Chapter XXII: Recent History

No sovereign ever mounted his throne amid greater tokens of
good will on the part of the nation than did King Humbert I on
the death of his father, whom he succeeded as quietly as if the
Italian kingdom had existed for generations under the princes
of the house of Savoy. It was a striking proof how completely
that royal house had identified itself with the national cause,
which had had no firmer supporter than Victor Emmanuel. His son
was no less true to it. He commenced his reign on the 9th of
January, 1878, and proved himself one of the best sovereigns
who ever governed a free people. He faithfully adhered to those
principles of constitutional liberty which have delivered Italy
from despotism, revolution, and foreign occupation. He placed
himself above party strife and took his place as chief of the
nation, leaving to it the exercise of the rights secured by its
free institutions. He devoted himself unsparingly to his royal
duties, and sympathised by word and deed with the nation’s joys
and sorrows. His whole conduct, as that of his queen and his
son, justly won the hearts of his people.--PROBYN.[b]

[Sidenote: [1878-1903 A.D.]]

The entry of Francesco Crispi into the Depretis cabinet (December, 1877) had placed at the ministry of the interior a strong hand and sure eye at a moment when they were about to become imperatively necessary. Crispi was the only man of truly statesmanlike calibre in the ranks of the Left. Formerly a friend and disciple of Mazzini, with whom he had broken on the question of the monarchical form of government which Crispi believed indispensable to the unification of Italy, he had afterwards been one of Garibaldi’s most efficient coadjutors and an active member of the “party of action.” Passionate, not always scrupulous in his choice and use of political weapons, intensely patriotic, loyal with a loyalty based rather on reason than sentiment, quick-witted, prompt in action, determined and pertinacious, he possessed in eminent degree many qualities lacking in other liberal chieftains.[c]

Of Crispi, a less moderate opinion is given in the work of Bolton King and Thomas Okey[d]:

“Crispi was a much abler man than Depretis. He had, at all events, grandiose politics, a considerable capacity of leading men, a force and an insistence that fascinated Italy, and for a time made him more worshipped and more hated than any Italian statesman of this generation. He was as unscrupulous as Depretis in his methods, and he had a hardy inconsistency that came not so much from any deliberate dishonesty as from an impulsiveness that made him the slave to the passion of the moment, quite forgetful of the promises and the policy of yesterday.

“At one moment he paraded his friendliness to France, a month or two later he was irritating her by hot and foolish speeches. Now he posed as an anti-clerical and free-thinker; now he spoke as one who longed for reconciliation with the Vatican. In 1886 he said that the ‘workman must be freed from the slavery of capital’; in 1894 he charged socialism with ‘raising the right of spoliation to a science.’ The wildest fancies, madcap adventures, anything that was showy and dazzling stood for statesmanship.

“In 1894 he believed, on the vaguest of forged evidence, that the Sicilian socialists were plotting to surrender the island to France. When the Russian exiles crowded into Italy after the assassination of Alexander II, Crispi, then an ex-minister and over sixty years old, preached a crusade of civilised nations against Russia. He was a savage, passionate fighter, who stuck at no severity, however unjust or unconstitutional, towards a political opponent, and whose intolerance grew till the ex-democrat became essentially a despot.”[d]

Hardly had Crispi assumed office when the unexpected death of Victor Emmanuel II, as previously described, stirred national feeling to an unprecedented depth, and placed the continuity of monarchical institutions in Italy upon trial before Europe. For thirty years Victor Emmanuel had been the central point of national hopes, the token and embodiment of the struggle for national redemption. He had led the country out of the despondency which followed the defeat of Novara and the abdication of Charles Albert, through all the vicissitudes of national unification to the final triumph at Rome. His disappearance snapped the chief link with the heroic period and removed from the helm of state a ruler of large heart, great experience, and civil courage, at a moment when elements of continuity were needed and vital problems of internal reorganisation had still to be faced.

Crispi adopted the measures necessary to insure the tranquil accession of King Humbert with a quick energy which precluded any radical or republican demonstrations. His influence decided the choice of the Roman Pantheon as the late monarch’s burial-place, in spite of formidable pressure from the Piedmontese, who wished Victor Emmanuel II to rest with the Sardinian kings at Superga. He also persuaded the new ruler to inaugurate, as King Humbert I, the new dynastical epoch of the kings of Italy, instead of continuing as Humbert IV the succession of the kings of Sardinia.

Before the commotion caused by the death of Victor Emmanuel had passed away, the decease of Pius IX, February 7th, 1878, had, as we have seen, placed further demands upon Crispi’s sagacity and promptitude. Like Victor Emmanuel, Pius IX had been bound up with the history of the Risorgimento, but, unlike him, had represented and embodied the anti-national, reactionary spirit. Having once let slip the opportunity which presented itself in 1846-1848, of placing the papacy at the head of the unitary movement, he had seen himself driven from Rome, despoiled piecemeal of papal territory, reduced to an attitude of perpetual protest, and finally confined, voluntarily, but still confined, within the walls of the Vatican. Ecclesiastically, he had become the instrument of the triumph of Jesuit influence, and had in turn set his seal upon the dogma of the immaculate conception, the syllabus, and papal infallibility. Yet, in spite of all, his jovial disposition and good-humoured cynicism saved him from unpopularity, and rendered his death an occasion of mourning. Notwithstanding the pontiff’s bestowal of the apostolic benediction _in articulo mortis_ upon Victor Emmanuel, the attitude of the Vatican had remained so inimical as to make it doubtful whether the conclave would be held in Rome.

Crispi, whose strong anti-clerical convictions did not prevent him from regarding the papacy as pre-eminently an Italian institution, was determined both to prove to the Catholic world the practical independence of the government of the church and to retain for Rome so potent a centre of universal attraction as the presence of the future pope. The sacred college of cardinals having decided to hold the conclave abroad, Crispi assured them of absolute freedom if they remained in Rome, or of protection to the frontier, should they migrate; but warned them that, once evacuated, the Vatican would be occupied in the name of the Italian government and be lost to the church as headquarters of the papacy.

The cardinals thereupon overruled their former decision, and the conclave was held in Rome, the new pope, Cardinal Pecci, being elected on the 20th of February, 1878, without let or hindrance. The Italian government not only prorogued the chamber during the conclave to prevent unseemly inquiries or demonstrations on the part of deputies, but by means of Mancini, minister of justice and Cardinal di Pietro, assured the new pope protection during the settlement of his outstanding personal affairs, an assurance of which Leo XIII, on the evening after his election, took full advantage. At the same time the duke of Aosta, commander of the Rome army corps, ordered the troops to render royal honours to the pontiff should he officially appear in the capital.

King Humbert addressed to the pope a letter of congratulation upon his election, and received a courteous reply. The improvement thus signalised in the relations between Quirinal and Vatican was further exemplified on the 18th of October, 1878, when the Italian government accepted a papal formula with regard to the granting of the royal _exequatur_ for bishops, whereby they, upon nomination by the holy see, recognised state control over, and made application for, the payment of their temporalities.[c]

IRREDENTISM, THE TRIPLE ALLIANCE AND “TRASFORMISMO”

The partnership of Depretis and Crispi in the cabinet had a short life. Crispi was attacked as a bigamist, and while the courts declared his earlier marriage in 1853 null and void and ratified his later marriage, the popular outcry compelled his resignation. The election of the leader of the Left, Cairoli, who was an enemy of Depretis and who defeated him on a taxation question, led Depretis to resign. Cairoli formed a new cabinet with Count Corti in charge of foreign affairs. He represented Italy at the congress of Berlin in 1878, where he witnessed Austrian triumphs over Italian policy. This caused a fall in his popularity and the activity of revolutionary bodies called irredentists, from their desire for the “redemption” of Trent and Trieste from Austria, provoked an agitation which led Corti to resign in October. In November a wretch named Passanante attempted to assassinate the king at Naples. The king defended himself with his sabre, but there was an outburst of public indignation against the ministry in spite of the fact that Cairoli had bravely thrown himself in front of his sovereign and received a serious dagger-wound.

Cairoli resigned and Depretis came back into power, only to yield again to Cairoli in July, 1879. Cairoli’s foreign policy was again so weak as to merit the epigram of Bonghi,[e] that it was “marked by enormous mental impotence balanced by equal moral weakness.” In November Cairoli was compelled to call Depretis to his aid in the face of a financial crisis, which was made the more dangerous by Depretis’ plan for spending over forty million pounds on the building of railways.

It was a railway which brought about a misunderstanding with France, and gave Italy another humiliation in her foreign affairs. Italian influence in Tunis was threatened by French aggression, and a railway built there by an English company was the subject of a rivalry between the two countries. The English courts prevented the French from buying it, whereupon the Italians secured it at a price estimated at eight times its value. The next year, 1881, the French, after some difficulties with a Tunisian tribe, seized Tabarca and Biserta, compelling the bey of Tunis, who had protested in vain to the powers, to accept a French protectory. This caused great excitement in Italy, and Cairoli was forced to resign by a vote of want of confidence.

On account of the dissensions in the party of the Left the king appealed to the leader of the Right, Sella, but the Left reunited against this loss of power and Depretis became minister, suffering a new humiliation in the massacre of Italian workmen at Marseilles on the return of French soldiers from Tunis. Riots in Rome during a procession carrying the remains of Pius IX from St. Peter’s to San Lorenzo showed further governmental feebleness.

A new problem now agitated the politics of Italy. There was an opportunity to strengthen Italy’s position in the eyes of Europe by entering a triple alliance with Germany and Austria. The Right strongly favoured this, but the Centre wished to keep on good terms especially with France, while Crispi and others in the Left leaned towards Austria. The irredentist agitation and a fear that Austria might throw her influence in favour of the papacy decided the matter in favour of the triple alliance. The visit to Austria of King Humbert and his queen Margherita furthered the matter. The opposition of Depretis was finally overcome and the offensive and defensive treaty of the triple alliance was signed May 20th, 1882. The treaty was, however, kept a secret until March, 1883. But the position of Italy in the alliance was not one of much honour, and while it minimised the chances of a restoration of the papal power, it brought Italy into some danger from France. On March 17th, 1887, the alliance was renewed on better terms for Italy.

In the meanwhile, in 1881, the suffrage had, by lowering the tax qualifications, been enlarged from 600,000 to 2,000,000; at the same time it had been extended to practically every man able to read and write. The state ownership and building of railways, whose income was far less than estimated, together with the forced currency and the expenditures on public works and various financial experiments, as well as a tendency to vote public works in return for local support, have kept Italian finances in a critical condition, though, in general, the industrial affairs of Italy have shown a steady improvement and sanitary legislation has received attention. The increase of the army and of the navy has also been marked, the new army bill of 1882 having given great satisfaction to Garibaldi just before his death at Caprera, June 2nd, 1882.

The long tenure of power by the Left had at the same time caused dissensions in its ranks and frequent compromises with factions of the Right, causing a gradual partisan “transformation,” called the _trasformismo_,--it was really another name for chaos. This state of affairs is generally blamed to Depretis who, in his four recompositions of his cabinet between 1881 and his death, July 29th, 1887, had made many alliances with the Right. It is customary to heap upon his memory the blame for a large part of the financial and political distresses of the country. He had a large influence also in the none too fortunate colonial policy of Italy.

In 1884, in return for lending support to the British policy in regard to Egypt, Italians were encouraged to seize Beilul and Massawa. England also invited Italy to join her in pacifying the Soudan, an invitation the more cordially accepted from the massacre in Assab of an exploring party under the Italian royal commissioner. In January, 1885, an Italian expedition occupied Beilul and Massawa and began to extend the zone of occupation. This aroused the _negus_ of Abyssinia and Alula, the _ras_ of Tigré who attacked the Italian exploring parties. The Abyssinians massacred a force of five hundred officers and men and mutilated the dead at Dogali, January 26th, 1887. All Italy was horrified at this atrocity and Crispi, having been called to Depretis’ cabinet, threw his influence to the vindication of the country’s dignity. The _negus_ of Abyssinia, though he had 100,000 men against Italy’s 20,000, opened negotiations for peace and turned against the Mahdists by whom he was defeated and killed March 10th, 1889. A war of succession arose in which an ancient enemy of the _negus_, Menelek, king of Shoa, signed the treaty of Ucciali, which the Italians construed as a protectorate.

But King Menelek, having received the submission of his rival Mangashá, became more independent in his tone towards the Italians. After an Italian expedition under General Baratieri had achieved great success in Eritrea over the Mahdists, Menelek, in 1893, repudiated the Treaty of Ucciali. His coalition with Mangashá, in which he was easily defeated in January, 1895, led Baratieri to push on to Adowa and even to Axum, the holy city of Abyssinia. In December, however, the Abyssinians arose and the Italian forces suffered several defeats, ending in the great disaster of Adowa March 1st, 1896, where the Italians lost 6,000 men and nearly 4,000 prisoners. Baratieri fled precipitately, leaving his troops to follow; but General Baldissera, who had been previously sent to replace Baratieri, succeeded in making terms with Menelek and securing the release of the prisoners.

THE POWER OF CRISPI

Shortly after the death of Depretis, Crispi, now sixty-eight years old, came into power and assumed that predominance which he held for so many years. Efforts at conciliation with the Vatican, where the pope called himself a prisoner, had no success. Crispi was strongly in favour of the Triple Alliance and did little to conciliate French feeling. He had much support from the Right until, in 1891, he lost his temper during a speech and rebuked them for their interruptions. Such feeling was raised against him that he resigned and was succeeded by the marquis de Rudini, the leader of the Right. Crispi had been accused of “megalomania,” but he had, by cultivating the friendship of Bismarck and paying him a visit, so strengthened Italy’s position that the Rudini cabinet seemed weak by comparison and fell in 1892, being succeeded by Giolitti, whose administration ushered in “what proved to be the most unfortunate period of Italian history since the completion of national unity.” Bank scandals and other revelations of corruption brought about the fall of the cabinet, weakened by its attitude towards an insurrection due to popular discontent in Sicily.

The strong hand of Crispi put an end to the riots upon his return in December, 1893, to the ministry, and heroic efforts were made by his minister of finance, Sonnino, whose measures were so severe, however, that Crispi became the victim of an unusually violent war of defamation, in which his political and private life was exposed to all imaginable accusation, just or otherwise. An attack was made upon his life by an anarchist and a few months later a mass of stolen documents were brought before the chamber by Giolitti, who endeavoured to prosecute Crispi but was compelled by a counter-suit to flee to Berlin. The radical leader Cavalotti made another attempt to prove Crispi guilty of embezzlement. The effort failed, though public respect for the condition of politics suffered a great diminution. Crispi had gained a great majority at the election of 1895, but fell before the disaster at Adowa in 1896.

His successor Rudini gave assistance to Cavalotti’s effort to disgrace Crispi, but without success, as has been said, and after a persecution of two years a parliamentary commission vindicated Crispi of dishonesty, though finding him guilty of irregularity. Public discontent brought about, in May, 1898, riots in the south of Italy. These were put down with an inexcusable severity especially at Milan where the repression amounted almost to a massacre. The month before Crispi, who had resigned his seat in parliament, had been returned by an enormous majority from Palermo. In June the Rudini ministry fell and Luigi Pelloux, a general of Savoy, succeeded, but he resigned after a defeat at the polls in June, 1900, and was followed by a moderate liberal cabinet under Saracco.

DEATH OF KING HUMBERT, OF CRISPI, AND OF LEO XIII

Shortly after, July 29th, 1900, an anarchist named Bresci assassinated King Humbert while he was returning from the distribution of prizes at an athletic carnival at Monza. King Humbert was a monarch whose personal magnetism and courage and whose tenderness to his people had atoned for his lack of great political distinction. During the flood of 1882, and after the earthquake of 1883, and during the cholera epidemic of 1884, he had risked his own life to aid the sufferers. He governed in strict accord with the constitution. His death brought genuine public grief, for his generosity had won him the name “Humbert the Good.”

The prince of Naples, his only son, succeeded the king, and took the title Victor Emmanuel III. He was born on November 11th, 1869, and had married the princess Helena of Montenegro in October, 1896. A daughter, the Princess Yolanda-Margherita of Savoy, was born to them June 1st, 1901.

On the 12th of August, 1901, Crispi died, leaving behind him a reputation for forcefulness of character and for intense national feeling, though there are many acts which his most fervent admirers deeply regret.

The Saracco cabinet had fallen in February, 1901, and was succeeded by the ministry of Zanardelli who recalled Giolitti, giving him the portfolio of the interior. The ministry was noteworthy for its somewhat socialistic spirit which tacitly encouraged great labour agitations; there were 600 strikes during the first six months of 1901. The general result was some amelioration of the condition of the labouring classes and the increase of the socialist strength. Italian finances have also been somewhat improved.

Pope Leo XIII died after a long illness, July 20th, 1903. While keeping to the policy of his predecessor in his attitude towards the Italian government he had brought the Catholic church to a far higher position of esteem in the eyes of all nations, even of those predominantly Protestant. His successor, Cardinal Sarto, the patriarch of Venice, took the name of Pius X and seems to be inclined to a policy of friendship towards the Italian government, a policy which the king seems eager to foster. In recent years Italian literature and science have been making large progress in cosmopolitan favour, and Italy seems destined to a re-illumination of her ancient splendours.[a]

BRIEF REFERENCE-LIST OF AUTHORITIES BY CHAPTERS

[The letter [a] is reserved for Editorial Matter.]