Timeline of World History TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 
 

TIMELINE OF WORLD HISTORY
 

Loading
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
     
     
 
1800 - 1899
 
 
1800-09 1810-19 1820-29 1830-39 1840-49 1850-59 1860-69 1870-79 1880-89 1890-99
1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890
1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851 1861 1871 1881 1891
1802 1812 1822 1832 1842 1852 1862 1872 1882 1892
1803 1813 1823 1833 1843 1853 1863 1873 1883 1893
1804 1814 1824 1834 1844 1854 1864 1874 1884 1894
1805 1815 1825 1835 1845 1855 1865 1875 1885 1895
1806 1816 1826 1836 1846 1856 1866 1876 1886 1896
1807 1817 1827 1837 1847 1857 1867 1877 1887 1897
1808 1818 1828 1838 1848 1858 1868 1878 1888 1898
1809 1819 1829 1839 1849 1859 1869 1879 1889 1899
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1860-1869 NEXT-1860 Part II    
 
 
     
1860 - 1869
YEAR BY YEAR:
1860-1869
History at a Glance
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1860 Part I
Treaty of Turin
First Taranaki War
Convention of Peking
Secession of South Carolina
Poincare Raymond
The Church Union
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1860 Part II
Barrie James Matthew
Boucicault Dion
Dion Boucicault: "The Colleen Bawn"
Collins Wilkie
Wilkie Collins: "The Woman in White"
Wilkie Collins 
"The Moonstone"
"The Woman in White"
George Eliot: "The Mill on the Floss"
Di Giacoma Salvatore
Labiche Eugene-Marin
Multatuli
Multatuli: "Max Havelaar"
Alexander Ostrovski: "The Storm"
Chekhov Anton
Anton Chekhov
"Uncle Vanya"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1860 Part III
Degas: "Spartan Boys and Girls Exercising"
Hunt: "Finding of the Saviour in the Temple"
Manet: "Spanish Guitar Player"
Ensor James
James Ensor
Mucha Alfons
Alfons Mucha
Levitan Isaak
Isaac Levitan
Steer Philip Wilson
Philip Wilson Steer
Mahler Gustav
Mahler - Das Lied von der Erde
Gustav Mahler
Paderewski Ignace
Paderewski - Minuet
Ignace Paderewski
Suppe Franz
Franz von Suppe - Das Pensionat
Franz von Suppe
Wolf Hugo
Hugo Wolf - "Kennst du das Land"
Hugo Wolf
MacDowell Edward
MacDowell - Piano Sonata No. 1 "Tragica"
Edward MacDowell
Albeniz Isaac
Albeniz - Espana
Isaac Albeniz
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1860 Part IV
Cesium
Rubidium
Fechner Gustav Theodor
Lenoir Etienne
Walton Frederick
Linoleum
Across the Continent
Burke Robert O'Hara
Wills William John
Stuart John McDouall
Grant James Augustus
"The Cornhill Magazine"
"The Catholic Times"
Heenan John Camel
Sayers Tom
The Open Championship
Park William
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1861 Part I
Kansas
Confederate States of America
Davis Jefferson
First inauguration of Abraham Lincoln
American Civil War
First Battle of Bull Run
Battle of Hatteras
The American Civil War, 1861
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1861 Part II
Siege of Gaeta
Emancipation Manifesto
Abduaziz
Louis I
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1861 Part III
Dal Vladimir
Steiner Rudolf
Whitehead Alfred North
Charles Dickens: "Great Expectations"
Dostoevsky: "The House of the Dead"
George Eliot: "Silas Marner"
Oliver Wendell Holmes: "Elsie Venner"
Tagore Rabindranath
Charles Reade: "The Cloister and the Hearth"
Wood Ellen
Mrs. Henry Wood: "East Lynne"
Spielhagen Friedrich
Friedrich Spielhagen: "Problematische Naturen"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1861 Part IV
Garnier Charles
Anquetin Louis
Louis Anquetin
Godward John William
John William Godward
Bourdelle Antoine
Antoine Bourdelle
Korovin Konstantin
Konstantin Korovin
Maillol Aristide
Aristide Maillol
Melba Nellie
Royal Academy of Music, London
The Paris version "Tannhauser"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1861 Part V
Archaeopteryx
Thallium (Tl)
Hopkins Frederick Gowland
Mort Thomas Sutcliffe
Nansen Fridtjof
Fermentation theory
Baker Samuel
Baker Florence
The Bakers and the Nile
Beeton Isabella
Harden Maximilian
First horse-drawn trams in London
Order of the Star of India
Otis Elisha Graves
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1862 Part I
Battle of Fort Henry
Second Battle of Bull Run
BATTLE OF ANTIETAM
Battle of Fredericksburg
Grey Edward
Briand Aristide
The American Civil War, 1862
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1862 Part II
Rawlinson George
Ogai Mori
Ivan Turgenev: "Fathers and Sons"
Flaubert: "Salammbo"
Victor Hugo: "Les Miserables"
Barres Maurice
Maeterlinck Maurice
Hauptmann Gerhart
Wharton Edith
Schnitzler Arthur
Uhland Ludwig
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1862 Part III
Albert Memorial, London
Manet: "Lola de Valence"
Manet: "La Musique aux Tuileries"
Nesterov Mikhail
Mikhail Nesterov
Klimt Gustav
Gustav Klimt
Rysselberghe Theo
Theo van Rysselberghe
Berlioz: "Beatrice et Benedict"
Debussy Claude
Debussy - Preludes
Claude Debussy
Delius Frederick
Frederick Delius - On Hearing the First Cuckoo in Spring
Frederick Delius
German Edward
Edward German - Melody in D flat major
Edward German
Kochel Ludwig
Kochel catalogue
Verdi: "La Forza del Destino"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1862 Part IV
Bragg William
Foucault Leon
Gatling Richard Jordan
Lamont Johann
Lenard Pnilipp
Sachs Julius
Palgrave William Gifford
The Arabian Desert
International Exhibition, London
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1863 Part I
Arizona
Idaho
West Virginia
Emancipation Proclamation
Battle of Chancellorsville
BATTLE OF GETTYSBURG
Lincoln's "Gettysburg Address"
The American Civil War, 1863
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1863 Part II
Isma'il Pasha
January Uprising
George I of Greece
Dost Mohammad Khan
Christian IX  of Denmark
Chamberlain Austen
Lloyd George David
Second Taranaki War
International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1863 Part III
Huxley: "Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature"
Charles Lyell: "The Antiquity of Man"
Massachusetts Agricultural College
D'Annunzio Gabriele
Bahr Hermann
Dehmel Richard
Hale Edward Everett
Edward Everett Hale: "Man without a Country"
Hope Anthony
Charles Kingsley: "The Water Babies"
Longfellow: "Tales of a Wayside Inn"
Quiller-Couch Arthur
Stanislavsky Constantin
Stanislavsky system
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1863 Part IV
Stuck Franz
Manet: "Dejeuner sur l'herbe"
Manet: "Olympia"
Meurent Victorine-Louise
The "Salon des Refuses" in Paris
Art in Revolt
Impressionism Timeline
(1863-1899)
Signac Paul
Paul Signac
Munch Edvard
Edvard Munch
Berlioz: "Les Troyens"
Bizet: "Les Pecheurs de perles"
Mascagni Pietro
Pietro Mascagni: Cavalleria rusticana
Pietro Mascagni
Weingartner Felix
Felix von Weingartner: Symphony No 6
Felix Weingartner
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1863 Part V
Billroth Theodor
Butterick Ebenezer
Ford Henry
Graham Thomas
National Academy of Sciences
Sorby Henry Clifton
The Football Association, London
Grand Prix de Paris
Hearst William Randolph
Yellow journalism
Pulitzer Joseph
Nadar
History of photography
Alexandra of Denmark
Royce Henry
Cuthbert Ned
Coburn Joe
Mike McCoole
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1864 Part I
Schleswig-Holstein Question
First Schleswig War
Second Schleswig War
Halleck Henry
Sherman William
BATTLE OF ATLANTA
Sand Creek massacre
Venizelos Eleutherios
Maximilian II of Bavaria
Louis II
First International Workingmen's Association
Confederate Army of Manhattan
The American Civil War, 1864
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1864 Part II
Lombroso Cesare
Newman: "Apologia pro Vita Sua"
Syllabus of Errors
Dickens: "Our Mutual Friend"
Karlfeldt Erik Axel
Trollope: "The Small House at Allington"
Wedekind Frank
Zangwill Israel
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1864 Part III
Stieglitz Alfred
History of photography
ALFRED STIEGLITZ
Dyce William
William Dyce
Jawlensky Alexey
Alexei von Jawlensky
Ranson Paul
Paul Ranson
Serusier Paul
Paul Serusier
Toulouse-Lautrec Henri
Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec
A More Tolerant Salon
Impressionism Timeline
(1863-1899)
Whistler: "Symphony in White, No. 2"
Roberts David
David Roberts "A Journey in the Holy Land"
D'Albert Eugen
Eugen d'Albert - Piano Concerto No.2
Eugen d’Albert
Foster Stephen
Stephen Foster - Beautiful Dreamer
Offenbach: "La Belle Helene"
Strauss Richard
Richard Strauss - Metamorphosen
Richard Strauss
Fry William Henry
William Henry Fry - Santa Claus Symphony
William Henry Fry - Niagara Symphony
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1864 Part IV
Lake Albert
Bertrand Joseph
Calculus
Nernst Walther
Pasteurization
Wien Wilhelm
Rawat Nain Singh
The Surveyors
Kinthup
First Geneva Convention
Knights of Pythias
"Neue Freie Presse""
De Rossi Giovanni Battista
"In God We Trust"
Travers Stakes
Farragut David
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1865 Part I
Union blockade in the American Civil War
Charleston, South Carolina in the American Civil War
Lee Robert Edward
Conclusion of the American Civil War
Assassination of Abraham Lincoln
Johnson Andrew
Causes of the Franco-Prussian War
Leopold II of Belgium
Harding Warren
George V of Great Britain
Ludendorff Erich
Free State–Basotho Wars
The American Civil War, 1865
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1865 Part II
Baudrillart Henri
William Stanley Jevons: "The Coal Question"
Billings Josh
Belasco David
Campbell Patrick
Lewis Carroll: "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland"
Dodge Mary Mapes
Mary Mapes Dodge: "Hans Brinker, or The Silver Skates"
Kipling Rudyard
Rudyard Kipling
Merezhkovsky Dmitry
John Henry Newman: "Dream of Gerontius"
Mark Twain: "The Celebrated Jumping Frog of Calaveras County"
Walt Whitman: "Drum-Taps"
Yeats William Butler
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1865 Part III
Serov Valentin
Valentin Serov
Wiertz Antoine
Antoine Wiertz
Vallotton Felix
Felix Vallotton
"Olympia" - a Sensation
Impressionism Timeline (1863-1899)
Nielsen Carl
Carl Nielsen - Aladdin Suite
Carl Nielsen
Glazunov Alexander
Glazunov - The Seasons
Alexander Glazunov
Dukas Paul
Paul Dukas "L'Apprenti Sorcier"
Paul Dukas
Meyerbeer: "L'Africaine"
Sibelius Jean
Jean Sibelius - Finlandia
Jean Sibelius
Wagner: "Tristan und Isolde"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1865 Part IV
Plucker Julius
Hyatt John Wesley
Kekule: structure of benzene
Antiseptic
Lowe Thaddeus
Mendelian inheritance
Sechenov Ivan
Whymper Edward
The High Andes
 Bingham Hiram
Rohlfs Friedrich Gerhard
Open hearth furnace
Martin Pierre-Emile
Ku Klux Klan
"The Nation"
Marquess of Queensberry Rules
"San Francisco Examiner"
"San Francisco Chronicle"
Mitchell Maria
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1866 Part I
Cuza Alexandru
"Monstrous coalition"
Carol I
Austro-Prussian War
Battle of Custoza
Battle of Trautenau
Battle of Koniggratz
Battle of Lissa
Cretan Revolt of 1866–1869
MacDonald Ramsay
Sun Yat-sen
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1866 Part II
Croce Benedetto
Soderblom Nathan
Larousse Pierre
Larousse: Great Universal Dictionary of the 19th Century
Friedrich Lange: "History of Materialism"
Benavente Jacinto
Dostoevsky: "Crime and Punishment"
Hamerling Robert
Ibsen: "Brand"
Kingsley: "Hereward the Wake"
Rolland Romain
Wells Herbert
H.G. Wells
"The War of the Worlds"

"The Invisible Man"
 
"A Short History of the World"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1866 Part III
Bakst Leon
Leon Bakst
Fry Roger
Kandinsky Vassili
Vassili Kandinsky
A Defender Appears
Impressionism Timeline (1863-1899)
Busoni Ferruccio
Ferruccio Busoni - Berceuse Elegiaque
Ferruccio Busoni
Offenbach: "La Vie Parisienne"
Smetana: "The Bartered Bride"
Satie Eric
Erik Satie: Nocturnes
Eric Satie
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1866 Part IV
Aeronautical Society of Great Britain
Morgan Thomas Hunt
Nicolle Charles
Werner Alfred
Whitehead Robert
Whitehead torpedo
Doudart de Lagree Ernest
Panic of 1866
Thomas Morris
MacGregor John
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1867 Part I
Manchester Martyrs
Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867
Nebraska
Constitution Act, 1867
Alaska Purchase
North German Confederation
Reform Act of 1867
Battle of Mentana
Mary of Teck
Baldwin Stanley
Rathenau Walther
Pilsudski Joseph
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1867 Part II
Bagehot Walter
Walter Bagehot: "The English Constitution"
Freeman Edward Augustus
Freeman: The History of the Norman Conquest of England
Marx: "Das Kapital"
Thoma Ludwig
Soseki Natsume
Russell George William
Reymont Wladislau
Bennett Arnold
Balmont Konstantin
Pirandello Luigi
Galsworthy John
Charles de Coster: "The Legend of Thyl Ulenspiegel"
Ouida: "Under Two Flags"
Trollope: "The Last Chronicle of Barset"
Turgenev: "Smoke"
Zola: "Therese Raquin"
Ibsen: "Peer Gynt"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1867 Part III
Delville Jean
Jean Delville
Kollwitz Kathe
Kathe Kollwitz
Nolde Emil
Emil Nolde
Bonnard Pierre
Pierre Bonnard
Manet's Personal Exhibition
Impressionism Timeline (1863-1899)
Bizet: "La Jolie Fille de Perth"
Gounod: "Romeo et Juliette"
Offenbach: "La Grande-Duchesse de Gerolstein"
Johann Strauss II: The "Blue Danube"
Toscanini Arturo
Verdi: "Don Carlos"
Granados Enrique
Enrique Granados - Spanish Dances
Enrique Granados
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1867 Part IV
Curie Marie
Michaux Pierre
Monier Joseph
Brenner Railway
Mining industry of South Africa
Dynamite
Thurn and Taxis
Chambers John Graham
London Athletic Club
Barnardo Thomas John
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1868 Part I
British Expedition to Abyssinia
Battle of Magdala
Tokugawa Yoshinobu
Tenure of Office Act
Province of Hanover
Russian Turkestan
Mihailo Obrenovic III
Milan I of Serbia
Glorious Revolution
Horthy Nicholas
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1868 Part II
International Alliance of Socialist Democracy
Charles Darwin: "The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication"
Louisa May Alcott: "Little Women"
Robert Browning: "The Ring and the Book"
Wilkie Collins: "The Moonstone"
Dostoevsky: "The Idiot"
George Stefan
Gorki Maxim
Rostand Edmond
Edmond Rostand
"Cyrano De Bergerac"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1868 Part III
Bernard Emile
Emile Bernard
Vollard Ambroise
Slevogt Max
Max Slevogt
Vuillard Edouard
Edouard Vuillard
The Realist Impulse
Impressionism Timeline (1863-1899)
Bantock Granville
Bantock "Overture The Frogs"
Granville Bantock
Brahms: "Ein deutsches Requiem"
Schillings Max
Max von Schillings: Mona Lisa
Max von Schillings
Wagner: "Die Meistersinger von Nurnberg"
Tchaikovsky: Symphony No. 1
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1868 Part IV
Lartet Louis
Cro-Magnon
Haber Fritz
Millikan Robert Andrews
Richards Theodore William
Scott Robert Falcon
Armour Philip Danforth
Badminton House
Garvin James Louis
Harmsworth Harold
Trades Union Congress
"Whitaker's Almanack"
Sholes Christopher Latham
Typewriter
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1869 Part I
Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant
French legislative election, 1869
Prohibition Party
Red River Rebellion
Chamberlain Neville
Gandhi Mahatma
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1869 Part II
Matthew Arnold: "Culture and Anarchy"
Eduard Hartmann: "The Philosophy of the Unconscious"
Mill: "On The Subjection of Women"
First Vatican Council
Blackmore Richard Doddridge
Blackmore: "Lorna Doone"
Flaubert: "Sentimental Education"
Gide Andre
Gilbert: "Bab Ballads"
Halevy Ludovic
Bret Harte: "The Outcasts of Poker Flat"
Victor Hugo: "The Man Who Laughs"
Leacock Stephen
Mark Twain: "The Innocents Abroad"
Tolstoy: "War and Peace"
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1869 Part III
Lutyens Edwin
Poelzig Hans
Carus Carl Gustav
Carl Gustav Carus
Somov Konstantin
Konstantin Somov
Matisse Henri
Henri Matisse
Manet Falls Foul of the Censor
Impressionism Timeline (1863-1899)
Bruckner: Symphony No. 0
Pfitzner Hans
Pfitzner - Nachts
Hans Pfitzner
Wagner Siegfried
Siegfried Wagner "Prelude to Sonnenflammen"
Richard Wagner: "Das Rheingold"
Roussel Albert
Albert Roussel - Bacchus et Ariane
Albert Roussel
Wood Henry
 
YEAR BY YEAR:
1869 Part IV
Francis Galton: "Hereditary Genius"
Celluloid
Periodic law
Nachtigal Gustav
Cincinnati Red Stockings
Girton College, Cambridge
Nihilism
1869 New Jersey vs. Rutgers football game
Co-operative Congress
Lesseps Ferdinand
Suez Canal
 
 

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)
 
 
 
 
 HISTORY, RELIGION, PHILOSOPHY, ART, LITERATURE, MUSIC, SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, DAILY LIFE
 
 
 
 
YEAR BY YEAR:  1800 - 1899
 
 
 
1860 Part I
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Treaty of Turin
 

The Treaty of Turin concluded on March 24, 1860 is the instrument by which the Duchy of Savoy and the County of Nice were annexed to France.

 
Background
Emperor Napoleon III of France and Prime Minister Cavour of the Kingdom of Sardinia met in secret at Plombières-les-Bains on 21 July 1858. They agreed that France would support the unification of Italy by Sardinia, provided that the Pope should retain control of Rome, and Sardinia would cede to France the Duchy of Savoy and County of Nice.

In April 1859, Austria, complaining that Sardinia had been supplying arms to Lombard separatists, declared war on Sardinia. The Franco-Sardinian forces defeated the Austrians in several battles: Palestro, Montebello, Magenta, and Solferino.

But Napoleon III, who had taken personal command of his army, professed himself horrified by the extent of the bloodshed involved and resolved to end the war. The fighting ended with the armistice of Villafranca on 12 July 1859. The armistice led to the Treaty of Zurich of 10 November 1859, which transferred Lombardy to Sardinia. Complete Italian unification was deferred, though as matters turned out, not for long.

The late King Charles Albert of Sardinia (1798–1849) had been an active Italian nationalist. Among the liberal elites in francophone Savoy, the idea had grown up that the "House of Savoy" in Turin had little concern for their province beyond Mont Blanc. In practical terms, at a time when the extent of state activity was increasing across Europe, this was manifest in a perceived discrimination against French speakers when making government appointments. On July 25, 1859, about 30 leading citizens of Chambéry presented an address to Napoleon III, calling for Savoy to be annexed to France.

Elsewhere in Savoy, especially in the north, opposition to the idea of French annexation began to mobilise. The formerly Savoyard province of Carouge, adjacent to Geneva, had been transferred to Switzerland in 1816 under an earlier Treaty of Turin, as part of the unbundling of Napoleon I's First French Empire. Scenarios now under discussion included continuing with Savoy as a province of Sardinia, or joining more or even all of the territory with Switzerland, an outcome favored by Great Britain. There was very little support for the idea of a totally autonomous Savoy, the vulnerability of small quasi-autonomous territories having been vividly demonstrated within living memory by Napoleon I.

  The Treaty
Faced with the uncertainties implicit in the conflicting scenarios, and unwilling to countenance any further expansion of Switzerland, French and Sardinian diplomats swung into action. The 1860 Treaty of Turin, signed on March 24, 1860, was the outcome. Savoy and Nice found themselves annexed to France as by the Plombières agreement of 1858, but subject to certain conditions. Article 1 of the finalized document also stated, in deliberately vague terms, that the annexation would take place after the populations of Nice and Savoy had consented to the arrangement. Sardinian troops evacuated Savoy during March 1860. On April 1 the King of Sardinia released his Savoyard subjects from their oaths of loyalty to the Kingdom of Sardinia and a suitably crafted plebiscite (restricted to adult males, following the pattern already established in France by Napoleon III) was held in Nice on April 15 and 16 and in Savoy on April 22 and 23 to provide popular endorsement of the Treaty. In order to deflect anticipated resistance from the north of Savoy, where the Swiss solution had its strongest appeal, the creation was confirmed of a form of duty-free zone north of a line defined by Saint-Genix-sur-Guiers, Le Châtelard, Faverges and Ugine. The effect of this provision was that Savoy's northern frontier posts, now to become a part of the French frontier, would be located a significant distance away from the actual frontier with Switzerland. The Treaty of Turin restated the political neutrality of the strip of Savoy north of the frontier posts but south of Switzerland, the neutrality of this land, along with that of Switzerland itself, having already been agreed in 1815 under the terms of the Final Act of the Congress of Vienna.

The outcome of the plebiscite held in Savoy on 22 April was an overwhelming "Yes" to the question, "Does Savoy wish to be unified with France?" In northern Savoy, the accepted vote was "Yes and Zone," indicating acceptance of the duty-free zone with Switzerland. A similar public vote of support for French annexation had been achieved by plebiscite one week earlier in the County of Nice. Logically, it should have been necessary for the outcome of the plebiscite to be known before the treaty could be signed off by the respective monarchs. The fact that the treaty was actually signed off a month before the plebiscite took place, the size of the majority supporting the treaty, and the wording of the question used for the plebiscite were some of the factors giving rise to subsequent doubts about the conduct of this 'popular consultation'.

 
 
Treaty of Turin (1860)

Signed in Turin March 24, 1860

In the name of the Most Holy and indivisible Trinity, His Majesty the Emperor of the French having explained the considerations which, in consequence of the changes made in the territorial relationships between France and Sardinia, made him desire the annexation (réunion) of Savoy and of the arrondissement of Nice (circondario di Nizza) to France, and His Majesty the King of Sardinia having shown himself disposed to accede thereunto, their said Majesties have decided to conclude a treaty to that effect, and have named as their Plenipotentiaries: His Majesty the Emperor of the French, Baron de Talleyrand Périgord [...] and M. Benedetti [...]; and His Majesty the King of Sardinia, his Excellency Count Camille Benso de Cavour [...], and his Excellency the Chevalier Charles Louis Farini [...] who, having exchanged their full powers in due form, have agreed upon the following articles:–

 
 

Art. 1. His Majesty the King of Sardinia consents to the annexation (réunion) of Savoy and of the arrondissement of Nice (circondario di Nizza) to France, and renounces for himself and all his descendants and successors his rights and claims to the said territories. It is agreed between their Majesties that this réunion shall be effected without any constraint upon the wishes of the populations, and that the Governments of the Emperor of the French and of the King of Sardinia shall concert together as soon as possible on the best means of appreciating and taking note of (constater) the manifestations of those wishes.

Art. 2. It is also understood that His Majesty the King of Sardinia cannot transfer the neutralized portions of Savoy except upon the conditions upon which he himself possesses them, and that it will appertain to His Majesty the Emperor of the French to come to an understanding on that subject as well with the Powers represented at the Congress of Vienna as with the Helvetic Confederation, and to give them the guarantees which result from the stipulations alluded to in the present article.

Art. 3. A mixed commission will determine, in a spirit off equity, the frontiers of the two States, taking into account the configuration of the mountains and the necessity of defence.

Art. 4. One or more mixed commissions will be charged to examine and to resolve, within a brief delay, the divers incidental questions to which the annexation will give rise,–such as the decision of the contribution of Savoy and of the arrondissement of Nice to the public debt of Sardinia, and the execution of the obligations resulting from contracts entered into with the Sardinian Government, which, however, engages to terminate itself the works commenced for cutting a tunnel through the Alps (Mont Cénia).

Art. 5. The French Government will take into account, as regards functionaries of the civil and military order belonging by their birth to the province of Savoy, or to the arrondissement of Nice, and who will become French subjects, the rights which they have acquired by services rendered to the Sardinian Government; they will especially enjoy the benefits of life appointments in the magistrature and of the guarantees assured to the army.

Art. 6. Sardinian subjects originally of Savoy, or of the arrondissement of Nice, or domiciled actually in those provinces, who would wish to maintain the Sardinian nationality, will enjoy during the period of one year, dating from the exchange of the ratifications, and in virtue of a previous declaration made to the competent authorities, the faculty of removing their domicile to Italy, and settling there, in which case their qualifications as Sardinian citizens will remain to them. They will be at liberty to keep their landed property situate on the territory annexed to France.

Art. 7. For Sardinia the present treaty will become law as soon as the necessary legislative sanction has been given by the Parliament.

Art. 8. The present treaty shall be ratified and the ratifications exchanged at Turin within the delay of ten days, or earlier if possible.

In faith of which the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed it and affixed their seals thereunto.

Done in duplicate at Turin the 24th day of the month of March of the year of grace 1860.

TALLEYRAND.
BENEDETTI.
CAVOUR.
FARINI.

 
The plebiscite
By the treaty of 24 March 1860, it was agreed between France and Sardinia that Savoy and Nice, after the population had been consulted, should be ceded to France, and that Tuscany and the Romagna should also, after a similar consultation, be annexed to Sardinia. By the terms of the treaty the annexation of these respective territories was made no less advantageous to Victor Emmanuel than to Napoleon. With Austria vindictive and powerful, and in a threatening strategic position; with the Pope outraged and desperate, and in control of an army which attached to itself a large share of the fanaticism of Europe, there was no hope for struggling Italy but in a firmer alliance with France. In this fact alone is to be found an explanation of the willingness of the Sardinian government to part with so considerable a portion of its territory. Reasons enough existed why King and Emperor were equally anxious that the people should vote for annexation.

The fifth article of the Sardinian Constitution provides that treaties which shall make any alteration in the territories of the State shall not take effect until after they have obtained the consent of the Chamber. In view of this provision, it was manifestly the duty of the government to submit the treaty to the Chamber for ratification before the popular vote should be taken, inasmuch as it was only by virtue of the treaty that the people would be entitled to vote at all. But there were dangers in this method of procedure which the Sardinian government did not fail to foresee.

The project of annexation was not popular in Parliament, indeed, it was likely to fail. Giuseppe Garibaldi did not hesitate to raise his voice, in season and out of season, against it; and, what was of the greatest importance, as showing the untrammelled desires of the people most affected, "every one of the delegates from Nice and Savoy to Parliament had been elected with the express understanding that they were to protest against such a transfer to another power." In the short time that allowed of effort, thirteen thousand signatures were obtained to a protest against annexation.

  In view of these inconvenient facts, it was determined to postpone a ratification by Parliament until a popular vote, unanimous or nearly unanimous, had been secured. It seems to have been of no consequence that the treaty, according to which the vote was to be taken, really had no existence until it was ratified by the Chamber; it was determined, to proceed as though it had been ratified, and then to use the advantage gained by this procedure to secure its ratification.

Accordingly, measures were instituted to secure such a popular vote as was desired. First of all, the Sardinian troops were withdrawn, and their places were filled by French garrisons. The opposition of the inhabitants of Nice to becoming French was indicated by the fact that the troops, on first entering the city, were received so roughly that they were obliged to resort to the use of the bayonet. The municipal junta sent a vote of thanks to those members of the British Parliament who had spoken in opposition to French annexation. The French Consul wrote to his government, that, if a French man-of-war did not come to Villa Franca, his own life and that of his family would not be secure. After the said ship arrived, the editor of the newly established French organ, L'Avenir de Nice, was besieged in his house, and obliged to rush down to Villa Franca for refuge.

Such were some of the indications of public sentiment at the time when the French garrisons were taking their places. It was evident that the people were not to be easily overawed.

But the efforts of the government had only just begun. Immediately after the occupation of the country by French troops, there was published an order transferring the civil government of the provinces to France. The French provisional governor, Lubonis, made haste to use the power thus placed in his hands for the advantage of his imperial master, and his example was speedily followed by Lachinal. Many of the mayors and local authorities were utterly opposed to the idea of French annexation, and without their co-operation it was felt that a vote of the people in favor of the measure could not be insured. Accordingly the following circular, filled out as might in each case be required, was issued:

 
 

THE GOVERNOR OF ANNECY.
Considering that Monsieur ——— , mayor of the commune of ——— , seems not to have accepted favorably the consequences of the Treaty of the 24th of March last; considering that it is important, under the present circumstances, to have at the head of the administration of each commune men devoted to the new order of things;

It is decreed,

1. Monsieur ——— , present mayor of the commune of ———— , is dismissed from his functions.

2. The municipal counselor ——— is charged, until a new order, with the administration of said commune.

3. The above will be transmitted to Messieurs ——— and ——— , for their guidance.

(Signed) LACHINAL, Governor Regent.
Annecy, April, 1860.

 
In commenting upon this transfer of civil authority to the sole interests of the Emperor, the French journals gave evidence of abundant zeal. One of them, Le Bon Sens, remarked:
 

"A very important thing for the success of the great votation to which Savoy is about to be called is to have at the head of each commune a mayor thoroughly devoted to the French annexation, for it is he who should give the impulse and preside at the electoral operations. A mayor who is devoted to Piedmont, or having a Swiss leaning, will be altogether out of place on such an occasion. We learn with pleasure that a great purgation has already taken place in the province of Chambery, of mayors, either hostile or suspected. We ask all sincere friends of France to keep a sharp look-out upon their communal administration. We do not doubt that the governor of the province of Annecy will be ready, if such is the case, to make use of the full powers with which he is clothed, to replace in each commune all the mayors who will not loyally co-operate in the great cause of our national regeneration."

 
The military and civil machinery thus in order, the authorities now devoted themselves to the more immediate work of manufacturing the requisite majority. First of all, the public was informed not only that it was prohibited to hold any meetings to discuss the affairs of Nice, but also that no canvassing on the part of those opposed to French annexation would be permitted, and that no placards or circulars would be allowed to be issued by the Italian party. At the same time, documents of various kinds were issued by the officers in authority, appealing to their subordinates and to the people. The provisional governor, Lubonis, issued a proclamation, of which the following is the most important portion:
 

"CITIZENS, All uncertainty with reference to our future has ceased. By the Treaty of the 24th of March, the gallant King Victor Emmanuel has ceded to France Savoy and the arrondissement of Nice. The most powerful motives of political necessity, the exigencies of the future of Italy, the sentiment of gratitude toward his powerful ally, and, finally, the exceptional circumstances of our country, have decided, although with regret, our beloved sovereign to separate the provinces which have been for so many centuries intimately bound up with his dynasty. But the fate of a people does not rest exclusively with the desire of princes. Therefore the magnanimous Emperor Napoleon the Third and the loyal Victor Emmanuel have desired that this Treaty of Cession should be strengthened by the popular adhesion... All opposition should fall powerless before the interests of the country and the sentiment of duty. Besides, it will find an insurmountable obstacle in the wishes themselves of Victor Emmanuel... Fellow-citizens, the mission which the King has confided to me is transitory but important. In order to fulfil my task at this extraordinary juncture, I count upon the support of your co-operation, upon your respect for law, and upon the high degree of civilization to which you have raised yourselves. Hasten, therefore, to confirm by your suffrages the reunion of your country to France. In making ourselves the echo of the intentions of the King, let us unfurl the banner of that noble and great nation which has always excited our lively sympathies. Let us rally round the throne of the glorious Emperor Napoleon the Third. Let us surround it with the same fidelity, so especial to our country, which we have always preserved to this day to Victor Emmanuel. As for this august Prince, let us retain among us the worship of bygone memories, and let us raise earnest prayers for his new and brilliant destiny. To the great Napoleon the Third, whose powerful and firm will is to open a new era of prosperity for our country, our inflexible fidelity, as well as our respectful devotion, will now commence.

Vive Ia France!

Vive L'Empereur Napoleon III!

Le Gouverneur Provisionnel, LUBONIS."

 
A proclamation similar to this of Lubonis was issued by Malaussena, Mayor of Nice; and finally, as if to crown all, the Bishop came forward in the same interest, appealing to all loyal members of the Church to vote for annexation. Nor, indeed, was this all. The French Committee sent to all the officials a circular bearing the government seal, and appealing for support to all the authorities in town and country. Referring to the advantages to be derived from annexation, the Committee used these words:
 

"We are convinced that the imperial government will recompense the people for the unanimity of their vote, and will proportion the reward according to the good disposition manifested by them. Without enumerating here the immense and incontestable advantages of every kind which our country would derive from its annexation to the great French Empire, we consider it our duty to address ourselves to all our friends and correspondents, not only to stimulate their zeal in favor of the common cause, and to engage them to use all their influence in order to insure the success of the vote in the French interest, but also that they may carefully watch and point out to us the steps that have been taken in a contrary interest by those in opposition, in order that the necessary measures may be taken to neutralize the influences which are hostile to the interests of the country. Will you have the goodness, M. ——— , to acknowledge the receipt of this, and to make known to us the spirit of your population, and that of the local authorities?"

 
The "necessary measures" to which the committee alluded were amply provided for. A sum of money had been placed at their disposal by the French government; and of this it is stated on good authority that 3,000,000 francs were used in the direct work of bribery, exclusive of the expenses of the government on the day of voting. Drinking booths and cafés were erected especially for the purpose by the officials, and a tri-colored cockade or a voting ticket with "oui" upon it entitled the bearer to the gratuitous enjoyment of all their privileges.

Another device which appealed to the religious zeal of the people was that of blessing the standards of the imperial party. This official blessing of the French flags was calculated to work an immense effect upon the ignorant and somewhat superstitious population. The authorization ran in this way:

 

"MM. les Commissaires will distribute the flags which MM. les Curés are authorized, and indeed invited, to bless. These standards will be in this case presented by the Commune, at the head of the inhabitants, to MM. les Curés, who will receive them at the entry of the church. Finally, you will understand the importance which I attach to this last recommendation. You will take care that official proclamations, manifestoes, and notices are preserved intact. All appeals to the passions—any notice whatever affixed without the required authorization—will be immediately torn down."

 
Side by side with this was posted the following official manifesto:
 

"The Mayor of Bonneville notifies that the Communal Council will assist at the benediction of the flags which the Imperial Government has presented to the Commune; that this religious ceremony will take place on Sunday, the 22nd, at seven o'clock, A. M.; that the cortège will leave the Hotel de Ville to go to the church. All electors are invited to this ceremony, which will immediately precede the opening of the voting-urns. In the morning the Hotel de Ville will be decorated with the French flags and the national colors. All the inhabitants are invited to decorate their houses with flags of the same colors.

"The Imperial Government has made its début by a signal benefit in giving us the customs zone, which has hitherto been refused. It assures to us the prosperity of the country. Its generosity will not end here. French engineers have explored the province, have begun to study the banks of the rivers, the state of the roads, and the public works most useful to the country. The numerous mines of Faucigny will be worked, the condition of our collége will be improved. Let us show our gratitude to the Emperor. Let us give a free course to our sympathies, so long restrained, and prove by a compact and unanimous vote that we are as much French as our fathers were.

Vive l'Empereur!

Vive la France!

(Signed) Dufour, Mayor."

 
As the day of voting approached, the Central Committee issued the following circular:
 

"SIR, The Central Annexationist Committee, upon whose proceedings no restrictions were placed, has named you member of the Special Committee for the parish of ———. You will have the goodness, sir, to concert with your colleagues, Messrs. ———, measures which may unite and bring to the poll on Sunday next the greatest possible number of electors, and take any steps which appear expedient, in order that the vote of the population may be at the same time a striking manifestation of its sentiments towards France and towards the Emperor."

 
In addition to all the other pressure, the local police authorities openly declared that lists of the proscrits would be made out, and that those who abstained from voting would be punished as soon as they became French subjects. The same authorities received orders from headquarters at Nice to collect the peasants on the day of voting and march them into town, with drums beating, and French flags floating at their head. An Englishman, who was at Nice at the time of the election, thus describes what he saw:
 

"The first object which met my view, as I entered Nice on the morning of the 15th, was a procession of country people marching into town. At the head of the procession was a fat curé, arm-in-arm with the village syndic and another functionary; behind were thirty or forty rustics, some of them extremely drunk, although early in the morning, carrying flags, beating drums, and cheering in a maudlin, irregular manner. The streets were crowded with persons wearing tri-colored cockades and carrying the oui voting-ticket in their hats. French soldiers, of whom there was a plentiful sprinkling, mingled freely with the crowd, although one battalion had been marched to Villa Franca, to give the authorities an opportunity of saying that, in order not to influence the vote, part of the French troops had left the town. The urns were placed in the National College, and thither I repaired to watch the process of voting. The people crowded in and voted with scarcely a challe.nge; lists of those registered were posted up outside; but at first the votes were given too rapidly to enable the scrutineers to exercise any check. The oui ticket was distributed freely in the streets; men stood at the corners as if they were advertising quack medicines, and gave you any number of "ouis", but I endeavored both in the shops and in the streets to procure a "non" without success. One boor I saw just about to vote two tickets. I asked him if such was his intention, and he naively answered, 'Why not?' 'Oh,' I said, 'it won't be fair; give me one' — which he most good-naturedly did at once. Another man to whom I spoke told me that he was strongly opposed to becoming French — that he had two sons in the Sardinian service, one in the army and the other in the navy, that he himself was a poor boatman, and that he had voted oui against his inclination, because the police had told him that if he did not he would be imprisoned, that the King whom he loved wanted it — that England and all the powers wanted it — and that as for his voting in the opposite sense he would simply get himself into a scrape and do no good. But he said promptly, 'I have neither cheered, nor will I wear a cockade.' As all the scrutineers were the nominees of Pietri (the French Agent of Police), and, as they held the keys of the urns, there was, of course, no security against any number of oui tickets being put into them in private."

 
The same witness wrote subsequently from Bonneville, where he happened to be on the day of the voting in Savoy:
 

"On the morning of the 22d I found myself once more at Bonneville in Faucigny; but a considerable change had taken place in the aspect of affairs since I had left it less than a month before. From every house, and almost every window of every house, waved French flags. The hotel, which had formerly been the headquarters of the anti-French party, and where I had dined with the members of the Committee, was tricked out in all the splendors of red, white, and blue. The booksellers shop, where I had heard sentiments strongly hostile to France, now displayed a gigantic banner; but, more remarkable than all, the house of the candidate who had contested Bonneville three weeks before on the Swiss interest, as opposed to the French, was now decorated with French flags. My old friends were nowhere to be found; the Committee had evaporated, and throughout the town where party feeling had recently run so high, and anti-French annexation was rampant and openly expressed, there was not a syllable to be heard against it. A little shopkeeper, whom I knew formerly as a furious anti-Frenchman, was now with difficulty dug out of his backshop, and owned to having just voted in favor of France as an act of self-preservation. 'What could I do?' said he; 'the concierge de la ville brought me two tickets this morning, with a message from the intendant that if I didn't vote them it would be the worse for me. He also asked where my French flag was, and advised me, if I valued my liberty, to show one without delay. There is the flag, and here is the other voting-ticket; a similar one I have just voted, but this I present to you."

'BULLETIN DE VOTATION.
La Savoie veut-elle être réunie à la France?
Oui et Zone.'


"My informant went on to tell me that every voter had received his ticket from the police authorities, and he smiled when I asked him where I could procure a non ticket. 'No printing-house here would venture to print one,' he said; 'you would have to get them from Geneva.' The addition of the word "Zone" struck me as curious, and I asked the object of its insertion in the voting-ticket. The device was ingenious. The authorities, fearing that though the people had not the courage to vote non they might be bold enough to abstain from voting at all, gave it to be understood that such a course would not prevent their being annexed, but that they would thereby lose their commercial zone or free frontier with Switzerland, upon which their future prosperity would depend; in other words, by voting they would be annexed and get their zone, by abstaining they would be equally annexed, but ruined. By a recent French circular I perceive it stated that the desire of the Emperor to carry out the conditions of neutrality, as laid down in the ninety-second article of the Treaty, has induced him to grant the Zone. It was originally invented as an election 'dodge', and served its purpose admirably, being used either as a bribe or as a threat."

 
Such were the means by which the hostility of Nice and Savoy to French annexation was converted into an almost unanimous declaration in its favor. Under any circumstances whatever such a spectacle of organized trickery would be a painful thing to contemplate. It is possible to imagine a situation in which the ruler of the nation, for political reasons, might submit a question that had already been decided to the ratification of his people with no other evil result than that which might chance to be inflicted upon the people themselves.

But in the case of Savoy and Nice there was an element in the transaction which made it an outrage upon the liberal sentiment of Europe and of the world. We refer to the repeated declarations that the votation would be perfectly "free". The first article of the treaty declared that "it is understood between their Majesties that this re-union shall be effected without any constraint upon the will of the people, and that the government of the King of Sardinia and that of the Emperor of the French will agree as soon as possible upon the best means of arriving at and of confirming the manifestation of this will." Not long after the Treaty was formed, a deputation from Nice waited upon Victor Emmanuel, when he assured them "that he had stipulated as a condition of this cession a votation free from any external pressure, and promised that, if a military occupation took place, or if the condition was violated in any manner, he would protest"; and again, in the proclamation by which he released his subjects in Nice and Savoy from their allegiance, he gave them this assurance:
  "Under no circumstances will this great change in your destiny be imposed upon you; it must be the result of your free consent.

Such is my firm determination; such also is the intention of the Emperor of the French." Finally, in the Chamber of Deputies, when the vigorous protest of Garibaldi seemed likely to put an end to the whole transaction, confidence was restored only when Count Cavour assured the deputies that the vote should be absolutely free (pienamente libero). And yet, in view of all these most solemn assurances, what have we seen? Italian troops removed and French troops put in their places; all the important civil offices filled with Frenchmen, or men committed to the support of the French cause; official circulars and placards advocating annexation scattered everywhere, while no publication of an opposing sentiment was anywhere allowed; ballot-boxes in exclusive control of French officers; ballots in favor of annexation distributed everywhere by the police, while ballots opposed to annexation could be procured only by sending to Geneva; priests blessing the flags presented by the Emperor, and appealing to the consciences of their people in behalf of France; money, as well as general free living and drinking, furnished by the imperial agents; and, finally, the people, with French music sounding and French banners flying, marched up en masse to the ballot-box, with priest and mayor arm-in-arm at their head. Such was the boasted "free vote" with the sanction and help of which Nice and Savoy were annexed to France.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
1860
 
 
Garibaldi Giuseppe and his 1,000 redshirts ("i Mille") sail from Genoa; reach Marsala; take Palermo and Naples
 
 

People cheering as Giuseppe Garibaldi rides into
Naples on horseback
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Victor Emmanuel II, King of Sardinia, invades Papal States and defeats papal troops
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Garibaldi Giuseppe proclaims Victor Emmanuel II King of Italy
 
 

Victor Emanuel meets Giuseppe Garibaldi in Teano
 
 
 
1860
 
 
First Taranaki War
 

The First Taranaki War was an armed conflict over land ownership and sovereignty that took place between Māori and the New Zealand Government in the Taranaki district of New Zealand's North Island from March 1860 to March 1861.

The war was sparked by a dispute between the government and Māori land owners over the sale of a property at Waitara, but spread throughout the region. It was fought by more than 3,500 imperial troops brought in from Australia, as well as volunteer soldiers and militia, against Māori forces that fluctuated between a few hundred and about 1,500. Total losses among the imperial, volunteer and militia troops are estimated to have been 238, while Māori casualties totalled about 200, although the proportion of Māori casualties was higher.

 
The war ended in a ceasefire, with neither side explicitly accepting the peace terms of the other. Though there were claims by the British that they had won the war, there were widely held views at the time they had suffered an unfavourable and humiliating result. Historians have also been divided on the result. Historian James Belich has claimed that Māori succeeded in thwarting the British bid to impose sovereignty over them, and had therefore been victorious. But he said the Māori victory was a hollow one, leading to the invasion of the Waikato.

In its 1996 report to the Government on Taranaki land claims, the Waitangi Tribunal observed that the war was begun by the Government, which had been the aggressor and unlawful in its actions in launching an attack by its armed forces. An opinion sought by the tribunal from a senior constitutional lawyer stated that the Governor, Thomas Gore Browne, and certain officers were liable for criminal and civil charges for their actions. The term "First Taranaki War" is opposed by some historians, who refer only to the Taranaki Wars, rejecting suggestions that post-1861 conflict was a second war. The 1927 Royal Commission on Confiscated Land also referred to the hostilities between 1864 and 1866 as a continuation of the initial Taranaki war.

 
 
Background
The catalyst for the war was the disputed sale of 600 acres (2.4 km²) of land known as the Pekapeka block, or Teira's block, at Waitara. The block's location perfectly suited European settlers' wish for a township and port to serve the north of the Taranaki district and its sale was viewed as a likely precedent for other sales that would open up for settlement all land between New Plymouth and the Waitara River. Pokikake Te Teira, a minor chief of the Te Atiawa iwi, first offered the land to the New Zealand government in 1857, immediately attracting the vehement opposition of the paramount chief of the tribe, Wiremu Kingi, who declared a veto on the plan. Governor Browne felt obliged to resist the veto; he insisted Māori had the right to sell if they wished, and was also keen to demonstrate support for a friendly chief over an individual who was resisting the authority of the Crown and the expansion of European law.

Governor Browne accepted the purchase with full knowledge of the circumstances and tried to occupy the land, anticipating it would lead to armed conflict. A year earlier Browne had written to the Colonial Office in England, advising: "I have, however, little fear that William King (Kingi) will venture to resort to violence to maintain his assumed right, but I have made every preparation to enforce obedience should he presume to do so."

 
Governor Thomas Gore Browne.
 
 
Although the pressure for the sale of the block resulted from the colonists' hunger for land in Taranaki, the greater issue fuelling the conflict was the Government's desire to impose British administration, law and civilisation on the Māori as a demonstration of the substantive sovereignty the British believed they had gained in the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi. The hastily written Māori translation, however, had given Māori chiefs an opposing view that the English had gained only nominal sovereignty, or "governorship" of the country as a whole while Māori retained "chieftainship" over their lands, villages and treasures.
 
 

Location of the disputed Pekapeka block on the site of modern-day Waitara.
 
 
By 1860, it was tacitly recognised that British law prevailed in the settlements and Māori custom elsewhere, though the British, who by then outnumbered Māori, were finding this fact increasingly irksome. One commentator observed, with reference to Waitara: "We seem to be fast approaching a settlement of that point, whether Her Fair Majesty or His Dark Majesty shall reign in New Zealand." The British were convinced that their system represented the best that civilization had to offer and saw it as both their duty and their right to impose it on other peoples.

However, in the 20 years since the signing of the Treaty, the Māori had made significant political advances. They had moved from being a collection of independent tribes to an effective confederation known as the Māori King Movement, which was centred on the Waikato region, but which had influence over large areas of the North Island. One of the uniting principles of the King Movement was their opposition to the sale of Māori land and the concomitant spread of British sovereignty.

The settlement of New Plymouth—at the time "a line of wooden houses straggling untidily along the waterfront and intersected by bush-filled gullies which provided perfect cover for an attacking party"—was deemed vulnerable to assault by hostile Māori because of tensions over land sales and a detachment of British troops had been placed in the settlement in 1855. The killing of Katatore, an opponent of land selling at Waitara, in January 1858—which in turn sparked more feuding among local Māori and threats of a revenge massacre at Waitara by Kingi—prompted the formation of the Taranaki Militia in 1858 and Taranaki Volunteer Rifle Company in 1859.

 
 
Battle at Te Kohia
Teira was paid a ₤100 deposit for the land in December 1859. When Māori obstructed surveyors as they began work on the block, Browne responded by declaring martial law throughout Taranaki on 22 February 1860. Two days later a deed for the sale of the disputed Pekapeka block was executed, with 20 Māori signatories of Te Teira's family being accepted as representing all owners of the land.

On 4 March, Browne ordered Colonel Charles Emilius Gold, commanding the 65th Regiment, the Taranaki Militia and the Taranaki Rifle Volunteers, to occupy the disputed block of land at Waitara in preparation for a survey. Four hundred men landed at Waitara the next day to fortify a position and the survey of the land began on 13 March without resistance.

On the night of 15 March, however, Kingi and about 80 men built an L-shaped pā, or defensive strong point, at Te Kohia, at the south-west extremity of the block, commanding the road access. The next day, they uprooted the surveyors' boundary markers and when ordered the next day, 17 March, to surrender, they refused. Gold's troops opened fire and the Taranaki wars had begun.

Gold's troops, by then numbering almost 500, poured in heavy fire all day from as near as 50 metres, firing 200 rounds from two 24-pound howitzers as well as small arms fire. Despite the firepower, the Māori suffered no casualties and abandoned the pā that night. Though it was small – about 650 square yards – the pā had been situated so that it was difficult to surround completely and had also been built with covered trenches and 10 anti-artillery bunkers, roofed with timber and earth, that protected its garrison.

The British objective at Waitara had been a rapid and decisive victory that would destroy the main enemy warrior force, checking and crippling Māori independence and asserting British sovereignty. That mission failed and the Te Kohia clash ended as little more than a minor skirmish with a result that disappointed English settlers.

Yet for Māori, too, the engagement had strong symbolic importance. Outnumbered and outgunned, Kingi needed to draw allies from several places, but by Māori tikanga, or protocol, support would not be offered to an aggressor. Te Kohia pa, hastily built and just as quickly abandoned, appeared to have been built for one purpose: to provide plain evidence of the Governor's "wrong". The aggressor having been identified, others were then free to launch reprisals under utu laws.

Within days, Māori war parties began plundering the farms south of New Plymouth, killing six settlers who had not taken refuge in the town. Fearing an attack on New Plymouth was imminent, the British withdrew from Waitara and concentrated around the town.

  Battle of Waireka
The military action at Waitara brought the result Kingi had been hoping for and within 10 days of the Te Kohia battle, about 500 warriors from the Taranaki, Ngati Ruanui and Nga Rauru iwi converged on the New Plymouth area to provide support. The warriors built an entrenched and stockaded pā named Kaipopo on one of the hills at Waireka, about 8 km southwest of New Plymouth and 4 km from the Omata stockade that lay on the road to the town. The area was scattered with some houses built by European settlers, and on 27 March, five settlers, including two boys, were either shot or tomahawked in the Omata district.

Tensions in New Plymouth quickly climbed and many settlers abandoned their farms to flee for the safety of the town. Among those who remained in the Omata area were the Rev. Henry Brown, the Rev. Thomas Gilbert and several others who were either French or Portuguese. All felt safe: both ministers were treated by Māori as tapu or untouchable, while the others were confident the Māori grievance was with only the British.

About 1pm on 28 March, a British force of about 335 men—28 Navy, 88 from the British 65th Regiment, 103 members of the newly formed Taranaki Rifle Volunteers and 56 from a local militia—set off in two columns to "rescue" those who had remained behind. It would be the first occasion on which a British Volunteer corps engaged an enemy on the battlefield.

Captain Charles Brown, in command of the settlers, was ordered to march down the coast until he reached the rear of the Māori positions at Waireka. The Regulars, under Lieut-Colonel G.F. Murray, marched down the main road to Omata, intending to dislodge a war party reported to be at Whalers Gate, north of Omata.

Once the road was clear, it was intended they would be joined by the Volunteers and militia, who had "rescued" the settlers, before marching back to New Plymouth. Because of the heightened state of fear in New Plymouth, however, Murray had been ordered to return his troops to the town before nightfall. The Volunteers were armed with muzzle-loading Enfield rifles and the militia had old smooth-bore muskets from the 1840s, with each man issued with just 30 rounds of ammunition.

Murray met no resistance at Whalers Gate, but as he approached Waireka he heard the sound of rapid firing towards the coast. He entrenched his men and opened fire on the Kaipopo pā with a rocket tube. The gunfire Murray heard was being exchanged between about 200 Māori warriors—who, armed mostly with double-barrel shotguns and some rifles, were firing from the cover of bush and flax in the river gully—and the militia and Volunteers, who had retreated to the safety of the farmhouse of settler John Jury.

About 5.30 pm, Murray sounded the bugle for a retreat, withdrawing his Regulars for the march back to New Plymouth so they could arrive before dark.

 
 
His withdrawal left the settler force, which had already suffered two killed and eight wounded, isolated at the farmhouse with little ammunition and late in the night, carrying their casualties, they scrambled across paddocks to the Omata stockade, arriving about 12.30 am, before returning to New Plymouth.

Late in the afternoon, meanwhile, Captain Peter Cracroft, commander of HMS Niger, had landed 60 bluejackets at New Plymouth and marched via Omata to Waireka, encountering Murray as he prepared to retreat. Cracroft's troops fired 24-pound rockets into the pā from a distance of about 700 metres and stormed it at dusk, tearing down three Māori ensigns. The first man into the pā was leading seaman William Odgers, who was awarded a Victoria Cross for bravery–the first awarded in the New Zealand wars. Cracroft's men then returned to New Plymouth, without making contact with the settler force, who were still at the Jury farmhouse.

Cracroft was lauded as a hero for his mission, with claims of the number of Māori killed by his troops ranging from 70 to 150. Total European losses were 14 killed and wounded. Historian James Belich has claimed the pā was more of a camp and all but empty and the total Māori casualties amounted to no more than one. He described the "legend" of Waireka as a classic example of the construction of a paper victory, with invented claims of "enormous" losses and a great British victory.

The settlers, apparently overlooked in the fracas, watched the action from their house and the next day made their own way to New Plymouth, where Gilbert said: "It was no wish of ours that an armed expedition should be set on foot on our behalf. We were perfectly safe."

Murray was widely condemned for his actions in withdrawing his troops and a court of inquiry was convened into his conduct.

 
 

Troops defend Jury's farmhouse in the Battle of Waireka, by A. H. Messenger.
 
 
Battle of Puketakauere
On 20 April 1860 Browne ordered a suspension of hostilities against Taranaki Māori, fearing the intervention of the King Movement and a possible attack on Auckland. He knew he lacked the resources to defend Auckland if troops were engaged in Taranaki. Both Kingi and the Government made repeated diplomatic approaches to King Pōtatau Te Wherowhero seeking his allegiance, but by early May Pōtatau seemed to have decided to offer at least token support to Taranaki Māori, sending a Kingite war party to the district under the control of war chief Epiha Tokohihi. Kingi seized the opportunity to spark a confrontation with the imperial government to demonstrate the viability of resistance and draw stronger Kingite support.

Early in June, Atiawa war chief Hapurona began building a stockaded pā, Onukukaitara, adjacent to an ancient, and apparently unpopulated and unfortified, pā known as Puketakauere. The two pā were sited on a pair of low hills 800m southeast of Te Kohia and 1.6 km south of the garrison known as Camp Waitara (site of the modern town of Waitara), which had been established to protect the surveying of Waitara. The pā posed a military threat to the Waitara garrison and was seen as extreme provocation.

On 23 June, a British reconnaissance party approached the pā, in what may have been an attempt to bait the Māori, and was fired on. Colonel Gold immediately authorised an attack. Before dawn on 27 June, the British commander at Waitara, Major Thomas Nelson, marched out with 350 experienced troops and two 24-pound howitzers to storm the pā, which was defended by about 200 Atiawa.

The troops intended to encircle the two hills, cutting off a path of retreat for the Māori, before destroying Onukukaitara, above the flax-covered stockade of which flew a flag. The troops split into three divisions for the march. Nelson led the main body of almost 180 men and the two howitzers on an approach from the north, intending to bombard the stockade from the south-west.

A second division of 125 men, led by Captain William Messenger, was given the more difficult task of approaching the area in darkness through a swampy gully and high fern and scrub to the east, taking possession of the apparently deserted Puketakauere, blocking the path of any possible reinforcements and supporting Nelson's efforts against the main target. His approach was made more challenging by the heavy mid-winter rain that had deepened the swamp. The remaining division, about 60 men under Captain Bowdler, was to take up a position on a mound between the pā and Camp Waitara, blocking an escape to the north.

  About 7am, Nelson's howitzers began pounding their target, but created only a small breach in the fort. His men then approached the pā across open ground, but came under heavy fire from Māori concealed just metres away in deep trenches in a small natural gully. The attack was described by some survivors as "hotter than anything in the great Indian battles or in the attack on the Redan in the Crimea". As they came under fire, Messenger's division found itself the target of other Māori who ambushed them from outlying trenches on the fern-covered slopes. Messenger's division became disordered and was split into groups. Many troops were tomahawked in the swamp or drowned as they fled to the flooded Waitara River. Most of the wounded were abandoned and many of those were hacked to death. A group of survivors with Messenger managed to join Nelson, who sounded the retreat, while others remained hiding in the swamp and fern and returned to camp later.

Puketakauere was both the most important and most disastrous battle of the First Taranaki War for the British, who suffered losses of 32 killed and 34 wounded, almost one in five of the force engaged. It was also one of the three most clear-cut defeats suffered by imperial troops in New Zealand. Despite claims at the time that the British killed between 130 and 150 of the enemy, Māori casualties were estimated to be just five, including two Maniapoto chiefs.

Colonel Gold came under heavy criticism for the defeat. He was accused of cowardice and stupidity and an attempt was made to persuade the senior militia officer to arrest him. He was subsequently replaced by Major-General Thomas Pratt.

The real reason for the Māori victory, however, was a combination of tactics and engineering techniques. Hapurona had enticed the British to fight at a place of his own choosing and then used the twin ploys of deception and concealment. He created a false target for the British artillery with the fortification of Onukukaitara which, despite its flag and flax-covered stockade, was essentially an empty pā. Māori defences were instead concentrated on the old, apparently unfortified pā, where deep trenches concealed the well-armed warriors until the British were almost at point-blank range. When the British were split into two groups at the two hills, Hapurona was also able to switch warriors from each focus of action, forcing the British to fight two battles while the Māori fought just one.

In the wake of the demoralising loss, the central portion of New Plymouth was entrenched and most women and children were evacuated to Nelson, out of fear the town would be attacked. The garrison was reinforced with almost 250 soldiers from the 40th Regiment, sent from Auckland, as well as additional artillery.

 
 
Further clashes
From August to October 1860, there were numerous skirmishes close to New Plymouth, including one on 20 August involving an estimated 200 Māori, just 800 metres from the barracks on Marsland Hill. Many settlers' farms were burned and the village of Henui, 1.6 km from town, was also destroyed. Several farmers and settlers, including children, were killed by hostile Māori as they ventured beyond the town's entrenchments, including John Hurford (tomahawked at Mahoetahi on 3 August), Joseph Sarten (shot and tomahawked, Henui, 4 December), Captain William Cutfield King (shot, Woodleigh estate, 8 February 1861) and Edward Messenger (shot, Brooklands, 3 March).[20] There were frequent skirmishes around Omata and Waireka, where extensive trenches and rifle pits were dug on the Waireka hills to threaten a British redoubt on the site of the Kaipopo pā.

With British forces in Taranaki boosted to about 2,000 by July, the British intensified efforts to crush resistance. Governor Browne was particularly worried that a general uprising would occur while the bulk of troops in the country were concentrated in Taranaki and he appealed to Britain and Australia for more reinforcements. Major Nelson, meanwhile, destroyed several Te Atiawa villages including Manukorihi, Tikorangi and Ratapihipihi, Pratt launched a major attack with 1,400 men near Waitara on 9 September, burning and looting four entrenched villages, and in October, he marched with a force of more than 1,000 to the Kaihihi River at Okato to conduct an operation with sapping and heavy artillery to destroy several more pā. On 6 November, a party of between 50 and 150 Ngati Haua Kingites were routed in a surprise attack by 1,000 troops at Mahoetahi.

There were some humiliating setbacks for the British, however, with 1,500 troops retreating from a small Māori force at Huirangi on 11 September and a force of 500 suffering casualties in an ambush while destroying a pā on 29 September.

Kingite warriors continued to travel between Taranaki and Waikato, providing a peak force of about 800 in January 1861, with weapons and ammunition being bought on the black market in Auckland, Waiuku and Kawhia, while in Taranaki posts at Omata, the Bell Block, Waireka and Tataramakia were garrisoned – with each of those often surrounded by a cordon of pā.

  Pratt's sapping campaign
In December 1860, Major-General Pratt began operations against a major Māori defensive line called Te Arei ("The barrier") on the west side of the Waitara River, barring the way to the historic hill pā of Pukerangiora. The principal defences were Kairau and Huirangi, skilfully engineered lines of rifle-pits, trenches and covered walkways. Backed with heavy artillery and a force of 900 men, Pratt advanced from Waitara on 29 December towards the Matarikoriko pā, between Puketakauere and the Waitara River, before building a redoubt on the old Kairau pā under heavy day-long fire from bush-covered rifle pits 150m away.
Both sides exchanged heavy fire the next day, with British troops expending 70,000 rounds of rifle ammunition and 120 rounds of shot and shell and suffering three deaths and 20 wounded. The pā was captured on 31 December after being abandoned, and a stockade and blockhouses built on the site for a garrison of 60.

A second redoubt, No.2, was built in 11 hours on 14 January 500m past the Kairau redoubt and garrisoned by 120 men with artillery. Four days later, Pratt and a force of 1,000 moved out another 400m to build Redoubt No.3, which was garrisoned with 300 men and made the headquarters of the 40th Regiment.

At 3.30 am on 23 January 1861, No.3 Redoubt was stormed by a force of 140 warriors of Ngati Haua, Ngati Maniapoto, Waikato and Te Atiawa, led by Rewi Maniopoto, Epiha Tokohihi and Hapurona. Fierce fighting at close quarters, involving rifles, bayonets, shotgun, hand grenades and tomahawks, took place over the newly built parapet and in the boundary trench and lasted until daylight when British reinforcements arrived from Redoubt No.1. British losses in the fight were five killed and 11 wounded. Māori losses were estimated at 50.

From 22 January, the day before the attack on No.3 Redoubt, Pratt began employing the Royal Engineers to systematically apply the technique of sapping to advance towards Te Arei. Excavating through night and day under frequent fire, Pratt's sap extended 768 yards and crossed the rifle pits of the Huirangi pā, prompting Māori to abandon the pā and fall back on Pukerangiora. Despite widespread criticism for his slowness and caution, Pratt pressed on towards Te Arei, creating the most extensive field-engineering works ever undertaken by British troops in New Zealand.

 
 
Five more redoubts were built as the saps continued to the edge of the cliff above the Waitara River, but ceased after the intervention of Kingite chief Wiremu Tamihana, who helped negotiate a truce. A ceasefire was formally effected on 18 March 1861, ending the first phase of the Taranaki War. For his actions on 18 March, Colour-Sergeant John Lucas was awarded the Victoria Cross.

By early 1861, settler opinion was evenly divided on Browne's stance against Māori and the fairness of the Waitara purchase and many believed the British had little hope of wearing the enemy down with further military campaigns. Even Pratt expressed doubts the war could be won. The district had also suffered great economic hardship, with emigration all but coming to a stop and the destruction of three-quarters of farmhouses at Omata, Bell Block, Tataraimaka, and settlements nearer the town.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Convention of Peking
 
The Convention of Peking (or First Convention of Peking) is an agreement comprising three distinct treaties concluded between the Qing Empire (China) and the United Kingdom, France, and Russia in 1860. In China they are regarded as among the unequal treaties.
 
Background
On 18 October 1860, at the culmination of the Second Opium War, the British and French troops entered the Forbidden City in Beijing. Following the decisive defeat of the Chinese, Prince Gong was compelled to sign two treaties on behalf of the Qing government with Lord Elgin and Baron Gros, who represented Britain and France respectively. Although Russia had not been a belligerent, Prince Gong also signed a treaty with Nikolay Ignatyev.

The original plan was to burn down the Forbidden City as punishment for the mistreatment of European prisoners by Qing officials. Because doing so would jeopardize the treaty signing, the plan shifted to burning the Emperor's garden estates of Qīngyī Yuán and Yuánmíng Yuán instead. The treaties with France and Britain were signed in the Ministry of Rites building immediately south of the Forbidden City on 24 October 1860.

Terms
In the Convention, the Emperor of China ratified the Treaty of Tientsin (1858).

The area known as Kowloon was originally leased in March 1860. The Convention of Peking ended the lease, and ceded the land formally to the British on 24 October 1860.

Article 6 of the Convention between China and the United Kingdom stipulated that China was to cede the part of Kowloon Peninsula south of present day Boundary Street, Kowloon, and Hong Kong (including Stonecutters Island) in perpetuity to Britain.

 
Prince Gong, photographed by Felice Beato, 2 November 1860, just days after he signed the treaty on the 24 Oct. 1860.
 
 
Article 6 of the Convention between China and France stipulated that "the religious and charitable establishments which were confiscated from Christians during the persecutions of which they were victims shall be returned to their owners through the French Minister in China".

The treaty also ceded parts of Outer Manchuria to the Russian Empire. It granted Russia the right to the Ussuri krai, a part of the modern day Primorye, the territory that corresponded with the ancient Manchu province of East Tartary.
 
 

Convention of Peking
 
 
Aftermath
The governments of the United Kingdom and the People's Republic of China (PRC) concluded the Sino-British Joint Declaration on the Question of Hong Kong in 1984, under which the sovereignty of the leased territories, together with Hong Kong Island, ceded under the Treaty of Nanking (1842), and Kowloon Peninsula (south of Boundary Street), was transferred to the PRC on 1 July 1997 without consulting the people of Hong Kong.

The parts of Outer Manchuria ceded to Russia were never returned and remain part of Russia today.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Lincoln Abraham elected 16th President of the U.S.; South Carolina secedes from the Union in protest
 
 
Secession of South Carolina
 
The Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union was a proclamation issued on December 24, 1860, by the government of South Carolina to explain its reasons for seceding from the United States.

It followed the brief Ordinance of Secession that had been issued on December 20. The declaration is a product of a convention organized by the state's government in the month following the election of Abraham Lincoln as U.S. President, where it was drafted in a committee headed by Christopher Memminger. The declaration stated the primary reasoning behind South Carolina's declaring of secession from the U.S., which was described as "increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery".
 
Background
An official secession convention met in South Carolina following the November 1860 election of Abraham Lincoln as President of the United States, on a platform opposing the expansion of slavery into U.S. territories. On December 20, 1860, the convention issued an ordinance of secession announcing the state's withdrawal from the union. The ordinance was brief, containing no explanation of the reasoning behind the delegates' decision:
 

We, the People of the State of South Carolina, in Convention assembled do declare and ordain, and it is hereby declared and ordained, That the Ordinance adopted by us in Convention, on the twenty-third day of May in the year of our Lord One Thousand Seven hundred and eighty eight, whereby the Constitution of the United State of America was ratified, and also all Acts and parts of Acts of the General Assembly of this State, ratifying amendment of the said Constitution, are here by repealed; and that the union now subsisting between South Carolina and other States, under the name of “The United States of America,” is hereby dissolved.

 
The convention had previously agreed to draft a separate statement that would summarize their justification and gave that task to a committee of seven members comprising Christopher G. Memminger (considered the primary author), F. H. Wardlaw, R. W. Barnwell, J. P. Richardson, B. H. Rutledge, J. E. Jenkins, and P. E. Duncan. The document they produced, the Declaration of the Immediate Causes Which Induce and Justify the Secession of South Carolina from the Federal Union, was adopted by the convention on December 24.
 
 
Synopsis
The opening portion of the declaration outlines the historical background of South Carolina and offers a legal justification for its secession. It asserts that the right of states to secede is implicit in the Constitution and this right was explicitly reaffirmed by South Carolina in 1852.

The declaration states that the agreement between South Carolina and the United States is subject to the law of compact, which creates obligations on both parties and which revokes the agreement if either party fails to uphold its obligations.

The next section asserts that the government of the United States and of states within that government had failed to uphold their obligations to South Carolina. The specific issue stated was the refusal of some states to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act and clauses in the U.S. Constitution protecting slavery and the federal government's perceived role in attempting to abolish slavery.

The next section states that while these problems had existed for twenty-five years, the situation had recently become unacceptable due to the election of a President (this was Abraham Lincoln although he is not mentioned by name) who was planning to outlaw slavery. The declaration states the primary reasoning behind South Carolina's declaring of secession from the Union, which is described as:

... increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the Institution of Slavery ...

The final section concludes with a statement that South Carolina had therefore seceded from the United States of America and was thus, no longer bound by its laws and authorities.

 
The first published Confederate imprint of secession
 
 
Legacy
While later claims have been made after the war's end that the South Carolinian decision to secede was prompted by other issues such as tariffs and taxes, these issues were not mentioned at all in the declaration.

The primary focus of the declaration is the perceived violation of the Constitution by northern states in not extraditing escaped slaves (as the U.S. Constitution required in Article IV, Section 2) and actively working to abolish slavery (which South Carolinian secessionists saw as Constitutionally guaranteed and protected).
 
 
The main thrust of the argument was that since the U.S. Constitution, being a contract, had been violated by some parties (the northern abolitionist states), the other parties (the southern slave-holding states) were no longer bound by it. Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas offered similar declarations when they seceded, following South Carolina's example.

The declaration does not make a simple declaration of states' rights. It asserts that South Carolina was a sovereign state that had delegated only particular powers to the federal government by means of the U.S. Constitution. It furthermore protests other states' failure to uphold their obligations under the Constitution.

The declaration emphasizes that the Constitution explicitly requires states to deliver "person(s) held in service or labor" back to their state of origin.

The declaration was the second of three documents to be officially issued by the South Carolina Secession Convention. The first was the Ordinance of Secession itself.

The third was "The Address of the people of South Carolina, assembled in Convention, to the people of the Slaveholding States of the United States", written by Robert Barnwell Rhett, which called on other slave holding states to secede and join in forming a new nation. The convention resolved to print 15,000 copies of these three documents and distribute them to various parties. The declaration was seen as analogous to the U.S. Declaration of Independence from 1776, however, it omitted the phrase that "all men are created equal" and "that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights".

 
"The seceding South Carolina delegation"
(Harper's Weekly, December 22, 1860)
 
 
 Professor and historian Harry V. Jaffa noted this omission as significant in his 2000 book, A New Birth of Freedom: Abraham Lincoln and the Coming of the Civil War:

South Carolina cites, loosely, but with substantial accuracy, some of the language of the original Declaration. That Declaration does say that it is the right of the people to abolish any form of government that becomes destructive of the ends for which it was established. But South Carolina does not repeat the preceding language in the earlier document: 'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal'...

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Poincare Raymond
 
Raymond Poincaré, (born August 20, 1860, Bar-le-Duc, France—died October 15, 1934, Paris), French statesman who as prime minister in 1912 largely determined the policy that led to France’s involvement in World War I, during which he served as president of the Third Republic.
 

Raymond Poincare
  The son of an engineer, he was educated at the École Polytechnique. After studying law at the University of Paris, he was admitted to the bar in 1882. Elected a deputy in 1887, he became six years later the youngest minister in the history of the Third Republic, holding the portfolio of education. In 1894 he served as minister of finance and in 1895 again as minister of education. In the Dreyfus Affair he declared that new evidence necessitated a retrial. Despite the promise of a brilliant political career, Poincaré left the Chamber of Deputies in 1903, serving until 1912 in the Senate, which was considered comparatively unimportant politically. He devoted most of his time to his private law practice, serving in the cabinet only once, in March 1906, as minister of finance. In January 1912, however, he became prime minister, serving simultaneously as foreign minister until January 1913. In the face of new threats from Germany, he conducted diplomacy with new decisiveness and determination. In August 1912 he assured the Russian government that his government would stand by the Franco-Russian alliance, and in November he concluded an agreement with Britain committing both countries to consult in the event of an international crisis as well as on joint military plans. Although his support of Russian activities in the Balkans and his uncompromising attitude toward Germany have been cited as evidence of his being a warmongering revanchist, Poincaré believed that in the existing state of contemporary Europe war was inevitable and that only a strong alliance guaranteed security. His greatest fear was that France might be isolated as it had been in 1870, easy prey for a militarily superior Germany.
 
 
Poincaré ran for the office of president; despite the opposition of the left, under Georges Clemenceau, a lifelong enemy, he was elected on January 17, 1913. Although the presidency was a position with little real power, he hoped to infuse new vitality into it and make it the base of a union sacrée of right, left, and centre. Throughout World War I (1914–18) he strove to preserve national unity, even confiding the government to Clemenceau, the man best qualified to lead the country to victory.

After his term as president ran out in 1920, Poincaré returned to the Senate and was for a time chairman of the reparations commission. He supported the thesis of Germany’s war guilt implicit in the Versailles Treaty; and when he served again as prime minister and minister for foreign affairs (1922–24), he refused a delay in German reparation payments and in January 1923 ordered French troops into the Ruhr in reaction to the default. Unseated by a leftist bloc, he was returned as prime minister in July 1926 and is largely credited with having solved France’s acute financial crisis by stabilizing the value of the franc and basing it on the gold standard. Under his highly successful economic policies the country enjoyed a period of new prosperity.

Illness forced Poincaré to resign from office in July 1929. He spent the remainder of his life writing his memoirs, Au service de la France, 10 vol. (1926–33).

Encyclopædia Britannica
 
 
 
1860
 
 
The Church Union
 
The Church Union is an Anglo-Catholic advocacy group within the Church of England.
 
The organisation was founded as the Church of England Protection Society on May 12, 1859 to challenge the authority of the English civil courts to determine questions of doctrine. It changed its name to the English Church Union in May 1860. It was active in defending Anglo-Catholic priests such as Arthur Tooth, Sidney Faithorn Green and Richard William Enraght against legal action brought under the Public Worship Regulation Act 1874 whose passage had been secured by Archbishop of Canterbury Archibald Campbell Tait, who sought to restrict the growing Oxford Movement.

One of the most famous prosecutions occurred beginning in 1888, against Edward King (bishop of Lincoln). Such prosecutions ended in 1906 after a Royal Commission recognized pluralism in worship, but the act was not repealed until the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963. In 1933 the English Church Union merged with the Anglo-Catholic Congress to form the present organisation.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Charles de Montalembert (Montalembert Charles): "Les Moines d'Occident"
 
 

Charles de Montalembert. "Les Moines d'Occident"
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Motley John Lothrop: "The History of the United Netherlands" (-1868)
 
 
 
1860
 
 
Schopenhauer Arthur d. (b. 1788)
 
 

Schopenhauer in 1852
 
 
     
  Arthur Schopenhauer

Schopenhauer Arthur

"Essays"
     
 
 
     
  IDEAS that Changed the World

Myths and Legends
History of Religion
History of Philosophy
     
 
 
 

 
 
CONTENTS
  BACK-1860-1869 NEXT-1860 Part II