The majority of the Assembly, however, were of a different opinion. They contended, that the whole of Germany was interested in the Hanoverian question; and, in spite of the attempts of ministers to give a different turn to the discussion, the motion of the last year was again carried unanimously.

M. de Rottick then charged ministers with refusing to permit a subscription to be opened in behalf of the exiled Gottingen professors; and also with prohibiting a bookseller from publishing a vindication of the Archbishop of Cologne. But, upon M. Winter, the minister of the Interior, declaring that it was merely to a public subscription that the Government had objected, and that, with respect to the Cologne controversy, the measure

complained of had no existence, M. de Rottick declared himself sa tisfied.

A curious but scarcely credible story, much to the disadvantage of the Duke of Saxe Cobourg Gotha, brother of the King of the Belgians, was current at the beginning of the year. This prince was charged with having issued a coinage of base value, which passed extensively throughout Bavaria, and the grand duchy of Hesse. These governments, when they became aware of the fraud, of course prohibited the circulation of the base money; but the Duke of Saxe Cobourg himself did the same, and actually prohibited the use of his own coin in his own dominions, so that the neighbouring states were unable to get rid of it.

[2 H 2]

pendent sect, acknowledging no authority in religious matters, except the Bible. At the time that this secession took place, the bishops of Brixen and Inspruch requested the interference of Government. This, however, was not afforded till several years afterwards, previously to which, two Prussian missionaries had, as it is alleged, made their appearance in the Tyrol, and converted many of the people to Protestant doctrines. The Austrian Government then signified to the dissenters of the Ziller-thal, that, unless they were prepared to return to the Catholic Church, they must quit that part of the empire, but that they were at full liberty to migrate to other districts in which non-Catholic communities already existed. It seems not to be denied, that, upon a strict construction of the thirtysixth article of the treaty of Westphalia, these proceedings of the Austrian Government were not open to question as a matter of right. When, however, as was to be expected, it was found that these poor people were reluctant to quit their native mountains, the Austrian Government always averse to violence, resorted to the no less effective expedient of a denial of civil rights. At the same time, it prohibited the public celebration of their religious ordinances, and in fact, as it is stated, accumulated upon them every kind of vexation, until at length, worn out by this kind of persecution, the Protestants of the Ziller-thal applied for permisssion to migrate to Prussia. This being readily granted by their rulers, they proceeded, upon special invitation of the Prussian Government, into Silesia, where they ultimately settled near the town of Schmiedeberg.

It is clear, that the Austrian Government must have had strong motives for its conduct in this matter. Nor can we help suspecting, that a spirit of disaffection must have become apparent in the Tyrol, which sheltered itself under the garb of religious dissent. It has, indeed, been insinuated, that the whole affair was the result of Prussian intrigue; and in corroboration of this suspicion, it is remarked, that the Austrian Government displayed no readiness to molest the schismatics of the Ziller-thal, until they had begun to form a nucleus for political, no less than for religious dissent. So that, according to this view of the case, Prince Metternich exercised his usual address, in not only clearing the empire of a dangerous germ of disaffection, but in contriving to throw it off upon the very government which had fomented its existence.

The Montenegrins, one of the half-barbarous Sclavonian tribes, who dwell between the Danube and the Adriatic coast, have been of late affording much trouble to their Austrian, as well as their Turkish, neighbours. In number not exceeding 40,000 souls, but brave and warlike to a degree, they are supposed to be acting under the covert instigation of Russia, with whom they are co-religionists, and whose agents have always exercised considerable influence amongst their leading people.

The Transylvanians are said to have at length wrested from the cabinet of Vienna, the privileges for which they have been long contending, and we learn, that the diet of that province has obtained the right both of appointing public functionaries, and of constitutionally controlling their acts. Three years before, the assertion of these

pretensions on the part of the Assembly had been the cause of its dissolution.

A very important treaty was this year concluded between Great Britain and Austria, thus further cementing the ancient and natural alliance between two countries of whom, it has been remarked, that, for 150 years, they have always had the same enemies, though those enemies have not been the same. If any estrangement may seem to have recently subsisted between these two powers, it is ascribable rather to the altered state of our domestic politics than to any change in the relations which necessarily unite them.

The treaty of Worms, which was signed as far back as 1743, between Austria, Great Britain, Holland and Sardinia, contained an article not only confirming " to the subjects of Great Britain the advantages of commerce and navigation, which they then enjoyed in the respective states," but promising," to grant other advantages as far as it should be judged practicable, by an especial treaty of commerce and navigation, whensoever his Britannic Majesty should require the same. This special treaty was never concluded, but, in 1829, a convention was exe cuted between Great Britain and Austria, which, as far as it went, was based on principles of commercial reciprocity. The British possessions in the Mediterranean were, however, expressly exempted from its operation, and it was, moreover, limited to a duration of ten years. In 1830, and 1831,

orders in council were issued for the purpose of giving due effect to this convention. But in the course of the year, with which we are at present occupied, a new treaty

was concluded between the two powers. Its provisions appear to be wise and beneficial, and as such, to promise advantages in a political, no less than in a commercial point of view; among these, may be reckoned as not the least valuable, a renewal of our former relations with the court of Vienna. This important document will be found in the Appendix, but some of its principal provisions may be mentioned here. It places the vessels of both countries on a reciprocal footing in all respects, and freely opens Gibraltar and Malta to the Austrian flag. The fourth article deserves more particular notice, as possibly involving important political consequences.

All Austrian vessels arriving from the ports of the Danube as far as Galatz inclusively, are together with their cargoes, to be admitted to British ports, exactly in the same manner, as if such vessels came direct from Austrian ports. And the same privileges are extended to British vessels entering or departing from such ports.

Now, it is to be remembered, that the Danube from Orsova to Galatz, flows through the territories of a third power, not a party to the treaty. This river, as our readers are aware, is virtually divided into two by the cataracts of the Iron-gate, which are situated below Orsova, and offer an almost insurmountable obstacle to ordinary navigation. Below the cataract, Austria has no port, and the effect, therefore, of the fourth arti

of merchant vessels belonging to Aus At the end of 1838, the number tria was 498, the tonnage being 122,844, besides 15 steamers.

ele is, that the ports of Moldavia and Wallachia are brought within the scope of the treaty. But it is the scarcely disguised policy of Russia, whose influence in these two provinces is at present paramount, to throw obstacles in the way of the navigation of the Danube. And how much it lies in her power to give effect to her inclinations, will appear from the facts which follow.

By the third article of the treaty of Adrianople, it was agreed, that the Pruth should continue to form the limit of the Russian and Turkish empires, from the point at which that river touches the territory of Moldavia down to its confluence with the Danube. The latter river having, it will be recollected, three main mouths forming a delta; Kili, Soulineh, and St. George. It was further stipulated, that the frontier should follow the St. George, which is the Southern channel. The left bank and the entire delta were thus abandoned to Russia, which power, however, agreed, that no other than quarantine establishments should be erected on the Delta, and that the left bank ..should remain uninhabited to a certain distance.

The article then proceeded thus, "The merchant vessels of the two powers shall be free to navigate the Danube along its whole course, and those bearing the Ottoman flag may enter freely the embou chures of Kili and Soulineh, that of St. George remaining common to the vessels of war and merchantmen of the two contracting powers. Unfortunately, however, for Turkey, the St. George is so shallow, that it will not admit vessels of war of any description, so that

the effect of the arrangement is, that none but Russian ships of war can enter the Danube, Nor was Russia content with this characteristic stroke of policy. She has taken care to let the sand accumulate at the mouth of the Soulineh, or middle channel; and, in a short time, it is probable, that it will cease to be navigable to vessels of any considerable burden.*

On the other hand, it is evident that the free navigation of the Danube is of vital importance to Austria; it is all that is wanting to develope those pregnant elements of commerce and civilization which are now fermenting in Hungary, and which, nourished as they are by a generous, though tempered, ardour for free institutions, promise, at no very distant day, to vindicate to the people of that kingdom a place in the European system very different to that which they have hitherto occupied. Nor should it be forgotten, that the freedom to which this chivalrous people seem to aspire is not the vulgar democratic dream which

much delights the shallow thinkers of modern Europe. All they require is a fair development of the institutions which they already possess, and which, like those of feudal England, contain in themselves the germs of indefinite progress.

The Hungarian aristocracy is said to bear a striking resemblance to our own in many respects, while England and its institutions