Washington sentinel., 1855-03-18
ALEXANDER AND NICHOLAS.

death of the Gear, we cannot, however, help
believing that it will have temporary in
huence upon the present state Of affairs in the
old continent. What that influence will be
remains to be seen. We can only be guided
in that matter by the past policy Of the
Car, and by the modification he introduced in
the system followed by his predecessor, Empe-
ror Alexander the First. 1t is only our object,
at present. to bestow a hasty glance on the
policy of both monarchs. f
by parallel, we would say that the policy Of
Alexander partook of those general views
OF liberalism and emancipation attributed to
the Jeffersonian school; whilst Nicholas, mar
rover IN his views, but perhaps more solid and
practical than his predecessor, belonged, by
his habits, sentiments, and ideas, to the feder-
alists. Alexander was like Jefferson, imbued
with liberal principles, which he wanted to see
triumphing all over the world; Nicholas had
none Of these philanthropic words on his lips,
but it is just to say that he attempted to
apply liberal principles among the serfs
of his realm. He endeavored by degrees to
make the peasants conceive the hope Of be-
coming free, and to make the masters under
stand that their white property must some day
or other be taken from them. In order to
set himself good example, he took care that
the serfs attached to the crowns lands should
be allowed many privileges. 1ze n "a
Nicholas loved his people, Alexander des-
pissed them. Nicholas expelled the French
language from the circles of the court, Alex
ander favored it,. Nicholas punished one Of
his subjects because he had shaved and fixed
his beard according to European style Alex.
ander introduced the Partisan fashions in St.
Petersburg, and encouraged foreign artists and
artisans. Nicholas was seen sometimes court
ing popularity, and chatting with the merchants
at the exchanges Alexander never meddled
with the people, but was seen almost constantly
with the greatest men of his time. The con-
sequence Of those two educations so opposite
in their elements was to impart to Nicholas o
sort Of egotistical system of policy, making
everything converge towards Russian inte
rests, and sacrificing everything to them; whilst
Alexander had always an eye upon the claims
of other nations, though, at the same time, he
never lost sight of the prosperity and greatness
of his own empire. Hence the difference be-
tween these two monarchs, especiallylin mat
ters concerning foreign policy. Alexander was
fond of constitutional liberties, and proved it,
by urging the grant Of the chartc of 1874 to
the French people. Had he been alive, he
would certainly have hailed both of their revolu-
tions; that of 1880, and that Of ls4s. Nicholas,
on the contrary wanted to attempt royalist
crusade in favor of the Bourbons in the first
revolution, and no sooner had he learned the
memorable event of February, l848, than he
said to his courtiers: Gentlemen, tomorrow, zoe
must mount our horses. However, reflection
cooled his warlike disposition. He soon saw
that he would have nothing to gain by inter-
fering in the conflict and he used to say after
the first moment of anger, Mot it ,cas better
to let Europe find its own ,ody an the an
archy IN phich II soas plunged. 1t was but
after the breaking of the Hungarian revolution
that he issued manifesto in which he said /:
IL ,oas time to destroy the revolutionary p,i',-
ciple in Europe.
Nicholas treated the monarchs of Europe
with contempt. When General Athalin, a
friend of Louis Philippe, brought him the let
ter in which the old king begged him in the
humblest manner to recognize the advent Of
the youngest branch Of the Bourbons, the Gear
looked at General Athalin with an air Of hu-
initiating compassion, saying, at the same
time, that the days Of July, 1880, were to be
deplored. Everybody knows how Louis Ma
poleon was scornfully looked upon by the
naughty Emperor. a5a
Alexander was the friend and the companion
Of all the monarchs of Europe. He had a
great fancy for the French people, whom he
called the people the most moral Of the world.
lie peuple lc Plus moral du monde No doubt
that he was sadly affected in comparing them
with his own people. "If my subjects" said
he, knc,c phere to put them, they tcould steal
my ships Of ,oar; ifhey could dra~ my teeth
pit,osa making me, they rould rob me Of them
in my Sleep" Alexander let corruption have
free swing among the Russians. Nicholas
forced it, not to disappear, but to. hide itself
under the veil of hypocrisy.
We give here the portrait Of Nicholas drawn
by one of his faithful subjects, Prince Peter
Kolofski. IE
"Nicholas has the noblest face ever saw in
my life. The habtual expression Of his ply.
siognomy has certain severity which is far
from putting the beholder at his ease. His
smile is smile Of complaisance, and not the
result of gaiety or abandon. There is some
thing approaching the prodgious in this
princes manner Of existence. He speaks with
vivacity, with simplicity and the most perfect
proprety; all he says is full Of point and mean
ing--no idle pleasantry-not q word out Of its
place. There is nothing in the tone of his
,,o;oo ar thu arran noement OF his phrases that