TOMmaso BERNETTI. — Cardinal. Born at Fermo on 29 Dec. 1779, died there on 21 Mar. 1852. He studied law in his native city and went to Rome to practise under Bartolucci. Intelligent and active, he soon made himself noticed and was appointed secretary of the Roman Rota. Nephew of Cardinal Brancadoro, archbishop of Fermo, when his uncle was exiled to Reims by Napoleon he followed him, remaining with him for five years. In 1813 Pius VII sent him to Maastricht with the task of delivering secret letters to the Emperor of Austria. This and other missions of trust, which he carried out well, brought him to the attention of the restored Roman court. After the defeat of Murat, during whose brief rule he had been obliged to leave Rome, he was sent to negotiate the evacuation of the Legations by the Austrians (1815). Much esteemed by Consalvi, he was appointed delegate to Ferrara, where he gave proof of promptness and energy, not devoid of tact, and subsequently became assessor of the military and, after the flight of Monsignor Pacca, director-general of police and governor of Rome (1820–26). In this double delicate office he won appreciation for his maturity of mind and soundness of judgment, especially on the occasion of the troubled biennium 1820–1821 and the Conclave of 1823. Leo XII sent him to Moscow for the coronation of Tsar Nicholas I (1826) and entrusted him with important negotiations in Vienna and Paris. A sign of gratitude and esteem was his creation as cardinal of the order of deacons, with the title of S. Cesareo in Palatio, on 25 June 1827, which he held until 22 Jan. 1844, when he passed to that of S. Lorenzo in Damaso. Subsequently appointed legate to Ravenna, he never reached his see, partly because of poor health (he suffered acutely from gout) and partly because of his wish not to go to a locality still under the authority of extraordinary commissions. Knowing the evils afflicting the papal administration, he wished that the causes should be radically removed rather than remedied intermittently and ineffectually. In the summer of 1828 he was called to succeed Della Somaglia as Secretary of State, a post from which he was removed at the accession of Pius VIII, who replaced him with Albani (March 1829). “Not having been recalled to the post I held two months ago,” he wrote with serene objectivity to his very dear friend Monsignor Amat on 8 Apr., “has not caused me the slightest passing bitterness... If I had started again, who knows whether I would have had the same good fortune? I fear indeed that the opposite would have happened, if only because of the accumulation of circumstances.” At the death of Pius VIII, he led in the conclave, together with Falzacappa, the faction opposed to Albani. The new pope, Gregory XVI, recalled him to the Secretariat of State (Feb. 1831). His qualities of intelligence and ability were immediately put to the test by the revolution that shook the State and by the discordant and intrusive policy of the great powers. Distrustful of France under Louis-Philippe, he had to rely on Austria, though seeking, whenever possible, to free himself from its tutelage. The “new era” he had promised did not materialise, but to his credit was a serious attempt at administrative reforms. A convinced supporter of the ascertainment and unity of government, in contrast even with the ideas of Cardinal Oppizzoni, legate *a latere* for the four Legations, he sought practically to annul the results of the Conference and the Memorandum of the four powers (21 May 1831), reaffirming the priority of papal initiative and aiming to mark out independent lines of future action. From the Austro-French dispute, which culminated in the occupation of Ancona (1832), he knew how to take advantage to obtain a modus vivendi and a definite term for evacuation. At the same time, alongside notable reforms of the army and public force, he sought those centurions, a local volunteer militia, which, in his view, was to help free the State from foreign tutelage. And, at least for the moment, he succeeded in saving the State and safeguarding its dignity. “I know well,” he confided to Amat on 19 Mar. 1831, “that people would now like to propose conciliations, give advice, settle things with moral intervention etc., and all that will be fine; but first let the bones be put back in their sockets.” Relieved of the burden of internal affairs by the appointment of Gamberini in 1833, in 1836, under the pretext of illness but in reality because of Austrian disapproval of his desire for independence and the complaints of many against his policy of lavish spending, he was replaced by Lambruschini. For many years in the background, he followed events with intelligence (of the manifesto of the rebels of Savigno, he wrote that “it is a certain thing that cannot fail to leave an impression because it contains truths that make one’s blood boil,” 28 Sept. 1843). In the Consistory of 22 Jan. 1844 he was raised to the dignity of Vice-Chancellor of the Holy Roman Church and at the same time was called to be part of a commission for the further strengthening of the papal army. His ability was also of service to Pius IX in his early acts, assigning him, together with Gizzi, Lambruschini and Amat, to the provisional advisory government commission. But his poor health tormented him. In the agitated events of 1848 he experienced the bitterness of a temporary arrest (1 May) after the allocution of 29 Apr. After the assassination of Rossi, he retired to S. Elpidio, whence he then went to Naples, to join Pius IX at Gaeta. After the restoration of the temporal power, he returned to Fermo much enfeebled in health and there he died peacefully. Good, cultured, witty and active, he is one of the most interesting figures among the cardinals of the 19th century. His unpublished letters to Amat are preserved in the Central Museum of the Risorgimento in Rome.
Alberto Maria Ghisalberti