Mr. Motley to Mr.
Seward
No. 31.]
Legation of the United States,
Vienna,
August 17, 1863.
Sir: So soon as the news of the proclamation of
the empire in Mexico, together with the offer of the imperial crown to
the Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian, reached Vienna, I requested an
interview with Count Rechberg.
I saw the minister accordingly on the 11th August. As he was to leave
next day for Frankfort to attend the conference at the diet of
sovereigns, and as many other members of the diplomatic corps were
waiting to see him, the interview was necessarily very brief; I merely
begged him to inform me what was authentically known to him in regard to
the Mexican affair.
He replied that the intelligence received by the government was hardly in
an authentic shape. He said: We do not consider our situation
essentially altered. We are not prepared to take action on what may
prove to be an ephemeral demonstration. We regard all that is reported
concerning the whole affair—so far as relates to his Imperial
Highness—as not having occurred; (comme non
avenu, was his expression, the conversation being in French.) I
asked if he considered it true that a deputation was on the way from
Mexico to offer the crown to the archduke. He replied that it
[Page 1006]
was possible, but that it
was very doubtful whether such a deputation would be received.
I asked if it was true that a telegram had been sent by the Emperor
Napoleon congratulating the archduke on the news. He said, yes; but
that, from the tenor of the telegram, the Emperor Napoleon did not
appear to attach much weight to the intelligence.
Under such circumstances, I said it was useless to ask whether any
decision had been taken in regard to the offer, as such a question had
already been answered in the negative by what he had already said.
He replied, “of course;” and I then took my leave, saying that I only
wished to know the exact position of the affair up to the present
moment.
I beg to be informed, at your earliest convenience, what language you
wish me officially to hold on this very important subject. The recent
conquest of Mexico by France seems to me fraught with future woe to our
whole continent; but I cannot think it desirable, in the present
condition of our own affairs, that we should hasten the evil day by
taking any part in that most unhappy adventure.
It is generally supposed that the Archduke Maximilian is desirous of
accepting the crown of Mexico, but I am not aware that there are many
persons in this empire who regard the project with favor. It certainly
is an unpopular one with all classes of society, so far as I have been
able to observe.
The language of the press is, in some cases, guarded, but in general
decidedly hostile on the subject.
As a specimen of Vienna journalism in this matter, I send you a
translation of a portion of an article from a widely circulated journal,
Die Presse. The tone, although bold and
bitter, is not exceptionably so.
I have the honor, sir, to remain your obedient servant,
Hon. William H. Seward, Secretary of State,
Washington.
[Extract from the Presse of August 11,
1863.]
[Untitled]
“The journals of Paris announce to-day that the Emperor and Empress
have already sent congratulations by telegraph to the Archduke
Ferdinand Maximilian, on the imperial Mexican dignity which has been
offered to him. Well, they may think it a piece of good fortune—and
they may have their reasons for it—to obtain possession of a crown
in such a way in a country like Mexico. We, however, believe that we
are a faithful organ of the opinion of the Austrian people when we
say, without concealment, that the acceptance of the crown by the
Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian would not be looked upon by any of
them as a piece of good fortune, but, on the contrary, they would
look upon it as an evil destiny. An evil destiny, we say, for it
would be nothing else if an Austrian prince should ever seriously
think of accepting a crown from the hands of a Napoleon. In the
deepest humiliation of Germany by the forcible dominion of Napoleon
I, we find nothing similar to this; and shall constitutional Austria
bear to-day what absolute Austria was too proud to endure? And what
sort of a crown is it? Without any plausible reason, treading under
foot those liberties of the people of which they are always
speaking, the French soldiers have broken into Mexico, and, after
shedding streams of blood, they have occupied the Mexican capital,
followed by the curses of a people hitherto proud of its
independence. And shall a crown of tears and blood, conquered in
this forcible manner, be placed upon the head of a prince of
constitutional Austria, perhaps
[Page 1007]
as an indemnity for the pearl which in 1859
was broken from Austria’s crown, or as a present to keep us unharmed
in case of future occurrences of a similar kind? The more we lose
ourselves in speculations of this kind, the more impossible,
adventurous, unacceptable, and monstrous, this proposed attention of
the court of Napoleon to Austria appears to us. Have those who play
with the thoughts of wrapping themselves in the purple mantle of an
Aztec emperor already reflected on the political consequences which
would follow Austria’s acceptance of this imperial crown? Have they
painted to themselves the wretched, dependent relation, the
vassalage in which Austria—even assuming that there is no thought of
compensation at the bottom of the French offer—that it is dictated
by the purest unselfishness—will find itself in regard to Napoleonic
France by accepting the Mexican crown? Is Archduke Maximilian, in
Mexico, to be the counterpart to King George of Greece, with only
the difference that before his throne French soldiers would keep
watch, as the King’s crown in Athens would be protected by those of
England? And even if it should be decided to give the new Emperor of
Mexico an Austrian corps as an escort, has the cost of this scheme
been already counted? What in the name of Heaven has Austria to do
in this Mexican galley? It would be bound and exposed to France on
all sides for this present of the Danaides, and particularly in
regard to Poland it would be made lame and impotent in its political
action; it would afford France a pretext for occupying Mexico, as
the Pope affords a pretext for occupying Rome; it will have engaged
its honor for specific French speculations, without satisfying a
single reasonable interest. We already see the moment when the
cabinet of Washington, fortified by the Monroe doctrine, by the
alliance of the states of Central and South America, and by the
enormous military resources which the end of the civil war will
leave at its disposition, shall call upon the French in Mexico to
leave a continent on which they have no business and no right to
command. Shall Austria, then, make war in company with France upon
America to uphold and occupy a problematical throne in Mexico? That
would be the height of the adventurous, and Austria would have then
no alternative than that of a shameful fiasco or that of a
vassalage, which would absorb its best powers for the interests of
France. Even if the thought of ruling the old empire of the Aztecs
should not be devoid of poetic charm to a romantic character, we
believe that the times have gone by when such caprices are
sufficient to compromise the policy of great states and to throw
them into endless complications. And so we still hope that the
answer of Austria to the proposition of the Mexican asamblea,
received by way of Paris, will, this time, be a decided negative,
and that once for all an end will be put to an intrigue which has no
other aim than to shift the ignominy of the Mexican expedition—that
attack on an independent people—from the shoulders of France on
those of Austria, and to cover the gulf of the dirty speculations of
the banker Jecker and his worthy associates in France and Mexico
with the brilliant name of an Austrian prince.”
