No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 February 2009
For most of the nineteenth century prior to the American Civil War relations between the United States and Austria were characterized by rancor and ill feeling. As Protestants with strong nativist sentiments and republicans anxious to spread their political institutions to other nations, Americans generally regarded Catholic Austria and its conservative monarchy with great suspicion and distrust. An attempt by an Austrian Catholic missionary society in the 1820's to foster Catholicism in America led to sharp recriminations against the government in Vienna, which some even accused of supporting conspiracies against the United States. In 1848, when revolution swept the Habsburg empire, Americans almost unanimously supported the revolutionaries, condemning an Austria which the North American Review called a “conglomeration of dissimilar races having no principle of unity but despotism.” Secretary of State John M. Clayton ordered A. Dudley Mann to Hungary to welcome the country into the family of nations as soon as her independence was assured. When the Hungarian revolutionary leader Lajos Kossuth toured the United States, he met a hero's welcome wherever he went. In response, Austria pursued an unfriendly policy of her own towards the United States, even briefly breaking off diplomatic relations.
1 The name of the missionary group was the Leopoldine Society. For a discussion of Austria's interest in missionary work in the United States, see Blied, Benjamin J., Austrian Aid to American Catholics, 1830–1860 (Milwaukee, Wis.: Privately published, 1944). For opposition to the Leopoldine SocietyGoogle Scholar, see Morse, Samuel F. B., Foreign Conspiracies against the Liberties of the United States (New York: Leavitt, Lord, and Co., 1836), pp. 4–5, 13, 23, 36, and 41. For the relations of the United States with Austria prior to 1848Google Scholar, see George, Barany, “The Interest of the United States in Central Europe,” Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, Vol. XLVII (1962), pp. 275–281Google Scholar; Hess, Mary Anthonita, American Tobacco and Central European Policy (Washington, D. C: Catholic University Press, 1948)Google Scholar; and Wriston, Henry Merritt, Executive Agents in American Foreign Relations (Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1929), pp. 633–635Google Scholar.
2 Quoted in Gazley, John Gerow, American Opinion of German Unification (New York: Columbia University Press, 1926), p. 38Google Scholar.
3 Curti, Merle E., “Austria and the United States, 1848–1852: a Study in Diplomatic Relations,” Smith College Studies in History, Vol. XX (April, 1926), pp. 141–205Google Scholar.
4 For Austria's relations with the United States prior to 1860, see Alfred, Loidolt, Die Beziehungen Österreichs zu den Vereinigten Staaten zur Zeit des Amerikanischen Bürgerkrieges (unpublished Ph. D. thesis, University of Vienna, 1949), pp. 1–6Google Scholar. While Loidolt's work deals with the same subject as this article, it is based almost solely on Austrian sources and only on a few printed American materials. It does not use the unpublished correspondence between American ministers and consuls in Austria and the United States Department of State. It also concentrates more on the Austrian reaction to the Civil War than on the actual diplomacy between the governments in Washington and Vienna. On the other hand , Lynch's, Mary ClaireDiplomatic Mission of John Lothrop Motley (Washington, D. C.: Catholic University Press, 1944)Google Scholar, which is concerned with the mission of the United States minister to Austria during the Civil War, is weak on Austrian sources. Furthermore, it emphasizes Motley's life in Vienna rather than matters of diplomacy.
5 Even the American representative to Vienna in the early 1850's Henry Jackson had attributed the strained relations between his government and Vienna to his country's interference in Austria's domestic affairs. Henry, Jackson to Marcy, William L., Vienna, January 6,1854, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
6 Curti, “Austria and the United States, 1848–1852,” p. 194.
7 Jones, to Cass, , Vienna, March 7 and November 15, 1859, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
8 Effroymson, C. W., “An Austrian Diplomat in America, 1840,” The American Historical Review, Vol. XL (April, 1936), pp. 503–514Google Scholar.
9 Curti, “Austria and the United States, 1848–1852,” pp. 173–174. Hülsemann expressed a similar desire to be on good terms with the United States during its war with Mexico. See Loidolt, Die Beziehungen Österreichs zu den Vereinigten Staaten zur Zeit des Amerikanischen Bügerkrieges, pp. 4–5.
10 See, for example, Edward, Stiles to Lewis, Cass, Vienna, September 30, 1859, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in ViennaGoogle Scholar; Buffom, W. A. to Cass, , Trieste, , April 11,1857, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in TriesteGoogle Scholar.
11 For an excellent discussion of Seward's expansionist views prior to becoming secretary of state, see Sharrow, Walter G., “William Henry Seward and the Basis for American Empire, 1850–1860,” Pacific Historical Review, Vol. XXXVI (August, 1967), pp. 325–342Google Scholar.
12 Seward, to Anson, Burlingame, Washington, D. C, April 13, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
13 Jones, J. Glancy to Seward, , Vienna, April 15 and July 20, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
14 Hülsemann to Rechberg, Washington, D. C, November 29, 1861, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University, Houston, Texas.
15 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, November 5, 1861, and February 12, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
16 Hülsemann to Rechberg, New York, May 6, 1861, and January 28, February 6, and May 6, 1862, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University; Hülsemann to Rechberg, Washington, D. C, June 1 and November 25 and 29.
17 Jones to Seward, Vienna, April 15, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to Austria; Motley to Seward, Vienna, February 12,1862, and April 12, 1864, ibid.
19 Theodore, Canisius to Seward, , Vienna, March 31, 1862, and March 30, 1865, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in ViennaGoogle Scholar. Another industry adversely affected by the war was cotton manufacturing, which was hurt by the Confederate cotton embargo. Manufacturers of cotton products in the Habsburg empire, however, were not as dependent on American cotton supplies as were those in England or France; therefore, their industry was not as seriously disrupted as that in other countries. Located primarily in Bohemia and Moravia, cotton manufacturing was a principal source of income for several areas of the empire. Reichenberg, in Bohemia, alone employed 5,050 workmen in cotton spinning and 8,500 more in cotton weaving. Thousands of workmen were also employed in Brünn and Olmütz, in Moravia, to run a large number of handlooms. According to the American consul in Vienna, Edward Stiles, who made a detailed survey of the empire's cotton industry, about 48 percent of the total cotton Austria used in 1860 came directly (by way of Trieste) or indirectly (by way of the German harbors of Hamburg and Bremen) from the United States. Stiles to Seward, Vienna, April 1, 1861, ibid. For reference to the empire's cotton industry, see also Jerome, Blum, “Transportation and Industry in Austria, 1815–1848,” The Journal of Modern History, Vol. XV (March, 1943), pp. 32–33. Most of the remainder, according to Stiles, came from the East Indies (about 40 percent) and from Egypt (about 12 percent). Stiles' figures cannot be verified, since it is not known how much American cotton came to Austria by way of Hamburg and Bremen. But cotton import figures for Trieste suggest that his figures were accurate. Of 85,064 bales imported Secre into Trieste in 1860, 36,248 came from the United States, 36,036 from the East Indies, and 10,512 from Egypt. The somewhat larger percentage of East India cotton coming to Trieste can be explained by the preference of American exporters for German harbors. Stephen Remak toGoogle ScholarSeward, F. W., Trieste, September 14, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in Trieste. While American cotton thus represented a significant percentage of the empire's total supply, it was still far less than that of England or France. Austria used large amounts of East India cotton, which was inferior in quality to the American product, because she purposely manufactured a cheaper grade cloth than that manufactured in England in order not to have to compete with her in the same markets. Stiles to William Seward, Vienna, April 1, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in Vienna;Google ScholarBuffom, William A. to John, Appleton, Trieste, September 30,1858, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in TriesteGoogle Scholar. Most likely it was because cotton manufacturers used East India cotton in such large amounts that the Vienna government never seemed greatly disturbed by the Confederate cotton embargo. Certainly there is no indication that the embargo affected the government's policy towards the Civil War in any way.
20 Hülsemann to Rechberg, New York, April 5 and 30, 1861, and Washington, D. C, June 1, 1861, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University; Hülsemann, to Seward, , New York, June 4,1861, William Henry Seward Papers, Rush Rhees Library, University of Rochester, Rochester, New YorkGoogle Scholar.
21 Jones, to Cass, , Vienna, March 15, September 5, and December 24, 1859, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar; Cass, to Jones, , Washington, D. C, November 12, 1859, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
22 Hülsemann to Rechberg, Washington, D. C, November 22, 1861, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University.
23 Die Presse, December 3,1861.
24 Hülsemann to Rechberg, Washington, D. C, November 22, 1861, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University.
25 The American minister, in fact, obtained most of his information about the affair from a lengthy correspondence he had with the already heavily burdened American minister to England, Charles Francis Adams. See Motley, to Adams, , Vienna, November 30 and December 20, 1861, Francis Adams Papers, Massachusetts Historical Society, Boston, Mass.Google Scholar; and Adams to Motley, London, December 4 and 26, 1861, ibid.
26 Rechberg, to Hülsemann, , Vienna, December 18, 1861, Senate Executive Document No. 14, 37th Congress, 2nd Session (Washington, D. C: Government Printing Office, 1861), p. 2Google Scholar.
27 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, February 12, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to ViennaGoogle Scholar.
28 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, March 3, 1862, William Henry Seward Papers, Rush Rhees Library, University of RochesterGoogle Scholar.
29 Motley to Seward, Vienna, March 3, 1862, ibid.; Henry Schelton Sanford to Seward, Paris, April 22, 1862, ibid.; Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, February 12, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to ViennaGoogle Scholar.
30 Canisius, to Seward, , Vienna, October 4, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in ViennaGoogle Scholar.
31 Seward to Canisius, Washington, D. C, October 10, 1862, ibid.; Seward to Motley, Washington, D. C, October 9, 1862, ibid.; Seward, to Sanford, Washington, D. C, July 27 and October 11, 1861, William Henry Seward Papers, Rush Rhees Library, University of RochesterGoogle Scholar.
32 Motley to Seward, Vienna, November 10, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D.C.), Dispatches from United States Ministers to Vienna. Later Canisius was reinstated in his old post, but Austria, satisfied that he had been properly reprimanded, made no objection. Motley to Seward, Vienna, December 26,1862, ibid.
33 Canisius, to Seward, , Vienna, November 18, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D.C.), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in ViennaGoogle Scholar; Bruce, Robert V., Lincoln and the Tools of War (Indianapolis, Ind.: The Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1956), p. 50Google Scholar.
34 Sanford to Seward, Brussels, May 25 and September 21,1861, William Henry Seward Papers, Rush Rhees Library, University of Rochester; Seward to Sanford, Washington, D. C, June 19, 1861, ibid.; Bruce, Lincoln and the Tools of War, pp. 42–43 and 48–49.
35 Bruce, Lincoln and the Tools of War, pp. 54–57.
36 Ibid., p. 107; Canisius to Seward, Vienna, November 18 and 30, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in Vienna. See also the statement of the Confederate purchasing agent in Europe Caleb, Huse in his The Supplies of the Confederate Army (Boston, Mass.: T. R. Marvin and Sons, 1904), pp. 26–27Google Scholar.
37 Davis, Tenney L., The Chemistry of Powders and Explosives (2 vols., New York: J. Wiley and Sons, 1941), Vol. II, pp. 98–99Google Scholar.
38 Canisius, to Seward, , Vienna, September 30, 1861, National Archives (Washington, D. C). Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in ViennaGoogle Scholar; Loidolt, Die Beziehungen Österreichs zu den Vereinigten Staaten zur Zeit des Amerikanischen Bürgerkrieges, pp. 45–54.
39 Canisius, to Seward, , Vienna, October 4 and November 18 and 30, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in Vienna; Bruce, Lincoln and the Tools of War, p. 107Google Scholar.
40 Mann, to Benjamin, , Brussels, December 9, 1862, Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies, ser. 2, Vol. III, p. 615Google Scholar; Canisius, to Seward, , Vienna, November 18, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Dispatches from United States Consuls in ViennaGoogle Scholar.
41 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, December 16, 1862, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
42 Egon, Caesar Count Corti, Maximilian and Charlotte of Mexico (2 vols., London: Alfred A. Knopf Co., 1928), Vol. I, pp. 107–108 and 114–115Google Scholar. See also Duniway, Clyde Augustus, “Reasons for the Withdrawal of the French from Mexico,” American Historical Association, Annual Report for 1902, Vol. I (Washington, D. C: Government Printing Office, 1903), p. 316Google Scholar.
43 Corti, , Maximilian and Charlotte of Mexico, Vol. I, p. 108Google Scholar.
44 Henry, Blumenthal, A Reappraisal of Franco-American Relations, 1830–1871 (Chapel Hill, N. C.: University of North Carolina Press, 1959), pp. 166–169Google Scholar.
45 Hülsemann to Rechberg, January 3 and February 6 and 18, 1862, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University.
46 Corti, , Maximilian and Charlotte of Mexico, Vol. I, p. 154Google Scholar.
47 See, for example, Hülsemann to Rechberg, Vienna, September 13,1863, Microfilm Copies of the Records of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in Fondren Library, Rice University; and De Giorgi to Rechberg, Washington, D. C, December 22, 1863, ibid.
48 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, September 21, 1863, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
49 Motley to Seward, Vienna, April 12,1864, ibid.
50 Motley to Seward, Vienna, November 24, 1863, ibid.; Seward to Motley, Washington, D. C., October 23, 1863, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in Austria.
51 Seward, to Motley, , Washington, D. C, February 15 and April 14 and 18, 1864, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
52 Benjamin, to Mason, , Richmond, , January 25, 1864, Official Records of the Union and Confederate Navies, ser. 2, Vol. III, pp. 1009–1010Google Scholar.
53 Virginia, Mason, The Public Life and Diplomatic Correspondence of James M. Mason (Roanoke, Va.: The Stone Printing and Manufacturing Co., 1903), pp. 473–474Google Scholar.
54 Meyensburg, to Motley, , Vienna, April 28, 1865, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
55 Duniway, “Reasons for the Withdrawal of the French from Mexico,” pp. 318–327.
56 Corti, , Maximilian and Charlotte of Mexico, Vol. II, p. 555Google Scholar.
57 A week before Motley informed Seward that troops would leave Austria for Mexico, the American minister had indicated that rumors regarding the sending of additional troops to the new world were without foundation. See Motley, to Seward, , February 20 and 27, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C), Dispatches from United States Ministers to Austria. For Seward's instructions to MotleyGoogle Scholar, see Seward, to Motley, , Washington, D. C, March 19, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
58 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, March 27,1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar. This writer has found no evidence to substantiate Bigelow's statements.
59 Seward, to Motley, , Washington, D. C, April 6 and 16, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Minister in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
60 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, April 6, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
61 Motley to Seward, Vienna, April 15, 1866, ibid.
62 Motley to Seward, Vienna, May 22, 1866, ibid.; Seward, to Motley, , Washington, D. C., April 30, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
63 Motley, to Seward, , Vienna, May 22, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Dispatches from United States Ministers to AustriaGoogle Scholar.
64 Seward, to Motley, , Washington, D. C, June 9 and 19, 1866, National Archives (Washington, D. C.), Records of the Department of State, Diplomatic Instructions to the United States Ministers in AustriaGoogle Scholar.
65 On this point see Bailey, Thomas A., “America's Emergence as a World Power: The Myth and the Verity,” Pacific Historical Review, Vol. XXX (February, 1961), pp. 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.