---
Title: Reorganisation of the British War Administration—The Austrian Summons—Britain’s Economic Situation—St. Arnaud (1854)
Description: Correspondence by Marx for the New-York Daily Tribune: a critique of Kossuth’s Sheffield speech, the new Ministry of War, the Austrian summons to Russia, trade and harvest, and a sketch of Marshal St. Arnaud’s career.
Author: Karl Marx
Date: 1854-06-09
URL: https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/originales/1854%20Reorganisation%20of%20the%20British%20War%20Administration%20-%20The%20Austrian%20Summons%20-%20Britain%E2%80%99s%20Economic%20Situation%20-%20St.%20Arnaud
---


*Published as a correspondence dated London, Friday, June 9, 1854, under the heading “The State of Europe” (after a letter from another correspondent), without a headline of its own and signed Karl Marx, in the* New-York Daily Tribune*, No. 4114, June 24, 1854, p. 6; attributed to Karl Marx by MEGA² (I/13), whose title is used here. Text from the original newspaper (Library of Congress, Chronicling America). [Traducción al español](https://marxismo.school/archivo/marx-engels/1854%20La%20reorganizaci%C3%B3n%20de%20la%20administraci%C3%B3n%20militar%20inglesa%20-%20El%20requerimiento%20austriaco%20-%20La%20situaci%C3%B3n%20econ%C3%B3mica%20de%20Inglaterra%20-%20Saint-Arnaud).*

London, Friday, June 9, 1854.

The speech delivered by Kossuth, at Sheffield, is the most substantial ever heard from him during his stay in England. Nevertheless one cannot help finding fault with it. Its historical expositions are partly incorrect. To date the decline of Turkey from the support given by Sobieski to the Austrian capital, is a proposition for which no grounds whatever exist. The researches of Hammer prove beyond dispute that the organization of the Turkish Empire was at that period already to a state of dissolution, and that the epoch of Ottoman grandeur and strength had been rapidly disappearing for some time before. Similarly incorrect was the proposition that Napoleon discarded the idea of attacking Russia by sea for other reasons than these suggested by his having no fleet, and his being excluded from the command of the ocean by the British. The menace that if England entered into alliance with Austria, Hungary might ally herself with Russia, was an act of imprudence. In the first place it furnished a weapon to the ministerial journals, of which *The Times* has not failed to make ample use by “convicting” all revolutionists as agents of Russia. Secondly, it came with a singular propriety from the lips of the man whose ministry already in 1849, had offered the Hungarian crown to a Cesarewitch. Lastly, how could he deny that if ever his threat should be carried into execution, either at his own or others’ instigation, the national existence of the Magyar race would be doomed to annihilation, the major part of the population of Hungary being Slavonians? It was equally a mistake to describe the war against Russia as a war between liberty and despotism. Apart from the fact that if such be the case, liberty would be for the nonce, represented by a Bonaparte, the whole avowed object of the war is the maintenance of the balance of power, and of the Vienna treaties—those very treaties which annul the liberty and independence of nations.

A more than usually vigorous speech has also been delivered by Mr. Urquhart at Birmingham, where he developed again his charge of treachery against the Coälition. However, as Mr. Urquhart is strictly opposed to the only party prepared to overthrow the rotten Parliamentary basis on which the Coälition Government of the Oligarchy rests, all his speeches are as much to the purpose as if they were addressed to the clouds.

In the House of Commons, last night, Lord John Russell announced the formation of a special Ministry of War, which ministry, however, is not to absorb the various departments at present constituting the administration of war, but only to have a nominal superintendence over all. The only merit of the change is the erection of a new ministerial place. With regard to the appointment, *The Morning Post* of yesterday stated that the Peelite section of the Cabinet had been victorious, and that the Duke of Newcastle would become the new Secretary of War, while the Colonies would be offered to Lord John Russell. *The Globe* of last evening confirmed this statement, adding that, as Lord John was not likely to accept, Sir George Grey would be nominated Colonial Secretary. Although the Peelite journals affect still to be ignorant of a final decision, the Palmerstonian journal of to-day announces in positive terms that the Duke of Newcastle and Sir George Grey have been appointed.

*The Morning Post* has the following in reference to the Austrian “peremptory summons:”

“We have reason to believe that Russia will not treat the Austrian communication with silence, nor meet it by a refusal, and we shall not be surprised if we shortly learn that Russia is disposed to accept the Austrian proposal for the complete evacuation of the Turkish territory, on condition that Austria shall arrange an armistice with a view to negotiation.”

*The Morning Chronicle* of to-day likewise grants that “the communication may be of the greatest importance.” It adds, nevertheless, that it must not be considered as an ultimatum, that it is couched in the usual courteous language, and that a rupture was only held out in case that Russia should ignore the communication altogether. If Russia gave an evasive answer, or made a partial concession, new suggestions and negotiations might follow.

Let us suppose, for a moment, that the assumption of *The Post* was just, and about to be realized; it will be seen that the service rendered by Austria would be only to procure another armistice in favor of Russia. It is highly probable that something like this may have been contemplated, founded on the supposition that Silistria, in the mean time, would fall, and the “character and honor of the Czar” be guaranteed. The whole scheme, however, must fail to the ground, if Silistria holds out, and the valor of the Turks should at last force the allied troops to enter into the campaign, much as it may be against the inclination of their commanders and Governments.

If there be anything fit to render the frequent gaps and omissions in this great war less unendurable, it is the amusing uncertainty of the English press and public about the value and the reality of the alliance between the western and the German powers. Scarcely is the “peremptory summons” of Austria started to the satisfaction of all the world, when all the world is distressed by the news of a meeting between the Austrian and Prussian monarchs, a meeting which, in the words of *The Times*, “forbodes no good to the western powers.”

The Board of Trade tables for the last month have been published. The results are less favorable than those of the preceding months. The declared value of exports has fallen off £747,527, as compared with the corresponding month of 1853. The articles chiefly affected have been those connected with the Manchester markets; but linen, woolen and silk manufactures likewise exhibit a decline.

In the usual monthly circular of Messrs. Sturge of Birmingham, we read that the wheat-plant has not tillered nor stooled well, and this is accounted for in the following way:

“The high price of seed caused a smaller quantity to be used per acre than in ordinary years, and the inferiority of the wheat of last year’s growth committed to the soil may not have done so well as would have been the case if it had been better harvested.”

In regard to this statement, *The Mark-lane Express* observes:

“This inference appears to us exceedingly probable and deserving of attention, as unsound seed can scarcely be expected to produce so healthy a plant as that gathered under more auspicious circumstances. The progress of the growing crop will be watched with more than ordinary interest, it being an admitted fact that stocks, not only in this country but almost in all parts of the world, have, owing to the extreme deficiency of the harvest of 1853, been reduced into a very narrow compass. The future range of prices will depend mainly on the character of the weather; the present value of wheat is too high to encourage speculation, and though it is more than probable that the supplies from abroad will, during the next three months, be on a much less liberal scale than they have hitherto been, still, if nothing should occur to give rise to uneasiness in respect to the probable result of the next harvest, those having anything to dispose of will naturally be anxious to clear out old stocks, while millers and others are likely to act on the hand-to-mouth system. . . . . . At the same time, it must be borne in mind that the country generally is bare of wheat.”

You cannot at present pass through the streets of London without being stopped by crowds assembled before patriotic pictures exhibiting the interesting group of the Sultan, Bonaparte and Victoria—“the three saviors of civilization.” To help you to a full appreciation of the characters of the personages who are now charged with saving civilization, after having “saved society,” I resume my sketch of their generalissimo, Marshal St. Arnaud.

The famous days of July rescued Jaques Leroy, (old style,) or Jaques Achille Leroy de St. Arnaud, (new style,) from the grasp of his creditors. The grave question then arose how to improve the circumstance of French society being thrown into a general confusion by the sudden fall of the old regime. Achille had not participated in the battle of the three days, nor could he pretend to have done so, the fact being too notorious that at the memorable epoch he found himself carefully locked up in a cell at St. Pélagie. He was therefore unable to claim, like many other adventurers of the day, any remuneration under the false pretense of having been a *combattant* of July. On the other hand, the success of the *bourgeois regime* appeared by no means favorable for this notorious outcast of the Parisian Bohemia, who had always professed an implicit faith in Legitimacy, and never belonged to the Society of the “Aide-Toi,” (a want of foresight which he has mended by becoming one of the first members of the Society of the “Dix-mille,”—nor played any part whatever in the great “comedy of fifteen years.” Achille, however, had learned something from his ancient master, M. E. de P., in the art of extemporisation. He boldly presented himself at the War Office, pretending to be a non-commissioned officer who, from political motives, had tendered his resignation at the time of the Restoration. His banishment from the *Gardes du Corps*, his expulsion from the Corsican Legion, his absence from the ranks of the 51st Regiment setting out for the colonies, were easily turned into as many proofs of his eccentric patriotism, and of the persecution he had suffered at the hands of the Bourbons. The conduct-list gave his assertions the lie, but the War Office feigned to believe in their truth. The withdrawal of numerous officers refusing to take the oath under Louis Phillippe had caused a great void which must be filled up, and every public apostacy from Legitimacy, whatever might have been the motives of the conversion, was accepted as a valuable support to the usurper’s government. Achille, consequently, was commissioned in the 64th Regiment of the Line, but not without undergoing the humiliation of being simply rehabilited in his post of non-commissioned officer, instead of being promoted to a higher grade, like the others, who had resigned under the Restoration.

Time and his brevet, advanced him at last to the rank of lieutenant. At the same time he was given an opportunity to make valid his special talents of servile apostacy. In 1832 his regiment was quartered at Parthenay, in the midst of the Legitimist insurrection of the Vendée. His former connection with some former *gardes du corps*, rallied around the Duchess of Berri, enabled him to combine the offices of soldier and of police-spy—a combination singularly agreeing with the genius matured in the gaming houses of London and the *cafés borgne* of Paris. The Duchess of Berri having been sold by the Jew Deutz to Mons. Thiers was arrested at Nantes, and Achille became intrusted with the mission of accompanying her to Blaye, where he was to act as one of her jailers under the orders of Gen. Bugeaud. Anxious not to let slip the occasion of exhibiting a conspicuous zeal for the dynastic interest, he over-shot the mark, and contrived to scandalize even Bugeaud himself by the abject services he allowed the police to impose upon him, and the brutal treatment to which he subjected the Duchess. Bugeaud, however, had not the power to dismiss an aid-de-camp whom the police had selected for the special duty of guarding the Duchess, who was under the particular superintendence of M. Joly, the Commissary of Police, and who, after all, depended more on the Ministry of the Interior than on that of War. The future generalissimo of the Anglo-French troops played the part of the mid-wife, it being his special mission to state and prove by witnesses the pregnancy of the Duchess, the discovery of which dealt the death-blow to the partisans of the old régime. It was in this same quality that the name of M. de St. Arnand figured for the first time in the *Moniteur*, in whose columns of May 1833, we read that “M. Achille de St. Arnand, “thirty-four years old, habitually residing at Paris, “Officer of Ordnance to Gen. Bugeaud, was summoned to sign, in his official capacity, the act of birth of the child of which the Duchess was delivered at her prison on May 10, 1833.” The gallant St. Arnand continuing to play his part of a jailer, accompanied the Duchess on board the corvette which disembarked her at Palermo.

Having returned to France, Achille became the laughing stock and the scape-goat of his regiment. Disliked by the other officers, excluded from their *réunions*, harrassed by undisguised proofs of their utter contempt, put as it were in quarantine by the whole regiment, he was forced to take refuge in the Foreign Legion at Algiers, which was then organizing at Paris under the care of Colonel Bedeau. This Foreign Legion may be fairly characterized as the Society of the Tenth December of the European armies. Notorious desperadoes, adventurers of broken fortune, deserters from all countries, the general offal of the European armies, constituted the nucleus of this *corps de élite*, which was properly called the *refugium peccatorum*. There was no situation that could have better suited the genius of Achille than the fellowship of such a corps, the official mission of which reserved it from the fangs of the police, while the character of its constituting members removed all the checks weighing on the officers of the regular army. Notwithstanding Achille’s habitual prodigality, he gave such slender proofs of military courage and capacity that he continued to vegetate during four years in the subaltern place of lieutenant in the 1st batallion of the Foreign Legion, until on the 15th August, 1837, when a new brevet conferred upon him the rank of captain. It is an unhappy circumstance that the company’s chest is placed under the control of the captains in the French army, who are accountable for the pay of the men and their provisions. Chests were exactly the spot in which the modern Achille was most vulnerable; and thus it happened that some months after his promotion a terrible deficit was discovered in his. The Inspector-General, M. de Rulhières, having detected this embezzlement, insisted on the punishment of the captain. The report to the Ministry was ready, it was on the point of being committed to the post, and M. de St. Arnaud would have been lost forever, if M. Bedeau, his lieutenant-colonel, affected by the despair of his inferior, had not interfered and appeased the wrath of Gen. Rulhières.

St. Arnaud has quite a manner of his own of showing his gratitude for past obligations. Appointed to the ministry of war, on the eve of the *coup d’état*, he caused Gen. Bedeau to be arrested, and struck the name of Gen. Rulhières from the lists. Rulhières addressed to him the following letter, which he circulated among his friends at Paris, and published in the Belgian journals:

“In 1837, the General Rulhières refused to break the sword of the Captain Leroy de St. Arnaud, unwilling to dishonor him; in 1851, the Minister of War, Leroy de St. Arnaud, unable to dishonor the General Rulhières, has broken his sword.”