MASTER'S THESIS M-846 MIO, Eugene O, AN ANALYSIS OF AMERICAN DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE ITALIAN STATES IN 1860. The American University, M.A., 1965 History, modern University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan AN ANALYSIS OF AMERICAN DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS WITH THE ITALIAN STATES IN I860 by Eugene 0. Mio Submitted to the Faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences of The American University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree o f Master of Arts Signatures of Committee; Chairman: a Dean of the College Date>?y^^ /7./96 k" ___ Date: AMERICAN UNIVERSITY 1965 SEP 7 1965 The American University Washington, D. C. WASHINGTON. D. C \ 3 PREFACE The fires of national revolution flamed bright in several corners of the European continent during the middle decades of the nineteenth century. Peoples subject to despotic control, often by governments alien to the native population, rose under the brilliantly lighted banners of liberty, freedom, and self-government. While the established policy of non-intervention in European affairs eliminated the possibility of assistance by the American govern­ ment, many Americans, seeing these struggles throu^ the perspective of 1776, offered sympathetic understanding, words of strong encouragement, and monetary support. The public attitude was often reflected in the individual actions of American officials stationed in Europe. This study w ill substantiate that United States representatives to the Italian states during 1860, the critical year for Italian liberation, did extend the American position beyond the negative lim its of a strictly applied non-intervention policy. There was no effort at any level of government to discourage these activities. By 1860, the United States had developed a vested interest in fairly extensive commercial activity in the Italian peninsula. Further, the secretary of state under President Buchanan, Lewis Cass, was definitely interested in securing treaty commitments from European nations to guarantee the rights of neutrals on the high seas. A free and inde­ pendent Kingdom of Italy, encompassing the entire peninsula and without sufficient means of naval defense for its coastlines, would be a natural partner in such a treaty. i i ill Reference material to support this position is not extensive since the basic isolationist approach to European involvement eliminated the possibility of valid negotiations by the United States government on the "Italian question." But the records of the Department of State suggest a connecting thread between the broad directing principles of American foreign policy during the Buchanan Administration and the particulars of Italian-American relations in I860. The basic source of information is the "Despatches from United States Ministers to the Italian States, 1832-1906." Also helpful are the instructions from the secretary of state to these ministers, but these are rather sparse since conditions often changed during the time lag necessary for such communications to reach Italian ports. The consular records are, far the most part, not pertinent to this study except in those instances where particular consuls were involved in decisions of national significance. Secondary works directed toward Italian-American relations prior to the Civil War are practically nonexistent. Survey-type treatment is given in the few studies which concentrate on the diplomatic activity between the two nations after the establishment of the first American mission to the united Kingdom of Italy in April of 1861. A few articles deal directly with the particulars of diplomacy before Italian unification, but these give rather superficial coverage to the conclusive events of the summer and fa ll of 1860. Howard Marraro’s scholarly publication, American Opinion on tl^ Unification of Italy, 1846-1861, serves as a most useful aid in evaluating the iv reaction of the American public to the efforts of Italian nationalists, but Dr. Marraro does not attempt to incorporate an extensive amount of diplomatic correspondence. Of the dispatches which constitute the basis of this effort, those of John M. Daniel, American minister to Turin, appear most often. This is not meant to reflect in any way on the abilities of other American diplomatic representatives. A few of the Daniel dispatches have appeared in print in the writings of H. Nelson Gay, and all of those of John Stockton, American minister to Rome during that period, in Leo Stock's United States Ministers to the Papal States, Instructions and Despatches, 1848-1868. For the most part, the passages used in this work were taken from the microfilm records in the National Archives of the United States, Washington, D. C. Any errors in transcription are the sole responsibility of this writer. A sincere expression of gratitude is extended to Mr. Ronald Heise and the staff of the Diplomatic, Legal, and Fiscal Branch of the National Archives, and to the library personnel of The American University, The Catholic University of America, and The Georgetown University. Without their patient assistance and understanding, this work would not have been possible. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I . INTRODUCTIŒ........................................................................................................ 1 I I . ANNEXATION AND EMBARKATION.......................................................................... 6 I I I . SUCCESS IN THE SOUTH........................................................................................ 19 IV. UNITY ACCOMPLISHED........................................................................................... 35 V. CONCLUSION............................................................................................................. 45 BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................. 48 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION In the third week of May, 1860, two events occurred at opposite poles of the western world which were to lead to national wars of rebellion. In Chicago, Abraham Lincoln captured the Republican nomina­ tion for President of the United States on the third ballot cast, and in an obscure mountain village in Sicily, Giuseppi Garibaldi captured the hearts of Italians throughout the peninsula as news of his first military victory against Neapolitan regulars reached the press. The following summer the natural synpathies which the two men shared for the cause of freedom found expression in President Lincoln's offer of a Union army commission of major-general to the Italian patriot. During the course of the American Civil War, an Italian-American rapprochement emerged which had several antecedents. Italian immigrants from the time of Columbus had found the new land a challenging and, almost always, a rewarding experience. It is estimated that by 1861, some 13,000 Italians had emigrated to the United States. Most of these were skilled and professional people who sought a new life in America and were a credit to their race. Many, like Garibaldi, sought political refuge, especially after the failures of 1848-49 in Europe, and were received with open enthusiasm by the American people. Very often, how­ ever, sympathy toward the Italian states was complicated by the religious issue. The reform legislation of Pio Nono was warmly received and was a 2 significant factor in the assignment by the United States government of a diplomatic mission to the Papal States in 1848. But later develop­ ments and the re-establishment of authoritarian control by the Papal government in the 1850's led to a marked change of opinion among the American public. Two incidents, especially, led to a crystallization of public sentiment. In June of 1859, while Sardinia-Piedmont and France waged war in the northern provinces of the peninsula against Austria, several of the cities in the Papal States made declarations of intent to join the Italian cause. To quell one such insurrection, Pius IX ordered Swiss mercenaries to occupy Perugia. In the chaotic situation which followed, several townspeople were killed and an American family visiting in that city was terrorized and lost its personal belongings.^ The Papal govern­ ment wrote a hasty apology for the enthusiastic activity of the troops and made monetary restitution well beyond the demands, but the American public voiced a loud protest. Our consul at Florence expressed the significant implications of the Perugia affair when he wrote, "The massacre at Perugia is to be regretted not only for the bloodshed; but because it s till more conçlicates the Italian question. Pius IX had given anple indication of his determination not to yield to public pressure for Italian liberation. toward Marraro, American Opinion on the Unification of Italy, 1846-1861 (New York; Columbia University Press, 1932), pp. 263-64. O Consul in F lo ren ce Edward M allet to S e c re ta ry o f S tate Lewis Cass, June 23, 1859, Despatches from United States Consuls in Florence, 1824-1906, Records of the Department of State, National Archives, Record Group 59 (Microcopy File). 3 When Louis Napoleon’s early withdrawal from the Austrian war eventually led to the French-Sardinian territorial exchanges of early 1860, the Pope excommunicated King Victor Emmanuel for his participation in the annexation of the Papal Romagna. The official Catholic Church in the United States supported Pius IX in this decision, but "the general sentiment in the Americas was one of joy at the advance which the country had made toward independence