formulas for the vote, to be written or printed on the ballots, were "Union with the Constitutional Monarchy of King Victor Emanuel" and "Separate Kingdom.” There was only one ballot-box or urn." The vote appears to have been meant to be secret, but it is probable that the voter had to select his ballot from one of two receptacles, as was the custom of the time, and thus the secrecy was somewhat impaired. Soldiers were to vote at their stations. The sealed ballot-boxes and formal minutes of the vote, drawn up by the election officials and transmitted through the several administrative officials to the Supreme Court of Cassation at Florence, were to be received by the court and the final vote announced in formal public session in the presence of the Ministry.

66

The provisions in Emilia were practically identical. Farini had objected to submitting the alternative of a vicariat in Romagna to popular suffrage, on the ground that it was a question at the same time complicated and unnecessary, as nothing would induce the people of Romagna to vote for a return of the papal legates. The formula of the question submitted in all parts of Emilia was the same as that used in Tuscany.

On March 2, the day after the decree had been promulgated, Boncompagni, who had been acting as governor-general of Tuscany, again resigned office. There was, however, no doubt of the result. It was obvious that the vote

1 Documents, post, p. 508.

2 These appear to be the equivalent of our electoral districts.

3 Zini, vol. 2, part 2, documents nos. 259 D and E.