



Produced by Keren Vergon, Rich Magahiz and PG Distributed Proofreaders




SELECT SPEECHES
OF
KOSSUTH.


Condensed and abridged,
_with Kossuth's express sanction_,

by
Francis W. Newman.




PREFACE TO KOSSUTH'S SPEECHES.

Nothing appears in history similar to the enthusiasm roused by Kossuth
in nations foreign to him, except perhaps the kindling for the First
Crusade by the voice of Peter the Hermit. Then bishops, princes, and
people alike understood the danger which overshadowed Europe from the
Mohammedan powers; and by soundly directed, though fanatical instinct,
all Christendom rushed eastward, till the chivalry of the Seljuk Turks
was crippled on the fields of Palestine. Now also the multitudes of
Europe, uncorrupted by ambition, envy, or filthy lucre, forebode the
deadly struggle impending over us all from the conspiracy of crowned
heads. Seeing the apathy of their own rulers, and knowing, perhaps by
dim report, the deeds of Kossuth, they look to him as the Great Prophet
and Leader, by whom Policy is at length to be moulded into Justice; and
are ready to catch his inspiration before he has uttered a word. Kossuth
undoubtedly is a mighty Orator; but no one is better aware than he, that
the cogency of his arguments is due to the atrocity of our common
enemies, and the enthusiasm which he kindles to the preparations of the
people's heart.

His orations are a tropical forest, full of strength and majesty,
tangled in luxuriance, a wilderness of self-repetition. Utterly
unsuited to form a book without immense abridgment, they contain
materials adapted equally for immediate political service and for
permanence as a work of wisdom and of genius. To prepare them for the
press is an arduous and responsible duty: the best excuse which I can
give for having assumed it, is, that it has been to me a labour of love.
My task I have felt to be that of a judicious reporter, who cuts short
what is of temporary interest, condenses what is too amplified for his
limits and for written style, severely prunes down the repetitions which
are inevitable where numerous[*] audiences are addressed by the same man
on the same subject, yet amid all these necessary liberties retains not
only the true sentiments and arguments of the speaker, but his forms of
thought and all that is characteristic of his genius. Such an operation,
rightly performed, may, like a diminishing mirror, concentrate the
brilliancy of diffuse orations, and assist their efficacy on minds which
would faint under the effort of grasping the original.

[Footnote *: The number of speeches, great and small, spoken in his
American half-year, is reckoned to be above 500.]

It is true, the exuberance of Kossuth is often too Asiatic for English
taste, and that excision of words, which needful abridgment suggests,
will often seem to us a gain. Moreover, remembering that he is a
foreigner, and though marvellous in his mastery of our language, still
naturally often unable to seize the word, or select the construction
which he desired, I have not thought I should show honour to him by
retaining anything verbally unskilful. To a certain cautious extent, I
account myself to be a _translator_, as well as a _reporter_,
and in undertaking so delicate a duty, I am happy to announce that I
have received Kossuth's written approval and thanks. Mere quaintness of
expression I have by no means desired entirely to remove, where it
involved nothing grotesque, obscure, or monotonous. In several passages
where I imperfectly understood the thought, I have had the advantage of
Kossuth's personal explanations, which have enabled me to clear up the
defective report, or real obscurities of his words.

Nevertheless I have to confess my conviction, that nothing can wholly
compensate for the want of systematic revision by the author himself;
which his great occupations have made impossible. The mistakes in the
reports of the speeches are sometimes rather subtle, and have not roused
my suspicion. Of this I have been, made disagreeably sensible, by
several errata communicated to me by Kossuth in the first great speech
at New York, here marked as No. VII. (which have been corrected in this
edition.)

Nearly all the points on which attempts have been made to misrepresent
in England the cause of Hungary are cleared up in these speeches. On two
subjects only does it seem needful here to make any remark:
_first_, on the Republicanism of Kossuth; _secondly_, on the
Hungarian levies against Italy in the year 1848.

1. Kossuth is attacked by his countrymen on opposite grounds: Szemere
despises him for not becoming a republican early enough, Count Casimir
Bathyanyi reproves him for becoming a republican at all. The facts are
these. Kossuth, like all English statesmen, was a historical royalist,
not a doctrinaire. When the existing reign had become treacherous and
lawless, he was willing to change the line of succession, and make the
Archduke Stephen king. When the dynasty had become universally detested
and actually expelled, he approved most heartily[*] the deposition of
the Hapsburgs; but still held himself in suspense as to the future of
the constitution. By his influence instructions were sent to his
representative in England, which were equivalent to soliciting a dynasty
from the British government. Meanwhile Szemere, his Home Secretary, took
on himself to avow in the Diet that the government was REPUBLICAN, and
no voice of protest was raised in either house. Indeed, Mr. Vucovics,
who was Minister of Justice under Kossuth, states (see Appendix I.) that
the government and both houses responded unanimously to the republican
avowal, and that the government removed the symbol of the Crown from the
public arms and seal. The press of all shades assented. After this, it
was clear (I presume) to Kossuth, or at least it soon became so, that
all sympathy with royal power was gone out of the nation's heart.
Hungarians may settle that amongst themselves: but as for
Englishmen,--when for seven or eight months together the English
ministry and English peerage would not stir, or speak, or whisper, to
save constitutional royalty and ancient peerage for Hungary and for
Europe while it was yet possible; with what face, with what decency, can
Englishmen censure Kossuth for despairing of a cause, which was
abandoned to ruin by ourselves, the greatest power interested to
maintain it,--which the monarchs have waded through blood and perjury to
destroy,-and which the millions of Hungary will not (in his belief)
peril life and fortune to restore?

[Footnote *: How unanimous was the whole country, is clear by the facts
stated. How spontaneous was the movement, and free from all government
intrigue, see in Appendix I. This is entirely confirmed by our envoy,
Mr. Blackwell: Blue Book, March--Ap. 1848.]

2. The ministry of Louis Bathyanyi and Kossuth have been attacked on
opposite grounds,--because they _did_, and because they did
_not_, attempt to subdue the Italians by force of arms. The facts
are rather complicated, but deserve here to be stated concisely.

When the ministry was appointed, there were _already_ Hungarians in
Italy with Radetzki, and Austrian soldiers in Hungary. The Viennese
ministry promised to exchange them, as fast as could be done without
encountering great expense or dislocating the regiments and making them
inefficient. With this promise the Hungarian ministry was forced to
content itself at the time. At a later period, when it discovered that
the Austrian commanders in Hungary had secret orders not to fight
against the Serbian marauders, and that the Austrian troops could not be
trusted, the Hungarian ministry _desired_ to get back their men
from Italy for their own defence; which desire proved ineffectual, yet
has been severely blamed by some of our monarchists. But meanwhile the
Viennese ministry, as early as June, 1848, endeavoured to buy of the
Hungarian ministry an increased grant of troops against Italy, by
conceding a most energetic "King's Speech" against the Serbs, with which
the Archduke Palatine was to open, and did open, the Diet on July 2d. A
part of this speech is quoted in Appendix II., and indeed it is a
loathsome exhibition of Austrian treachery. The Hungarian ministry were
pressed by the arguments, that since Austria was attacked in Italy by
the King of Sardinia, the war was not merely against the Lombards; and
that the Pragmatic Sanction bound Hungary to defend the empire if
assailed from without. This led them to acknowledge the
_principle_, that they were bound to assist, if able; but they
replied that Hungary itself must first be secured against marauders, and
no troops could be spared until the Serbs were subdued. At the same
time orders were sent to Radetzki from Vienna to offer independence to
the Lombards, and constitutional nationality under the Austrian crown to
the Venetians: hence the Hungarian ministry for a time fancied that they
would not be fighting against the Italians, as they expected the terms
to be accepted by them. When it was farther represented that the
Italians had rejected them,--(for Radetzki, acting probably by secret
orders, suppressed the despatches, and never offered independence to
Lombardy, though the Austrian ministers made diplomatic capital of their
liberality,)--then the Hungarian ministry began to think the Italians
unreasonable; yet they did not go beyond their abstract principle, that
Hungary ought to grant troops for Austrian defence in Italy, provided,
1st, that rebellion in Hungary itself were repressed; 2d, that the
troops should not act against the Italians, unless the Italians had
rejected the offer of national liberties and a constitution coordinate
to those of Hungary, under the Austrian crown.

The protocol on this subject was drawn on July 5th; the public speech of
Kossuth concerning it was not until July 22d; and in this short interval
the treachery of the dynasty had been so displayed, that Kossuth could
no longer speak in the same tone as a few weeks earlier. For a fuller
development of this, I refer the reader to Appendix III. The real object
of the Austrian ministry, was, to ruin the popularity of Bathyanyi and
Kossuth, if they could induce them to sacrifice Italian freedom; or
else, to accuse them to all the European diplomatists as conspirators
against the integrity of the Austrian empire, if they refused to oppress
the liberties of Italy.

Finally, the reader has even here proof enough how false is the
statement which has been current in English newspapers, that Kossuth's
visit to America was "a failure." This was an attempt to practise on our
prevalent disgraceful tendency to judge of a cause by its success.
However, the end is not yet seen: America has still to act decisively,
if she would win the lasting glory which we have despised, of rescuing
Law and Right from lawless force, and establishing the future of Europe.

CONTENTS.

1. Secrecy of Diplomacy
       London, Oct. 30th, 1851.

2. Monarchy and Republicanism
       Copenhagen House, London, Nov. 3d.

3. Communism and the Sibylline Books
       Manchester, Nov. 12th.

4. Legitimacy of Hungarian Independence
       Staten Island, Dec. 5th, 1851.
       Declaration of Independence by the Hungarian Nation

5. Statement of Principles and Aims
       New York, Dec. 6th.

6. Reply to the Baltimore Address
       Dec. 10th.

7. Hereditary Policy of America
       New York, to the Corporation, Dec. 11th.

8. On Nationalities
       New York, to the Press.

9. On Military Institutions
       New York, to the Militia, Dec. 16th.

10. Conditions essential for Democracy and Peace
       New York, Tammany Hall, Dec. 17th.

11. Hungary and Austria in Religious Contrast
       In a Brooklyn Church, New York, Dec. 18th.

12. Public Piracy of Russia
       New York, to the Bar, Dec. 19th.

13. Claims of Hungary on the Female Sex
       New York, to the Ladies, Dec. 21st.

14. Results of the Overthrow of the French Republic
       Philadelphia, Dec. 26th.

15. Interest of America in Hungarian liberty
       Baltimore, Dec. 27th.

16. Novelties in American Republicanism
       Washington, Legislative Banquet, Jan. 15th, 1852.

17. On the Merits of Turkey

18. Aspects of America toward England
       Washington, Jan. 8th, day of battle of New Orleans.

19. Meaning of Recognizing Hungarian Independence
       Washington, last speech.

20. Contrast of the American to the Hungarian Crisis
       Annapolis, Maryland, Jan. 13th, to the Senate.

21. Thanks for his great Success
       Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, Jan. 14th, to the Legislature.

22. On the present Weakness of Despotism
       Harrisburg, Legislative Banquet.

23. Agencies of Russian Ascendancy and Supremacy
       Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, Jan. 26th.

24. Reply to the Pittsburg Clergy
       Jan. 26th.

25. Hungarian Loan
       Cleveland, Ohio, Feb. 3d.
       Address to Kossuth from the State Committee of Ohio

26. Panegyric of Ohio
       Columbus, Ohio, Feb. 5th.

27. Democracy the Spirit of the Age
       Columbus, Feb. 6th, to the Legislature.

28. The Miseries and the Strength of Hungary
       Columbus, Feb. 7th.

29. Ohio and France Contrasted as Republics
       Cincinnati, Ohio.

30. War a Providential Necessity against Oppression
       Cincinnati.

31. On Washington's Policy
       Cincinnati, Washington's Birthday, Feb. 24th.

32. Kossuth's Credentials
       Cincinnati, Feb. 25th.

33. Harmony of the Executive and of the People in America
       Indianapolis, at the State House, Feb 27th.

34. Importance of Foreign Policy and of strengthening England
       Louisville, March 6th, at the Court House.

35. Catholicism _versus_ Jesuitism
       St. Louis, Missouri.

36. The Ides of March
       St. Louis, March 15th.

37. History of Kossuth's Liberation
       Jackson, Mississippi, April 1st, address to the Governor.

38. Pronouncement of the South
       Mobile, Alabama, April 3d.

39. Kossuth's Defence against certain Mean Imputations
       Jersey City, April 20th.

40. The Brotherhood of Nations
       Newark, New Jersey, April 22d.

41. The History and Heart of Massachusetts
       Worcester, Massachusetts, April 25th.

42. Panegyric of Massachusetts
       Faneuil Hall, Boston, April 29th.

43. Self-Government of Hungary
       Faneuil Hall, Legislative Banquet. April 30th.

44. Russia the Antagonist of the U. S.
       Salem, May 6th.

45. The Martyrs of the American Revolution
       Lexington, May 11th.

46. Condition of Europe
       Faneuil Hall, Boston, May 14th.

47. Pronouncement of all the States
       Albany, May 20th.

48. Sound and Unsound Commerce
       Buffalo, May 27th.

49. Russia and the Balance of Power
       Syracuse, June 4th.

50. Retrospect and Prospect
       Utica, June 9th.

51. The Triple Bond
       New York, June 22d.

52. The Future of Nations
       New York.

APPENDICES

KOSSUTH'S SPEECHES.

[The speeches of Kossuth in England, though masterly in themselves, are
in great measure superseded by those which he delivered in America,
where the same subjects were treated at far greater length, and viewed
from many different aspects. From the speeches in England I here present
only three topics, in a rather fragmentary form.]

I.--SECRECY OF DIPLOMACY.

[_First Extract: from Kossuth's Speech at the Guildhall, London, Oct.
30th_, 1851.]

The time draws near, when a radical change must take place for the whole
world in the management of diplomacy. Its basis has been secrecy:
therein is the triumph of absolutism, and the misfortune of a free
people. This has won its way not in England only, but throughout the
whole world, even where not a penny of the national property can be
disposed of without public consent. It surely is dangerous to the
interests of the country and to constitutional liberty, to allow such a
secrecy, that the people not only should not know how its interests are
being dealt with, but that after the crisis is passed, the minister
should inform them: "The dinner has been prepared,--and eaten; and the
people has nothing to do, but digest the consequences." What is the
principle of all evil in Europe? The encroaching spirit of Russia.--And
by what power has Russia become so mighty?  By its arms?--No: the arms
of Russia are below those of many Powers. It has become almost
omnipotent,--at least very dangerous to liberty,--by diplomatic
intrigues. Now against the secret intrigues of diplomacy there is no
surer safeguard, or more powerful counteraction, than public discussion.
This must be opposed to intrigues, and intrigues are then of no weight
in the destinies of humanity.

       *       *       *       *       *

[_Second Extract from a Short Speech in London, May 25th, 1858_.]

I must ask leave to make a remark on the system pursued by your
Government in their Foreign relations. You consider yourselves a
constitutional nation: I fear that in some respects you are not so.
There is a Latin proverb [current in Hungary], _Nil de nobis sine
nobis_,--"nothing that concerns us, without us." This in many things
you make your maxim. You say that none of your money shall be spent
without your knowledge and approval; and in your internal affairs you
carry this out; but I think that the secrecy in which the transactions
of your diplomacy are involved is hardly constitutional. Of that most
important portion of your affairs which concerns your country in its
relations with the rest of Europe, what knowledge have you? If any
interpellation is made about any affair not yet concluded, my Lord the
Secretary of the Foreign Office will reply that _he cannot give any
answer, for the negotiations are still pending_. A little later he
will be able to answer, that _as all is now concluded, all comment
will be superfluous_.

One little fact I will just mention. By the last treaty with Denmark, to
which you became a party, the crown of that kingdom was so settled that
only three lives stand between it and the Czar of Russia. Three lives!
but a fragile barrier, when high political aims are concerned. It is
therefore an allowed fact, that the country which commands entrance to
the Baltic, and which, in the hands of an unfriendly power, would
effectually exclude your commerce from that sea, may pass into the hands
of Russia, whose pretensions in the south of Europe you take so much
pains to check. This your government have done quietly. How many are
there of your people that know and approve it? I hope you will not be
offended, if I say, that I cannot understand how yours can be called in
this respect a constitutional country.

       *       *       *       *       *

II.--MONARCHY AND REPUBLICANISM.

[_From Kossuth's Speech at Copenhagen House, Nov. 3d, 1851_.]

In my opinion, the form of Government may be different in different
countries, according to their circumstances, their wishes, their wants.
England loves her Queen, and has full motive to do so. England feels
great, glorious and free, and has full reason to feel so. But the fact
of England being a monarchy cannot be sufficient reason for her to hate
and discredit republican forms of government in other countries
differing in circumstances, in wishes, and in wants. On the other side,
to the United States of America, which under republican government are
likewise great, glorious, and free, their republicanism gives no
sufficient reason to hate and discredit monarchical government in
England. It entirely belongs to the right of every nation to dispose of
its domestic concerns. Therefore I claim for my own country also, that
England, seeing from our past that our cause is just, should profess the
sovereign right of every nation to dispose of itself, and should allow
no power whatever to interfere with our domestic matters. Since I thus
regard the internal affairs of every nation to be its own separate
concern, I did not think it became me here in England to speak about the
future organization of our country.

But my behavior has not been everywhere appreciated as I hoped. I have
met in certain quarters the remark that I "am slippery, and evade the
question." Now on the point of sincerity I am particularly susceptible.
I have the sentiment of being a straightforward man, and I would not be
charged with having stolen into the sympathies of England without
displaying my true colours. Therefore I must clearly state, that in our
past struggle it was NOT _we_ who made a revolution. We began
peacefully and legislatively to transform the monarchico-aristocratical
constitution of Hungary into a monarchico-democratical constitution. We
preserved our municipal institutions, as our most valuable treasure; but
to them, as well as to the legislative power, we gave, as basis, the
common liberty of the people, instead of the class-privileges of old.
Moreover, in place of the old Board of Council,--which, being a
corporate body, was of course a mockery in regard to that responsibility
of the Executive, which was our chartered right on paper,--we
established the real and personal responsibility of ministers. In this,
we merely[*] upheld what was due to us by constitution, by treaties, by
the coronation-oath of every king,--the right to be "governed as a
self-consistent, independent country, by our native institutions,
according to our own laws." This and all our other reforms we effected
peacefully by careful legislation, which the King sanctioned and swore
to maintain.

[Footnote *: Many Englishmen have unjustly accused the Hungarians as
having by the laws of March, 1848, effected a SEPARATION of Hungary from
Austria. _Even if this were true_, it could not justify the cause
of the Hapsburgs. The dynasty yielded, under the pressure of
circumstances (as alone will dynasties ever yield), while Hungary did
but petition legally, and was in fact unarmed. The dynasty swore to the
new laws; and then conspired with Croatians, Serbians, and Russians to
overthrow the laws by marauding and force of arms. In fact, if in
January, 1849, Austria would have negotiated, instead of arresting all
Hungarian ambassadors, Hungary would have consented to modify the laws
of March: but the Austrians had already in October ordered the overthrow
of the whole Hungarian constitution, and had no wish to do anything by
legal methods.

At the same time, the original objection is fundamentally _false_.
No separation of the two countries was effected by the laws of March,
1848; for no legal union ever existed. Only the crowns were united, not
the countries. Kossuth rightly compares the union to that which was
between England and Hanover. At any time in the past, Hungary might have
made _peace_ with a power with which Austria was at _war_, if
the Kings had not falsified their oath by not assembling the Diet: for
the Diet always had the lawful right of War and Peace. Any mode
whatsoever of enforcing the Coronation oath, might, according to this
logic, be condemned as a "separating" of Austria and Hungary.]

Nevertheless, this very dynasty, in the most perjurious manner, attacked
these laws, this freedom, this constitution, by arms. We defended
ourselves by arms victoriously. When upon this the perjurious dynasty
called in the Russian armies to beat us down, we of course declared the
Hapsburgs to be no longer our sovereigns. We avowed ourselves to be a
free and independent nation, but fixed as yet no definite form of
government,--neither monarchical nor republican. These are plain facts.
Hungary is not now under lawful government, but is being trampled down
by a foreign intruder who is _not_ King of Hungary, being
_neither acknowledged by the nation, nor sanctioned by law_.
Hungary is, in a word, in a state of WAR against the Hapsburg dynasty, a
war of legitimate defence, by which alone it can ever regain
independence and freedom. By such war alone has any nation ever won its
freedom from oppressors; as you see in Switzerland, Belgium, Spain,
Portugal, France, Sweden, Norway, Greece, the United States, and England
itself.

I can state it, as known to me, with the certainty of matter of fact,
that Hungary will never accept the Hapsburgs as legitimate sovereigns in
the future, nor ever enter into any new moral relations with that
perjurious family. Nor only so; but their perjury has so entirely
plucked out of my nation's heart all faith in monarchy and all
attachment to it, that there is no power on earth to knit the broken tie
again: and therefore Hungary wishes and wills to be a free and
independent republic,--a republic founded on the rule of law, securing
social order, guaranteeing person, property, the moral development as
well as material welfare of the people,--in a word, a republic like that
of the United States, founded on institutions inherited from England
itself. This is the conviction of my people, which I share in the very
heart of my heart.

       *       *       *       *       *

III.--COMMUNISM AND THE SIBYLLINE BOOKS.

[_From Kossuth's Second Speech at Manchester, Nov. 12th_, 1851.]

I can understand Communism, but not Socialism. I have read many books on
the subject, I have consulted many doctors; but they differ so much that
I never could understand what they really mean. However, the only sense
which I can see in socialism, is inconsistent with social order and the
security of property.

Now since France has three times in sixty years failed to obtain
practical results from Political revolutions, all Europe is apt to press
forward into new Social doctrine to regulate the future. Believing then,
that,--not from my merit, but from the state of my country,--I may be
able somewhat to influence the course of the next European revolution, I
think it right plainly to declare beforehand my allegiance to the great
principle of security for personal property. Nevertheless, to give
success to my endeavours in this direction, the rational expectations of
the nations of Europe must speedily be fulfilled; else neither I, nor
more important men, can avail to stay revolutionary movement. The danger
of the case may be illustrated by the ancient story of the Sibylline
books.

Take Hungary as an instance. Three years ago we should have been
extremely well contented with the laws as made by our parliament in
1848, _which laws did not break the tie between us and the house of
Hapsburg_. But then Austria assailed us with arms, and it became
impossible for us to go on with that constitution; indeed she herself
proclaimed it to be dissolved. We defeated her, and next she called in
the Russian armies. Hungary was then under the necessity of _casting
off the Hapsburg monarchy_; and only the third Sibylline book
remained. Yet Hungary did not even then renounce monarchy, but gave
instructions to her representative in England to say to the Government
of this country, that _if they wished to see monarchy established in
Hungary, we would accept any dynasty they proposed_: but it was
not-listened to. Then came the horrors of Arad,[*] and destroyed all our
faith in monarchy. So the last of the three books was burned.

[Footnote *: In Arad the Hungarian Generals, who surrendered by Goergy's
persuasion, were hanged or shot; and simultaneously Bathyanyi, who had
been arrested when he came as an ambassador of peace, was judged anew
and murdered by a second court-martial.]

And so, wherever men's reasonable expectations are not fulfilled, it
cannot be known where their fluctuations will end. Every man who is
anxious for the preservation of person and property should help the
world in obtaining rational freedom: if it be not obtained, mankind will
search after other forms of action, totally subversive of all existing
social order; and where the excitement will subside, I do not know. Men
like me, who merely wish to establish political freedom, will in such
circumstances lose all their influence, and others will get influence
who may become dangerous to all established interests whatsoever.

       *       *       *       *       *


IV.--LEGITIMACY OF HUNGARIAN INDEPENDENCE.

[When Kossuth had landed at Staten Island, thus for the first time
setting his foot on American soil, he was met by a deputation, which
made an address to him. He replied as follows (Dec. 5th, 1851)]:--

Ladies and gentlemen: The twelve hours that I have had the happiness to
stand on your shores, give me augury that, during my stay in the United
States, I shall have a pleasant duty to perform, in answering the
generous spirit of your people. I hope, however, that you will consider
that I am in the first moments of a hard task,--to address your
intelligent people in a tongue foreign to me. You will not expect from
me an elaborate speech, but will be contented with a few warmly-felt
words. Citizens, accept my fervent thanks for your generous welcome, and
my blessing upon your sanction of my hopes. You have most truly stated
what they are, when you announce the destiny of your glorious country,
and tell me that from it the spirit of liberty will go forth and achieve
the freedom of the world.

Yes, citizens, these are the hopes which have induced me, in a most
eventful period, to cross the Atlantic. I confidently hope, that as you
have anticipated my wishes by the expression of your generous
sentiments, so you will agree with me, that the spirit of liberty has to
go forth, not only spiritually, but materially, from your glorious
country. That spirit is a power for deeds, but is yet no _deed_ in
itself. Despotism and oppression never yet were beaten except by heroic
resistance. That is a sad necessity,--but it is a necessity
nevertheless. I have so learned it out of the great book of history. I
hope the people of the United States will remember, that in the hour of
_their_ nation's struggle, it received from Europe _more_ than
kind wishes. It received material aid from others in times past, and it
will, doubtless, now impart its mighty agency to achieve the liberty of
other lands.

Citizens, I thank you for having addressed me, not in the language of
party, but in the language of liberty, which is that of the United
States. I come hither, in the name of Hungary, to entreat, not from any
_party_ among you, but from your _whole nation_, a generous
protection for my country. And for that very reason, neither will I
intermeddle with any of your party questions. In England I often avowed
this principle; inasmuch as the very mission on which I come, is to ask
that the right of every nation to arrange its domestic concerns may be
respected. Notwithstanding this, I am sorry to see, that, before my
arrival, I have been charged with intermeddling with your presidential
election, because in one of my addresses in England I mentioned the name
of your fellow-citizen, Mr. Walker, as one of the candidates for the
Presidency. I confess with warm gratitude, that Mr. Walker uttered such
sentiments in England, as, if happily they are also those of the United
States, will enable me to declare, that Hungary and Europe are free.
Therefore I feel deeply indebted to him. But in no respect did I mix
myself up with your elections. I consider no man honest who does not
observe towards other nations the principles which he desires to be
observed towards his own: and therefore I will not interfere in your
domestic questions.

Allow me, citizens, to advert to one expression of your kind address,
personal to myself. You named me "Kossuth, Governor of Hungary."

My nomination to be Governor was not to gratify ambition. Never,
perhaps, did I feel sadder, than at the moment when that title was
conferred upon me; for I compared my feeble faculties and its high
responsibilities. It is therefore not from ambition that I thank you for
the title, but because the title rests upon our Declaration of
Independence; and by acknowledging it as mine, you recognize the
rightfulness and validity of that Declaration. And, gentlemen I frankly
declare that your whole people are bound in honour and duty to recognize
it. At this moment there is no other legitimate existing law in Hungary.
It was not the proclamation of a man or of a party. It was the solemn
declaration of the whole nation in _Congress_ assembled. It was
sanctioned by _every village_, and by _every municipality_. No
counter-proclamation has gone forth from Hungary. It has been overturned
solely by the invasion of an ambitious _foreign_ power, the Czar of
Russia; who can no more legitimately make or unmake a governor of
Hungary, than General Santa Anna, if in your late war he had forced his
way to Washington, could have unmade President Taylor. None of you will
admit that violence can destroy righteousness: it can but establish
unlawful, unrightful _fact_. If so,--if your own people, and not
foreign invaders, are the source of rightful law to _you_,--you
must in consistency recognize _our_ Independence as legitimate, and
its declaration as our still rightful law.

As to the praises which you were so kind as to bestow upon me, it is no
affectation in me when I declare that I am not conscious of having any
other merit than that of being a plain, straightforward man, a faithful
friend of freedom, a good patriot. And these qualities, gentlemen, are
so natural to _every_ honest man, that it is scarcely worth while
to speak of them; for I cannot conceive how a man with understanding and
with a sound heart, can be anything else than a good patriot and a lover
of freedom.

Yet my humble capacity has not preserved me from calumnies. Scarcely had
I arrived here, when I learned that I had been charged in the United
States with being an _irreligious man_. So long as despots exist,
and have the means to pay, they will find men to calumniate those who
are opposed to tyranny. But, suppose I were the most dishonest creature
in the world; in the name of all that is sacred, _what would that
matter in respect to the cause of Hungary?_ Would that cause become
less just, less righteous, less worthy of your sympathy, because I, for
instance, am a bad man? No! I believe you. It is not a question in
regard to any individual here. It is a question with regard to a just
cause, the cause of a country worthy to take its place in the great
family of the free nations of the world. Until I learn that you refuse
to recognize nations, whenever their governors fall short of religious
perfection, I need not care much about attacks on my mere personality.
But one thing I can scarcely comprehend,--that the PRESS--that mighty
vehicle of justice and champion of human rights--could have found an
organ, and that, in the United States, which (to say nothing of personal
calumnies) should degrade itself to assert that it was not the people of
Hungary, it was not myself and my coadjutors, that contended for
liberty; but it was the Emperor of Austria who was the champion of
liberty. Do not give it groans, gentlemen, but rather thank it; for
there can be no better service to any cause, than for its opponents to
manifest that they have nothing to say but what is ridiculous. That
_must_ have been a sacred and just cause, whose detractors need to
assert that the Emperor of Austria is the champion of freedom throughout
his own dominions and throughout the European continent.

I thank you that you have given me full proof that all these calumnies
have affected neither your judgment nor your heart. As this will be the
place whence I shall start back for Europe, I shall once more have the
happiness of addressing you publicly and bidding you an affectionate
adieu:--hoping then to be able to thank you for _acts_, as I now
thank you for _sentiments_.

       *       *       *       *       *

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE BY THE HUNGARIAN NATION.

[The reader may be glad to possess the most important portions of this
celebrated document. The opponents of Kossuth have of late pretended,
that the deposition of the Hapsburgs _caused_ the overthrow of
Hungary. But the deposition was not carried until Austria was thoroughly
beaten, and Russia _had engaged_ to give her utmost aid. This
finally united all Hungary. At no earlier period would Hungary have
acted with full unanimity in so decisive a step. To have delayed it
longer would not have averted Russian invasion, and would have caused
deep discontent in Hungary. Nothing but the wilful disobedience of
Goergey, who wasted a month at Buda at this very crisis, saved the
Hapsburgs from being conquered in Vienna, before the Russian armies
could possibly come up.]

We, the legally-constituted representatives of the Hungarian nation
assembled in Diet, do by these presents solemnly proclaim, in
maintenance of the inalienable natural rights of Hungary, with all its
appurtenances and dependencies, to occupy the position of an Independent
European state; that the house of Lorraine-Hapsburg, as perjured in the
sight of God and man, has forfeited its right to the Hungarian throne.
At the same time, we feel ourselves bound in duty to make known the
motives and reasons which have impelled us to this decision, that the
civilized world may learn we have not taken this step out of overweening
confidence in our own wisdom, or out of revolutionary excitement, but
that it is an act of the last necessity, adopted to preserve from utter
destruction a nation persecuted to the limit of the most enduring
patience.

Three hundred years have passed since the Hungarian nation, by free
election, placed the house of Austria upon its throne, in accordance
with stipulations made on both sides, and ratified by treaty. These
three hundred years have been, for the country, a period of
uninterrupted suffering.

The Creator has blessed this country with all the elements of wealth and
happiness. Its area of one hundred and ten thousand square miles
presents, in varied profusion, innumerable sources of prosperity. Its
population, numbering nearly fifteen millions, feels the glow of
youthful strength within its veins, and has shown temper and docility
which warrant its proving at once the main organ of civilization in
Eastern Europe, and the guardian of that civilization when attacked.
Never was a more grateful task appointed to a reigning dynasty by the
dispensation of Providence than that which devolved upon the house of
Lorraine-Hapsburg. It would have sufficed, to do nothing to impede the
development of the country. Had this been the rule observed, Hungary
would now rank among the most prosperous nations. It was only necessary
that it should not envy the Hungarians the moderate share of
constitutional liberty which they timidly maintained during the
difficulties of a thousand years with rare fidelity to their sovereigns,
and the house of Hapsburg might long have counted this nation among the
most faithful adherents of the throne.

This dynasty, however, which can at no epoch point to a ruler who based
his power on the freedom of the people, adopted a course towards this
nation, from father to son, which deserves the appellation of perjury.

The house of Austria has publicly used every effort to deprive the
country of its legitimate Independence and Constitution, designing to
reduce it to a level with the other provinces long since deprived of all
freedom, and to unite all in a common sink of slavery. Foiled in this
effort by the untiring vigilance of the nation, it directed its
endeavour to lame the power, to check the progress of Hungary, causing
it to minister to the gain of the provinces of Austria, but only to the
extent which enabled those provinces to bear the load of taxation with
which the prodigality of the imperial house weighed them down; having
first deprived those provinces of all constitutional means of
remonstrating against a policy which was not based upon the welfare of
the subject, but solely tended to maintain despotism and crush liberty
in every country of Europe.

It has frequently happened that the Hungarian nation, in despite of this
systematized tyranny, has been obliged to take up arms in self-defence.
Although constantly victorious in these constitutional struggles, yet so
moderate has the nation ever been in its use of the victory, so strongly
has it confided in the king's plighted word, that it has ever laid down
arms as soon as the king, by new compacts and fresh oaths, has
guaranteed the duration of its rights and liberty. But every new
compact was as futile as those which preceded it; each oath which fell
from the royal lips was but a renewal of previous perjuries. The policy
of the house of Austria, which aimed at destroying the independence of
Hungary as a state, has been pursued unaltered for three hundred years.

It was in vain that the Hungarian nation shed its blood for the
deliverance of Austria whenever it was in danger; vain were all the
sacrifices which it made to serve the interests of the reigning house;
in vain did it, on the renewal of the royal promises, forget the wounds
which the past had inflicted; vain was the fidelity cherished by the
Hungarians for their king, and which, in moments of danger, assumed a
character of devotion; they were in vain, since the history of the
government of that dynasty in Hungary presents but an unbroken series of
perjured deeds from generation to generation.

In spite of such treatment, the Hungarian nation has all along respected
the tie by which it was united to this dynasty; and in now decreeing its
expulsion from the throne, it acts under the natural law of
self-preservation, being driven to pronounce this sentence by the full
conviction that the house of Lorraine-Hapsburg is compassing the
destruction of Hungary as an independent State: so that this dynasty has
been the first to tear the bands by which it was united to the Hungarian
nation, and to confess that it had torn them in the face of Europe. For
many causes a nation is justified, before God and man, in expelling a
reigning dynasty. Among such are the following:

1. When the dynasty forms alliances with the enemies of the country,
with robbers, or partizan chieftains to oppress the nation: 2. When it
attempts to annihilate the Independence of the country and its
Constitution, supported on oaths, by attacking with an armed force the
people who have committed no act of revolt: 3. When the integrity of a
country, which the sovereign has sworn to maintain, is violated, and its
resources cut away: 4. When foreign armies are employed to murder the
people, and to oppress their liberties.

Each of the grounds here enumerated would justify the exclusion of a
dynasty from the throne. But the House of Lorraine-Hapsburg is
unexampled in the compass of its perjuries, and has committed every one
of these crimes against the nation.***

In former times, a governing COUNCIL, under the name of the Royal
Hungarian Stadtholdership, the president of which was the Palatine, held
its seat at Buda, whose sacred duty it was to watch over the integrity
of the state, the inviolability of the Constitution, and the sanctity of
the laws; but this _collegiate_ authority not presenting any
element of _personal_ responsibility, the Vienna cabinet gradually
degraded this council to the position of an administrative organ of
court absolutism. In this manner, while Hungary had ostensibly an
independent government, the despotic Vienna cabinet disposed at will of
the money and blood of the people for foreign purposes, postponing our
commercial interests to the success of courtly cabals, injurious to the
welfare of the people, so that we were excluded from all connection with
the other countries of the world, and were degraded to the position of a
colony. The mode of governing by a MINISTRY was intended to put a stop
to these proceedings, which caused the rights of the country to moulder
uselessly in its parchments; by the change,[*] these rights and the
royal oath were both to become a reality. It was the apprehension of
this, and especially the fear of losing its control over the money and
blood of the country, which caused the house of Austria to resolve on
involving Hungary, by the foulest intrigues, in the horrors of fire and
slaughter, that, having plunged the country in a civil war, it might
seize the opportunity to dismember the kingdom, and to blot out the name
of Hungary from the list of independent nations, and unite its plundered
and bleeding limbs with the Austrian monarchy.

[Footnote *: The change was solemnly enacted in the Parliamentary Laws of
March, 1848, which King Ferdinand V. sanctioned by his public oath in
April, 1848.]

The beginning of this course was, (after a Ministry had been called into
existence), by ordering an Austrian general [Jellachich] to rise in
rebellion against the laws of the country and nominating him Ban of
Croatia, a kingdom belonging to the kingdom of Hungary.***

The Ban revolted therefore in the name of the emperor, and rebelled
openly against the king of Hungary, who is however one and the same
person; and he went so far as to decree the separation of Croatia and
Slavonia from _Hungary_, with which they had been united for eight
hundred years, as well as to incorporate them with the _Austrian_
empire. Public opinion and undoubted facts threw the blame of these
proceedings on the Archduke Louis, uncle to the emperor, on his brother,
the Archduke Francis Charles, and especially on the consort of the
last-named prince, the Archduchess Sophia; and since the Ban, in this
act of rebellion, openly alleged that he acted as a faithful subject of
the emperor, the ministry of Hungary requested their sovereign, by a
public declaration, to wipe off the stigma which these proceedings threw
upon the family. At that moment affairs were not prosperous for Austria
in Italy; the emperor therefore did proclaim that the Ban and his
associates were guilty of high treason, and of exciting to rebellion.
But while publishing this edict, the Ban and his accomplices were
covered with favours at court, and supplied for their enterprise with
money, arms, and ammunition. The Hungarians, confiding in the royal
proclamation, and not wishing to provoke a civil conflict, did not hunt
out those proscribed traitors in their lair, and only adopted measures
for checking any extension of the rebellion. But soon afterward the
inhabitants of South Hungary, of Servian race, were excited to rebellion
by precisely the same means.

These were also declared by the king to be rebels, but were
nevertheless, like the others, supplied with money, arms, and
ammunition. The king's commissioned officers and civil servants enlisted
bands of robbers in the principality of Servia to strengthen the rebels,
and aid them in massacring the peaceable Hungarian and German
inhabitants of the Banat. The command of these rebellious bodies was
further entrusted to the rebel leaders of the Croatians.

During this rebellion of the Hungarian Servians, scenes of cruelty were
witnessed at which the heart shudders; the peaceable inhabitants were
tortured with a cruelty which makes the hair stand on end. Whole towns
and villages, once flourishing, were laid waste. Hungarians fleeing
before these murderers were reduced to the condition of vagrants and
beggars in their own country; the most lovely districts were converted
into a wilderness.***

The greater part of the Hungarian regiments were, according to the old
system of government, scattered through the other provinces of the
empire. In Hungary itself, the troops quartered were mostly Austrian;
and they afforded more protection to the rebels than to the laws, or to
the internal peace of the country. The withdrawal of these troops, and
the return of the national militia, was demanded of the government, but
was either refused, or its fulfilment delayed; and when our brave
comrades, on hearing the distress of the country, returned in masses,
they were persecuted, and such as were obliged to yield to superior
force were disarmed, and sentenced to death for having defended their
country against rebels.

The Hungarian ministry begged the king earnestly to issue orders to all
troops and commanders of fortresses in Hungary, enjoining fidelity to
the Constitution, and obedience to the ministers of Hungary. Such a
proclamation was sent to the Palatine, the viceroy of Hungary, Archduke
Stephen, at Buda. The necessary letters were written and sent to the
post-office. But this nephew of the king, the Archduke Palatine,
shamelessly caused these letters to be smuggled back from the
post-office, although they had been countersigned by the responsible
ministers; and they were afterward found among his papers when he
treacherously departed from the country.

The rebel Ban menaced the Hungarian coast with an attack, and the
government, with the king's consent, ordered an armed corps to march
into Styria for the defence of Fiume; but this whole force received
orders to march into Italy.***

The rebel force occupied Fiume, and disunited it from the kingdom of
Hungary, and this hateful deception was disavowed by the Vienna cabinet
as having been a _misunderstanding_; the furnishing of arms,
ammunition, and money to the rebels of Croatia was also declared to have
been a misunderstanding. Finally, instructions were issued to the
effect that, until special orders were given, the army and the
commanders of fortresses were not to follow the orders of the Hungarian
ministers, but were to execute those of the Austrian cabinet.***

The king from that moment began to address the man whom he himself had
branded as a rebel, as "dear and loyal" (Lieber Getreuer); he praised
him for having revolted, and encouraged him to proceed in the path he
had entered upon.

He expressed a like sympathy for the Servian rebels, whose hands yet
reeked from the massacres they had perpetrated. It was under this
command that the Ban of Croatia, after being proclaimed as a rebel,
assembled an army, and announced his commission from the king to carry
fire and sword into Hungary, upon which the Austrian troops stationed in
the country united with him.***

Even then the Diet did not give up all confidence in the power of the
royal oath, and the king was once more requested to order the rebels to
quit the country. The answer given was a reference to a manifesto of the
Austrian ministry, declaring it to be their determination to deprive the
Hungarian nation of the independent management of their financial,
commercial, and war affairs. The king at the same time refused his
assent to the bills submitted for approval respecting troops and the
subsidy for covering the expenditure.

Upon this the Hungarian ministers resigned, but the names submitted by
the president of the council, at the demand of the king, were not
approved of for successors. The Diet then, bound by its duty to secure
the safety of the country, voted the supplies, and ordered the troops to
be levied. The nation obeyed the summons with readiness.

The representatives of the people then summoned the nephew of the
emperor to join the camp, and as Palatine[*] to lead the troops against
the rebels. He not only obeyed the summons, but made public professions
of his devotion to the cause. As soon, however, as an engagement
threatened, he fled secretly from the camp and the country, like a
coward traitor. Among his papers a plan, formed by him some time
previously, was found, according to which Hungary was to be
simultaneously attacked on nine sides at once--from Styria, Austria,
Moravia, Silesia, Galicia, and Transylvania.

[Footnote *: The Palatine was a high officer elected by the Diet, as its
organ, and the defender of its Constitution. In fact, they always
elected a prince of the blood royal. He was virtually a Viceroy.]

From a correspondence with the Minister of War, seized at the same time,
it was discovered that the commanding generals in the military frontier
and the Austrian provinces adjoining Hungary had received orders to
enter Hungary, and support the rebels with their united forces.

This attack from nine points at once really began. The most painful
aggression took place in Transylvania; for the traitorous commander in
that district did not content himself with the practices considered
lawful in war by disciplined troops. He stirred up the Wallachian
peasants to take up arms against their own constitutional rights, and,
aided by the rebellious Servian hordes, commenced a course of Vandalism
and extinction, sparing neither women, children, nor aged men; murdering
and torturing the defenceless Hungarian inhabitants; burning the most
flourishing villages and towns, among which, Nagy-Igmand, the seat of
learning for Transylvania, was reduced to a heap of ruins.

But the Hungarian nation, although taken by surprise, unarmed and
unprepared, did not abandon its future prospects in any agony of
despair.

Measures were immediately taken to increase the small standing army by
volunteers and the levy of the people. These troops, supplying the want
of experience by the enthusiasm arising from the feeling that they had
right on their side, defeated the Croatian armaments, and drove them out
of the country.***

The defeated army fled in the direction of Vienna, where the emperor
continued his demoralizing policy, and nominated the beaten and flying
rebel as his plenipotentiary and substitute in Hungary, suspending by
this act the constitution and institutions of the country, all its
authorities, courts of justice, and tribunals, laying the kingdom under
martial law, and placing in the hand of, and under the unlimited
authority of, a rebel, the honour, the property and the lives of the
people; in the hand of a man who, with armed bands, had braved the laws,
and attacked the Constitution of the country.

But the house of Austria was not contented with the unjustifiable
violation of oaths taken by its head.

The rebellious Ban was taken under the protection of the troops
stationed near Vienna, and commanded by Prince Windischgraetz. These
troops, after taking Vienna by storm, were led as an imperial Austrian
army to conquer Hungary. But the Hungarian nation, persisting in its
loyalty, sent an envoy to the advancing enemy. This envoy, coming under
a flag of truce, was treated as a prisoner, and thrown into prison. No
heed was paid to the remonstrances and the demands of the Hungarian
nation for justice. The threat of the gallows was, on the contrary,
thundered against all who had taken arms in defence of a wretched and
oppressed country. But before the army had time to enter Hungary, a
family revolution in the tyrannical reigning house was perpetrated at
Olmuetz. Ferdinand V. was forced to resign a throne which had been
polluted with so much blood and perjury, and the son of Francis Charles,
(who also abdicated his claim to the inheritance,) the youthful Archduke
Francis Joseph, caused himself to be proclaimed Emperor of Austria and
King of Hungary. But no one can by any family compact dispose of the
constitutional throne without the Hungarian nation.

At this critical moment the Hungarian nation demanded nothing more than
the maintenance of its laws and institutions, and peace guaranteed by
their integrity. Had the assent of the nation to this change in the
occupant of the throne been asked in a legal manner, and the young
prince offered to take the customary oath that he would preserve the
Constitution, the Hungarian nation would not have refused to elect him
king in accordance with the treaties extant, and to crown him with St.
Stephen's crown, before he had dipped his hand in the blood of the
people.

He, however, refusing to perform an act so sacred in the eyes of God and
man, and in strange contrast to the innocence natural to youthful
breasts, declared in his first words his intention of conquering
Hungary, (which he dared to call a rebellious country, whereas it was he
himself that raised rebellion there,) and of depriving it of that
independence which it had maintained for a thousand years, to
incorporate it into the Austrian monarchy.***

But even then an attempt was made to bring about a peaceful arrangement,
and a deputation was sent to the generals of the perjured dynasty. This
house in its blind self-confidence, refused to enter into any
negotiation, and dared to demand an unconditional submission from the
nation. The deputation was further detained, and one of the number, the
former President[*] of the Ministry, was even thrown into prison. Our
deserted capital was occupied, and was turned into a place of execution;
a part of the prisoners of war were there consigned to the axe, another
part were thrown into dungeons, while the remainder were exposed to
fearful sufferings from hunger, and were thus forced to enter the ranks
of the army in Italy.

[Footnote *: Louis Bathyanyi. See Note to p. 6.]

[**]Finally, to reap the fruit of so much perfidy, the Emperor Francis
Joseph dared to call himself King of Hungary, in the manifesto of the
9th of March [1849], wherein he openly declares that he erases the
Hungarian nation from the list of the independent nations of Europe, and
that he divides its territory into five parts, cutting off Transylvania,
Croatia, Slavonia, and Fiume from Hungary, creating at the same time a
principality (vayvodeschaft) for the Servian rebels, and, having
paralyzed the political existence of the country, declares it
incorporated into the Austrian monarchy.

[Footnote **: This paragraph, omitted above, is inserted here, where the
reader will better understand it.]

The measure of the crimes of the Austrian house was, however, filled up,
when, after[*] its defeat, it applied for help to the Emperor of Russia;
and, in spite of the remonstrances and protestations of the Porte, and
of the consuls of the European powers at Bucharest, in defiance of
international rights, and to the endangering of the balance of power in
Europe, caused the Russian troops, stationed at Wallachia, to be led
into Transylvania, for the destruction of the Hungarian nation.

[Footnote *: The Russian army entered Transylvania on January 3d, 1849;
this is the army which was driven out again. But the main Russian armies
were only on the move in April, and took two months longer to enter
Hungary. These were applied for late in March.]

Three months ago we were driven back upon the Theiss; our just arms have
already recovered all Transylvania; Klausenburg, Hermanstadt, and
Kronstadt are taken; one portion of the troops of Austria is driven into
Bukowina; another, together with the Russian force sent to aid them, is
totally defeated, and to the last man obliged to evacuate Transylvania,
and to flee into Wallachia. Upper Hungary is cleared of foes.

The Servian rebellion is further suppressed; the forts of St. Thomas and
the Roman intrenchment have been taken by storm, and the whole country
between the Danube and the Theiss, including the country of Bacs, has
been recovered for the nation.

The commander-in-chief of the perjured house of Austria has himself been
defeated in five consecutive battles, and has with his whole army been
driven back upon and even over the Danube.

Founding a line of conduct upon all these occurrences, and confiding in
the justice of an eternal God, we in the face of the civilized world, in
reliance upon the natural rights of the Hungarian nation, and upon the
power it has developed to maintain them, further impelled by that sense
of duty which urges every nation to defend its existence, do hereby
declare and proclaim in the name of the nation regally represented by
us, the following:--

1st. Hungary, with Transylvania, as legally united with it, and the
possessions and dependencies, are hereby declared to constitute a free,
independent, sovereign state. The territorial unity of this state is
declared to be inviolable, and its territory to be indivisible.

2d. The house of Hapsburg-Lorraine--having by treachery, perjury, and
levying of war against the Hungarian nation, as well as by its
outrageous violation of all compacts, in breaking up the integral
territory of the kingdom, in the separation of Transylvania, Croatia,
Slavonia, Fiume, and its districts, from Hungary--further, by compassing
the destruction of the independence of the country by arms, and by
calling in the disciplined army of a foreign power, for the purpose of
annihilating its nationality, by violation both of the Pragmatic
Sanction and of treaties concluded between Austria and Hungary, on which
the alliance between the two countries depended--is, as treacherous and
perjured, for ever excluded from the throne of the united states of
Hungary and Transylvania, and all their possessions and dependencies,
and are hereby deprived of the style and title, as well as of the
armorial bearings belonging to the crown of Hungary, and declared to be
banished for ever from the united countries and their dependencies and
possessions. They are therefore declared to be deposed, degraded, and
banished for ever from the Hungarian territory.

3d. The Hungarian nation, in the exercise of its rights and sovereign
will, being determined to assume the position of a free and independent
state among the nations of Europe, declares it to be its intention to
establish and maintain friendly and neighbourly relations with those
states with which it was formerly united under the same sovereign, as
well as to contract alliances with all other nations.

4th. The form of government to be adopted for the future will be fixed
by the Diet of the nation.

But until this point shall be decided, on the basis of the foregoing and
received principles which have been recognized for ages, the government
of the united countries, their possessions and dependencies, shall be
conducted on personal responsibility, and under the obligation to render
an account of all acts, by Louis Kossuth, who has by acclamation, and
with the unanimous approbation of the Diet of the nation, been named
Governing President (Gubernator), and the ministers whom he shall
appoint.

And this resolution of ours we proclaim for the knowledge of all nations
of the civilized world, with the conviction that the Hungarian nation
will be received by them among the free and independent nations of the
world, with the same friendship and free acknowledgment of its rights
which the Hungarians proffer to other countries.

We also hereby proclaim and make known to all the inhabitants of the
united states of Hungary and Transylvania, their possessions and
dependencies, that all authorities, communes, towns, and the civil
officers, both in the counties and cities, are completely set free and
released from all the obligations under which they stood, by oath or
otherwise, to the said house of Hapsburg; and that any individual daring
to contravene this decree, and by word or deed in any way to aid or abet
any one violating it, shall be treated and punished as guilty of high
treason. And by the publication of this decree, we hereby bind and
oblige all the inhabitants of these countries to obedience to the
government, now instituted formally, and endowed with all necessary
legal powers.

_Debreczin, April_ 14, 1849.

       *       *       *       *       *

V.--STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES AND AIMS.

[_Castle Garden, New York, Dec. 6th_.]

After apologies for his weakness through the effects of the sea, Kossuth
continued:--

Citizens! much as I want some hours of rest, much as I need to become
acquainted with my ground, before I enter publicly on matters of
business, I yet took it for a duty of honour to respond at once to your
generous welcome. I have to thank the People, the Congress, and the
Government of the United States for my liberation. I must not try to
express what I felt, when I,--a wanderer,--but not the less the
legitimate official chief of Hungary,--first saw the glorious flag of
the stripes and stars fluttering over my head--when I saw around me the
gallant officers and the crew of the _Mississippi_ frigate--most of
them worthy representatives of true American principles, American
greatness, American generosity. It was not a mere chance which cast the
star-spangled banner around me; it was your protecting will. The United
States of America, conscious of their glorious calling as well as of
their power, declared by this unparalleled act their resolve to become
the protectors of human rights. To see a powerful vessel of America,
coming to far Asia, in order to break the chains by which the mightiest
despots of Europe fettered the activity of an exiled Magyar, whose name
disturbed their sleep--to be restored by such a protection to freedom
and activity--you may well conceive, was intensely felt by me; as indeed
I still feel it. Others _spoke_--you _acted_; and I was free!
You acted; and at this act of yours tyrants trembled; humanity shouted
out with joy; the Magyar nation, crushed, but not broken, raised its
head with resolution and with hope; and the brilliancy of your stars was
greeted by Europe's oppressed millions as the morning star of liberty.
Now, gentlemen, you must be aware how great my gratitude must be. You
have restored me to life--in restoring me to activity; and should my
life, by the blessing of the Almighty, still prove useful to my
fatherland and to humanity, it will be your merit--it will be your work.
May you and your country be blessed for it!

Your generous part in my liberation is taken by the world for the
revelation of the fact, that the United States are resolved not to allow
the despots of the world to trample on oppressed humanity. That is why
my liberation was cheered from Sweden to Portugal as a ray of hope. Even
those nations which most desire my presence in Europe now, have said to
me, "Hasten on, hasten on, to the great, free, rich, and powerful people
of the United States, and bring over its brotherly aid to the cause of
your country, so intimately connected with European liberty;" and here I
stand to plead the cause of common human rights before your great
Republic. Humble as I am, God the Almighty has selected me to represent
the cause of humanity before you. My warrant hereto is written in the
sympathy and confidence of all who are oppressed, and of all who, as
your elder sister the British nation, sympathize with the oppressed. It
is written in the hopes and expectations you have entitled the world to
entertain, by liberating me out of my prison. But it has pleased the
Almighty to make out of my humble self yet another opportunity for a
thing which may prove a happy turning-point in the destinies of the
world. I bring you a brotherly greeting from the people of Great
Britain. I speak not in an official character, imparted by diplomacy
whose secrecy is the curse of the world, but I am the harbinger of the
public spirit of the people, which I witnessed pronouncing itself in the
most decided manner, openly--that the people of England, united to you
with enlightened brotherly love, as it is united in blood--conscious of
your strength as it is conscious of its own, has for ever abandoned
every sentiment of irritation and rivalry, and desires the brotherly
alliance of the United States to secure to every nation the sovereign
right to dispose of itself, and to protect that right against
encroaching arrogance. It desires to league with you against the league
of despots, and with you to stand sponsor at the approaching baptism of
European liberty.

Now, gentlemen, I have stated my position. I am a straightforward man. I
am a republican. I have avowed it openly in monarchical but free
England; and am happy to state that I have lost nothing by this avowal
there. I hope I shall not lose here, in republican America, by that
frankness, which must be one of the chief qualities of every republican.
So I beg leave openly to state the following points: FIRST that I take
it to be duty of honour and principle not to meddle with any
party-question of your own domestic affairs. SECONDLY, I profess my
admiration for the glorious principle of union, on which stands the
mighty pyramid of your greatness. Taking my ground on this
constitutional fact, it is not to a party, but to your united people
that I will confidently address my humble requests. Within the limits
of your laws I will use every honest exertion to gain your effectual
sympathy, and your financial material and political aid for my country's
freedom and independence, and entreat the realization of the hopes which
your generosity has raised. And, therefore, THIRDLY, I frankly state
that my aim is to restore my fatherland to the full enjoyment of her own
independence, which has been legitimately declared, and cannot have lost
its rightfulness by the violent invasion of foreign Russian arms. What
can be opposed to it? The frown of Mr. Hulsemann--the anger of that
satellite of the Czar, called Francis-Joseph of Austria!  and the
immense danger (with which some European and American papers threaten
you), lest your minister at Vienna receive his passports, and Mr.
Hulsemann leave Washington, should I be received in my official
capacity?  Now, as to your Minister at Vienna, how you can reconcile the
letting him stay there with your opinion of the cause of Hungary, I do
not know; for the present absolutist atmosphere of Europe is not very
propitious to American principles. But as to Mr. Hulsemann, do not
believe that he would be so ready to leave Washington. He has extremely
well digested the caustic words which Mr. Webster has administered to
him so gloriously. I know that your public spirit would never allow any
responsible depository of the executive power to be regulated in its
policy by all the Hulsemanns or all the Francis-Josephs in the world.
But it is also my agreeable conviction that the highminded Government of
the United States shares warmly the sentiments of the people. It has
proved it by executing in a ready and dignified manner the resolution of
Congress on behalf of my liberation. It has proved it by calling on the
Congress to consider how I shall be received, and even this morning I
was honoured by the express order of the Government with an official
salute from the batteries of the United States, in a manner in which,
according to the military rules, only a high official personage can be
greeted.

I came not to your glorious shores to enjoy a happy rest--I came not to
gather triumphs of personal distinction, but as a humble petitioner, in
my country's name, as its freely chosen constitutional leader, to
entreat your generous aid. I have no other claims than those which the
oppressed principle of freedom has to the aid of victorious liberty. If
you consider these claims not sufficient for your active and effectual
sympathy, then let me know at once that the hopes have failed, with
which Europe has looked to your great, mighty, and glorious
Republic--let me know it at once that I may hasten back and say to the
oppressed nations, "Let us fight, forsaken and single-handed, the battle
of Leonidas; let us trust to God, to our right, and to our good sword;
for we have no other help on earth." But if your generous Republican
hearts are animated by the high principle of freedom and of the
community in human destinies,--if you have the will, as undoubtedly you
have the power, to support the cause of freedom against the sacrilegious
league of despotism, then give me some days of calm reflection, to
become acquainted with the ground upon which I stand--let me take kind
advice as to my course--let me learn whether any steps have been already
taken in favour of that cause which I have the honour to represent; and
then let me have a new opportunity to expound before you my humble
request in a practical way.

I confidently hope, Mr. Mayor, the Corporation and Citizens of THE
EMPIRE CITY will grant me a second opportunity. If this be your generous
will, then let me take this for a boon of happier days; and let me add,
with a sigh of thanksgiving to the Almighty God, that Providence has
selected your glorious country to be the pillar of freedom, as it is
already the asylum to oppressed humanity.

I am told that I shall have the high honour to review your patriotic
militia. My heart throbs at the idea of seeing this gallant army
enlisted on the side of freedom against despotism. The world would then
soon be free, and you the saviours of humanity. Citizens of New York, it
is under your protection that I place the sacred cause of freedom and
the independence of Hungary.

       *       *       *       *       *

VI.--REPLY TO THE BALTIMORE ADDRESS.

[_Dec. 10th_, 1851.]

Mr. Henry P. Brooks, Chairman of the Committee of the Baltimore City
Council, came forward, and after congratulating Kossuth upon his release
from peril, and arrival in America, he presented the following
resolutions of the Council written on parchment:--

IN CITY COUNCIL.

Whereas it is understood that Louis Kossuth, the illustrious Hungarian
patriot and exile, is about seeking an asylum upon our shores; and
whereas it is believed that the city of Baltimore, in common with the
whole people of the United States, feel a deep and abiding interest in
the cause of freedom wherever it is assailed, and entertain the most
sincere regret for the unfortunate condition of Hungary; and whereas, in
the reception of Kossuth, an opportunity is offered of expressing our
sympathy for the cause of Hungarian independence--of recording our
detestation of the unholy coalition by which that gallant people have
been crushed, and of evincing our admiration of the noble conduct of the
Turkish Sultan in refusing to deliver to the despots of Europe that
illustrious exile and patriot whom it is about to be our privilege and
pride to receive, as it befits the chosen people of liberty to receive
one who has so nobly battled and suffered in that sacred cause;
therefore--

_Resolved_, By the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, that we
look to the arrival of Kossuth upon our shores with mingled feelings of
satisfaction and regret--satisfaction that we are enabled to afford a
safe asylum to an illustrious patriot--regret that the cause of liberty
should give birth to such necessity.

_Resolved_, That we sympathize fully with the Hungarians in their
important struggles for Independence, but mindful of that Providence
which crowned our own efforts for liberty with success, trust yet to
behold that glorious future which their noble leader so eloquently
predicts for his beloved country.

_Resolved_, That we regard the alliance with Russia and Austria for
the purpose of crushing the spirit of liberty in Hungary as a fit
accompaniment in the annals of time for the infamous partition of
unfortunate Poland by the same tyrannical powers, each alike worthy of
the execration of the civilized world.

_Resolved_, That we cordially welcome Kossuth and his exiled
companions to the full enjoyment of American liberty and an asylum
beyond the reach of European despotism.

_Resolved_, further, That a Joint Committee of five from each
branch of the City Council be appointed, whose duty it shall be, in
conjunction with the Mayor, in the event of their arrival in our city,
to tender to them appropriate public tokens of our esteem and admiration
for their gallant conduct, as well as of our sympathy for their
sufferings and their cause.

Committee under the last resolution--First Branch: Henry P. Brooke, John
Dukehart, J. Hanson Thomas, David Blanford, John Thomas Morris.

Second Branch: Jacob J. Cohen, W. B. Morris, Hugh A. Cooper, James C.
Ninde, Geo. A. Lovering.

JOHN H. J. JEROME, Mayor.
JOHN S. BROWN, President of First Branch.
HUGH BOLTON, President of Second Branch.
City of Baltimore, State of Maryland, United States of America, Oct. 28,
A.D. 1851.

[After hearing several other--complimentary addresses, Kossuth in a few
minutes replied. He began with apologies, and then proceeded]:--

Permit me to say, that in my opinion the word "glory" should be blotted
out from the Dictionary in respect to individuals, and only left for use
in respect to nations. Whatever a man can do for his country, even
though he should live a long life, and have the strongest faculties,
would not be too much: for he ought to use his utmost exertions, and his
utmost powers, in return for the gifts he receives. Whatever a man can
do on behalf of his country and of humanity, would never be so much as
his duty calls upon him to do, still less so much as to merit the use of
the word "glory" in regard to himself. Once more, I say, that duty
belongs to the man and glory to the nation. When an honest man does his
duty to his own country, and becomes a patriot, he acts for all
humanity, and does his duty to mankind.

You have bestowed great attention upon the cause of Hungary, and the
subject is here well understood generally, which is a benefit to me. I
declare to you all, that I find more exact knowledge of the Hungarian
cause here, than in any other place I have been. Yet I am astonished to
see in a report of the proceedings of the United States Senate, that a
member rose and said that we were not struggling for the principle of
Freedom and of Liberty, but rather for the support of our ancient
Charter. This, gentlemen, is a misrepresentation of our cause. There is
a truth in the assertion that we were struggling for our _ancient
rights_, for the right of self-government is an ancient right. The
right of self-government was ours a thousand years ago, and has been
guaranteed to us by the coronation oaths of more than thirty of our
kings. I say that this right was guaranteed to us, yet it had become a
dead letter in the course of time. Before the Revolution of 1848 we were
long struggling to enforce our notorious but often invaded rights; but
the whole people were not interested in them: for although they were
constitutional rights, they were restricted in ancient times, not to a
particular _race_, but to a particular _class_, called Nobles.
These did not belong to the Magyars alone, but to all the races that
settled in the country, to the Sclaves, to the Wallachians, the Serbs,
and to others, whatever their race or their extraction. Yet none but the
_Nobles_ were privileged. We saw that for one class only to be
interested in these rights was not enough, and we wished to make them a
benefit to every man in the country, and to replace the old Constitution
by one which should give a common and universal right to all men to
vote, without regard to the tongue they speak or the Church at which
they pray. I need not enter further into the subject than to say, that
we established a system of practically universal suffrage, of equality
in representation, a just share in taxation for the support of the
State, and equality in the benefits of public education, and in all
those blessings which are derived from the freedom of a free people.

It has been asked by some, why I allowed a treacherous general to ruin
our cause. I have always been anxious not to assume any duty for which I
might be unsuited. If I had undertaken the practical direction of
military operations, and anything went amiss, I feared that my
conscience would torture me, as guilty of the fall of my country, as I
had not been familiar with military tactics. I therefore entrusted my
country's cause, thus far, into other hands; and I weep for the result.
In exile, I have tried to profit by the past and prepare for the future.
I believe that the confidence of Hungary in me is not shaken by
misfortune nor broken by my calumniators. I have had all in my own hands
once; and if ever I am in the same position again, I will act. I will
not become a Napoleon nor an Alexander, and labour for my own ambition;
but I will labour for freedom and for the moral well-being of man. I do
but ask you to enforce your own great constitutional principles, and not
permit Russia to interfere.

       *       *       *       *       *

VII.--HEREDITARY POLICY OF AMERICA.

[_Speech at the Corporation Dinner, New York, Dec. 11th_,
1851.]

The Mayor having made an address to Kossuth, closed by proposing the
following toast:--

"Hungary--Betrayed but not subdued. Her call for help is but the echo of
our appeal against the tread of the oppressor."

Kossuth rose to reply. The enthusiasm with which he was greeted was
unparalleled. It shook the building, and the chandeliers and candelabras
trembled before it. Every one present rose to his feet, and appeared
excited to frenzy. The ladies participated in honouring the Hungarian
hero. At length the storm of applause subsided, and then ensued a
silence most intense. Every eye was fixed on Kossuth, and when he
commenced his speech, the noise caused by the dropping of a pin could be
heard throughout the large and capacious room.

KOSSUTH'S SPEECH.

Sir,--In returning you my most humble thanks for the honour you did me
by your toast, and by coupling my name with that cause which is the
sacred aim of my life, I am so overwhelmed with emotion by all it has
been my strange lot to experience since I am on your glorious shores,
that I am unable to find words; and knowing that all the honour I meet
with has the higher meaning of principles, I beg leave at once to fall
back on my duties, which are the lasting topics of my reflections, my
sorrows, and my hopes. I take the present for a highly important
opportunity, which may decide the success or failure of my visit. I must
therefore implore your indulgence for a pretty long and plain
development of my views concerning that cause which the citizens of New
York, and you particularly, gentlemen, honour with generous interest.

When I perceive that the sympathy of your people with Hungary is almost
universal, and that they pronounce their feelings in its favour with a
resolution such as denotes noble and great deeds about to follow; I
might feel inclined to take for granted, at least _in principle_,
that we shall have your generous aid for restoring to our land its
sovereign independence. Nothing but _details_ of negotiation would
seem to be left for me, were not my confidence checked, by being told,
that, according to many of your most distinguished Statesmen, it is a
ruling principle of your public policy never to interfere in European
affairs.

I highly respect the source of this conviction, gentlemen. This source
is your religious attachment to the doctrines of those who bequeathed to
you the immortal constitution which, aided by the unparalleled benefits
of nature, has raised you, in seventy-five years, from an infant people
to a mighty nation. The wisdom of the founders of your great republic
you see in its happy results. What would be the consequences of
departing from that wisdom, you are not sure. You therefore
instinctively fear to touch, even with improving hands, the dear legacy
of those great men. And as to your glorious constitution, all humanity
can only wish that you and your posterity may long preserve this
religious attachment to its fundamental principles, which by no means
exclude development and progress: and that every citizen of your great
union, thankfully acknowledging its immense benefits, may never forget
to love it more than momentary passion or selfish and immediate
interest. May every citizen of your glorious country for ever remember
that a partial discomfort of a corner in a large, sure, and comfortable
house, may be well amended without breaking the foundation; and that
amongst all possible means of getting rid of that partial discomfort,
the worst would be to burn down the house with his own hands.

But while I acknowledge the wisdom of your attachment to fundamental
doctrines, I beg leave with equal frankness to state, that, in my
opinion, there can be scarcely anything more dangerous to the
progressive development of a nation, than to mistake for a basis that
which is none; to mistake for a principle that which is but a transitory
convenience; to take for substantial that which is but accidental; or to
take for a constitutional doctrine that which is but a momentary
exigency of administrative policy. Such a course of action would be like
to a healthy man refusing substantial food, because when he was once
weak in stomach his physician ordered him a severe diet. Let me suppose,
gentlemen, that that doctrine of non-interference was really bequeathed
to you by your Washingtons (and that it was not, I will essay to prove
afterwards), and let me even suppose that your Washingtons imparted to
it such an interpretation, as were equivalent to the words of Cain, "Am
I my brother's keeper?" (which supposition would be, of course, a
sacrilege; but I am forced to such suppositions:) I may be entitled to
ask, is the dress which suited the child, still suitable to the full
grown man? Would it not be ridiculous to lay the man into the child's
cradle, and to sing him to sleep by a lullaby? In the origin of the
United States you were an infant people, and you had, of course, nothing
to do but to grow, to grow, and to grow. But now you are so far grown
that there is no foreign power on earth from which you have anything to
fear for your existence or security. In fact, your growth is that of a
giant. Of old, your infant frame was composed of thirteen states, and
was restricted to the borders of the Atlantic: now, your massive bulk is
spread to the gulf of Mexico and the Pacific, and your territory is a
continent. Your right hand touches Europe over the waves; your left
reaches across the Pacific to eastern Asia; and there, between two
quarters of the world, there you stand, in proud immensity, a world
yourselves. Then you were a small people of three millions and a half;
now you are a mighty nation of twenty-four millions. Thus you have fully
entered into the second stadium of national life, in which a nation
lives at length not for itself separately, but as a member of the great
family of human nations; having a right to whatever is due from that
family _towards_ every one of its full-grown members, but also
engaged to every duty which that great family may claim _from_
every one of its full-grown members.

A nation may, either from comparative weakness, or by choice and policy,
as Japan and China, or by both these motives, as Paraguay under Dr.
Francia,--be induced to live a life secluded from the world, indifferent
to the destinies of mankind, in which it cannot or will not have any
share. But then it must be willing to be also excluded from the benefits
of progress, civilization and national intercourse, while disavowing all
care about all other nations in the world. No citizen of the United
States has, or ever will have, the wish to see this country degraded to
the rotting vegetation of a Paraguay, or the mummy existence of a Japan
and China. The feeling of self-dignity, and the expansiveness of that
enterprizing spirit which is congenial to freemen, would revolt against
the very idea of such a degrading national captivity. But if there were
even a will to live such a mummy life, there is no possibility to do so.
The very existence of your great country, the principles upon which it
is founded, its geographical position, its present scale of
civilization, and all its moral and material interests, would lead on
your people not only to maintain, but necessarily more and more to
develop your foreign intercourse. Then, being in so many respects linked
to mankind at large, you cannot have the will, nor yet the power, to
remain indifferent to the outward world. And if you cannot remain
indifferent, you must resolve to throw your weight into that balance in
which the fate and condition of man is weighed. You are a power on
earth. You must be a power on earth, and must therefore accept all the
consequences of this position. You cannot allow that any power in the
world should dispose of the fate of that great family of mankind, of
which you are so pre-eminent a member: else you would resign your proud
place and your still prouder future, and be a power on earth no more.

I hope I have sufficiently shown, that should even that doctrine of
non-interference have been established by the founders of your republic,
that which might have been very proper to your infancy would not now be
suitable to your manhood. It is a beautiful word of Montesquieu, that
republics are to be founded on virtue. And you know that virtue between
man and man, as sanctioned by our Christian religion, is but an exercise
of that great principle--"Thou shalt do to others as thou desirest
others to do to thee." Thus I might rely simply upon your generous
republican hearts, and upon the consistency of your principles; but I
beg to add some essential differences in material respects, between your
present condition and that of yore. Of your twenty-four millions, more
than nineteen are spread over yonder immense territory, the richest of
the world, employed in the cultivation of the soil, that honourable
occupation, which in every time has proved to be the most inexhaustible
and most unfailing source of public welfare and private happiness, as
also the most unwavering ally of freedom, and the most faithful fosterer
of all those upright, noble, generous sentiments which the constant
intercourse with ever young, ever great, ever beautiful virtue, imparts
to man. Now this immense agricultural interest, desiring large markets,
at the same time affords a solid basis to your manufacturing industry,
and in consequence to your immensely developed commerce. All this places
such a difference between the republic of Washington and your present
grandeur, that though you may well be attached to your original
principles (for the principles of liberty are everlastingly the same),
yet not so in respect to the exigencies of your policy. For if it is to
be regulated by _interest_, your country has other interests to-day
than it had then; and if ever it is to be regulated by the higher
consideration of _principles_, you are strong enough to feel that
the time is already come. And I, standing here before you to plead the
cause of oppressed humanity, am bold to declare that there may never
again come a crisis, at which such an elevation of your policy would
prove either more glorious to you, or more beneficial to man: for we in
Europe are apparently on the eye of that day, when either the hopes or
the fears of oppressed nations will be crushed for a long time.

Having stated so far the difference of the situation, I beg leave now to
assert that it is an error to suppose that non-interference in foreign
matters has been bequeathed to the people of the United States by your
great Washington as a doctrine and as a constitutional principle.
Firstly, Washington never even recommended to you non-interference in
the sense of _indifference_ to the fate of other nations. He only
recommended _neutrality_. And there is a mighty diversity between
these two ideas. Neutrality has reference to a state of war between two
belligerent powers, and it is this case which Washington contemplated,
when he, in his Farewell Address, advised the people of the United
States not to enter into entangling alliances. Let quarrelling powers,
let quarrelling nations go to war--but do you consider your own
concerns; leave foreign powers to quarrel about ambitious topics, or
narrow partial interests. Neutrality is a matter of convenience--not of
principle. But while neutrality has reference to a state of war between
belligerent powers, the principle of non-interference, on the contrary,
lays down the sovereign right of nations to arrange their own domestic
concerns. Therefore these two ideas of neutrality and non-interference
are entirely different, having reference to two entirely different
matters. The sovereign right of every nation to rule over itself, to
alter its own institutions, to change the form of its own government, is
a common public law of nations, common to all, and, _therefore, put
under the common guarantee of all_. This sovereign right of every
nation to dispose of itself, you, the people of the United States must
recognize; for it is the common law of mankind, in which, because it is
such, every nation is equally interested. You must recognize it,
secondly, because the very existence of your great republic, as also the
independence of every nation, rests upon this ground. If that sovereign
right of nations were no common public law of mankind, then your own
independence would be no matter of right, but only a matter of fact,
which might be subject, for all future time, to all sorts of chances
from foreign conspiracy and violence. And where is the citizen of the
United States who would not revolt at the idea that this great republic
is not a righteous nor a lawful existence, but only a mere accident--a
mere matter of fact? If it were so, you were not entitled to invoke the
protection of God for your great country; for the protection of God
cannot, without sacrilege, be invoked but in behalf of justice and
right. You would have no right to look to the sympathy of mankind for
yourselves; for you would profess an abrogation of the laws of humanity
upon which is founded your own independence, your own nationality.

Now, gentlemen, if these be principles of common law, of that law which
God has given to every nation of humanity--if to organize itself is the
common lawful right of every nation; then the interference with this
common law of all humanity, the violent act of hindering, by armed
forces, a nation from exercising that sovereign right, must be
considered as a violation of that common public law upon which your very
existence rests, and which, being a common law of all humanity, is, by
God himself, placed under the safeguard of all humanity; for it is God
himself who commands us to love our neighbours as we love ourselves, and
to do towards others as we desire others to do towards us. Upon this
point you cannot remain indifferent. You may well remain neutral to war
between two belligerent nations, but you cannot remain indifferent to
the violation of the common law of humanity. That indifference
Washington has never taught you. I defy any man to show me, out of the
eleven volumes of Washington's writings, a single word to that effect.
He could not have recommended this indifference without ceasing to be
wise as he was; for without justice there is no wisdom on earth. He
could not have recommended it without becoming inconsistent; for it was
this common law of mankind which your fathers invoked before God and man
when they proclaimed your independence. It was he himself, your great
Washington, who not only accepted, but again and again asked, foreign
aid--foreign help for the support of that common law of mankind in
respect to your own independence. Knowledge and instruction are so
universally spread amongst the enlightened people of the United States,
the history of your country is such a household science at the most
lonely hearths of your remotest settlements, that it may be sufficient
for me to refer, in that respect, to the instructions and correspondence
between Washington and the Minister at Paris--the equally immortal
Franklin--the modest man with the proud epitaph, which tells the world
that he wrested the lightning from heaven, and the sceptre from the
tyrant's hands.

I will go further. Even that doctrine of neutrality which Washington
taught and bequeathed to you, he taught not as a constitutional
_principle_--a lasting regulation for all future time, but only as
a matter of temporary _policy_. I refer in that respect to the very
words of his Farewell Address. There he states explicitly that "it is
your _policy_ to steer clear of _permanent_ alliances with any
portion of the foreign world." These are his very words. Policy is the
word, and you know that policy is not the science of principle, but of
exigencies; and that principles are, of course, by a free and powerful
nation, never to be sacrificed to exigencies. The exigencies pass away
like the bubbles of a shower, but the nation is immortal: it must
consider the future also, and not only the egotistical dominion of the
passing hour: it must be aware that to an immortal nation nothing can be
of higher importance than immortal principles. Again, in the same
address Washington explicitly says, in reference to his policy of
neutrality, that "with him a predominant motive has been to _gain
time_ to your country to settle and mature its institutions, and to
progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency
which is necessary to give it the command of its own fortunes." These
are highly memorable words, gentlemen. Here I take my ground; and
casting a glance of admiration over your glorious land, I confidently
ask you, gentlemen, are your institutions settled and matured or are
they not? Are you, or are you not, come to such a degree of strength and
consistency as to be the masters of your own fortunes? Oh!  how do I
thank God for having given me the glorious view of this country's
greatness, which answers this question for me! Yes! you _have_
attained that degree of strength and consistency in which your less
fortunate brethren may well claim your protecting hand.

One word more on Washington's doctrines. In one of his letters, written
to Lafayette, he says:--"Let us only have twenty years of peace, and our
country will come to such a degree of power and wealth that we shall be
able, in a just cause, to defy any power on earth whatsoever." "In a
just cause!" Now, in the name of eternal truth, and by all that is dear
and sacred to man, since the history of mankind is recorded, there has
been no cause more just than the cause of Hungary. Never was there a
people, without the slightest reason, more sacrilegiously, more
treacherously attacked, or by fouler means than Hungary. Never has
crime, cursed ambition, despotism, and violence, united more wickedly to
crush freedom, and the very life, than against Hungary. Never was a
country more mortally aggrieved than Hungary is. All _your_
sufferings--all _your_ complaints, which, with so much right, drove
your forefathers to take up arms, are but slight grievances in
comparison with those immense deep wounds, out of which the heart of
Hungary bleeds! If the cause of our people is not sufficiently just to
insure the protection of God, and the support of right-willing men--then
there is no just cause, and no justice on earth. Then the blood of no
new Abel will moan towards Heaven. The genius of charity, Christian
love, and justice will mourningly fly the earth; a heavy curse will fall
upon morality--oppressed men will despair, and only the Cains of mankind
walk proudly with impious brow about the ruins of liberty on earth.

Now, allow me briefly to consider how your Foreign Policy has grown and
enlarged itself. I will only recall to your memory the message of
President Monroe, when he clearly stated that the United States would
take up arms to protect the American Colonies of Spain, now free
republics, should the Holy (or rather unholy) Alliance make an attempt
either to aid Spain to reduce the new American republics to their
ancient colonial state, or to compel them to adopt political systems
more conformable to the policy and views of that alliance. I entreat you
to mark this well, gentlemen. Not only the forced introduction of
monarchy, but in general the interference of foreign powers in the
contest, was declared sufficient motive for the United States to protect
the colonies. Let me remind you that this declaration of President
Monroe was not only approved and confirmed by the people of the United
States, but that Great Britain itself joined the United States, in the
declaration of this decision and this policy. I further recall to your
memory the instructions given in 1826 to your Envoys to the Congress of
Panama, Richard Anderson and John Sergeant, where it was clearly stated
that the United States would have opposed, with their whole force, the
interference of the continental powers in that struggle for
independence. It is true, that this declaration to go even to war, to
protect the independence of foreign States against foreign interference,
was restricted to the continent of America; for President Monroe
declares in his message that the United States can have no concern in
European straggles, being distant and separated from Europe by the great
Atlantic Ocean. But I would remark that this indifference to European
concerns is again a matter, not of principle but of temporary
exigency--the motives of which have, by the lapse of time, entirely
disappeared--so much that the balance is even turned to the opposite
side.

President Monroe mentions _distance_ as a motive of the
above-stated distinction. Well, since the prodigious development of your
Fulton's glorious invention, distance is no longer calculated by miles,
but by hours; and, being so, Europe is of course less distant from you
than the greater part of the American continent. But, let even the word
distance be taken in a nominal sense. Europe is nearer to you than the
greatest part of the American continent--yea! even nearer than perhaps
some parts of your own territory. President Monroe's second motive is,
that you are separated from Europe _by the Atlantic_. Now, at the
present time, and in the present condition of navigation, the Atlantic
is no separation, but rather a link; as the means of that commercial
intercourse which brings the interest of Europe home to you, connecting
you with it by every tie of moral as well as material interest.

There is immense truth in that which the French Legation in the United
States expressed to your government in an able note of 27th October
past:--"America is closely connected with Europe, being only separated
from the latter by a distance scarcely exceeding eight days' journey, by
one of the most important of general interests--the interest of
commerce. The nations of America and Europe are at this day so
dependent upon one another, that the effects of any event, prosperous or
otherwise, happening on one side of the Atlantic, are immediately felt
on the other side. The result of this community of interests,
commercial, political, and moral, between Europe and America--of this
frequency and rapidity of intercourse between them, is, that it becomes
as difficult to point out the geographical degree where American policy
shall terminate, and European policy begin, as it is to trace out the
line where American commerce begins and European commerce terminates.
Where may be said to begin or terminate the ideas which are in the
ascendant in Europe and in America?"

It is chiefly in New York that I feel induced to urge this, because New
York is, by innumerable ties, connected with Europe--more connected than
several parts of Europe itself. It is the agricultural interest of this
great country which chiefly wants an outlet and a market. Now, it is far
more to Europe than to the American continent that you have to look in
that respect. On this account you cannot remain indifferent to the fate
of freedom on the European continent: for be sure, gentlemen--and I
would say this chiefly to the gentlemen of trade--should absolutism gain
ground in Europe, it will, it must, put every possible obstacle in the
way of commercial intercourse with republican America: for commercial
intercourse is the most powerful convoyer of principles, and be sure the
victory of absolutism on the European continent will in no quarter have
more injurious national consequences than against your vast agricultural
and commercial interests. Then why not prevent it, while it is still
possible to do so with comparatively small sacrifices, rather than abide
that fatal catastrophe, and have to mourn the immense sacrifices it
would then cost?

Even in political considerations, now-a-days, you have stronger motives
to feel interested in the fate of Europe than in the fate of the Central
or Southern parts of America. Whatever may happen in the institutions
of these parts, you are too powerful to see your own institutions
affected by it. But let Europe become absolutistical (as, unless
Hungary be restored to its independence, and Italy become free, be sure
it will)--and your children will see those words, which your national
government spoke in 1827, fulfilled on a larger scale than they were
meant, that "the absolutism of Europe will not be appeased, until every
vestige of human freedom has been obliterated even here." And oh! do not
rely too fondly upon your power. It is great, assuredly. You have not to
fear any single power on earth. But look to history. Mighty empires
have vanished. Let not the enemies of freedom grow too strong.
Victorious over Europe, and then united, they would be too strong even
for you! And be sure they hate you most cordially. They consider you as
their most dangerous opponent. Absolutism cannot sleep tranquilly, while
the republican principle has such a mighty representative as your
country is. Yes, gentlemen, it was the fear of driving the absolutists
to fanatical effort, which induced your great Statesmen not to extend to
Europe the principle on which they acted towards the New World, and by
no means the publicly avowed feeble motives. Every manifestation of your
public life in those times shows that I am right to say so. The European
nations were, about 1823, in such a degraded situation, that indeed you
must have felt anxious not to come into any political contact with that
pestilential atmosphere, when, as Mr. Clay said in 1818, in his speech
about the emancipation of South America, "Paris was transferred to St.
Petersburg." But scarcely a year later, the Greek nation came in its
contest to an important crisis, which gave you hope that the spirit of
freedom was waking again, and at once you abandoned the principle of
political indifference for Europe. You know, your Clays and your
Websters spoke, as if really they were speaking for my very cause. You
know how your citizens acted in behalf of that struggle for liberty in a
part of Europe which is more distant than Hungary: and again when Poland
fell, you know what spirit pervaded the United States.

I have shown you how Washington's policy has been gradually changed: but
one mighty difference I must still commemorate. Your population has,
since Monroe's time, nearly doubled, I believe; or at least has
increased by millions. And what sort of men are these millions? Are they
only native-born Americans? No European emigrants?  Many are men, who
though citizens of the United States are, by the most sacred ties of
relationship, attached to the fate of Europe. That is a consideration
worthy of reflection with your wisest men, who will, ere long agree with
me, that in your present condition you are at least as much interested
in the state of Europe, as twenty-eight years ago your fathers were in
the fate of Central and Southern America. And really so it is. The
unexampled sympathy for the cause of my country which I have met with in
the United States proves that it is so. Your generous interference with
the Turkish captivity of the Governor of Hungary, proves that is so. And
this progressive development in your foreign policy, is, in fact, no
longer a mere instinctive ebullition of public opinion, which is about
hereafter to direct your governmental policy; the opinion of the people
is _already_ avowed as the policy of the government. I have a most
decisive authority to rely upon in saying so. It is the message of the
President of the United States. His Excellency, Millard Fillmore, made a
communication to Congress, a few days ago, and there I read the
paragraph:--"The deep interest which we feel in the spread of liberal
principles, and the establishment of free governments, and the sympathy
with which we witness every struggle against oppression, _forbid that
we should be indifferent_ to a case in which the strong arm of a
foreign power is invoked to stifle public sentiment and repress the
spirit of freedom in any country."

Now, gentlemen, here is the ground which I take for my earnest
endeavours to benefit the cause of Hungary. I have only respectfully to
ask: Is a principle which the public opinion of the United States so
resolutely professes, and which the government of the United States,
with the full sentiment of its responsibility, declares to your Congress
to be a ruling principle of your national government--is that principle
meant to be serious? Indeed, it would be a most impertinent outrage
towards your great people and your national government, to entertain the
insulting opinion, that what the people of the United States and its
national government profess in such a solemn diplomatic manner could be
meant as a mere sporting with the most sacred interests of humanity. God
forbid that I should think so. Therefore, I take the principle of your
policy as I find it established--and I come in the name of oppressed
humanity to claim the unavoidable, practical, consequences of your own
freely chosen policy, which you have avowed to the whole world; to claim
the realization of those expectations which you, the sovereign people of
the United States, have chosen, of your own accord, to raise in the
bosom of my countrymen and of all the oppressed.

You will excuse me, gentlemen, for having dwelt so long upon that
principle of non-interference with European measures: but I have found
it to be the stone of stumbling thrown in my way when I spoke of what I
humbly request from the United States. I have been charged as arrogantly
attempting to change your existing policy, and since I cannot in one
speech exhaust the complex and mighty whole of my mission, I choose on
the present opportunity to develop my views about that fundamental
principle: and having shown, not theoretically, but practically, that it
is a mistake to think that you had, at any time, such a principle, and
having shown that if you ever entertained such a policy, you have been
forced to abandon it--so much, at least, I hope I have achieved. My
humble requests to your active sympathy may be still opposed by--I know
not what other motives; but the objection, that you must not interfere
with European concerns--this objection is disposed of, once and for
ever, I hope. It remains now to inquire, whether, since you have
professed not to be indifferent to the cause of European freedom--the
cause of Hungary is such as to have just claims to your active and
effectual assistance and support. It is, gentlemen.

To prove this I do not now intend to enter into an explanation of the
particulars of our struggle, which I had the honour to conduct, as the
chosen Chief Magistrate of my native land. It is highly gratifying to me
to find that the cause of Hungary is--excepting some ridiculous
misrepresentations of ill-will--correctly understood here. I will only
state now one fact, and that is, that our endeavours for independence
were crushed by the armed interference of a foreign despotic power--the
principle of all evil on earth--Russia. And stating this fact, I will
not again intrude upon you with my own views, but recall to your memory
the doctrines established by your own statesmen. Firstly--I return to
your great Washington. He says, in one of his letters to Lafayette, "My
policies are plain and simple; I think every nation has a right to
establish that form of government under which it conceives it can live
most happy; and that no government ought to interfere with the internal
concerns of another." Here I take my ground:--upon a principle of
Washington--a _principle_, not a mere temporary policy calculated
for the first twenty years of your infancy. Russia _has_ interfered
with the internal concerns of Hungary, and by doing so has violated the
policy of the United States, established as a lasting principle by
Washington himself. It is a lasting principle. I could appeal in my
support to the opinion of every statesman of the United States, of every
party, of every time; but to save time, I pass at once from the first
President of the United States to the last, and recall to your memory
this word of the present annual message of his Excellency President
Fillmore:--"Let every people choose for itself, and make and alter its
political institutions to suit its own condition and convenience." I beg
leave also to quote the statement of your present Secretary of State,
Mr. Webster, who, in his speech on the Greek question, speaks
thus:--"The law of nations maintains that in extreme cases resistance is
lawful, and that one nation has no right to interfere in the affairs of
another." Well, that precisely is the ground upon which we Hungarians
stand.

But I may perhaps meet the objection (I am sorry to say I have met it
already)--"Well, we own that it has been violated by Russia in the case
of Hungary, but after all what is Hungary to us? Let every people take
care of itself, what is that to us?" So some speak: it is the old
doctrine of private egotism, "Every one for himself, and God for us
all." I will answer the objection again by the words of Mr. Webster,
who, in his speech on the Greek question, having professed that the
internal sovereignty of every nation is a law of nations--thus goes on,
"But it may be asked 'what is all that to us?' The question is easily
answered. _We are one of the nations_, and we as a nation have
precisely the same interest in international law as a private individual
has in the laws of his country." The principle which your honourable
Secretary of State professes, is a principle of eternal truth. No man
can disavow it, no political party can disavow it. Thus happily I am
able to address my prayers, not to a party, but to the whole people of
the United States, and will go on to do so as long as I have no reason
to regard one party as opposed or indifferent to my country's cause.

But from certain quarters it may be avowed, "Well, we acknowledge every
nation's sovereign right; we acknowledge it to be a law of nations that
no foreign power interfere in the affairs of another, and we are
determined to respect this common law of mankind; but if others do not
respect that law it is not ours to meddle with them." Let me answer by
an analysis:--_Every nation has the same interest in international,
law as a private individual has in the laws of his country_. That is
an acknowledged principle with your statesmen. What then is the latter
relation? Does it suffice that an individual do not himself violate the
law? Must he not so far as is in his power also prevent others from
violating the law? Suppose you see that a wicked man is about to rob--to
murder your neighbour, or to burn his house, will you wrap yourself in
your own virtuous lawfulness, and say, "I myself neither rob, nor
murder, nor burn; but what others do is not my concern. I am not my
brother's keeper. _I sympathize with him_; but I am not called on to
save him from being robbed, murdered, or burnt." What honest man of the
world would answer so? None of you. None of the people of the United
States, I am sure. That would be the damned maxim of the Pharisees of
old, who thanked God that they were not as others were. Our Saviour was
not content himself to avoid trading in the hall of the temple, but he
drove out those who were trading there.

The duty of enforcing observance to the common law of nations has no
other _limit_ than the power to fulfil it. Of course the republic
of St. Marino, or the Prince of Monaco, cannot stop the Czar of Russia
in his ambitious annoyance. It was ridiculous when the Prince of Modena
refused to recognize the government of Louis Philippe--"but to whom much
is given, from him will much be expected," says the Lord. Every
condition has not only its rights, but also its own duties; and whatever
exists as a power on earth, is in duty a part of the executive
government of mankind, called to maintain the law of nations. Woe, a
thousandfold woe to humanity, should there be no force on earth to
maintain the laws of humanity. Woe to humanity, should those who are as
mighty as they are free, not feel interested to maintain the laws of
mankind, because they are rightful laws,--but only in so far as some
partial money-interests would desire it. Woe to mankind if every despot
of the world may dare to trample down the laws of humanity, and no free
nation make these laws respected. People of the United States, humanity
expects that your glorious republic will prove to the world, that
_republics are founded on virtue_--it expects to see you the
guardians of the laws of humanity.

I will come to the last possible objection. I may be told, "You are
right in your principles, your cause is just, and you have our sympathy,
but, after all, we _cannot_ go to war for your country; we cannot
furnish you armies and fleets; we cannot fight your battle for you."
There is the rub! Who can exactly tell what would have been the issue of
your own struggle for independence (though your country was in a far
happier geographical position than we, poor Hungarians), had France
given such an answer to your forefathers in 1778 and 1781, instead of
sending to your aid a fleet of thirty-eight men-of-war, and auxiliary
troops, and 24,000 muskets, and a loan of nineteen millions? And what
was far more than all this, did it not show that France resolved with
all its power to espouse the cause of your independence? But, perhaps, I
shall be told that France did this, not out of love of freedom, but out
of hatred against England. Well, let it be; but let me then ask, shall
the curse of olden times--hatred--be more efficient in the destinies of
mankind than love of freedom, principles of justice, and the laws of
humanity?  And is America in the days of steam navigation more distant
from Europe to-day, than France was from America seventy-three years
ago? However, I most solemnly declare that it is not my intention to
rely literally upon this example. It is not my wish to entangle the
United States in war, or to engage your great people to send out armies
and fleets to raise up and restore Hungary. Not at all, gentlemen; I
most solemnly declare that I have never entertained such expectations or
such hopes; and here I come to the practical point.

The principle of evil in Europe is the enervating spirit of Russian
absolutism. Upon this rests the daring boldness of every petty tyrant to
trample upon oppressed nations, and to crush liberty. To this Moloch of
ambition has my native land fallen a victim. It is with this that
Montalembert threatens the French republicans. It was Russian
intervention in Hungary which governed French intervention in Rome, and
gave German tyrants hardihood to crush all the endeavours for freedom
and unity in Germany. The despots of the European continent are leagued
against the freedom of the world. That is A MATTER OF FACT. The second
matter of fact is that the European continent is on the eve of a new
revolution. It is not necessary to be initiated in the secret
preparations of the European democracy to be aware of that approaching
contingency. It is pointed out by the French constitution itself,
prescribing a new Presidential election for the next spring. Now,
suppose that the ambition of Louis Napoleon, encouraged by Russian
secret aid, awaits this time (_which I scarcely believe_), and
suppose that there should be a Republic in France; of course the first
act of the new French President must be, at least, to recall the French
troops from Rome. Nobody can doubt that a revolution in Italy will
follow. Or if there is no peaceful solution in France, but a revolution,
then every man knows that whenever the heart of France boils up, the
pulsation is felt throughout Europe, and oppressed nations once more
rise, and Russia again interferes.

Now I humbly ask, with the view of these circumstances before your eyes,
can it be convenient to such a great power as this glorious Republic, to
await the very outbreak, and not until then to discuss and decide on
your foreign policy?  There may come, as under the last President, at a
late hour, agents to see how matters stand in Hungary. Russian
interference and treason achieved what the sacrilegious Hapsburg dynasty
failed to achieve. You know the old words, "While Rome debated, Saguntum
fell." So I respectfully press upon you my FIRST entreaty: it is, that
your people will in good time express to your central government what
course of foreign policy it wishes to be pursued in the case of the
approaching events I have mentioned. And I most confidently hope that
there is only one course possible, consistently with the above recorded
principles. If you acknowledge that the right of every nation to alter
its institutions and government is a law of nations--if you acknowledge
the interference of foreign powers in that sovereign right to be a
violation of the law of nations, as you really do--if you are
_forbidden to remain indifferent_ to this violation of international
law (as your President openly professes that you are)--then there
is no other course possible than neither to interfere in that
sovereign right of nations, nor to allow any other powers
whatever to interfere.

But you will perhaps object to me, "That amounts to going to war." I
answer: no--that amounts to preventing war. What is wanted to that
effect? It is wanted, that, being aware of the precarious condition of
Europe, your national government should, as soon as possible, send
instructions to your Minister at London, to declare to the English
government that the United States, acknowledging the sovereign right of
every nation to dispose of its own domestic concerns, have resolved not
to interfere, but also not to let any foreign power whatever interfere
with this sovereign right in order to repress the spirit of freedom in
any country. Consequently, to invite the Cabinet of St. James's into
this policy, and declare that the United States are resolved to act
conjointly with England in that decision, in the approaching crisis of
the European continent. Such is my FIRST humble request. If the citizens
of the United States, instead of honouring me with the offers of their
hospitality, would be pleased to pass convenient resolutions, and to
ratify them to their national government--if the press would hasten to
give its aid, and in consequence the national government instructed its
Minister in England accordingly, and by communication to the Congress,
as it is wont, give publicity to this step, I am entirely sure that you
would find the people of Great Britain heartily joining this direction
of policy. No power could feel peculiarly offended by it; no existing
relation would be broken or injured: and still any future interference
of Russia against the restoration of Hungary to that independence which
was formally declared in 1849 would be prevented, Russian arrogance and
preponderance would be checked, and the oppressed nations of Europe soon
become free.

There may be some over-anxious men, who perhaps would say, "But if such
a declaration of your government were not respected, and Russia still
did interfere, then you would be obliged by this previous declaration,
to go to war; and you don't desire to have a war." That objection seems
to me as if somebody were to say, "If the vault of heaven breaks down,
what shall we do?" My answer is, "But it will not break down." Even so I
answer. But your declaration _will_ be respected--Russia will not
interfere--you will have no occasion for war--you will have prevented
war. Be sure Russia would twice, thrice consider, before provoking
against itself, besides the roused judgment of nations--(to say nothing
of the legions of republican France)--the English "Lion" and the
star-surrounded "Eagle" of America. Remember that you, in conjunction
with England, once before declared that you would not permit European
absolutism to interfere with the formerly Spanish colonies of America.
Did this declaration bring you to a war? quite the contrary; it
prevented war. So it would be in our case also. Let me therefore most
humbly entreat you, people of the United States, to give such practical
direction to your generous sympathy for Hungary, as to arrange meetings
and pass such resolutions, in every possible place of this Union, as I
took the liberty to mention above.

The SECOND measure which I beg leave to mention, has reference to
commercial interest. In later times a doctrine has stolen into the code
of international law, which is as contrary to the commercial interests
of nations as to their independence. The pettiest despot of the world is
permitted to exclude your commerce from whatever port he pleases. He
has only to arrange the blockade, and your commerce is shut out; or, if
captured Venice, bleeding Lombardy, or my prostrate but resolute
Hungary, rises to shake off the Austrian tyrant's yoke (as surely they
will), that tyrant believes he has the right, from that very moment, to
exclude your commerce from the uprisen nation. Now, this is an
absurdity--a tyrannical invention of tyrants violating your
interest--your independence. The United States have not always regarded
things from the despotic point of view. I find, in a note of Mr.
Everett, Minister of the United States in Spain, dated "Madrid, Jan. 20,
1826," these words:--"In the war between Spain and the Spanish American
colonies, the United States have freely granted to _both_ parties
the hospitality of their ports and territory, and have allowed the
agents of _both_ to procure within their jurisdiction, in the way
of lawful trade, _any_ supplies which suited their convenience."
Now, gentlemen, this is the principle which humanity expects, for your
own and for mankind's benefit, to see maintained by you, and not yonder
fatal course, which permits tyrants to draw from your country every
facility for the oppression of their nations, but forbids nations to buy
the means of defence. That was not the principle of your Washington.
When he speaks of harmony, of friendly intercourse, and of peace, he
always takes care to apply his ideas to _nations_, and not to
_governments_--still less to tyrants who subdue nations by foreign
arms. The sacred word Nation, with all its natural rights, should not be
blotted out, at least from _your_ political dictionary: and yet I
am sorry to see that the word nation is often replaced by the word
Government. Gentlemen, I humbly wish that the public opinion of the
people of the United States, conscious of its own rights, should loudly
and resolutely declare that the people of the United States will
continue its commercial intercourse with any or every nation, be it in
revolution against its oppressors or be it not; and that the people of
the United States expect confidently, that its government will provide
for the protection of your trade. I feel assured, that your national
government, seeing public opinion so pronounced, will judge it
convenient to augment your naval forces in the Mediterranean: and to
look for some such station for it as would not force the navy of
republican America to make disavowals inconsistent with republican
principles or republican dignity, only because King So-and-So, be he
even the cursed King of Naples, grants the favour of an anchoring place
for the naval forces of your republic. I believe your illustrious
country should everywhere freely unfurl the star-spangled banner of
liberty, with all its congenial principles, and not make itself in any
respect dependent on the glorious smiles of the Kings Bomba et Compagne.

The THIRD object of my wishes, gentlemen, is the recognition of the
independence of Hungary when the critical moment arrives. Your own
declaration of independence proclaims the right of every nation to
assume among the powers of the earth the separate and equal station to
which "the laws of nature and nature's God" entitle them. The political
existence of your glorious republic is founded upon this principle, upon
this right. Our nation stands upon the same ground: there is a striking
resemblance between your cause and that of my country. On the 4th July,
1776, John Adams spoke thus in your Congress, "Sink or swim, live or
die, survive or perish, I am for this declaration. In the beginning we
did not go so far as separation from the Crown, but 'there is a divinity
which shapes our ends.'" These noble words were present to my mind on
the 14th April, 1849, when I moved the forfeiture of the Crown by the
Hapsburgs in the National Assembly of Hungary. Our condition was the
same; and if there be any difference, I venture to say it is in favour
of us. Your country, before this declaration, was not a
_self-consisting independent_ State. Hungary was. Through the
lapse of a thousand years, through every vicissitude of this long
period, while nations vanished and empires fell, _the self-consisting
independence of Hungary was never disputed_, but was recognized by
all powers of the earth, sanctioned by treaties made with the Hapsburg
dynasty, at the era when this dynasty, by the freewill of my nation,
which acted as one of two contracting parties, was invested with the
kingly crown of Hungary. Even more, this independence of the kingdom was
acknowledged to make a part of the international law of Europe, and was
guaranteed not only by foreign European governments, such as Great
Britain, but also by several of those once constitutional states which
belonged formerly to the German, and after its dissolution, to the
Austrian empire.

This independent condition of Hungary is clearly defined in one of our
fundamental laws of 1791, in these words:--"Hungary is a free and
independent kingdom, having its own self-consistent existence and
constitution, and not subject[*] to any other nation or country in the
world." This therefore was our ancient right. _We were not dependent
on, nor a part of, the Austrian empire, as your country was dependent on
England._ It was clearly defined that we owed to Austria nothing but
good neighbourhood, and the only tie between us and Austria was, that we
elected to be our kings the same dynasty which were also the sovereigns
of Austria, and occupied the same line of hereditary succession as our
kings; but by accepting this; our forefathers, with the consent of the
King, again declared, that though Hungary accepts the dynasty as our
hereditary kings, all the other franchises, rights, and laws of the
nation shall remain in full power and intact; and our country shall not
be governed like the other dominions of that dynasty, but according to
our constitutionally established authorities. We could not belong to
"the Austrian Empire," for that empire did not then as yet exist, while
Hungary had already existed as a substantive kingdom for many centuries,
and for some two hundred and eighty years under the government of that
Hapsburgian dynasty. The Austrian Empire, as you know, was established
only in 1806, when the Rhenish confederacy of Napoleon struck the
deathblow of the German empire, of which Francis II. of Austria, was not
_hereditary_ but _elected_ Emperor. That Hungary had belonged
to the _German_ empire is a thing which no man in the world ever
imagined yet. It is only now that the Hapsburgian tyrant professes an
intention to melt Hungary into the German Confederation; but you know
this intention to be in so striking opposition to the European public
law, that England and France solemnly protested against it, so that it
is not carried out even to-day. The German Empire having died, its late
Emperor Francis, also King of Hungary, chose to entitle himself Austrian
Emperor, in 1806; but even in that fundamental charter he solemnly
declared that Hungary and its annexed provinces _are not intended to
make, and will not make, a part of the Austrian Empire_. Subsequently
he entered with this empire into the German Confederation, but Hungary,
as well as Lombardy and Venice, not making part of the Austrian empire,
still remained separated, and were not received into the confederacy.

[Footnote *: In the original Latin, _obnoxium_, "not entangled, or
compromised, with any other."]

The laws which we succeeded to carry in 1848, of course altered nothing
in that old chartered condition of Hungary. We transformed the
peasantry into freeholders, and abolished feudal incumbrances. We
replaced the political privileges of aristocracy by the common liberty
of the whole people; gave to the people at large representation in the
legislature; transformed our municipalities into democratic
corporations; introduced equality before the law for the whole people in
rights and duties, and abolished the immunity of taxation which had been
enjoyed by the class called _Noble_; secured equal religious
liberty to all, secured liberty of the press and of association,
provided for public gratuitous instruction of the whole people of every
confession and of whatever tongue. In all this we did no wrong. All
these were, as you see, internal reforms which did not at all interfere
with our allegiance to the king and were carried lawfully in peaceful
legislation _with the king's own sanction_. Besides this there was
one other thing which was carried. We were formerly governed by a Board
of Council, which had the express duty to govern according to our laws,
and be responsible for doing so; but we found by long experience that a
Corporation cannot really be responsible; and that this was the reason
why the absolutist tendency of the dynasty succeeded in encroaching upon
our liberty. So we replaced the Board of Council by Ministers; the empty
responsibility of a Board by the individual responsibility of men--and
_the king consented to it_. I myself was named by him Minister of
the Treasury. That is all. But precisely here was the rub. The dynasty
could not bear the idea that we would not give to its ambition the life
sweat of our people; it was not contented with the 1,500,000 dollars
which were generously appropriated to it yearly. It dreaded that it
would be disabled in future from using our brave army, against our will,
to crush the spirit of freedom in the world. Therefore it resorted to
the most outrageous conspiracy, and attacked us by arms, and upon
receiving a false report of a great victory this young usurper issued a
proclamation declaring that Hungary shall no more exist--that its
independence, its constitution, its very existence is abolished, and it
shall be absorbed, like a farm or fold, into the Austrian Empire. To all
this Hungary answered, "Thou shalt not exist, tyrant, but we will;" and
we banished him, and issued the declaration of the deposition of his
dynasty, and of our separate independence.

So you see, gentlemen, that there is a very great difference between
your declaration and ours--it is in our favour. There is another
difference; you declared your independence of the English crown when it
was yet very doubtful whether you would be successful. We declared our
independence of the Austrian crown only after we, in legitimate defence,
were already victorious; when we had actually beaten the pretender, and
had thus already proved that we had strength to become an independent
power. One thing more: our declaration of independence was not only
overwhelmingly voted in our Congress, but every county, every
municipality, solemnly declared its consent and adherence to it; so it
became sanctioned, not by mere representatives, but by the whole nation
positively, and by the fundamental institutions of Hungary. And so it
still remains. Nothing has since happened on the part of the nation
contrary to this declaration. One thing only happened,--a foreign
power, Russia, came with its armed bondsmen, and, aided by treason, has
overthrown us for a while. Now, I put the question before God and
humanity to you, free sovereign people of America, can this violation of
international law abolish the legitimate character of our declaration of
independence? If not, then here I take my ground, because I am in this
very manifesto entrusted with the charge of Governor of my fatherland. I
have sworn, before God and my nation, to endeavour to maintain and
secure this act of independence. And so may God the Almighty help me as
I will--I will, until my nation is again in the condition to dispose of
its government, which I confidently trust,--yea, more, I know,--will be
republican. And then I retire to the humble condition of my former
private life, equalling, in one thing at least, your Washington, not in
merits, but in honesty. That is the only ambition of my life. Amen.
Here, then, is my THIRD humble wish: that the people of the United
States would, by all constitutional means of its wonted public life,
declare that, acknowledging the legitimacy of our independence, it is
anxious to greet Hungary amongst the independent powers of the earth,
and invites the government of the United States to recognize this
independence _at the earliest convenient time_. That is all. Let
me see the principle announced: the rest may well be left to the wisdom
of your government, with some confidence in my own respectful discretion
also.

So much for the people of the United States, in its public and political
capacity. But if that sympathy which I have the honour to meet with is
really intended to become beneficial, there is one humble wish more
which I entertain: it is a respectful appeal to generous feeling.
Gentlemen, I would rather starve than rely, for myself and family, on
foreign aid; but for my country's Freedom, I would not be ashamed to go
begging from door to door. I have taken the advice of some kind friends
whether it be lawful to express such a humble request, for I feel it an
honourable duty neither to offend nor to evade your laws. I am told it
is lawful. There are two means to see this my humble wish accomplished.
The first is, by spontaneous subscription; the second is, by a loan. The
latter may require private consultation in a narrower circle. As to
subscriptions, the idea was brought home to my mind by a plain but very
generous letter, which I had the honour to receive, and which I beg to
read. It is as follows:--

CINCINNATI, O., Nov. 14, 1851.

M. LOUIS KOSSUTH, Governor of Hungary:--Sir--I have authorized the
office of the Ohio Life Insurance and Trust Company, in New York, to
honour your draft on me for one thousand dollars. Respectfully yours, W.
SMEAD.

I beg leave here publicly to return my most humble thanks to the
gentleman, for his ample aid, and the delicate manner in which he
offered it; and it came to my mind, that where one individual is ready
to make such sacrifices to my country's cause, there may perhaps be many
who would give their small share to it, if they were only apprised that
it will be thankfully accepted, however small it may be. And it came to
my mind, that millions of drops make an ocean, and the United States
number many millions of inhabitants, all warmly attached to liberty. A
million dollars, paid singly, would be to me far _more_ precious
than paid in one single draft; for it would practically show the
sympathy of the people at large. Would I were so happy as your
Washington was, when he also, for your glorious country's sake, in the
hours of your need, called to France for money.

Sir, I have done. I came to your shores an exile: you have poured upon
me the triumph of a welcome such as the world has never yet seen. And
why? Because you took me for the representative of that principle of
liberty which God has destined to become the common benefit of all
humanity. It is glorious to see a free and mighty people so greet the
principle of freedom, in the person of one who is persecuted and
helpless. Be blessed for it! Your generous deed will be recorded; and as
millions of Europe's oppressed nations will, even now, raise their
thanksgiving to God for this ray of hope, which by this act you have
thrown on the dark night of their fate; even so, through all posterity,
oppressed men will look to your memory as to a token of God that there
is a hope for freedom on earth, since there is a people like you to feel
its worth and to support its cause.

       *       *       *       *       *

VIII.--ON NATIONALITIES.

[_Speech at the Banquet of the Press, New York_.]

At this Banquet, Mr. Bryant, the poet, presided, and numerous speeches
were delivered, among which was one by the well-known author, Mr.
Bancroft, lately ambassador in England. This gentleman closed by saying,
that when the illustrious Governor of Hungary uttered the solemn truth,
that Europe had no hope but in republican institutions--that was a
renunciation to the world that the Austrian monarchy was sick and dying,
and that vitality remained in the people alone. And as he uttered that
truth, not his own race only--not the Magyars only, but every
nationality of Hungary, all the fifteen or twenty millions within its
limits--all cried out that he was the representative of their
convictions--that he was the man of their affections, that he was the
utterer of truths on which they relied.

Our guest crosses the Atlantic, and he is received; and what is the
great fact that constitutes his reception? He finds there the military
arranged to do him honour. And among those who, on that day, bore arms,
were men of every tongue that is spoken between the steppes of Tartary,
eastward, towards the Pacific ocean. The great truth that was pronounced
on that occasion--I do not fear to utter it--was, let who will cavil,
_la solidarite des peuples_--the sublime truth that all men are
brothers--that all nations, too, are brethren, and are responsible for
one another.

The chairman also spoke eloquently in introducing the third toast, which
was briefly, LOUIS KOSSUTH. As Mr. Bryant pronounced his name, Kossuth
rose, and was received with multifarious demonstrations of enthusiasm.
At last he proceeded as follows:--

Gentlemen.--I know that in your hands the Independent Republican Press
is a weapon to defend truth and justice, a torch lit at the fire of
immortality, a spark of which glisters in every man's soul and proves
its divine origin: and as the cause of my country is just and true, and
wants nothing but light to secure support from every friend of freedom,
every noble-minded man,--for this reason I address you with joy,
gentlemen.

Though it is sorrowful to see how Austrian intrigues, distorting plain
open history into a tissue of falsehood, find their way even into the
American press, I am proud and happy that the immense majority of you,
conscious of your noble vocation and instinct with the generosity of
freedom, protect our sacred rights against the dark plots of tyranny.
Your Independent Press has likewise proved that its freedom is the most
efficient protection even against calumny; a far better one than
restrictive prevention, which condemns the human intellect to eternal
minority.

I address you, gentlemen, with the greater joy, because through you I
have the invaluable benefit of reaching the whole of your great,
glorious, and free people.

Eighty years ago the immortal Franklin's own press was almost the only
one in the colonies: now you have above three thousand newspapers, with
a circulation of five millions of copies. I am told that the journals of
New York State alone exceed in number those of all the rest of the world
outside of your great Union, and that the circulation of the newspapers
of this city alone nearly reaches that of the whole empire of Great
Britain! But, what is more,--I boldly declare that, except in the United
States, there is scarcely anywhere a practical freedom of the press.
Indeed, concerning Norway I am not quite aware. But throughout the
European continent you know how the press is fettered. In France, under
nominally republican government, all the fruits of victorious
revolutions are nipt by the blasting grip of _centralized_
power,--legislative and administrative omnipotence. The independence of
the French press is crushed; the government cannot bear the free word of
public opinion; and in a republic, the shout "Vive la republique" is
become almost a crime. This is a mournful sight, but is an efficient
warning against centralization. It is chiefly Great Britain which boasts
of a free press; and assuredly in one sense the freedom is almost
unlimited: for I saw placards with the printer's name stating that Queen
Victoria is no lawful queen, and all those who rule ought to be hanged;
but men only laughed at the foolish extravagance. Nevertheless, I hope
the generous people of Great Britain will not be offended when I say
that their press is not practically free. Its freedom is not real, for
it is not a _common benefit_ to all: it is but a particular
benefit, that is, a _privilege_. Taxation there forbids the use of
newspapers to the poor. Absence of taxation enables your journals to be
published at one tenth, or even one twentieth, of the English price:
hence several of your daily papers reach from thirty to sixty thousand
readers, while in England one paper alone is on this scale,--the London
'Times,' which circulates thirty thousand, perhaps. Such being the
condition of your press, in addressing you I address a whole people; nor
only so, but a whole intelligent people.

The wide diffusion of intelligence among you is in fact proved by the
immense circulation of your journals. It is not solely the cheap price
which renders your press a common benefit, and not a mere privilege to
the richer; but it is the universality of public instruction. It is
glorious to know that in this flourishing young city alone nearly a
hundred thousand children receive public education annually. Do you
know, gentlemen, what I consider to be your most glorious monument? if
it be, as I have read, that, when your engineers draw geometrical lines
to guide your wandering squatters in the solitudes where virgin Nature
adores her Lord, they place on every thirty-sixth square of the district
marked out to be a township, a modest wooden pole with the glorious
mark, POPULAR EDUCATION. This is your proudest monument. In my opinion,
not your geographical situation, not your material power, not the bold
enterprizing spirit of your people, is the chief guarantee of their
future; but the universality of education: for a whole people, once
become intelligent, never can consent not to be free. You will always be
willing to be free, and you are great and powerful enough to be as good
as your will.

My humble prayers in my country's cause I address to your entire nation:
but you, gentlemen, are the engineers through whom my cause must reach
them. It is therefore highly gratifying to me to see, not isolated men,
but the powerful complex of the great word PRESS, granting me this
important manifestation of generous sentiment. I beg you to consider,
that whatever and wherever I speak, is _always_ spoken to the
press; and for all the imperfections of my language let me plead for
your indulgence, as one of your professional colleagues: for indeed such
I have been.

Yes, gentlemen; I commenced my public career as a journalist. You, under
your happy institutions, know not the torment of writing with hands
fettered by an Austrian censor. To sit at the desk, with a heart full of
the necessity of the moment, a conscience stirred with righteous
feeling, a mind animated with convictions and principles, and a whole
soul warmed by a patriot's fire;--to see before your eyes the scissors
of the censor ready to lop your ideas, maim your arguments, murder your
thoughts, render vain your laborious days and sleepless nights;--to know
that the people will judge you, not by what you have felt, thought,
written, but by what the censor will let you say;--to perceive that the
prohibition has no rule or limit but the arbitrary pleasure of a man who
is doomed by profession to be a coward and a fool;--oh! his little
scissors suspended over one are a worse misery than the sword of
Damocles. Oh! to go on, day by day, in such a work of Sisyphus, believe
me, is no small sacrifice of any intelligent man to fatherland and
humanity. And this is the present condition of the press, not in Hungary
only, but in all countries cursed by Austrian rule. Indeed, our recent
reforms gave freedom of the press, not to my fatherland only, but
indirectly to Vienna, Prague, Lemberg; in a word, to the whole empire of
Austria and this must ensure your sympathy to us. Contrariwise, the
interference of Russia has crushed the press on the whole European
continent. Freedom of the press is incompatible with the preponderance
of Russia, and with the very existence of the Austrian dynasty, the
sworn enemy of every liberal thought. This must engage your generous
support to sweep away those tyrants, and to raise liberty where now foul
oppression rules.

Some time back there appeared in certain New York papers systematic
falsehoods, which went so far as to state that we, the Hungarians, had
struggled for oppression, while it was the Austrian dynasty which stood
up for liberty!  Such effrontery astonishes even one who has seen
Russian treacheries. We may be misrepresented, scorned, jeered at,
censured. Our martyrs, whose blood cries for revenge, may be laughed at
as fools. Heroes, who will command the veneration of history, may be
called Don Quixotes. But that among freemen and professed republicans
even the honour of an unfortunate nation, in its most mournful
suffering, should not be sacred,--that is indeed a sorrowful page in
human history.

You cannot expect me to enter into a special refutation of this compound
of calumnies. I may reserve it for my pen. But inasmuch as the basis of
all the calumnies lies in general ignorance concerning the relation of
the Magyars to other races of Hungary, permit me to speak on the
question of NATIONALITIES, a false theory of which plays so mischievous
a part in the destinies of Europe. No word has been more misrepresented
than the word Nationality, which is become in the hands of absolutism a
dangerous instrument against liberty.

Let me ask you, gentlemen: are you, the people of the United States, a
_nation_, or not? Have you a _national_ government, or not?
You answer, yes: and yet you are not all of one blood, nor of one
language. Millions of you speak English; others French, German, Italian,
Spanish, Danish, and even several Indian dialects: yet you are a nation.
Neither your central government, nor those of separate states, nor your
municipalities, legislate or administer in every language spoken among
you; yet you have a national government.

Now, suppose many of you were struck with the curse of Babel, and
exclaimed, "This union is an oppression! our laws, our institutions, our
state and city governments, are an oppression! What is union to us? what
are rights?  what avail laws? what is freedom? what is geography? what
is community of interests to us? They are all nothing; LANGUAGE is
everything. Let us divide the Union, divide the states, divide the very
cities, divide the whole territory, according to languages. Let the
people of every language become a separate state: for every nation has a
right to national life, and to us, the language, and nothing else, is
the nationality. Unless the state is founded upon language, its
organization is tyranny."

What then would become of your great Union? What of your constitution,
the glorious legacy of your greatest man?  What of those immortal stars
on mankind's moral sky?  What would become of your country itself,
whence the spirit of freedom soars into light, and rising hope
irradiates the future of humanity? What would become of this grand,
mighty complex of your republic, should her integrity ever be rent by
the fanatics of language? Where now she walks among the rising temples
of liberty and happiness, she soon would tread upon ruins, and mourn
over human hopes. But happy art then, free nation of America, founded on
the only solid basis,--liberty! a principle steady as the world, eternal
as the truth, universal for every climate, for every time, like
Providence. Tyrants are not in the midst of you to throw the apple of
discord and raise hatred in this national family, hatred of
_races_, that curse of humanity, that venomous ally of despotism.
Glorious it is to see the oppressed of diverse countries,--diverse in
language, history, habits,--wandering to these shores, and becoming
members of this great nation, regenerated by the principle of common
liberty.

If language alone makes a nation, then there is no great nation on
earth: for there is no country whose population is counted by millions,
but speaks more than one language. No! It is not language only.
Community of interests, of rights, of duties, of history, but chiefly
community of institutions; by which a population, varying perhaps in
tongue and race, is bound together through daily intercourse in the
towns, which are the centres and home of commerce and industry:--besides
these, the very mountain-ranges, the system of rivers and streams,--the
soil, the dust of which is mingled with the mortal remains of those
ancestors who bled on the same field, for the same interests, the common
inheritance of glory and of woe, the community of laws and institutions,
common freedom or common oppression:--all this enters into the complex
idea of Nationality.

That this is instinctively felt by the common sense of the people,
nowhere is more manifestly shown than at this very moment in my native
land. Hungary was declared by Francis Joseph of Austria _no more to
exist_ as a Nation, no more as a State. It was and is put under
martial law. Strangers, aliens to our laws and history as well as to our
tongue, rule now, where our fathers lived and our brothers bled. To be a
Hungarian is become almost a crime in our own native land. Well: to
justify before the world the extinction of Hungary, the partition of its
territory, and the reincorporating of the dissected limbs into the
common body of servitude, the treacherous dynasty was anxious to show
that the Hungarians are in a minority in their own land. They hoped that
intimidation and terrorism would induce even the very Magyars to disavow
their language and birth. They ordered a census of races to be made.
They performed it with the iron rule of martial law; and dealt so
arbitrarily that thousands of women and men, who professed to be
Magyars, who professed not to know any other language than the Magyar,
were, notwithstanding all their protestation, put down as Sclaves,
Serbs, Germans, or Wallachians, because their names had not quite a
Hungarian sound. And still what was the issue of this malignant plot?
That of the twelve millions of inhabitants of Hungary proper, the
Magyars turned out to be more than eight millions, some two millions
more than we know the case really is. The people instinctively felt that
the tyrant had the design through the pretext of language to destroy the
existence of the complex nation, and it met the tyrannic plot as if it
answered, "We are, and must be, a nation; and if the tyrant takes
language only for the mark of nationality, then we are all Magyars." And
mark well, gentlemen! this happened, not under my governorship, but
under the rule of Austrian martial law. The Cabinet of Vienna became
furious; it thought of a new census, but prudent men told them that a
new census would give the whole twelve millions as Magyars; thus no new
census was taken.

But on the European continent there unhappily has grown up a school,
which bound the idea of nationality to the idea of language only, and
joined political pretensions to it. There are some who advocate the
theory that existing States must cease, and the territories of the world
be divided anew by languages and nations, separated by tongues.

You are aware that this idea, if it were not impracticable, would be a
curse to humanity--a deathblow to civilization and progress, and throw
back mankind by centuries. It would be an eternal source of strife and
war: for there is a holy, almost religious tie, by which man's heart is
bound to his home, and no man would ever consent to abandon his native
land only because his neighbours speak another language than himself.
His heart claims that sacred spot where the ashes of his fathers
lie--where his own cradle stood--where he dreamed the happy dreams of
youth, and where nature itself bears a mark of his manhood's toil. The
idea were worse than the old migration of nations was. Nothing but
despotism would rise out of such a fanatical strife of all mankind.

And really it is very curious. Nobody of the advocates of this
mischievous theory is willing to yield to it for himself--but others he
desires to yield to it. Every Frenchman becomes furious when his Alsace
is claimed to Germany by the right of language--or the borders of his
Pyrenees to Spain--but there are some amongst the very men who feel
revolted at this idea, who claim of Germany that it should yield up
large territory because one part of the inhabitants speak a different
tongue, and would claim from Hungary to divide its territory, which God
himself has limited by its range of mountains and the system of streams,
as also by all the links of a community of more than a thousand years;
to cut off our right hand, Transylvania, and to give it up to the
neighbouring Wallachia, to cut out like Shylock one pound of our very
breast--the Banat--and the rich country between the Danube and
Theiss--to augment by it Turkish Serbia and so forth. It is the new
ambition of conquest, but an easy conquest not by arms, but by language.

So much I know, at least, that this absurd idea cannot, and will not, be
advocated by any man here in the United States; which did not open its
hospitable shores to humanity, and greet the flocking millions of
emigrants with the right of a citizen, in order that the Union may be
cut to pieces, and even your single States divided into new-framed,
independent countries according to languages.

And do you know, gentlemen, whence this absurd theory sprang up on the
European Continent? It was the idea of Panslavismus--that is the idea
that the mighty stock of Sclavonic races is called to rule the world, as
once the Roman did. It was a Russian plot--it was a dark design to make
out of national feelings a tool to Russian preponderance over the world.

Perhaps you are not aware of the historical origin of this plot. It was
after that most immortal act of tyranny, the third division of Poland,
that the chance of fate brought the Prince Czartorinsky, to the Court of
Catherine of Russia. He subsequently became minister of Alexander the
Czar. It was in this quality that, with the noble aim to benefit his
fallen fatherland, he claimed from the young Czar the restoration of
Poland, suggesting for equivalent the idea of Russian preponderance over
all nations of the old Sclavonic race. I believe his intention was
sincere; I believe he did not mean to overlook those natural borders,
which, besides the affinity of language, God himself has drawn between
the nations. But he forgot that he might be no longer able to master
the spirits which he would raise, and that an undesired fanaticism might
force sundry fantastical shapes into his framework, by which the frame
itself must burst in pieces. He forgot that Russian preponderance cannot
be propitious to liberty; he forgot that it cannot be favourable even to
the development of the Sclave nationality, because Sclavonic nations
would by this idea be degraded into mere Russians, that is, absorbed by
despotism.

Russia got hold of the fanciful idea very readily! May be that young
Alexander had in the first moment noble inclinations; the warm heart of
youth is susceptible to noble instincts. It is not common in history to
find young princes so premature in tyranny as Francis-Joseph of Austria.
But a few years of power were sufficient to extinguish every spark of
noble sentiment, if there was one, in Alexander's heart. Upon the
throne of the Romanoffs the man is soon absorbed by the Autocrat. The
traditional policy of St. Petersburg is not an atmosphere in which the
plant of regeneration can grow, and the fanciful idea became soon a
weapon of oppression and of Russian preponderance--Russia availed
herself of the idea of Panslavism to break Turkey down, and to make an
obedient satellite out of Austria. Turkey still withstands her, but
Austria has fallen into the snare. Russia sent out its agents, its
moneys, its venomous secret diplomacy; it whispered to the Sclave
nations about hatred against foreign dominion--about independence of
religion connected with nationality under its own supremacy; but chiefly
it spoke to them of Panslavism under the protectorate of the Czar. The
millions of his large empire also, all oppressed--all in servitude--all
a tool to his ambition; them too he flattered with the idea of becoming
rulers of the world, in order that they might not think of liberty: he
knew that man's breast cannot maintain in ascendancy two great passions
at once. He gave them ambition and excluded the spirit of liberty. This
ambition got hold of all the Sclave nations through Europe; so
Panslavism became the source of a movement, not of nationality, but of
the dominion of languages. That word "language" replaced every other
sentiment, and so it became a curse to the development of liberty.

Only one part of the Sclavonic races saw the matter clear, and withstood
the current of this dark Russian plot. These were the Polish
Democrats--the only ones who understood that to fight for liberty is to
fight for nationality. Therefore they fought in our ranks, and were
willing to flock in thousands upon thousands to aid us in our struggle;
but we could not arm them, so I would not accept them. We ourselves had
a hundredfold more hands ready to fight than arms--and there was nobody
in the world to supply us with arms.

Now let me see what was the condition of Hungary under these
circumstances.

Eight hundred and fifty years ago, when the first King of Hungary, St.
Stephen, becoming Christian himself, converted the Hungarian nation to
Christianity, it was the Roman Catholic clergy of Germany whom he
invited to assist him in his pious work. They did assist him, but the
assistance, as happens with human nature, was accompanied by some
worldly designs. Hungary offered a wide field to the ambition of
foreigners, and they persuaded the King to adopt a curious principle,
which he laid down in his last Will and Testament--that it is not good
for the people of a country to be but of one extraction and speak but
one tongue. A second rule was, to adopt the language of the
Church--Latin--for the language of government, legislature, law and all
public proceedings. This is the origin of that fatality, that Democracy
did not grow up for centuries in Hungary. The public proceedings being
in Latin, the laws given in Latin, public instruction carried on in
Latin, the great mass of the people, who were agriculturists, did not
partake in any of this; and the few who in the ranks of the people
partook in it, became severed and alienated from the people's interests.
This dead Latin language, introduced into the public life of a living
nation, was the most mischievous barrier against liberty. The first
blow to it was stricken by the Reformation. The Protestant Church,
introducing the national language into the divine services, became a
medium to the development of the spirit of liberty, and so our ancient
struggles for religious liberty were always connected with the
maintenance of political rights. But still, Latin public life went on
down to 1780. At that time, Joseph of Hapsburg, aiming at
centralization, replaced the Latin by the German tongue. This roused the
national spirit of Hungary; and our forefathers seeing that the dead
Latin language, excluding the people from the public concerns, cannot be
propitious to liberty, and anxious to oppose the design of the Viennese
Cabinet to Germanize Hungary, and _so melt it into the common
absolutism of the Austrian dynasty_--I say, anxious to oppose this
design by a cheerful public life of the people itself, from the year
1790 began to pass laws in the direction that by-and-by, step by step,
the Latin language should be replaced in the public proceedings of the
Legislature and of the Government by a living language familiar to the
people itself. And what was more natural, than that, being in the
necessity to choose one language, they choose the Magyar? the more so,
since those who spoke Hungarian were not only more than those who spoke
any one of the other languages, but were if not more than, at least
equal to, all those who spoke several other languages together.

Be so kind to mark well, gentlemen; no other language was oppressed--the
Hungarian language was enforced upon nobody. Wherever another language
was in use even in public life; of whatever Church--whatever popular
school--whatever community--it was not replaced by the Hungarian
language. It was only the dead Latin, which by-and-by became eliminated
from the diplomatic public life, and replaced by the living Hungarian in
Hungary.

In Hungary, I say. Gentlemen, be pleased to mark: never was this measure
extended into the municipal life of Croatia and Sclavonia, which, though
belonging for 800 years to Hungary, still were not Hungary, but a race
with distinct local institutions.

The Croatians and Sclavonians themselves repeatedly urged us in the
common parliament to afford them opportunity to learn the Hungarian
language, that, having the right, they might also enjoy the benefit, of
being employed in the government offices of our common Hungary. This
opportunity was afforded to them, but nobody was forced to make use of
it; while neither with their own municipal and public life, nor with the
domestic, social, religious life, of any other people in Hungary itself,
did the Hungarian language ever interfere. It replaced only the Latin
language, which no people spoke, and which was contrary to liberty,
because it excluded the millions from public life. Willing to give
freedom to the people, we expelled that Latin tongue; which was an
obstacle to its future. We did what every other nation in the old world
has done, clearing by it the way to the universal liberty.

Your country is happy even in that respect. Being a young nation, you
did not find the Latin tongue in your way when you established this
Republic; so you did not want a law to eject it from your public life.
You have a living language, which is spoken in your Congress, in your
State Legislatures, and by which your Government rules. It is not the
native language of your whole people--and yet no man in the Union takes
it for an oppression that legislature and government is not carried on
in every language spoken in the United States.

And one thing I have to mention yet. This replacing of the Latin
language by the Hungarian was not a work of our recent measures, it was
done before, step by step, from 1791. When we carried in 1848 our
democratic reforms, and gave political, social, civil, and full
religious freedom to the whole people, we extended our cares to the
equal protection of every tongue and race, affording to all equal right
to aid out of the public funds, for the moral, religious, and scientific
development in churches and in schools. Nay, we extended this even to
political affairs, sanctioning the free use of every tongue, in the
municipalities and communal corporations, as well as in the
administration of justice. The promulgation of the laws in every tongue,
the right to petition and to claim justice in each man's tongue, the
duty of the government to answer in the same, all this was granted, and
thus far more was done in that respect also, than any other nation ever
accorded to the claims of tongues; by far more than the United States
ever did, though there is no country in the world where so many
different languages are spoken as here.

It is therefore the most calumnious misrepresentation to say that the
Hungarians struggled for the dominion of their own _race_. No; we
struggled for civil, political, social, and religious freedom, common to
all, against Austrian despotism. We struggled for the great principle
of _self-government against centralization_; because centralization
is absolutism; and is inconsistent with constitutional rights. Austria
has given the very proof of it. The House of Austria had never the
intention to grant constitutional life to the nations of Europe. I will
prove that on another occasion. But the friends of the Hapsburgs say,
it has granted a constitution--in March, 1849. Well, where is that
Constitution now? It was not only never executed, but it was, three
months ago, formally withdrawn. Even the word Ministry is blotted out
from the Dictionary of the Austrian government! Schwarzenberg is again
House, Court, and State Chancellor, as Metternich was; only Metternich
ruled not with the iron rule of martial law over the whole empire of
Austria as Schwarzenberg does. Metternich _encroached upon_ the
constitutional rights of Hungary, Transylvania, Croatia, and Slavonia.
Schwarzenberg has _abolished_ them, and young Francis-Joseph has
melted all the nations together into common bondage, where the promised
_equality of nationalities_ is carried out most literally, to be
sure, for they are all equally oppressed, and all are equally ruled by
absolutist principles and by the German language. And why was that
illusory constitution withdrawn? Because it was a lie from the
beginning; an impossibility. It was founded on the principle of
centralization. It centralized thirteen different nations, which had had
no political history in common, except to have groaned under Austrian
rule. Under such circumstances to have a common life was an absurdity
augmented by deceit.

I cannot exhaust this vast topic in one speech. We want Republican
institutions, so founded on self-government everywhere, that the people
themselves may be sovereign everywhere. This is the cause, for which I
humbly request your protecting aid. It is the cause of oppressed Europe.
It is the cause of Germany, bleeding under some thirty petty tyrants who
lean on that league of despots, the basis of which is Petersburg. It is
the cause of fair, but unfortunate Italy, which in so many respects is
now dear to our heart. We have a common enemy; so we are brothers in
arms for freedom and independence. I know how Italy is situated; and I
dare confidently to declare, there is no hope for Italy, but in that
great republican party, at the head of which Mazzini stands. It has
nothing to do with communistical schemes, or the French doctrines of
Socialism: but it wills, that Italy be free and republican. Whither else
could Italy look for freedom and independence, if not to that party
which Mazzini leads? To the King of Naples perhaps? Let me be silent
about that execrated man. Or to the dynasty of Sardinia and Piedmont?
This professes to be constitutional; yet it captures those poor
Hungarian soldiers who seek an asylum in Piedmont,--captures, and
delivers them to Austria to be shot: and they _are_ shot,
increasing the number of those 3742 martyrs whom Radetzky murdered on
the scaffold during three short years. The House of Savoy is become the
blood-hound of Austria against fugitive Hungarians.

Gentlemen, the generous sympathy of public opinion here (God be
blessed!) is strongly aroused to the wrongs and sufferings of Hungary. I
look to _your_ aid to keep that sympathy alive,--to urge the
formation of societies to collect funds and support a loan,--to move in
favour of the propositions which I had the honour to express at the
Corporation Banquet. Consider not the weakness of my address, but only
the strength of my cause; and following the generous impulse of your
republican hearts, accord to it the protective aid of the free
independent Press. Then I may yet see fulfilled the noble words of your
Chairman's poetry:--

  Truth crush'd to earth shall rise again;
    The eternal years of God are hers;
  But error, wounded, writhes in pain,
    And dies _among_....
  (let me add, Sir,).. _with all_ her worshippers.

In the course of the same evening, one of the toasts drunk was, "To the
Political Exiles of Europe," to which Michael Doheny, Esq., an Irish
exile, first responded, in a speech full of animosity against England.
After him Mr. DANA made the following speech, which may be a useful
comment on that of Kossuth.

My friend, who has taken his seat, spoke in his own right as a political
exile from Ireland, a country than which none has more deeply suffered
from the woes of foreign domination. I speak here by no such title. And
yet if any man may without presumption claim to speak in behalf of the
political exiles and rebels against tyranny, of several nations, of all
nations, indeed it is an American. For he is not only himself the heir
of a nation of rebels, but his whole lineage is cosmopolitan, and he may
boast that he is akin to all the races of Europe. We have no exclusive
origin, thank God! In the veins of our country there flows the blood of
a thousand tribes, just as our language is made up of a thousand idioms.
We hear a good deal from certain quarters about the greatness of races,
the practical energy of this race, the artistic genius of the other, and
the great intellectual qualities of another. America disproves of all
these dogmas, and establishes in their stead the higher principle that
all races are capable of a noble development under noble institutions.
Give freedom to the Celt, the Slavon, or the Italian, or whatever other
people; give them freedom and independence; establish among them the
great principle of _local self-government_, and the earth does not
more surely revolve in its orbit than they will in due time ripen into
all the excellence and all the dignity of humanity. Men make and control
institutions, but institutions in their turn make men. And if a people
under Providence are endowed with institutions that have given free play
and healthy growth to the most useful and admirable powers of man, it is
not for that people to boast of its race as better than other races, and
thank God, like the Pharisee, that it is not as other men. No, it is for
that people to see the cause of its good fortune in its institutions,
and to remember that it has responsibilities, and that it owes a helping
hand to others that honestly struggle for such benefits. Especially is
this the case with the American people, made up as they are from all
races, and absorbing yearly as they do so much of the best blood of all.
America has thriven and grown strong upon the misfortunes of Europe. Our
toast specially refers to the political exiles of Europe, but the truth
is, that all the exiles of that continent are political. Every shipload
of emigrants that seeks our shores has been banished by political
causes; for had the institutions of their country been such as to secure
to them freedom and the prosperity of freedom, do you think they would
have forsaken their homes and the homes of their fathers to seek new
homes beyond the ocean? We owe then to Europe a debt for all this
population and power that it has flung upon our shores, and how else can
we pay it except by doing what we can to help the European nations to
gain their freedom and form institutions under which there will be no
political exiles? For one I go for paying that debt, according to our
means and opportunities. I saw the other day in the streets a large
body of Europeans of various nations, marching along with a red flag.
In Paris, or Rome, or Vienna, such a procession would have been
impossible, or if it could have got into the streets, it would have been
assailed by the soldiery, and its members either shot down or flung into
prison. Yet in New York they went peacefully on their way, made their
demonstration in all freedom, and no trouble or harm came of it. Very
many of those men were political exiles. And why? Not because they were
bad men, for here in New York nothing could be more quiet and
appropriate than their behaviour. But they prove, that from whatever
country there are political exiles, there the institutions are bad. I
know we are in the habit of hearing about Red Republicans and Socialists
as men who are dangerous on account of their opinions, and who have
deserved to be banished from France, from Germany, from Italy. I will
not now say anything about those opinions, but this I do say, that a
country where all opinions and every opinion cannot be held and freely
discussed, has a bad system of government and bad institutions. It is
not the men nor their opinions that stand condemned, but the government
and institutions. Therefore it is that we must sympathize with such
exiles, without regard to their opinions, and pray earnestly and labour
earnestly for the elevation of all countries to freedom.

       *       *       *       *       *

IX.--ON MILITARY INSTITUTIONS.

[_Speech to the New York Militia, December 16th._]

The First Division, consisting of four brigades, was presented to
Kossuth in the Castle Garden. Major-General Sandford then proceeded to
address Kossuth as follows:--

Governor Kossuth:--It is with no ordinary feeling of gratification that
I have this opportunity of addressing you, in the name and on behalf of
the citizen soldiers of the city of New York. With an unbounded
admiration of your devotion to the great cause of constitutional
liberty, and of that indomitable firmness with which you have persevered
under all circumstances in sustaining it, they were most happy to
testify, upon your arrival in our city, their sense of your services in
that cause which they are organized to sustain, and now they are again
assembled to greet you with a heart-felt welcome, and to listen to the
voice of one whom they have learned to respect, to love, and to
venerate. The body of men now presented to you, about five thousand in
number, represents the First Division of New York State Militia. The
division enrols about fifty thousand men in this city and upon Staten
Island, and the law of our State only imposes upon the general body the
duty of appearing armed and equipped once in each year, at an annual
parade appointed for that purpose. But out of this large number the law
provides for the organization of those who are willing and desirous to
acquire that degree of military science, to fit them, upon any sudden
emergency of domestic insurrection or of foreign aggression, to sustain
the laws and support the institutions of our country. They uniform and
equip themselves at their own expense, and they serve without pay,
satisfied with the consciousness that they are discharging a duty to
their country, and qualifying themselves to sustain the honour of our
flag and the freedom won by our fathers. They represent fairly all
classes of our citizens. Our hard-working and ingenious mechanic--our
enterprising and energetic merchant--our intelligent professional
men--our grocers, butchers, bakers, and cartmen, are all to be found in
our ranks, exhibiting in public spirit, energy, and intelligence, a body
of men not to be surpassed, even in this country of active enterprise
and widely diffused intelligence. It is amongst such men, devoted to
such a service, that, you may feel well assured, the intelligence of the
noble struggle of the Hungarian people for their rights and liberties
was received with the deepest feeling, and the progress of your contest
watched with the most earnest solicitude. They exulted in your
victories as the triumph of freedom over oppression and despotism--they
saw in your almost superhuman energies and dauntless courage the hearts
of a people determined to be free. They rejoiced that a great nation,
with kindred principles and institutions, was established as an
independent republic amidst the despotisms of Europe. But, alas! all
their hopes and anticipations were blasted. Such an example amidst the
down-trodden subjects of the arbitrary governments of Europe, was viewed
with alarm by their despotic rulers, and the enslaved hordes of the
imperial Russian were hurled upon the free sons of Hungary. Even with
such mighty odds, we should not have despaired for Hungary, had she been
afforded but one year of peaceful preparation to complete her
organization and develop her resources. Her gallant sons upon her own
soil, and battling for their homes, their altars, and their
independence, would have been unconquerable. But treason and despotism
combined, triumphed over freedom. Then commenced a scene of horrors and
cruelty, such as despots only and the minions of despots can perpetrate.

Hungarian liberty may be cast down, but cannot be destroyed. The sacred
flame burns unquenched in the hearts of the people, and will again burst
forth, a glorious light to enlighten the nation--but a consuming fire to
their oppressors. But when? and how shall this be accomplished? Sir, we
believe and feel with you that this will be accomplished whenever the
free people of America, uniting with those kindred nations of Europe
which sustain and shall secure free institutions, will support and
insist upon that great moral principle of international law which you
have recently so eloquently and ably expounded--that one nation should
not interfere with the domestic concerns of another. Establish this
great and just principle, and Hungary would again assume her station
among the nations of the earth--free and independent. Establish this
great principle, and Germany and Italy would also soon be free. Sir, we
believe in this great principle; we believe it to be a principle of
justice and humanity; we believe it to be the inalienable right of every
people to establish such forms of government as are best adapted to
their condition, and as they may deem best calculated to ensure their
own rights, liberties, and pursuit of happiness. And we believe that
this great principle of international law should be the basis of the
intercourse of nations, and that we have no more right to make free with
the forms of government of other nations, than with their forms of
religion. But this principle being conceded and established, how is it
to be enforced? How are the despotic dynasties of Europe to be prevented
from lending their combined energies to crush every germ of freedom
amongst those who, if left to themselves, would, like Hungary, be free
and independent. Solely by the method which you have so ably developed.
Solely by inducing those nations which are strong enough to maintain the
principles of international law--to unite in their support, and by such
union, effectually to guarantee the peace of the world. To effect this
most desirable object, you have adopted the true method. You would
operate upon the public opinion, and public opinion operating upon free
government, creates and establishes public and international law. But
when we see this great principle of non-intervention violated--when we
see a free and united people crushed and trampled upon by foreign
despots, because they have dared to proclaim and establish equal rights
and privileges as the basis of their own institutions, must we look
tamely on and see the life-blood of freedom crushed out by the iron heel
of barbaric despotism, and hear the death-groans of the brave and free
without daring to express our feelings or to extend the hand of sympathy
and comfort to the suffering sons of liberty? No! in the name of
outraged justice and humanity, no! We will openly, warmly, and freely
express our sympathy in the cause of freedom, and our approbation of the
devotion, the endurance, and the gallantry of her sons. We will, by all
constitutional modes, endeavour to sustain those principles, which will
terminate this outrage upon the sacred laws of justice and humanity. We
will further aid this cause by contributing our share to the
contributions offered by our people to enable you to advance the
establishment of those principles so important to the emancipation of
your beloved Hungary, and so essential to the preservation of civil and
religious liberty. And now upon this interesting occasion, I hail the
presence of this noble company of faithful and devoted sons of Hungary,
your companions in exile and in prison, and present them to this
division; men, who, like our fathers, pledged their sacred honours "to
sustain the independence of their country." [Here there was an outburst
of cheering, and Colonel Berczenszy and the other Hungarians, companions
in arms of Kossuth, all rose, and were again greeted with another burst
of enthusiastic cheering.] We receive them as friends and brothers, and
as martyrs in the same holy cause of constitutional liberty in which our
fathers fought and bled, and suffered, and triumphed; and in which, we
trust and believe, you will also live to triumph and rejoice, in the
bosom of your own, your native land.

Loud applause followed the conclusion of this address.

Kossuth then rose and said--

General and gentlemen,--I accept with the highest gratitude, the honour
to meet the first division of the New York State Militia, who having, in
their capacity of citizen soldiers, honoured me on my arrival by their
participation in the generous welcome which I met with, have also, by
the military honour bestowed on me, so much contributed to impart to
this great demonstration that public character which cannot fail to
prove highly beneficial to the cause which I hold up before the free
people of this mighty republic, and which I dare confidently to state is
the great question of freedom and independence to the European
continent. I entreat you, gentlemen, not to expect any elaborate speech
from me, because really I am unprepared to make one. You are citizen
soldiers, a glorious title, to which I have the ambition of aspiring;
so, I hope you will kindly excuse me, if I endeavour to speak to you
_as_ soldiers. Do you know, gentlemen, what is the finest speech I
ever heard or read? It is the address of Garibaldi to his Roman soldiers
in the last war, when he told them:--"Soldiers, what I have to offer you
is fatigue, danger, struggling, and death--the chill of the cold night,
the open air, and the burning sun--no lodgings, no munitions, no
provisions--but forced marches, dangerous watchposts, and continual
struggling with bayonets against batteries. Let those who love freedom
and their country, follow me." That is the most glorious speech I ever
heard in my life. But, of course, that is no speech for to-day. I will
speak so, when I again meet the soldiers of Hungary, to fight once more
the battle of freedom and independence. [After various compliments to
General Sandford on the appearance of his soldiers, and the good order
of the republic, Kossuth continued as follows:] I thank you for the
explanation of the organization and discipline of this gallant division.
Europe has many things to learn from America. It has to learn the value
of free institutions--the expansive power of freedom--the practical
value of local self-government, as opposed to centralization. But one of
the most important lessons you give to Europe, is in the organization of
the militia of the United States. You have the best organized army in
the world, and yet you have scarcely a standing army at all. That is a
necessary thing for Europe to learn from America---that great standing
armies must cease. But they can cease, only _then_, when the nations
are free; for great standing armies are not national institutions, they
are the instruments of dynastic violence or foreign despotism. The
existence of tyranny imposes on Europe great standing armies. When the
nations once become free, they will not want them, because they will not
war with each other. Freedom will become a friendly link among nations.
But as far as they may want them, your example shows that a popular
militia, like yours, is the mightiest national Defence. Thirty-seven
years ago a great battle was fought at New Orleans, which showed what a
defence your country has in its militia. Nay more, your history proves
that this institution affords the most powerful means of Offensive war,
should war become indispensable. I am aware, gentlemen, that your war
with Mexico was chiefly carried on by volunteers. I know what a
distinguished part the volunteers of New York took in that war. And who
were these volunteers? Who were those from New York city, and of other
regiments? They were of your militia, the source of that military spirit
which is the glory of your country, and its safety when needed in time
of war or social disorder. I learned all this from the United States,
and it was my firm intention to carry out this militia organization in
Hungary. My idea was and still is to do so, and I will endeavour, with
the help of God, to carry it out.

My idea is, there are duties towards one native land common to every
citizen, and public instruction and education must have such a direction
as to enable every citizen to perform them. One of these duties is to
defend it in time of danger, to take up arms for its freedom and
independence and security. My idea is to lay such a foundation for
public instruction, in the schools, that every boy in Hungary shall be
educated in military skill, so much as is necessary for the defence of
his native land, and those who feel inclined to adopt the profession of
arms, might complete their education in higher public schools and
universities, as is the case in the professions of the bar, and physic,
and the pulpit. But I would have no distinction among the citizens. To
defend our country is a common duty, and every one must know how to
perform it. Taking the basis of your organization as an example for
Hungary, Hungary would have at least one million of men ready to defend
it against the oppression of any power whatever. That the militia of
Hungary, thus developed, would be the most solid guardian of my
country's freedom and independence, we have shown in our past struggles.
The glorious deeds which the unnamed heroes of the people achieved,
proves what with previous preparation they could do in defence of their
native land. Often they have gone into battle without knowing how to
fire or cock a musket; but they took batteries by their bayonets, and
they achieved glorious deeds like those that are classed among the deeds
of immortality. We have not either wish or inclination for conquest. We
are content with our native land if it be independent and free. For the
maintenance of that independence and freedom, we established by law the
institution of the National Guard. It is like your militia. I consider
the organization to be like a porcupine, which moves on its own road
quietly, but when attacked or when danger approaches, stretches forth
its thorns. May God Almighty grant that I may soon see developed in my
native land, the great institution of a National Guard!

The power of Hungary, thus established, is a basis indispensable to the
freedom of Europe. I will prove this in a few words. The enemy of
European freedom is Russia. Now, can Hungary be a barrier to secure
Europe against this power of Russia? I answer: yes. You are a nation of
twenty-four millions, and you have an organized militia of some three
millions; Hungary is a nation of fifteen millions, and at least can have
one million of brave citizen soldiers. I hope this may be regarded,
then, as a positive proof of what I say about the ability of Hungary to
resist the power of despotism, and defend Europe against Russian
encroachments. Another thing is, the weakness of Russia herself; for she
is not so strong as people generally believe. It has taken her whole
power to put down Hungary, and all she can raise consists of 750,000
men. Then you must consider that the Russian territory is of immense
extent, and that its population is oppressed; tranquillity and the order
of the grave,--not the order of contentment,--is kept in Russia itself,
only by the armed soldiery of the Czar. Now, it is not much when I say
that 250,000 men are indispensable to keep tranquillity in the interior
of that empire; 100,000 men are necessary to guard its frontiers
extending from Siberia to Turkey; 100,000 to keep down the heroic spirit
of oppressed Poland, Take all this together, and you will see that
Russia scarcely can, at the utmost, employ 300,000 men in a foreign war,
and, really, it had not more engaged, as history will prove, in the
greatest struggle it made for existence--it could not bring more into
the field. The million of citizen soldiers would not require to be so
brave as they are, to be a match for those 300,000 men; and, therefore,
the first result of restored independence in Hungary would be--should
the Czar once more have the arrogant intention to put his foot upon
mankind's neck, as he blasphemously boasted he had the authority of God
to do--the repression of his power by Hungary. Not only would it be
repressed, but Hungary could assault him in a quarter where she would
find powerful allies. His financial embarrassments are very great, for
you know that even in the brief war in Hungary he was necessitated to
raise a loan in England. We should have for our allies the oppressed
people, and our steps would be marked by the liberation of all who are
now enslaved. First among our allies would be the Polish nation, which
is not restricted to the Poland of the maps, but extends through the
wide provinces of Gallicia, Lithuania, &c. These are proofs that the
might of Russia is not so immense that it should intimidate a nation
fighting in a just cause. With Hungary once free, Russia would never
dare to threaten European liberty again.

But if Russia is so weak as I have shown her to be, why, you may say, do
I ask your support and aid against her interference? Because Russia is
only thirty hours' distance from Hungary, and one of her large armies
stands prepared to move at any time against the liberties of our people,
before we could have time to develop our resources. This is the motive
why I ask, in the name of my country, the great and beneficial support
of the United States to check and prevent Russian interference in
Hungary, so that we may have _time_ to erect it into an
insurmountable barrier and impregnable fortress against the despotism of
the Czar. This, I say, is the reason why I claim aid from the United
States, and ask it to assume its rightful executive in the police of
nations. That is the only glory which is wanting to the lustre of your
glorious stars. The militia of the United States having been the
assertors of the independence and liberties of this country and the
guardians of its security, have now scarcely any other calling; and I
confidently hope, that being your condition, you will not deny your
generous support to the great principle of non-interference, in the next
struggle which Hungary will make for freedom and independence, which
even now is felt in the air, and is pointed out by the finger of God
himself. My _second_ earnest wish and hope is, that the people will
see that their commerce with other people, whether in revolution or not,
shall be secured. It is not so much my interest as it is your right; and
I hope the militia of the United States will ever be ready to protect
oppressed humanity. My _third_ humble claim is, that this great
republic shall recognize the legitimate independence of Hungary. The
militia of this country fought and bled for that principle upon your own
soil; so, by the glory of your predecessors--by all the blessings which
have flowed from your struggle, which make your glory and happiness--you
will feel inclined to support this my humble claim for the recognition
of the legitimate independence of my fatherland.

I thank you for the generous sympathy, and for the reception and welcome
of my companions, the devoted sons of Hungary, who were ready to
sacrifice life and fortune to the independence of their native land.
There are several among them who were already soldiers before our
struggle, and they employed their military skill in the service of their
country. But there were others who were not soldiers, yet whose
patriotism led them to embrace the cause of their native land, and they
proved to be brave and efficient supporters of the freedom for which
they fought. Thanking you for the sympathy you have expressed for them,
I promise you, gentlemen, that they will prove themselves worthy of it.
I will point out to them the most dangerous places, and I know they will
acquit themselves honourably and bravely. As to myself, I have here a
sword on my side given to me by an American citizen. This being a gift
from a citizen of the United States, I take it as a token of
encouragement to go on in that way by which, with the blessing of
Almighty God, I shall yet be enabled again to see my fatherland
independent and free. I swear here before you, that this American sword
in my hand shall be always faithful in the cause of freedom--that it
shall be ever foremost in the battle--and that it shall never be
polluted by ambition or cowardice.

       *       *       *       *       *

X.--CONDITIONS ESSENTIAL FOR DEMOCRACY AND PEACE.

[_Reply to the Address of the Democrats of Tammany Hall, New York,
Dec. 17th_.]

Mr. Sickles, who made the address, closed by stating that he contributed
to the cause of Hungary "a golden dollar, fresh from the free mines of
the Pacific;" adding that he trusted millions would follow, and that the
"Almighty Dollar," if still the proverb of a money-making people, would
become a symbol of its noblest instincts and truest ambition.

Kossuth, in reply, after warm thanks, declined the personal praises
bestowed on him, and sketched the series of events by which the Austrian
tyranny had converted him from insignificance into a man of importance.
He then proceeded to comment on France[*] as follows:--I hope that the
great French nation will soon succeed to establish a true republic. But
I have come to the conviction, that for freedom there is no duration in
CENTRALIZATION, which is a legacy of ambitious men. To be conquerors,
power must be centralized; but to be a free nation, self-government must
reign in families, villages, cities, counties, states. As power now is
lodged in France, the government has in its hand an army of half a
million of men, under that iron discipline which is needed in a standing
army. It has under its control a budget of more than a thousand million
francs. It can dispose of every public office in France; it has a civil
army of more than 500,000 men: the mayor of the least village derives
his appointment from the government. All the police, all the _gens
d'armes_, are in its hands. Now, gentlemen, is it not clear
that--with such authority and force,--not to become dangerous to
liberty, every President needs to be a Washington. And Washingtons are
not so thickly strewn around. Woe to the country, whose institutions are
such, that their freedom depends on the personal character of one man.
Be he the best man in the world, he will not overcome the essential
repugnance of his position to freedom. When France abandons this
_centralization_, and carries out her own principles of "Liberty,
Equality, Fraternity," by _local self-government_, she will be the
great basis of European republics. As to sovereignty of the people, I
take it that the right to cast a vote for the election of a President
once in four years does not exhaust the sovereign rights of a nation. A
people deciding about its own matters, must be everywhere master of its
own fate, in village communes as much as in electing its chief officer.

[Footnote *: The news of the _coup d'etat_ had not yet reached him.]

You have spoken about certain persons who will have "peace at any
price." Of course you feel that permanent peace _cannot_ be had at
any less price, than that which buys justice: nor can there be justice,
where is no freedom. Under oppression is neither contentment nor
tranquillity. There are some who prefer being oppressed to the dangers
of shaking off oppression; but I am sure there are millions who fear
death less than enslavement. Peace therefore will not exist, though all
your Rothschilds and Barings help the despots. To withhold material aid
from the oppressed will not avert the war, but by depriving the leaders
of the means of concert will simply make the struggle more lingering: a
result surely not desired by friends of peace.

But, sir, I thank you for your dollar. The ocean is composed of drops.
The greatest results are achieved, not by individuals, but by the humble
industry of mankind, incessantly bringing man nearer to the aim
providentially destined for him. Not all the Rothschilds together can
wield such sums as poor people can; for the poor count by millions.
Those dollars of the people have another great value. One million of
them given by a million of men gives hope to the popular cause: it gives
the sympathy and support of a million men. I bless God for that word of
yours, that the one dollar should be followed by many; for then your
example would not only in a financial respect be a great benefit, but
afford a foundation for that freedom which the Almighty designs for the
nations. Here is a great glory for your country to aim at. It is
glorious to stand at the top of the pyramid of humanity; more glorious
to become yourselves the pillar on which the welfare of human nature
rests. For this, mankind looks to your country with hope and confidence.

       *       *       *       *       *

XI.--HUNGARY AND AUSTRIA IN RELIGIOUS CONTRAST.

[_Address in the Plymouth Church at Brooklyn, Dec. 18th, 1851_.]

The Rev. H. W. Beecher having assured Kossuth of the deep and religious
interest long felt and expressed towards him within those very walls:
Kossuth replied, declaring that he felt himself always in the power of
God, and believed Christianity and freedom to be but one cause. He went
on to add:

The cause of Hungary is strongly connected with the principle of
religious liberty on earth. In the first war of the sixteenth century a
battle was fought by the Moslems in Hungary, by which the power of our
nation was almost overthrown. At that time the monarchy was elective. A
Hungarian, who was Governor of Transylvania, was chosen king, but
another party elected Ferdinand of Austria to be King of Hungary. A long
struggle ensued, in which the Princes of Transylvania called in Turkish
aid against the House of Austria.

In the hour of necessity, the House of Austria complied with the wishes
of my nation, whenever my country had taken up arms; but no sooner was
the sword laid down, than this dynasty always neglected to perform its
promises. In the midst of the last century, under Maria Theresa, those
who did not belong to the Catholic faith were almost excluded from all
offices. Joseph succeeded, who was a tolerant man; but scarcely was he
in his grave, when the Emperor Francis renewed persecution, and it was
only in 1848, that religious liberty was established to every creed.
When the House of Austria took arms against the laws of 1848, they took
arms against religious liberty.

In our Parliament, it was Roman Catholics who stood in the van of battle
for religious liberty: but when I say this, I must state it without
drawing any commentary from it. It was reserved to our revolution to
show the development of the glorious cause of freedom. When my country
imposed on me the duty to govern the land, I was ready to show the
confidence I had in religious freedom. I chose a Catholic Minister to be
Minister of Education in Hungary, and he fully justified the confidence
I reposed in him. He has shown that our Constitution is founded upon
equality; that it regards all men as citizens, and makes no distinction
of profession. It is only under free institutions that a clergyman can
remain a clergyman with burning heart towards his own duties, and yet,
when called to perform the duties of a citizen, be no longer a clergyman
but a citizen. Could the Church of Rome have appreciated this principle,
and have acted upon it, my friend Mazzini were not now necessary for the
freedom of Italy. But as Rome did not appreciate it, the temporal power
of the Pope will probably fall at the next revolution.

My principles are, that the Church shall not meddle with politics, and
Government will not meddle with religion. In every society there are
political and civil concerns on one side, and on the other social
concerns; for the first, civil authority must be established--in
political and civil respects every one has to acknowledge the power of
its jurisdiction. But, in respect to social interests, it is quite the
contrary. Religion is not an institution--it is a matter of conscience.

For the support of these principles I ask your generous aid. You know
that whenever the House of Austria attains to any strength, its first
step is to break down religious liberty. And Austria is helped by
Russia, which is even still less propitious to these principles; you
remember the insolence or hardship to which in Russia those people are
subject who do not belong to the Greek Church; at the present time the
poor Jews are subjected to great indignities, and compelled, if not to
shave off their hair, to cut it in a particular manner, so as to
distinguish them from members of the Greek Church. But Hungary, by the
providence of God, is destined to become once more the vanguard of
civilization, and of religious liberty for the whole of the European
Continent against the encroachments of Russian despotism, as it has
already been the barrier of Christianity, against Islamism.

Kossuth then proceeded to explain, that any moneys contributed by the
generosity of the American public would not be employed as a warlike
fund, for which it would be utterly insignificant; but solely as a means
of enabling the oppressed to concert their measures. After this he
canvassed _the three props_ of Austria, and pointed out the
weakness of them all; viz. its loans,--its army,--and Russia. Its loans
run fast to a bankruptcy. Its army is composed of nations which hate it.
Under the Austrian government, the Tyrol perhaps alone has escaped
bombardments, scaffolds, and jails filled with patriots. The armies are
raised by forcible conscriptions, and contain some hundred thousand
Hungarians who recently fought and conquered Austria, whom Austria now
keeps in drill to serve against her when the time comes. As to the third
prop--Russia,--possibly for some days yet in the future it may support
Austria; but not in a long war: Austria can never stand in a long war.

I am told (said Kossuth) that some who call themselves "men of peace"
cry out for _peace at any price_. But is the present condition
peace? Is the scaffold peace?--that scaffold, on which in Lombardy
during the "peaceful" years the blood of 3742 patriots has been shed.
When the prisons of Austria are filled with patriots, is that peace? or
is the discontent of all the nations peace? I do not believe that the
Lord created the world for _such_ a kind of peace as that,--to be a
prison,--to be a volcano, boiling up and ready to break out. No: but
with justice and liberty there will be contentment, and with
contentment, peace--lasting peace, consistent peace: while from the
tyrants of the world there is oppression, and with oppression the
breaking forth of war.....

       *       *       *       *       *

XII.--PUBLIC PIRACY OF RUSSIA

[_Reply to the Address of the Bar of New York, Dec. 19th, 1851_.]

A reception and a banquet to Kossuth having been prepared by the Bar at
Tripler Hall, ex-justice Jones introduced him with a short speech; after
which Judge Sandford, in the name of the whole Bar, read an ample
address, of which the following is the principal part:--

Governor Kossuth.--The Bar of New York, having participated with their
fellow-citizens in extending to you that cordial and enthusiastic
welcome which greeted your landing upon the shores of America, have
solicited the opportunity to express to you, as a member of the legal
profession, their respect for your great talents and eminent
attainments, and their admiration for the ardour and enthusiasm with
which you have devoted all your powers and energies to the sacred cause
of the emancipation of your native land. Wherever freedom has needed an
advocate, wherever law has required a supporter, wherever tyranny and
oppression have provoked resistance, and men have been found for the
occasion, it is the proud honour of our common profession to have
presented from our ranks some prominent individual who has generously
and boldly engaged in the service; and Hungary has furnished to the
world one of the most striking in the brilliant series of illustrious
examples. As early as the year 1840, the public history of Hungary had
made us acquainted with the distinguished part which a Mr. Kossuth, an
attorney, as he was then described, had performed in sustaining the laws
of his country. Mr. Kossuth, the Attorney of that day, has since matured
into the Counsellor, Statesman, Patriot, Governor, and now stands before
us the Exile more distinguished for his firmness and undaunted courage
in his last reverse than for his exaltation by the free choice of his
countrymen. After the years of your imprisonment and painful anxiety had
worn away, and the illegal measure of your arrest had been publicly
acknowledged, we found you restored to your personal liberty, and again
ardently engaged in the great cause of your country's freedom. At the
meeting of the Diet of Hungary which was held in November, 1847, and
before the flame of revolution had illuminated Europe, we found a series
of acts resolved upon by that body, which declared an equality of civil
rights and of public burdens among all classes, denominations, and races
in Hungary and its provinces, perfect toleration for every form of
religion, an extension of the elective franchise, universal freedom in
the sale of landed property, liberty to strangers to settle in the
country, the emancipation of the Jews, the sum of eight millions set
apart to encourage manufactures and construct roads, and the nobles of
Hungary, by a voluntary act, abolishing the old tenure of the lands,
thereby constituting the producing classes to be absolute owners of
nearly one half of the cultivated territory in the kingdom. This great
advance made by your country in a system of benign and ameliorating
legislation, was checked by occurrences which are too fresh in your
recollection to require a recapitulation. We welcome you among us; we
tender you our admiration for your efforts; our sympathy for your
sufferings; our cordial wishes that your persevering labours may be
successful in restoring your country to her place among nations, and her
people to the enjoyment of those blessings of civil and religious
liberty, to which, by their intelligence and bravery, and by the _laws
of nature and of nature's God_, they are justly entitled. Our
professional pursuits have led us to the study of the system of
jurisprudence which has been matured by the wisdom and experience of
ages, but which has been recognized by all eminent jurists to be founded
upon the defined principles of Christianity. From that great source of
law we have learned, that as members of the family of mankind, our
duties are not bounded by the territorial limits of the government which
protects us, nor circumscribed as to time or space. We have framed a
constitution of government, and under it have adopted a system of laws
which we are bound to execute and obey. The stability and efficiency of
our own government are dependent upon the intelligence, virtue, and
moderation of our people. It has been justly remarked by one of our most
distinguished jurists, that "in a republic, every citizen is himself in
some measure entrusted with the public safety, and acts an important
part for its weal or woe." Trained as we have been in these principles
of self-government, appreciating all the blessings which a bounteous
Creator has so profusely showered upon us, and desirous to see the
principles of civil and religious liberty extended to other nations, we
rejoice at every uprising of their oppressed people; we sympathize with
their struggles, and within the limits of our public laws and public
policy, we aid them in their efforts. If through weakness or treachery
they fail, we grieve at their misfortunes. In you, sir, we behold a
personification of that great principle which forms the corner stone of
our own revered Constitution--the right of self-government. Darkened as
has been the horizon of suffering Hungary, in you, sir, still burns that
living fire of freedom, which we trust will yet light up her firmament,
and shed its lustrous flame over her wasted lands. "The unnamed
demi-gods" whose blood has moistened her battle-fields, the martyrs
whose lives have been freely offered up on the scaffold and beneath the
axe, the living exiles now scattered through distant lands, have not
suffered, are not suffering in vain. Governments were created for the
benefit of the many, and not of the few. A day, an hour of retribution
will yet come; the Almighty promise will not be forgotten--"Vengeance is
mine--I will repay it, saith the Lord."

Kossuth thereupon replied:--

Gentlemen,--Highly as I value the opportunity to meet the gentlemen of
the Bar, I should have felt very much embarrassed to have to answer the
address of that corporation before such a numerous and distinguished
assembly, had not you, sir, relieved my well-founded anxiety by justly
anticipating and appreciating my difficulties. Let me hope, that herein
you were the interpreter of this distinguished assembly's indulgence.

Gentlemen of the Bar, you have the noble task to be the first
interpreters of the law; to make it subservient to justice; to maintain
its eternal principles against encroachment; and to restore those
principles to life, whenever they become obliterated by misunderstanding
or by violence. My opinion is, that Law must keep pace in its
development with institutions and intelligence, and until these are
perfect, law is and must be with them in continual progress. Justice is
immortal, eternal, and immutable, like God himself; and the development
of law is only then a progress, when it is directed towards those
principles which, like Him, are eternal; and whenever prejudice or error
succeeds in establishing in customary law any doctrine contrary to
eternal justice, it is one of your noblest duties, gentlemen,--having no
written Code to fetter justice within the bonds of error and
prejudice,--it is one of your noblest duties to apply _Principles_,
--to show that an unjust custom is a corrupt practice, an
abuse; and by showing this, to originate that change, or rather
development in the unwritten, customary law, which is necessary to make
it protect justice, instead of opposing and violating it.

If this be your noble vocation in respect to the Private laws of your
country, let me entreat you, gentlemen, to extend it to that Public law
which, regulating the mutual duties of nations towards each other, rules
the destinies of humanity. You know that in that eternal code of "nature
and of nature's God," which your forefathers invoked when they raised
the colonies of England to the rank of a free nation, there are no
pettifogging subtleties, but only everlasting principles: everlasting,
like those by which the world is ruled. You know that when artificial
cunning of ambitious oppressors succeeds to pervert those principles,
and when passive indifference or thoughtlessness submits to it, as
weakness must submit: it is the noble destiny--let me say, duty--of
enlightened nations, alike powerful as free, to restore those eternal
principles to practical validity, so that justice, light, and truth may
sway, where injustice, oppression, and error have prevailed. Raise high
the torch of truth; cast its beams on the dark field of arbitrary
prejudice; become the champions of principles, and your people will be
the regenerators of International law.

It will. A tempestuous life has somewhat sharpened my eye, and had it
even not done so, still I would dare to say, I know how to read your
people's heart. It is conscious of your country's power; it is jealous
of its own dignity; it knows that it is able to restore the law of
nations to the principles of justice and right; and knowing its ability,
its will shall not be lacking. Let the cause of Hungary become the
opportunity for the restoration of true and just international law.
Mankind is come to the eleventh hour in its destinies. One hour of delay
more, and its fate may be sealed, and nothing left to the generous
inclinations of your people--so tender-hearted, so noble, and so
kind--but to mourn over murdered nations, its beloved brethren in
humanity.

I have but to make a few remarks about two objections, which I am told I
shall have to contend with. The first is, that it is a leading principle
of the United States not to interfere with European nations. I may
perhaps assume that you have been pleased to acquaint yourselves with
what I have elsewhere said on that argument; viz. that the United States
had never entertained or confessed such a principle, or at any rate had
abandoned it, and had been forced to do so: which indicates it to have
been only a temporary policy. I stated the mighty difference between
neutrality and non-interference; so I will only briefly remark that a
like difference exists between alliance and interference. Every
independent power has the right to form alliances, but is not under duty
to do so: it may remain neutral, if it please. Neither alliances nor
neutrality are matters of principle, but simply of policy. They may hurt
interest, but do not violate law; whereas with interference the contrary
is the case. Interference with the sovereign right of nations to resist
oppression, or to alter their institutions and government, is a
violation of the law of nations and of God: therefore non-interference
is a duty common to every power and every nation, and is placed under
the safeguard of every power, of every nation. He who violates that law
is like a pirate: every power on earth has the duty to chase him down as
a curse to human nature. There is not a man in the United States but
would avow that a pirate must be chased down; and no man more readily
than the gentlemen of trade. A gentleman who came yesterday to honour
me with the invitation of Cincinnati, that rising wonder of the
West,--with eloquence which speaks volumes in one word, designated as
_piracy_ the interference of foreign violence with the domestic
concerns of a nation. There is such a moving power in a word of truth!
That word has relieved me of many long speeches. I no longer need to
discuss the principle of your foreign policy: there can be no doubt
about what is lawful, what is a duty, against piracy. Your naval forces
are, and must be, instructed to put down piracy wherever they meet it,
on whatever geographic lines, whether in European or in American waters.
You sent your Commodore Decatur for that purpose to the Mediterranean,
who told the Dey of Algiers, that "if he claims powder, he will have it
with the balls;" and no man in the United States imagined this to oppose
your received policy. Nobody then objected that it is the ruling
principle of the United States not to meddle with European or African
concerns; rather, if your government had neglected so to do, I am sure
the gentlemen of trade would have been foremost to complain. Now, in the
name of all which is pleasing to God and sacred to man, if all are ready
thus to unite in the outcry against a rover, who, at the danger of his
own life, boards some frail ship, murders some poor sailors, or takes a
few bales of cotton--is there no hope to see a similar universal outcry
against those great pirates who board, not some small cutters, but the
beloved home of nations? who murder, not some few sailors, but whole
peoples? who shed blood, not by drops, but by torrents? who rob, not
some hundred weight of merchandize, but the freedom, independence,
welfare, and the very existence of nations?  Oh God and Father of human
kind! spare--oh spare that degradation to thy children; that in their
destinies some bales of cotton should more weigh than those great
moralities. Alas! what a pitiful sight! A miserable pickpocket, a
drunken highway robber, chased by the whole human race to the gallows:
and those who pickpocket the life-sweat of nations, rob them of their
welfare, of their liberty, and murder them by thousands--these
high-handed criminals proudly raise their brow, trample upon mankind,
and degrade its laws before their high reverential name, and term
themselves "most sacred majesties." But may God be blessed, there is
hope for human nature; for there is a powerful, free, mighty people here
on the virgin soil of America, ready to protect the laws of man and of
Heaven against the execrated pirates and their associates.

But again I am told, "The United States, as a power, are not
indifferent; we sympathize deeply with those who are oppressed; we will
respect the laws of nations; but we have no interest to make them
respected by others towards others." Interest! and always interest! Oh,
how cupidity has succeeded to misrepresent the word? Is there any
interest which could outweigh the interest of justice and of right?
Interest! But I answer by the very words of one of the most
distinguished members of your profession, gentlemen, the present
Honourable Secretary of State:--"The United States, as a nation, have
precisely the same interest (yes, _interest_ is his word) in
international law as a private individual has in the laws of his
country." He was a member of the bar who advanced that principle of
eternal justice against the mere fact of policy; and now that he is in
the position to carry out the principle which he has advanced, I
confidently trust he will be as good as his word,[*] and that his
honourable colleagues, the gentlemen of the bar, will remember their
calling to maintain the permanent principles of justice against the
encroachments of accidental policy.

[Footnote *: See the extracts from Mr. Webster's speech at the Washington
Banquet.]

But I may be answered--"If we (the United States) avow that we will not
endure the interference of Russia in Hungary (for that is the practical
meaning, I will not deny), and if Russia should not respect our
declaration; then we _might_ have to go to war." Well, I am not the
man to decline the consequences of my principles. I will not steal into
your sympathy by evasion. Yes, gentlemen, I confess, _should_
Russia not respect such a declaration of your country, then you are
forced to go to war, or else be degraded before mankind. But,
gentlemen, you must not shrink back from the mere _word_ war; you
must consider what is the probability of its occurrence. I have already
stated publicly my certain knowledge how vulnerable Russia is; how weak
she is internally. But the best clue to you as to what will be her
future conduct, if you act decisively, will be gained by examining the
extreme caution and timidity with which, in the late events, she felt
her way, before she interposed by force.

The last French Revolution broke out in February, 1848. The Czar hates
republics,--name and thing; but he did not interfere against the France
of Lamartine, any more than against the France of Louis Philippe in
1830. Why not?  He dared not. But he resorted to his natural and his
most dangerous weapon, _secret diplomacy_. He sent male and female
intriguers to Paris, and succeeded in turning the revolution into a mock
republic. But from the pulsations of the great French heart every tyrant
had trembled. The German nation took its destiny into its own hands, and
proposed to itself to become ONE, in Frankfort. The throne in Berlin
quaked; the Austrian emperor fled from his palace, a few weeks after he
had with his own hands waved the flag of freedom out of his window. In
Vienna an Austrian Parliament met. A constitution was devised for Polish
Gallicia, linked by blood, history, and nature, to the Poland domineered
over by the Czar; while on its western frontier another Polish province,
Posen, was wrapt in revolutionary flames. You can imagine how the Czar
raged, how he wished to unite all mankind in one head, so that he might
cut it off with a single blow; and still he nowhere interfered. Why not?
Again I say, he was prudently afraid. However, the French republic
became very innocent to him--almost an ally in some respects, really an
ally in others, as in the case of unfortunate Rome. The gentlemen of
Frankfort proved also to be very innocent. The hopes of Germany
failed--the people were shot down in Vienna, Prague, Lemberg,--the
Austrian mock Parliament was sent from Vienna to Kremsen, and from
Kremsen home. Only Hungary stood firm, steady, victorious--the Czar had
nothing more to fear from all revolutionary Europe--nothing from
Germany--nothing from France. He had no fear from the United States,
since he knew that your government then was not willing to meddle with
European affairs: so he had free hands in Hungary. But one thing still
he did not know, and that was--what will _England_ and what will
_Turkey_ say, if he interferes?--and that consideration alone was
sufficient to check him. So anxious was he to feel the pulse of England
and of Turkey, that he sent first a small army--some ten thousand
men--to help the Austrians in Transylvania; and sent them in such a
manner as to have, in case of need, for excuse, that he was called to do
so, _not by Austria only, but by that part of the people also, which
deceived by foul delusion, stood by Austria!_ Oh, it was an infernal
plot! We beat down and drove out his 10,000 men, together with all the
Austrians--but the Czar had won his game. He was hereby assured that he
would have no foreign power to oppose him when he dared to violate the
law of nations by an armed interference in Hungary. So he interfered
with all his might.

It is a torture even to remember, how like a dream vanished all our
hopes that there is yet justice on earth. When I saw my nation, as a
handful of brave men, forsaken to fight alone that immense battle for
humanity; when I saw Russian diplomacy stealing, like secret poison,
into our ranks, introducing treason into them;--but let me not look
back; it is all in vain; the past is past. _Forward_ is my word,
and forward I will go; for I know that there is yet a God in heaven, and
there is a people like you on earth, and there is a power of decided
will here also in this bleeding heart. It is my motto still, that "there
is no difficulty to him who wills." But so much is a fact, so much is
sure, that _the Czar did not dare to interfere until he was assured
that he would meet no foreign power to oppose him_. Show him, free
people of America--show him in a manly declaration, that he will meet
your force if he dares once more to trample on the laws of
nations--accompany this declaration with an augmentation of your
Mediterranean fleets, and be sure he will not stir. You will have no
war, and Austria falls almost without a battle, like a house without
foundation, raised upon the sand; Hungary--my poor Hungary--will be
free, and Europe's oppressed continent able to arrange its domestic
concerns. Even without my appeal to your sympathy, you have the source
in your own generous hearts. This meeting is a substantial proof of it.
Receive my thanks.

I have done, gentlemen; I am worn out. I must reserve for another
occasion what I would say further, were I able. I know that when I
speak in this glorious country, there is the mighty engine of the press
which enables me to address the whole people. Let me now say that the
ground on which the hopes of my native land rest, is the principle of
justice, right, and law. To the maintenance of these you have devoted
your lives, gentlemen of the Bar. I leave them under your professional
care, and trust they will find many advocates among you.

       *       *       *       *       *

XIII.--CLAIMS OF HUNGARY ON THE FEMALE SEX.

[_Speech to the Ladies of New York_.]

The Rev. Dr. Tyng having spoken in the name of the Ladies of New York,
and concluded with the words: "And now, sir, the ladies whom I have the
honour to represent, knowing your history, and fully aware of its vast
importance, desire themselves to be the audience, and to hear the voice
of Kossuth, and the claims of Hungary." Kossuth replied as follows:--

I would I were able to answer that call. I would I were able suitably to
fill the place which your kindness has assigned to me. You were pleased
to say that Austria was blind to let me escape. Be assured that it was
not the merit of Austria. She would have been very glad to bury me
alive, but the Sultan of Turkey took courage, and notwithstanding all
the remonstrances of Austria, I am free.

Ladies, worn out as I am, still I am very glad that the ladies of New
York condescend to listen to my farewell. When in the midst of a busy
day, the watchful care of a guardian angel throws some flowers of joy in
the thorny way of man, he gathers them up with thanks: a cheerful thrill
quivers through his heart, like the melody of an Aeolian harp; but the
earnest duties of life soon claim his attention and his cares. The
melodious thrill dies away, and on he must go; on he goes, joyless,
cheerless, and cold, every fibre of his heart bent to the earnest duties
of the day. But when the hard work of the day is done, and the stress of
mind for a moment subsides, then the heart again claims its right, and
the tender fingers of our memory gather up again the violets of joy
which the guardian angel threw in our way, and we look at them with
delight; while we cherish them as the favourite gifts of life--we are as
glad as the child on Christmas eve. These are the happiest moments of
man's life. But when we are not noisy, not eloquent, we are silent
almost mute, like nature in a midsummer's night, reposing from the
burning heat of the day. Ladies, that is my condition now. It is a hard
day's work which I have had to do here. I am delivering my farewell
address; and every compassionate smile, every warm grasp of the hand,
every token of kindness which I have received (and I have received so
many), every flower of consolation which the ladies of New York have
thrown on my thorny way, rushes with double force to my memory. I feel
happy in this memory--there is a solemn tranquillity about my mind; but
in such a moment I would rather be silent than speak. You know, ladies,
that it is not the deepest feelings which are the loudest.

And besides, I have to say farewell to New York! This is a sorrowful
word. What immense hopes are linked in my memory with its name!--hopes
of resurrection for my fatherland--hopes of liberation for the European
continent! Will the expectations which the mighty outburst of New York's
heart foreshadowed, be realized? or will the ray of consolation pass
away like an electric flash? Oh, could I cast one single glance into the
book of futurity! No, God forgive me this impious wish. It is He who hid
the future from man, and what he does is well done. It were not good for
man to know his destiny. The sense of duty would falter or be unstrung,
if we were assured of the failure or success of our aims. It is because
we do not know the future, that we retain our energy of duty, So on will
I go in my work, with the full energy of my humble abilities, without
despair, but with hope.

It is Eastern blood which runs in my veins. If I have somewhat of
Eastern fatalism, it is the fatalism of a Christian who trusts with
unwavering faith in the boundless goodness of a Divine Providence. But
among all these different feelings and thoughts that come upon me in the
hour of my farewell, one thing is almost indispensable to me, and that
is, the assurance that the sympathy I have met with here will not pass
away like the cheers which a warbling girl receives on the stage--that
it will be preserved as a principle, and that when the emotion subsides,
the calmness of reflection will but strengthen it. This consolation I
wanted, and this consolation I have, because, ladies, I place it in your
hands. I bestow on your motherly and sisterly cares, the hopes of
Europe's oppressed nations,--the hopes of civil, political, social, and
religious liberty. Oh let me entreat you, with the brief and stammering
words of a warm heart, overwhelmed with emotions and with sorrowful
cares--let me entreat you, ladies, to be watchful of the sympathy of
your people, like the mother over the cradle of her beloved child. It is
worthy of your watchful care, because, it is the cradle of regenerated
humanity.

Especially in regard to my poor fatherland, I have particular claims on
the fairer and better half of humanity, which you are. The _first_
of these claims is, that there is not perhaps on the face of the earth a
nation, which in its institutions has shown more chivalric regard for
ladies than the Hungarian. It is a praiseworthy trait of the Oriental
character. You know that it was the Moorish race in Spain, who were the
founders of the chivalric era in Europe, so full of personal virtue, so
full of noble deeds, so devoted to the service of ladies, to heroism,
and to the protection of the oppressed. You are told that the ladies of
the East are degraded to less almost than a human condition, being
secluded from all social life, and pent up within the harem's walls. And
so it is. But you must not judge the East by the measure of European
civilization. They have their own civilization, quite different from
ours in views, inclinations, affections, and thoughts. We in Hungary
have gained from the West the advantages of civilization for our women,
but we have preserved for them the regard and reverence of our Oriental
character. Nay, more than that, we carried these views into our
institutions and into our laws. With us, the widow remains the head of
the family, as the father was. As long as she lives, she is the mistress
of the property of her deceased husband. The chivalrous spirit of the
nation supposes she will provide, with motherly care, for the wants of
her children; and she remains in possession so long as she bears her
deceased husband's name. Under the old constitution of Hungary (which we
reformed upon a democratic basis--it having been aristocratic) the widow
of a lord had the right to send her representative to the parliament,
and in the county elections of public functionaries widows had a right
to vote alike with the men. Perhaps this chivalric character of my
nation, so full of regard toward the fair sex, may somewhat commend my
mission to the ladies of America.

Our _second_ particular claim is, that the source of all the
misfortune which now weighs so heavily upon my bleeding fatherland, is
in two ladies--Catharine of Russia, and Sophia of Hapsburg, the
ambitious mother of this second Nero, Francis-Joseph. You know that one
hundred and fifty years ago, Charles the Twelfth of Sweden, the bravest
of the brave, foreseeing the growth of Russia, and fearing that it would
oppress and overwhelm civilization, ventured with a handful of men to
attack its rising power. After immortal deeds, and almost fabulous
victories, one loss made him a refugee upon Turkish soil, like myself.
But, happier than myself, he succeeded in persuading Turkey of the
necessity of checking Russia in her overweening ambition, and curtailing
her growth. On went Mehemet Baltadji with his Turks, and met Peter the
Czar, and pent him up in a corner, where there was no possibility of
escape. There Mehemet held him with iron grasp till hunger came to his
aid. Nature claimed her rights, and in a council of war it was decided
to surrender to Mehemet. Then Catharine who was present in the camp,
appeared in person before the Grand Vizier to sue for mercy. She was
fair, and she was rich with jewels of nameless value. She went to the
Grand Vizier's tent. She came back without her jewels, but she brought
mercy, and Russia was saved. From that celebrated day dates the downfall
of Turkey, and the growth of Russia. Out of this source flowed the
stream of Russian preponderance over the European continent. The
depression of liberty, and the nameless sufferings of Poland and of my
poor native land, are the dreadful fruits of Catharine's success on that
day, cursed in the records of the human race.

The second lady who will be cursed through all posterity in her memory,
is Sophia, the mother of the present usurper of Hungary--she who had the
ambitious dream to raise the power of a child upon the ruins of liberty,
and on the neck of prostrate nations. It was her ambition--the evil
genius of the House of Hapsburg in the present day--which brought
desolation upon us. I need only mention one fact to characterize what
kind of a heart was in that woman. On the anniversary of the day of
Arad, where our martyrs bled, she came to the court with a bracelet of
rubies set in so many roses as was the number of heads of the brave
Hungarians who fell there, declaring that she joyfully exhibited it to
the company as a memento which she wears on her very arm, to cherish in
eternal memory the pleasure she derived from the killing of those heroes
at Arad. This very fact may give you a true knowledge of the character
of that woman, and this is the _second_ claim to the ladies'
sympathy for oppressed humanity and for my poor fatherland.

Our _third_ particular claim is the behaviour of our ladies during
the last war. It is no arbitrary praise--it is a fact,--that, in the
struggle for our rights and freedom, we had no more powerful
auxiliaries, and no more faithful executors of the will of the nation,
than the women of Hungary. You know that in ancient Rome, after the
battle of Cannae, which was won by Hannibal, the Senate called on the
people spontaneously to sacrifice all their wealth on the altar of their
fatherland. Every jewel, every ornament was brought forth, but still the
tribune judged it necessary to pass a law prohibiting the ladies of Rome
to wear more than half an ounce of gold, or particoloured splendid
dresses. Now, we wanted in Hungary no such law. The women of Hungary
brought all that they had. You would have been astonished to see how, in
the most wealthy houses of Hungary, if you were invited to dinner, you
would be forced to eat soup with iron spoons. When the wounded and the
sick--and many of them we had, because we fought hard--when the wounded
and the sick were not so well provided as it would have been our duty
and our pleasure to do, I ordered the respective public functionaries to
take care of them. But the poor wounded went on suffering, and the
proper officers were but slow in providing for them. When I saw this,
one single word was spoken to the ladies of Hungary, and in a short time
there was provision made for hundreds of thousands of sick. And I never
met a single mother who would have withheld her son from sharing in the
battle; but I have met many who ordered and commanded their children to
fight for their fatherland. I saw many and many brides who urged on the
bridegrooms to delay their day of happiness till they should come back
victorious from the battles of their fatherland. Thus acted the ladies
of Hungary. A country deserves to live; a country deserves to have a
future, when the women, as much as the men, love and cherish it.

But I have a stronger motive than all these to claim your protecting
sympathy for my country's cause. It is her nameless woe, nameless
sufferings. In the name of that ocean of bloody tears which the impious
hand of the tyrant wrung from the eyes of the childless mothers, of the
brides who beheld the executioner's sword between them and their wedding
day--in the name of all these mothers, wives, brides, daughters, and
sisters, who, by thousands of thousands, weep over the graves of Magyars
so dear to their hearts,--who weep the bloody tears of a patriot (as
they all are) over the face of their beloved native land--in the name of
all those torturing stripes with which the flogging hand of Austrian
tyrants dared to outrage human nature in the womankind of my native
land--in the name of that daily curse against Austria with which even
the prayers of our women are mixed--in the name of the nameless
sufferings of my own dear wife [here the whole audience rose and cheered
vehemently]--the faithful companion of my life,--of her, who for months
and for months was hunted by my country's tyrants, with no hope, no
support, no protection, but at the humble threshold of the hard-working
people, as noble and generous as they are poor--in the name of my poor
little children, who when so young as to be scarcely conscious of life,
had already to learn what an Austrian prison is--in the name of all
this, and what is still worse, in the name of liberty trodden down, I
claim, ladies of New York, your protecting sympathy for my country's
cause. Nobody can do more for it than you. The heart of man is as soft
wax in your tender hands. Mould it, ladies; mould it into the form of
generous compassion for my country's wrongs, inspire it with the noble
feelings of your own hearts, inspire it with the consciousness of your
country's power, dignity, and might. You are the framers of man's
character. Whatever be the fate of man, one stamp he always bears on his
brow--that which the mother's hand impressed upon the soul of the child.
The smile of your lips can make a hero out of the coward, and a generous
man out of the egotist; one word from you inspires the youth to noble
resolutions; the lustre of your eyes is the fairest reward for the toils
of life. You can kindle energy even in the breast of broken age, that
once more it may blaze up in a noble generous deed before it dies. All
this power you have. Use it, ladies, in behalf of your country's glory,
and for the benefit of oppressed humanity, and when you meet a cold
calculator, who thinks by arithmetic when he is called to feel the
wrongs of oppressed nations, convert him, ladies. Your smiles are
commands, and the truth which pours forth instinctively from your
hearts, is mightier than the logic articulated by any scholar. The Peri
excluded from Paradise, brought many generous gifts to heaven in order
to regain it. She brought the dying sigh of a patriot; the kiss of a
faithful girl imprinted upon the lips of her bridegroom, when they were
distorted by the venom of the plague. She brought many other fair gifts;
but the doors of Paradise opened before her only when she brought with
her the first prayer of a man converted to charity and brotherly love
for his oppressed brethren and humanity.

Remember the power which you have, and which I have endeavoured to point
out in a few brief words. Remember this, and form associations;
establish ladies' committees to raise substantial aid for Hungary. Now I
have done. One word only remains to be said-a word of deep sorrow, the
word, "Farewell, New York!" New York! that word will for ever make every
string of my heart thrill. I am like a wandering bird. I am worse than a
wandering bird. He may return to his summer home, I have no home on
earth!  Here I felt almost at home. But "Forward" is my call, and I must
part. I part with the hope that the sympathy which I have met here in a
short transitory home will bring me yet back to my own beloved home, so
that my ashes may yet mix with the dust of my native soil. Ladies,
remember Hungary, and--farewell!

       *       *       *       *       *

XIV.--RESULTS OF THE OVERTHROW OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC.

[_Speech at the Citizens' Banquet, Philadelphia, Dec. 26th._]

Mr. Dallas, the Chairman, made an eloquent address advocating the cause
of Hungary against Russia, and avowing the duty of America to give
warlike aid. This speech was the more remarkable, as coming immediately
after the arrival of the news of Louis Napoleon's usurpation. The mind
of the public was naturally so full of the event, that Kossuth could not
avoid to discuss it; but the topic is so threadbare to the reader, that
it will suffice here to preserve a few sentiments.

In the opening, Kossuth complained of forged letters and forged cheques
sent to annoy him, and anonymous letters of false accusation circulated
against him. Proceeding from this to public topics, and the certainty of
a new convulsion in Europe, he said, that it might prove in the future
highly dangerous to the moneyed interests, if the world be persuaded
that the holders of great disposable wealth use it to aid despotism, and
that the possession of it checks the generous propensity to forward the
triumph of freedom. If the world be confirmed in this persuasion, the
results will be painfully felt by those gentlemen, whose treasures are
always open for the despots to crush liberty with. Such moneylenders
have excited boundless hatred in all that section of Europe, which has
had to suffer from their ready financial aid to despotism. I (said
Kossuth) am no Socialist, no Communist; and if I get the means to act
efficiently, I shall so act that the inevitable revolution may not
subvert the rights of property: but so much I confidently declare--that
to the spreading of Communist doctrines in certain quarters of Europe
nobody has so much contributed as those European capitalists, who by
incessantly aiding the despots with their money have inspired many of
the oppressed with the belief that financial wealth is dangerous to the
freedom of the world. Rothschild is the most efficient apostle of
Communism.

In regard to Louis Bonaparte's temporary success, Kossuth argued, that
it would secure, when France makes her next move for freedom, two
results beneficial to liberty: First, that in future, the French
republicans would abandon their delusive and disastrous Centralization.
We have shown (said he) in Hungary, that for a nation to be invincible,
its life must not be bound up with its metropolis. Henceforward, in
European aspirations, centralization is replaced by federative harmony.
I thank Louis Napoleon for it. _Your_ principles of local
self-government, gentlemen, were hitherto professed on the continent of
Europe chiefly by us Hungarians: now they will conquer the world,--a new
victory for humanity. Had the old French republic stood, it would have
perpetuated the curse of _great standing armies_, which are
instruments of ambition and a wasting pestilence. Again; the blow struck
by Louis Napoleon has forced his nation into the common destiny of
Europe. It has forbidden France ever in future to play a separate game,
and think to keep her own liberty, without effectively espousing the
cause of foreign liberty.

What is the sum of all this? First, that there is nothing in the news
from France to alter any judgments which you might previously have
formed, or cause you any suspense. Secondly, it only more than ever
claims from you an immediately decisive conduct. The success of freedom
now depends entirely on what policy the United States of America will
adopt.

Well! gentlemen. It may be that the United States have no reply to the
hopes of the world. You will then see a mournful tear in the eye of
humanity, and its breast heaving with sighs. We presume, you are so
powerful that you can afford not to care about the treading down of the
law of nations and the funeral of European freedom. You are so glorious
at home, that you can afford to lose the glory (at so rare a crisis!) of
saving liberty and justice on earth. Yet in your own hour of trial you
asked and received military and naval aid from France. Your President
has informed the world, that you are not willing to allow "the strong
arm of a foreign power to suppress the spirit of freedom in any
country." If after this you tell me that you are _afraid_ of
Russia, and are _too weak_ to help us,--and would rather be on good
terms with the Czar, than rejoice in the liberty and independence of
Hungary, Italy, Germany, France,--dreadful as it would be, I would wipe
away my tear, and say to my brethren, "Let us pray, and let us go to the
Lord's Last Supper, and thence to battle and to death." I would then
leave you, gentlemen, with a dying farewell, and with a prayer that the
sun of freedom may never drop below the horizon of your happy land.

I am in Philadelphia, the city of brotherly love, the city of William
Penn, whose likeness I saw this day in a history of your city, with this
motto under it: "_Si vis pacem, para bellum_"--(prepare for war, if
thou wilt have peace)--a weighty memento, gentlemen, to the name of
William Penn.

And I am in that city which is the cradle of your independence--where,
in the hour of your need, the appeal was proclaimed to the Law of
Nature's God, and that appeal for help from Europe, which was granted to
you.

I stood in Independence Hall, whence the spirit of freedom lisps eternal
words of history to the secret recesses of your hearts. Man may well be
silent where from such a place history so speaks. So my task is
done--with me the pain, with you the decision--and, let me add the
prophetic words of the poet, "the moral of the strain."

Kossuth took his seat amid the three times three of the audience.

       *       *       *       *       *

XV.--INTEREST OF AMERICA IN HUNGARIAN LIBERTY.

[_Baltimore, Dec. 27th_.]

On the 27th December Kossuth reached Baltimore, and was met by an
immense concourse of citizens and a long line of military, who escorted
him to his quarters with much enthusiastic demonstration. In the evening
he addressed the citizens in the Hall of the Maryland Institute, which
was densely crowded, great numbers standing outside the building, when
unable to get admittance.

After an apologetic introduction, Kossuth proceeded to say:--

Gentlemen! It is gratifying to me to receive this spontaneous welcome. I
was already grateful, during my stay in New York, to receive the
expression of your sentiments, and your generous resolutions. They
become the more beneficial to me, because I am on my way and very near
to Washington City, where the elected of your national confidence stand
in their proud position, as conservators of those lofty interests, which
bind your thirty-one stars of Sovereign States into one mighty
constellation of Freedom, Power, and Right; where the Congress and
Government of this vast Republic watch over the common weal of your
united country, and hereby make you a Power on earth, a fullgrown member
of that great Family of Nations, which, having One Father in heaven, are
brethren, and should act as brethren.

Among the interests intrusted by you to the Congress and Government,
your _foreign policy_ is nearly the most important. This, in a
great and powerful nation, can have no other basis than Eternal Law and
Christian Morality. Even your peculiar interests are, in my belief, best
served, when your foreign policy rests, not on transitory
considerations, but on everlasting principles. Even in private life no
man can entirely cut himself off from others. A man willing to attempt
it would be an exile in his own country, an exile in his own city, an
exile in his family. Just so with nations, which in the larger family of
man are individual members. If a nation seclude itself, it is an exile
in the midst of humanity. No man, ladies and gentlemen, is independent
of his fellow-man; no nation, however powerful, is independent of other
nations. Put the richest, the strongest man for a single week wholly
apart from family, city, country, and he will quickly learn his
essential weakness. In a nation, the consequence of total isolation is
not felt as soon, but it will at length be felt as surely. The
_hours_ of nations are counted by _years_; yet the secluded
nation, self-exiled from mankind, dwindles away. Woe to the people,
whose citizens care only for their own present, and not for the future
of their country! the future, in which they have to live immortally by
children and children's children, with whose glory and happiness and
power they ought now to sympathize. Men or nations secluded are like
the silk-worm, which secretes itself in a self-woven case, and at length
creeps out to die. So will it at length be with the nation which is
wrapped up in self.

It is one of your glories, that some portions of your united republic
are farther from other portions than Hungary is from Baltimore: mere
distance is therefore no reason why you should be unconcerned about our
fate. You are not too far for commercial intercourse with the most
distant coasts of Europe; and especially since the invention of one of
your citizens has been brought to higher perfection, the ocean rather
unites you to us, than separates you. Would you have the
_advantages_ of the connection, without the _duties_ which
spring out of it? Disregard of duty sooner or later kills advantage. I
need not remind you what a link of nature, blood, language, science,
industry, religion, civilization, exists between you and us, and binds
us ever tighter. You cannot help feeling at home our condition in
Europe. Our peace or war, our civilization or barbarism, our freedom or
oppression, our wealth or starvation, progress or retrogression,
_must_ act upon you, just as your condition reacts upon us. The
link between the destinies of Christendom cannot be cut asunder. In
fact, there never yet was a time when Europe more demanded that you
should have _some_ policy towards it; and indifference is none at
all. At this moment it is under universal oppression of _social,
political_, and _religious_ liberty,--the three treasures which
make your glory and happiness. This oppression is ordered by Russia, and
executed by her satellites. The elected President of France has
impiously stabbed the constitution, to make himself Emperor. The
Austrian Ministry has openly declared that the absolutist powers will
maintain him. Thus the impulse of revolution has been given; its
vibration will be felt throughout Europe and in my fatherland. Never
will you have an opportunity more glorious for you, and more favourable
to mankind, for adopting a real policy founded upon principles.

The people of Hungary have abundant motives to risk life for freedom and
independence. Once we had a nationality; now we have none. Once we had a
constitution;--by the blessing of God we succeeded to transform it three
years ago from an aristocratic to a democratic one;--now Hungary has no
constitution at all. For a thousand years we were a free people; we are
now so no longer. Like a flock of sheep, we are appropriated, not by the
Austrian empire, not by the nation, but by a despotic ambitious family.
We had freedom of the press. Not nineteen years ago, I began the
struggle, and endured three years imprisonment for it; but we won that
great right of mankind--free expression of thought. Now there is no
press at all in Hungary; there is only the hangman and martial law. We
established equal protection for every religion; now there is equal
oppression for all. The Protestant Church had its own self-government
for its churches and schools, won by victorious arms and secured by a
hundred laws; now the laws are torn down, and the freedom of church and
school is gone. The Catholic Church had control of its own estates; now,
day by day, the nearly bankrupt Austrian government is overgrowing that
property by the poisonous weeds of a new loan, on which it vegetates, a
curse to every nation on the continent. Such is the condition of the
Catholic Church, concerning which I--a Protestant, not only by birth,
but also by conviction--declare, that during a whole lifetime, when
Hungary was struggling for religious liberty, that Church contended in
the foremost rank for the rights of us Protestants. So much do we value
the freedom of conscience, that the very thought was repugnant to us
all, that there should be unequal rights of citizenship between
Protestants and Catholics and professors of the Faith of Moses. Zeal for
religious freedom will kindle Magyars to struggle, as long as there is
blood in our veins. As during three centuries, so the late war was for
religious independence as well as civil; indeed, still earlier, we were
the barrier of Christendom against the invading Mahommedan. We
succeeded lately in freeing the agriculture of Hungary, and transforming
peasants into freeholders; now the Austrian dynasty is stealthily
bringing back feudal rights. In freeing the peasants, we provided for
indemnification of landlords; Austria taxes the peasants very heavily,
and does not (for she cannot) indemnify the landlords; because her
violence and wastefulness does not know how to turn our public estates
to account. She favours a few landlords only, who are faithful tools of
her oppression. During our struggle, we issued paper-money,--it was
called the Kossuth-bank-note; Austria disavowed it, and commanded its
surrender, yet twenty millions are firmly held by the people, as
valuable after a new revolution. Before we fell under the stroke of
Russian interference, the taxation permitted by our Parliament was only
four and a half millions of dollars; Austria now imposes SIXTY. Our
people burn their tobacco-seed and cut down their vines, rather than
endure her tax. Such are the motives which Austria gives to Hungary
_not_ to make a new revolution! There is not a single interest
which she has not mortally wounded. The mind, the heart, dignity,
conscience, self-esteem, hatred, love, revenge, besides every material
interest of every class, is engaged to the struggle.

The oppression of Hungary has ratified the oppression of all our
continent. Since she has fallen, Italy has been completely crushed, the
moderate freedom of Germany has been put down by Austria with the
support of Russia; lastly, the usurpation of Louis Napoleon has been
made possible. Without the restoration of Hungary Europe cannot be freed
from Russian thraldom; under which nationalities are erased, no freedom
is possible, all religions are subjected to like slavery. Gentlemen! the
Emperor Napoleon spoke a prophetic word, when he said that in fifty
years all Europe would be either republican or Cossack. Hungary once
free, Europe is republican; Hungary permanently crushed, all Europe is
Cossack. And what does Hungary _need_ for freedom? Not that other
nations should fight our proper battle against our immediate oppressor.
We have hearts loving freedom and ready to shed their blood for it; we
have armies fully equal to Austria, we want only "FAIR PLAY." Let the
United States feel itself to be as it is, a Power on earth, bound to aid
in the police of the nations, and in the name of violated right let it
say to the Russian intruder, "Keep back, hands off, let the brave
Magyars fight their own battle, _else_ we must take their part."
For centuries, perhaps, you will have no more glorious opportunity than
now. Hitherto, the word Glory has been connected with conquest and
oppression. Take the New Glory for yours, by assuring to all nations
exemption from the conspiracy of tyrants. That is what I _first_
humbly request and hope.

[Kossuth proceeded, as in former speeches, to explain his other
requests, viz. _secondly_, free commerce with America, whether
Hungary was in war with Austria or not; _thirdly_, that when the
suitable moment arrived, the Government should recognize the legitimate
character of the Declaration of Independence made by Hungary in April,
1849. He added]:--

These requests I have very often explained since I have had the honour
to be in the United States. I explained them yesterday in
Philadelphia--the cradle of your Declaration of Independence. There I
was answered, not only by the unanimous adoption of these resolutions on
the part of the city of Harrisburg the capital of Pennsylvania, but also
by the people of Philadelphia, at a great and important meeting. Nor was
that enough. I received more in Philadelphia. I was told that, besides
the granting of these my humble requests, whenever war breaks out for
Hungary's freedom and independence I shall find brave hearts and stout
arms among the twenty-four millions of the people of the United States
ready to go over to Europe and fight side by side in the great battle
for the freedom and independence of the European continent. I was told
that it was not possible, when the battle for mankind's liberty is
fought, for the sword of Washington to rest in its scabbard. That sword,
which struck the first blow here on this continent for the republican
freedom of this great country, must be present there, where the last
stroke for all humanity will be given. Now, gentlemen, I will not abuse
your kind indulgence and patience, which you have bestowed in your
crowded situation. I will only say, that should this be the generous
will of the people of the United States, in the name of the honour of my
nation I can give the assurance that the Hungarians will be found worthy
to fight side by side with you for civil and political freedom on the
European continent, and to take care, with the sword of Washington, that
no hair of that lock which I received as a present in Philadelphia, and
which I promised to attach to that very standard which I will bear to
decide the victory against despotism--that no hair of that lock shall
fall into the hands of tyrants. And now may the ladies who have honoured
me with their presence graciously allow me to express to them my most
humble thanks and one humble prayer. The destinies of mankind--the
future of humanity--repose in the hands of womanhood. The mark which the
mother imprints upon the brow of the child remains for his whole life.
Ladies of the United States, when the wandering exile passes away from
your presence, take to your kind care the great cause of the liberty of
the world with the tenderness with which a mother takes care of her
child; and when _you_ take care of this great cause, the sympathy
of the people of the United States will not vanish like the passing
emotion of the heart, but will become substantial, active, and
effectual.

The speaker then took his seat, with three times three from the
audience.

Judge Legrand followed and proposed the Harrisburg resolutions, which
were adopted. They are as annexed:--

Resolved,--That the citizens of Harrisburg, the seat of government of
Pennsylvania, in town meeting assembled, hereby approve and endorse the
three propositions promulgated by Louis Kossuth, Governor of Hungary, in
his great speech before the Mayor and authorities of the city of New
York, viz.:--

"First. That feeling interested in the maintenance of the laws of
nations, acknowledging the sovereign right of every people to dispose of
its own domestic concerns to be one of the laws, and the interference
with this sovereign right to be a violation of these laws of nations,
the people of the United States--resolved to respect and to make
respected these public laws--declares the Russian past intervention in
Hungary to be a violation of these laws, which, if reiterated, would be
a new violation, and would not be regarded indifferently by the people
of the United States.

"Second. That the people of the United States are resolved to maintain
its right of commercial intercourse with the nations of Europe, whether
they be in a state of revolution against their government or not; and
that, with the view of approaching scenes on the continent of Europe,
the people invite the government to take appropriate measures for the
protection of the trade of the people with the Mediterranean.

"Third. That the people of the United States should declare their
opinion in respect to the question of the independence of Hungary, and
urge the government to act accordingly."

Resolved, That the people of Hungary are, and ought to remain a free and
independent nation; that Louis Kossuth is their lawful governor, and
that the Hungarian people should not be prevented from exercising the
rights of freemen by the tyranny of Austria and Russia.

Resolved, That we extend to Louis Kossuth, Governor of Hungary, and the
Hungarian nation, that has made such a noble stand in the cause of
freedom, that sympathy, aid, and support, which freemen alone know how
to grant.

Resolved, That a committee of fifteen, including the officers of this
meeting, be appointed to repair to Philadelphia, and invite the Governor
of Hungary to visit the capital of Pennsylvania at such times as may
suit his convenience.

       *       *       *       *       *

XVI.--NOVELTIES IN AMERICAN REPUBLICANISM.

[_Washington Banquet, Jan. 5th_, 1852.]

The Banquet given by a large number of the Members of the two Houses of
Congress to Kossuth took place at the National Hotel, in Washington
City. The number present was about two hundred and fifty. The Hon. Wm.
R. King, of Alabama, president of the Senate, presided. On his right sat
Louis Kossuth, and on his left the Hon. Daniel Webster, Secretary of
State. On the right of Kossuth at the same table, sat the Hon. Linn
Boyd, speaker of the House of Representatives. Besides other
distinguished guests who responded to toasts, are named Hon. Thomas
Corwin, Secretary of the Treasury, and Hon. Alex. H. H. Stuart,
Secretary of the Interior.

A few minutes after eight o'clock, a large number of ladies were
admitted, and the President of the Senate requested gentlemen to fill
their glasses for the first toast, which was,

  "The President of the United States."

To this, Mr. Webster responded.

The President then announced the second toast:

"The Judiciary of the United States: The expounder of the Constitution
and the bulwark of liberty regulated by law."

Judge Wayne, of the Supreme Court of the United States, replied, and
after alluding to "The distinguished stranger" who was then among them,
said: I give you, gentlemen, as a sentiment:

"Constitutional liberty to all the nations of the earth, supported by
Christian faith and the morality of the Bible."

The toast was received with enthusiastic applause.

The third toast was,--

"The Navy of the United States: The home squadron everywhere. Its glory
was illustrated, when its flag in a foreign sea gave liberty and
protection to the Hungarian Chief."

Mr. Stanton, of Tennessee, in his reply, said:

But recently, Mr. President, a new significance has been given to this
flag. Heretofore, the navy has been the symbol of our power and the
emblem of our liberty, but now it speaks of humanity and of a noble
sympathy for the oppressed of all nations. _The home squadron
everywhere_, to give protection to the brave and to those who may
have fallen in the cause of freedom! Your acquiescence in that sentiment
indicates the profound sympathy of the people of the United States for
the people of Hungary, manifested in the person of their great chief;
and I can conceive of no duty that would be more acceptable to the
gallant officers of the navy of the United States except one, and that
is, _to strike a blow for liberty themselves in a just cause, approved
by our Government_.

The fourth toast was,--

"The army of the united states. In saluting the illustrious Exile with
magnanimous courtesy, as high as it could pay to any Power on earth, it
has added grace to the glory of its history."

General Shields, Senator for Illinois, Chairman of the Committee of
Military Affairs in the Senate, being loudly called for, replied in the
necessary absence of General Scott, the chief of the army; and after an
appropriate acknowledgment of the toast, added:

In paving this very high honor to our illustrious guest--this noble
Hungarian--let me observe that that army which has been toasted to-night
spoke for his reception by the voice of their cannon; and the cannon
that spoke there spoke the voice of twenty-five millions of people. Sir,
that salute which the American cannon gave the Hungarian exile had a
deep meaning in it. It was not a salute to the mere man Louis Kossuth,
but it was a salute in favour of the great principle which he
represents--the principle which he advocates, the principle of
nationality and of human liberty. Sir, I was born in a land which has
suffered as an oppressed nation. I am now a citizen of a land which
would have suffered from the same power, had it not been for the
bravery, gallantry, and good fortune of the men of that time. Sir, as an
Irishman by birth, and an American by adoption, I would feel myself a
traitor to both countries if I did not sustain downtrodden nationalities
everywhere--in Hungary, in Poland, in Germany, in Italy--everywhere
where man is trodden down and oppressed. And, sir, I say again, that
that army which maintained itself in three wars against one of the
greatest and most powerful nations of the world, will, if the trying
time should come again, maintain that same flag (the stars and stripes)
and the same triumph, and the same victories in the cause of liberty.
[Great applause.]

The president of the evening then, after a cordial speech, proposed the
fifth toast:

"Hungary, represented in the person of our honoured Guest, having proved
herself worthy to be free by the virtues and valour of her sons, the law
of nations and the dictates of justice alike demand that she shall have
fair play in her struggle for independence."

This toast was received with immense applause, which lasted several
minutes.

Kossuth then rose and spoke as follows:

Sir: As once Cineas the Epirote stood among the Senators of Rome, who,
with a word of self-conscious majesty, arrested kings in their ambitious
march--thus, full of admiration and of reverence, I stand amongst you,
legislators of the new Capitol, that glorious hall of your people's
collective majesty. The Capitol of old yet stands, but the spirit has
departed from it, and is come over to yours, purified by the air of
liberty. The old stands a mournful monument of the fragility of human
things: yours as a sanctuary of eternal right. The old beamed with the
red lustre of conquest, now darkened by the gloom of oppression; yours
is bright with freedom. The old absorbed the world into its own
centralized glory; yours protects your own nation from being absorbed,
even by itself. The old was awful with unrestricted power; yours is
glorious by having restricted it. At the view of the old, nations
trembled; at the view of yours, humanity hopes. To the old, misfortune
was introduced with fettered hands to kneel at triumphant conquerors'
feet; to yours the triumph of introduction is granted to unfortunate
exiles who are invited to the honour of a seat. And where Kings and
Caesars never will be hailed for their power and wealth, there the
persecuted chief of a downtrodden nation is welcomed as your great
Republic's guest, precisely because he is persecuted, helpless, and
poor. In the old, the terrible _voe victis!_ was the rule; in
yours, protection to the oppressed, malediction to ambitious oppressors,
and consolation to a vanquished just cause. And while from the old a
conquered world was ruled, you in yours provide for the common
federative interests of a territory larger than that old conquered
world. There sat men boasting that their will was sovereign of the
earth; here sit men whose glory is to acknowledge "the laws of nature
and of nature's God," and to do what their sovereign, the People, wills.

Sir, there is history in these contrasts. History of past ages and
history of future centuries may be often recorded in small facts. The
particulars to which the passion of living men clings, as if human
fingers could arrest the wheel of Destiny, these particulars die away;
it is the issue which makes history, and that issue is always coherent
with its causes. There is a necessity of consequences wherever the
necessity of position exists. Principles are the _alpha_: they must
finish with _omega_, and they will. Thus history may be often told
in a few words.

Before the heroic struggle of Greece had yet engaged your country's
sympathy for the fate of freedom, in Europe then so far distant and now
so near, Chateaubriand happened to be in Athens, and he heard from a
_minaret_ raised upon the Propylaeum's ruins a Turkish priest in
the Arabic language announcing the lapse of hours to the Christians of
Minerva's town. What immense history there was in the small fact of a
Turkish Imaum crying out, "Pray, pray! the hour is running fast, and the
judgment draws near."

Sir, there is equally a history of future ages written in the honour
bestowed by you on my humble self. The first Governor of Independent
Hungary, driven from his native land by Russian violence; an exile on
Turkish soil, protected by a Mahommedan Sultan from the blood-thirst of
Christian tyrants; cast back a prisoner to far Asia by diplomacy; was at
length rescued from his Asiatic prison, when America crossed the
Atlantic, charged with the hopes of Europe's oppressed nations. He
pleads, as a poor exile, before the people of this great Republic, his
country's wrongs and its intimate connection with the fate of the
European continent, and, in the boldness of a just cause, claims that
the principles of the Christian religion be raised to a law of nations.
To see that not only is the boldness of the poor exile forgiven, but
that he is consoled by the sympathy of millions, encouraged by
individuals, associations, meetings, cities, and States; supported by
effective aid and greeted by Congress and by Government as the nation's
guest; honoured, out of generosity, with that honour which only one man
before him received (a man who had deserved them from your gratitude,)
with honours such as no potentate ever can receive, and this banquet
here, and the toast which I have to thank you for: oh! indeed, sir,
there is a history of future ages in all these facts!  They will go down
to posterity as the proper consequences of great principles.

Sir, though I have a noble pride in my principles, and the inspiration
of a just cause, still I have also the consciousness of my personal
insignificance. Never will I forget what is due from me to the
_Sovereign Source_ of my public capacity. This I owe to my
nation's dignity; and therefore, respectfully thanking this highly
distinguished assembly in my country's name, I have the boldness to say
that Hungary well deserves your sympathy; that Hungary has a claim to
protection, because it has a claim to justice. But as to myself, I am
well aware that in all these honours I have no personal share. Nay, I
know that even that which might seem to be personal in your toast, is
only an acknowledgment of a historical fact, very instructively
connected with a principle valuable and dear to every republican heart
in the United States of America. As to ambition, I indeed never was
able to understand how anybody can love ambition more than liberty. But
I am glad to state a historical fact, as a principal demonstration of
that influence which institutions exercise upon the character of
nations.

We Hungarians are very fond of the principle of municipal
self-government, and we have a natural horror against centralization.
That fond attachment to municipal self-government, without which there
is no provincial freedom possible, is a fundamental feature of our
national character. We brought it with us from far Asia a thousand
years ago, and we preserved it throughout the vicissitudes of ten
centuries. No nation has perhaps so much struggled and suffered for the
civilized Christian world as we. We do not complain of this lot. It may
be heavy, but it is not inglorious. Where the cradle of our Saviour
stood, and where His divine doctrine was founded, there now another
faith rules: the whole of Europe's armed pilgrimage could not avert this
fate from that sacred spot, nor stop the rushing waves of Islamism from
absorbing the Christian empire of Constantine. _We_ stopped those
rushing waves. The breast of my nation proved a breakwater to them. We
guarded Christendom, that Luthers and Calvins might reform it. It was a
dangerous time, and its dangers often placed the confidence of all my
nation into one man's hand. But there was not a single instance in our
history where a man honoured by his people's confidence deceived them
for his own ambition. The man out of whom Russian diplomacy succeeded in
making a murderer of his nation's hopes, gained some victories when
victories were the chief necessity of the moment, and at the head of an
army, circumstances gave him the ability to ruin his country; but he
never had the people's confidence. So even he is no contradiction to the
historical truth, that no Hungarian whom his nation honoured with its
confidence was ever seduced by ambition to become dangerous to his
country's liberty. That is a remarkable fact, and yet it is not
accidental; it springs from the proper influence of institutions upon
the national character. Our nation, through all its history, was
educated in the school of local self-government; and in such a country,
grasping ambition having no field, has no place in man's character.

The truth of this doctrine becomes yet more illustrated by a quite
contrary historical fact in France. Whatever have been the changes of
government in that great country--and many they have been, to be
sure--we have seen a Convention, a Directorate, Consuls, and one
Consul, and an Emperor, and the Restoration, and the Citizen King, and
the Republic; Through all these different experiments centralization was
the keynote of the institutions of France--power always centralized;
omnipotence always vested somewhere. And, remarkable indeed, France has
never yet raised one single man to the seat of power, who has not
sacrificed his country's freedom to his personal ambition!

It is sorrowful indeed, but it is natural. It is in the garden of
centralization that the venomous plant of ambition thrives. I dare
confidently affirm, that in your great country there exists not a single
man through whose brains has ever passed the thought, that he would wish
to raise the seat of his ambition upon the ruins of your country's
liberty, if he could. Such a wish is impossible in the United States.
Institutions react upon the character of nations. He who sows wind will
reap storm. History is the revelation of Providence. The Almighty rules
by eternal laws not only the material but also the moral world; and as
every law is a principle, so every principle is a law. Men as well as
nations are endowed with free-will to choose a principle, but, that once
chosen, the consequences must be accepted.

With self-government is freedom, and with freedom is justice and
patriotism. With centralization is ambition, and with ambition dwells
despotism. Happy your great country, sir, for being so warmly attached
to that great principle of self-government. Upon this foundation your
fathers raised a home to freedom more glorious than the world has ever
seen. Upon this foundation you have developed it to a living wonder of
the world. Happy your great country, sir!  that it was selected by the
blessing of the Lord to prove the glorious practicability of a
federative union of many sovereign States, all preserving their
State-rights and their self-government, and yet united in one--every
star beaming with its own lustre, but altogether one constellation on
mankind's canopy.

Upon this foundation your free country has grown to prodigious power in
a surprizingly brief period, a power which attracts by its fundamental
principle. You have conquered by it more in seventy-five years than Rome
by arms in centuries. Your principles will conquer the world. By the
glorious example of your freedom, welfare, and security, mankind is
about to become conscious of its aim. The lesson you give to humanity
will not be lost. The respect for State-rights in the Federal Government
of America, and in its several States, will become an instructive
example for universal toleration, forbearance, and justice to the future
States, and Republics of Europe. Upon this basis those mischievous
questions of language-nationalities will be got rid of, which cunning
despotism has raised in Europe to murder liberty. Smaller States will
find security in the principle of federative union, while they will
preserve their national freedom by the principle of sovereign
self-government; and while larger States, abdicating the principle of
centralization will cease to be a blood-field to unscrupulous usurpation
and a tool to the ambition of wicked men, municipal institutions will
ensure the development of local elements; freedom, formerly an abstract
political theory, will be brought to every municipal hearth; and out of
the welfare and contentment of all parts will flow happiness, peace, and
security for the whole.

That is my confident hope. Then will the fluctuations of Germany's fate
at once subside. It will become the heart of Europe, not by melting
North Germany into a Southern frame, or the South into a Northern; not
by absorbing historical peculiarities into a centralized omnipotence;
not by mixing all in one State, but by federating several sovereign
States into a Union like yours.

Upon a similar basis will take place the national regeneration of
Sclavonic States, and not upon the sacrilegious idea of Panslavism,
which means the omnipotence of the Czar. Upon a similar basis shall we
see fair Italy independent and free. Not unity, but _union_ will
and must become the watchword of national members, hitherto torn rudely
asunder by provincial rivalries, out of which a crowd of despots and
common servitude arose. In truth it will be a noble joy to your great
Republic to feel that the moral influence of your glorious example has
worked this happy development in mankind's destiny; nor have I the
slightest doubt of the efficacy of that example.

But there is one thing indispensable to it, without which there is no
hope for this happy issue. It is, that the oppressed nations of Europe
become the masters of their future, free to regulate their own domestic
concerns. And to this nothing is wanted but to have that "fair play" to
all, _for_ all, which you, sir, in your toast, were pleased to
pronounce as a right of my nation, alike sanctioned by the law of
nations as by the dictates of eternal justice. Without this "fair play"
there is no hope for Europe--no hope of seeing your principles spread.

Yours is a happy country, gentlemen. You had more than fair play. You
had active and effectual aid from Europe in your struggle for
independence, which, once achieved, you used so wisely as to become a
prodigy of freedom and welfare, and a lesson of life to nations.

But we in Europe--we, unhappily, have no such fair play. With us,
against every pulsation of liberty all despots are united in a common
league; and you may be sure that despots will never yield to the moral
influence of your great example. They hate the very existence of this
example. It is the sorrow of their thoughts, and the incubus of their
dreams. To stop its moral influence abroad, and to check its spread at
home, is what they wish, instead of yielding to its influence.

We shall have no fair play. The Cossack already rules, by Louis
Napoleon's usurpation, to the very borders of the Atlantic Ocean. One of
your great statesmen--now, to my deep sorrow, bound to the sick bed of
far advanced age[*]--(alas!  that I am deprived of the advice which his
wisdom could have imparted to me)--your great statesman told the world
thirty years ago that Paris was transferred to St. Petersburg. What
would he now say, when St. Petersburg is transferred to Paris, and
Europe is but an appendage to Russia?

[Footnote *: Henry Clay, since deceased.]

Alas! Europe can no longer secure to Europe fair play. England only
remains; but even England casts a sorrowful glance over the waves.
Still, we will stand our ground, "sink or swim, live or die." You know
the word; it is your own. We will follow it; it will be a bloody path to
tread. Despots have conspired against the world. Terror spreads over
Europe, and persecutes by way of anticipation. From Paris to Pesth there
is a gloomy silence, like the silence of nature before the terrors of a
hurricane. It is a sensible silence, disturbed only by the thousandfold
rattling of muskets by which Napoleon prepares to crush the people who
gave him a home when he was an exile, and by the groans of new martyrs
in Sicily, Milan, Vienna, and Pesth. The very sympathy which I met in
England, and was expected to meet here, throws my sisters into the
dungeons of Austria. Well, God's will be done! The heart may break, but
duty will be done. We will stand our place, though to us in Europe there
be no "fair play." But so much I hope, that no just man on earth can
charge me with unbecoming arrogance, when here, on this soil of freedom,
I kneel down and raise my prayer to God: "Almighty Father of Humanity,
will thy merciful arm not raise up a power on earth to protect the law
of nations when there are so many to violate it?" It is a prayer and
nothing else. What would remain to the oppressed if they were not even
permitted to pray? The rest is in the hand of God.

Sir, I most fervently thank you for the acknowledgment that my country
has proved worthy to be free. Yes, gentlemen, I feel proud at my
nation's character, heroism, love of freedom and vitality; and I bow
with reverential awe before the decree of Providence which has placed my
country into a position such that, without its restoration to
independence, there is no possibility for freedom and independence of
nations on the European continent. Even what now in France is coming to
pass proves the truth of this. Every disappointed hope with which Europe
looked towards France is a degree more added to the importance of
Hungary to the world. Upon our plains were fought the decisive battles
for Christendom; _there_ will be fought the decisive battle for the
independence, of nations, for State rights, for international law, and
for democratic liberty. We will live free, or die like men; but should
my people be doomed to die, it will be the first whose death will not be
recorded as suicide, but as a martyrdom for the world, and future ages
will mourn over the sad fate of the Magyar race, doomed to perish, not
because we deserved it, but because in the nineteenth century there was
nobody to protect "the laws of nature and of nature's God."

But I look to the future with confidence and with hope. Manifold
adversities could not fail to impress some mark of sorrow upon my heart,
which is at least a guard against sanguine illusions. But I have a
steady faith in principles. Once in my life indeed I was deplorably
deceived in my anticipations, from supposing principle to exist in
quarters where it did not. I did not count on generosity or chivalrous
goodness from the governments of England and France, but I gave them
credit for selfish and instinctive prudence. I supposed them to value
Parliamentary Government, and to have foresight enough to know the
alarming dangers to which they would be exposed, if they allowed the
armed interference of Russia to overturn historical, limited,
representative institutions. But France and England both proved to be
blind, and deceived me. It was a horrible mistake; and has issued in a
horrible result. The present condition of Europe, which ought to have
been foreseen by those governments, exculpates me for having erred
through expecting them to see their own interests. Well, there is a
providence in every fact. Without this mistake the principles of
American republicanism would for a long time yet not have found a
fertile soil on that continent, where it was considered wisdom to belong
to the French school. Now matters stand thus: that either the continent
of Europe has no future at all, or this future is American
republicanism. And who can believe that two hundred millions of that
continent, which is the mother of such a civilization, are not to have
any future at all? Such a doubt would be almost blasphemy against
Providence. But there is a Providence indeed--a just, a bountiful
Providence, and in it I trust, with all the piety of my religion. I dare
to say my very self was an instrument of it. Even my being here, when
four months ago I was yet a prisoner of the league of European despots
in far Asia, and the sympathy which your glorious people honours me
with, and the high benefit of the welcome of your Congress, and the
honour to be your guest, to be the guest of your great Republic--I, a
poor exile--is there not a very intelligible manifestation of Providence
in it?--the more, when I remember that the name of your guest is by the
furious rage of the Austrian tyrant, nailed to the gallows.

I confidently trust that the nations of Europe have a future. I am
aware that this future is vehemently resisted by the bayonets of
absolutism; but I know that though bayonets may give a defence, they
afford no seat to a prince. I trust in the future of my native land,
because I know that it is worthy to have one, and that it is necessary
to the destinies of humanity. I trust to the principles of
republicanism; and, whatever may be my personal fate, so much I know,
that my country will preserve to you and your glorious land an
everlasting gratitude.

A toast in honour of Mr. Webster, the Secretary of State, having then
been proposed, that gentleman responded in an ample speech, of which the
following is an extract:--

Gentlemen, I do not propose at this hour of the night, to entertain you
by any general disquisition upon the value of human freedom, upon the
inalienable rights of man, or upon any general topics of that kind; but
I wish to say a few words upon the precise question, as I understand it,
that exists before the civilized world, between Hungary and the Austrian
Government, and I may arrange the thoughts to which I desire to give
utterance under two or three general heads.

And in the first place I say, that wherever there is in the Christian
and civilized world a nationality of character--wherever there exists a
nation of sufficient knowledge and wealth and population to constitute a
Government, then a National Government is a necessary and proper result
of nationality of character. We may talk of it as we please, but there
is nothing that satisfies the human being in an enlightened age, unless
he is governed by his own countrymen and the institutions of his own
Government. No matter how easy be the yoke of a foreign Power, no matter
how lightly it sits upon the shoulders, if it is not imposed by the
voice of his own nation and of his own country, he will not, he cannot,
and he _means_ not to be happy under its burden.

There is not a civilized and intelligent man on earth that enjoys entire
satisfaction in his condition, if he does not live under the government
of his own nation--his own country, whose volitions and sentiments and
sympathies are like his own. Hence he cannot say "This is not my
country; it is the country of another Power; it is a country belonging
to somebody else." Therefore, I say that whenever there is a nation of
sufficient intelligence and numbers and wealth to maintain a government,
distinguished in its character and its history and its institutions,
that nation cannot be happy but under a government of its own choice.

Then, sir, the next question is, whether Hungary, as she exists in our
ideas, as we see her, and as we know her, is distinct in her
nationality, is competent in her population, is also competent in her
knowledge and devotion to correct sentiment, is competent in her
national capacity for liberty and independence, to obtain a government
that shall be Hungarian out and out? Upon that subject, gentlemen, I
have no manner of doubt. Let us look a little at the position in which
this matter stands. What is Hungary?

Hungary is about the size of Great Britain, and comprehends nearly half
of the territory of Austria.

[According to one authority its population is 14 millions and a half.]

It is stated by another authority that the population of Hungary is
_nearly_ 14,000,000; that of England (in 1841) nearly 15,000,000;
that of Prussia about 16,000,000.

Thus it is evident that, in point of power, so far as power depends upon
population, Hungary possesses as much power as England _proper_, or
even as the kingdom of Prussia. Well, then, there is population
enough--there are people enough. Who, then, are they? They are distinct
from the nations that surround them. They are distinct from the
Austrians on the west, and the Turks on the east; and I will say in the
next place that they are an _enlightened_ nation. They have their
history; they have their traditions; they are attached to their own
institutions--institutions which have existed for more than a thousand
years.

Gentlemen, it is remarkable that, on the western coasts of Europe,
political light exists. There is a sun in the political firmament, and
that sun sheds his light on those who are able to enjoy it. But in
eastern Europe, generally speaking, and on the confines between eastern
Europe and Asia, there is no political sun in the heavens. It is all an
arctic zone of political life. The luminary, that enlightens the world
in general, seldom rises there above the horizon. The light which they
possess is at best crepuscular, a kind of twilight, and they are under
the necessity of groping about to catch, as they may, any stray gleams
of the light of day. Gentlemen, the country of which your guest to-night
is a native is a remarkable exception. She has shown through her whole
history, for many hundreds of years, an attachment to the principles of
civil liberty, and of law and order, and obedience to the constitution
which the will of the great majority have established. That is the
fact; and it ought to be known wherever the question of the
practicability of Hungarian liberty and independence are discussed. It
ought to be known that Hungary stands out from it above her neighbours
in all that respects free institutions, constitutional government, and a
hereditary love of liberty.

Gentlemen, my sentiments in regard to this effort made by Hungary are
here sufficiently well expressed. In a memorial addressed to Lord John
Russell and Lord Palmerston, said to have been written by Lord
Fitzwilliam, and signed by him and several other Peers and members of
Parliament, the following language is used, the object of the memorial
being to ask the mediation of England in favour of Hungary.

"While so many of the nations of Europe have engaged in revolutionary
movements, and have embarked in schemes of doubtful policy and still
more doubtful success, it is gratifying to the undersigned to be able to
assure your lordships that the Hungarians demand nothing but the
recognition of ancient rights and the stability and integrity of their
ancient constitution. To your lordships it cannot be unknown that that
constitution bears a striking family-resemblance to that of our own
country."

Gentlemen, I have said that a National Government, where there is a
distinct nationality, is essential to human happiness. I have said that
in my opinion, Hungary is thus capable of human happiness. I have said
that she possesses that distinct nationality, that power of population,
and that of wealth, which entitles her to have a Government of her own;
and I have now to add what I am sure will not sound well upon the Upper
Danube; and that is, that, in my humble judgment, the imposition of a
foreign yoke upon a people capable of self-government, while it
oppresses and depresses that people, adds nothing to the strength of
those who impose that yoke. In my opinion, Austria would be a better
and a stronger Government to-morrow if she confined the limits of her
power to hereditary and German dominions. Especially if she saw in
Hungary a strong, sensible, independent neighbouring nation; because I
think that the cost of keeping Hungary quiet is not repaid by any
benefit derived from Hungarian levies or tributes. And then again, good
neighbourhood, and the goodwill and generous sympathies of mankind, and
the generosity of character that ought to pervade the minds of
Governments as well as those of individuals, is vastly more promoted by
living in a state of friendship and amity with those who differ from us
in modes of government, than by any attempt to consolidate power in the
hands of one over all the rest.

Gentlemen, the progress of things is unquestionably onward. It is
onward with respect to Hungary. It is onward everywhere. Public
opinion, in my estimation at least, is making great progress. It will
penetrate all resources; it will come more or less to animate all minds;
and in respect to that country, for which our sympathies to-night have
been so strongly invoked, I cannot but say that I think the people of
Hungary are an enlightened, industrious, sober, well-inclined community;
and I wish only to add, that I do not now enter into any discussion of
the form of government which may be proper for Hungary. Of course, all
of you, like myself, would be glad to see her, when she becomes
independent, embrace that system of government which is most acceptable
to ourselves. We shall rejoice to see our American model upon the Lower
Danube, and on the mountains of Hungary. But that is not the first step.
It is not that which will be our first prayer for Hungary. The first
prayer shall be, that Hungary may become independent of all foreign
power, that her destinies may be entrusted to her own hands, and to her
own discretion. I do not profess to understand the social relations and
connections of races, and of twenty other things that may affect the
public institutions of Hungary. All I say is, that Hungary can regulate
these matters for herself infinitely better than they can be regulated
for her by Austria, and therefore I limit my aspirations for Hungary,
for the present, to that single and simple point HUNGARIAN
INDEPENDENCE:--

"Hungarian independence; Hungarian control of her own destinies; and
Hungary as a distinct nationality among the nations of Europe."

The toast was received with enthusiastic applause.

The President then announced the next toast--

"The rights of states are only valuable when subject to the free control
of those to whom they appertain, and utterly worthless if to be
determined by the sword of foreign interference."

Mr. Douglas of Illinois, one of the Candidates for the Presidency, in
responding, spoke at length, and denounced the injustice and folly of
England. In the close he said:--

He regarded the intervention of Russia in the affairs of Hungary as a
palpable violation of the laws of nations, that would authorize the
United States to interfere. If Russia, or Austria, or any other power,
should interfere again, then he would determine whether or not we should
act, his action depending upon the circumstances as they should then be
presented. In the mean time, however, he would proclaim the principle of
the laws of nations: he would instruct our ministers abroad to protest
the moment there was the first symptom of the violation of these laws.
He would show to Europe that we had as much right to sympathize in a
system of government similar to our own, as they had in similar
circumstances. In his opinion, Hungary was better adapted for a liberal
movement than any other nation in Europe.

In conclusion, Mr. Douglas begged leave to offer the following
sentiment:--

"Hungary: When she shall make her next struggle for liberty, may the
friends of freedom throughout the world proclaim to the ears of all
European despots, Hands off, a clear field and a fair fight, and God
will protect the right."

The toast was received with the greatest applause.

Colonel Florence submitted the following sentiment:--

"The American Minister to France, whose intervention defeated the
quintuple treaty."

General Cass replied in a very energetic speech, in which he stated that
he was approaching the age of three score years and ten. Turning to
Kossuth, he said:--

Leader of your country's revolution--asserter of the rights of
man--martyr of the principles of national independence--welcome to our
shores! Sir, the ocean, more merciful than the wrath of tyrants, has
brought you to a country of freedom and of safety. That was a proud day
for you, but it was a prouder day for us, when you left the shores of
old Hellespont and put your foot upon an American deck. Protected by
American cannon, with the stars of our country floating over you, you
could defy the world in arms! And, sir, here in the land of Washington,
it is not a barren welcome that I desire to give you; but much further
than that I am willing to go. I am willing to lay down the great
principles of national rights, and adhere to them. The sun of heaven
never shone on such a government as this. And shall we sit blindfolded,
with our arms crossed, and say to tyranny, "Prevail in every other
region of the world?" [Cries of "No, no!"] I thank you for the response.
Every independent nation under Heaven has a right to establish just such
a government as it pleases. And if the oppressed of any nation wish to
throw off their shackles, they have the right, without the interference
of any other; and, with the first and greatest of our Presidents--the
father of his country--I trust we are prepared to say, that "we
sympathize with every oppressed nation which unfurls the banner of
freedom." And I am willing, as a member of Congress, to pass a
declaration to-morrow, in the name of the American people, maintaining
that sentiment.

A toast was then proposed:

"Turkey: Her noble hospitality extended to a fallen patriot, even at the
risk of war, proves her to be worthy of the respect and friendship of
liberal nations."

Kossuth replied as follows:--

Sir, I feel very thankful for having the opportunity to express in this
place my everlasting gratitude to the Sultan of Turkey and to his noble
people. I am not a man to flatter any one. Before God, nations, and
principles I bow--before none else. But I bow with warm and proud
gratitude, before the memory of the generous conduct I met in Turkey.
And I entreat your kind permission to state some facts, which perhaps
may contribute something to a better knowledge of that country, because
I am confident that, when it is once better known, more attention will
be bestowed on its future.

Firstly, as to myself. When I was in that country, and Russia and
Austria, in the full pride of their victory, were imposing their will
upon the Sultan, and claiming the surrender of me and my associates, it
is true that a grand divan was held at Constantinople, and not very
favourable opinions were pronounced by a certain party opposed to the
existing government in Turkey, whereby the Sublime Porte itself was led
to believe that there was no help for us poor exiles, but to abandon our
faith and become Mohammedans, in order that Turkey might be able to
protect us. I thereupon made a declaration, which I believe I was bound
in honesty to make. But I owe it to the honour of the Sultan to say
openly, that even before I had declared that I would rather die than
accept this condition--before that declaration was conveyed to
Constantinople, and before any one there could have got knowledge that I
had appealed to the public opinion of England in relation
thereto--before all this was known at Constantinople, when the decision
of that great divan was announced to the Sultan to be unfavourable to
the exiles, he out of the generosity of his own heart, without knowing
what we were willing to accept or not to accept, declared: "They are
upon the soil; they have trusted to my honour, to my justice--to my
religion--and they shall not be deceived. Rather will I accept war than
deliver them up." That is entirely his merit. But notwithstanding these
high obligations which I feel towards Turkey, I never will try to engage
public sympathy and attention towards a country--towards a power--upon
the basis of one fact. But there are many considerations in reference to
Turkey which merit the full attention of the United States of America.

When we make a comparison between the Turkish Government and that of
Austria and Russia in respect to religious liberty, the scale turns
entirely in favour of Turkey. There is not only toleration for all
religions, but the government does not mix with their religious affairs,
but leaves these entirely to their own control; whereas under Austria,
although self-government was secured by three victorious revolutions, by
treaties which ensured these revolutions, and by hundreds of laws; still
Austria has blotted out from Hungary the self-government of the
Protestant church, while Turkey accords and protects the self-government
of every religious denomination. Russia (as is well known) taking
religion as a political tool, persecutes the Roman Catholics, and indeed
the Greeks and Jews, in such a manner that the heart of man must revolt
against it. The Sultan, whenever a fanatic dares to encroach on the
religious freedom of any one at all in his wide dominions, is the
inexorable champion of that religious liberty which is permitted
everywhere under his rule.

Again, I must cite from the history of Hungary this fact; that when
one-half of Hungary was under Turkish dominion, and the other half under
Austrian, religious liberty was always encouraged in that part which was
under the Turkish rule; and there was not only a full development of
Protestantism, but Unitarianism also was protected; yet by Austria the
Unitarians were afterwards excluded from every civil right, because they
were Unitarians, although our revolution restored their natural rights.
Such was the condition in respect to religious liberty under the
Austrian and under the Turkish dominion.

Now, in respect to municipal self-government, Hungary and all those
different provinces which are now opposed to the Austrian empire,--if
indeed an empire which only rests upon the goodwill of a foreign master,
can be said to exist, or even to vegetate,--all those different
provinces are absorbed by Austria. There was not one which had not in
former times a constitutional life, not one which Austria did not
deprive of it by centralizing all power in her own court. Such is the
principle of Christian rule!

Take, on the other hand, the Turk. In Turkey I have not only seen the
municipal self-government of cities developed to a very considerable
degree, but I have seen administration of justice very much like the
institution of the jury. I have seen a public trial in a case where one
party was a Turk, and the other party a Christian; where the municipal
authorities of the Christian and of the Turkish population were called
together to be not only the witnesses of the trial, but mutually to
control and direct it with perfect publicity. But more yet: there exist
Wallachia and Moldavia, under Turkish dominion; and the Turkish nation,
which has conquered that province and is dominant, yet, out of respect
for national self-government, has prescribed to its own self not to have
the right of a house to dwell in, or a single foot of soil in that land.
In all the domestic concerns of the province--which for centuries has
had a charter, by which the self-government of Wallachia and Moldavia
was ensured--it is worthy to mention that the Turk has never broken his
oath. Whereas in the European continent there is scarcely a single
dynasty, whether king, prince, duke, or emperor, which has not broken
faith before God and man. Now, the existence of this Turkey, great as
the present power of Europe is, is indispensable to the security of
Europe. You know that in the Crimea, in the time of Catherine, Potemkin
wrote the words, "Here passes the way to Constantinople." The policy
indicated by him at that time is always the policy of St. Petersburg;
and it is of Constantinople that Napoleon rightly said, that the power
which has it in command, if it is willing, is able, to rule
three-quarters of the world. Now, it is the intention, it is the
consistent policy of the Russian cabinet, to lay hold of Constantinople;
and therefore to protect the independent existence of Turkey is
necessary to Europe: for if Turkey be crushed, Russia becomes not only
entirely predominant, as she already is, but becomes the single mistress
of Asia and of Europe. And to uphold this independence of Turkey,
gentlemen, nothing is wanted but some encouragement from such a place as
the United States. Since Turkey has lost the possession of Buda in
Hungary, its power is declining. But why? Because from that time
European diplomatists began to succeed in persuading Turkey that she had
no strength to stand by herself; and by and bye it became the rule in
Constantinople that every petty interior question needed European
diplomacy. Now I say, Turkey has vitality such as not many nations have.
It has a power that not many have. Turkey wants nothing but a
consciousness of its own powers and encouragement to stand upon its own
feet; and this encouragement, if it comes as counsel, as kind advice,
out of such a place as the United States, I am confident will not only
be thankfully heard, but also very joyfully followed. That is the only
thing which is wanted there.

And besides this political consideration that the existence of Turkey,
as it is, is necessary to the future of Europe, there are also high
commercial considerations proper to interest and attract the United
States. The freedom of commerce on the Danube is a law of nations
guaranteed by treaties; and yet there exists _no_ freedom. It is in
the hands of Russia. Turkey, to be sure, is very anxious to re-establish
freedom; but there is nobody to back her in her demands. Turkey can also
present to the manufacturing industry of such a country as the United
States a far larger and more important market than all China, with her
two hundred and fifty millions of inhabitants.

But one consideration I can mention--and though it has no reference to
the public opinion here, I beg permission to avail myself of this
opportunity to pronounce it and give it publicity--and that is, that I
hope in the name of the future freedom and independence of the European
nations, those provinces of Turkey which are inhabited by Christians
will not, out of theoretical passion, and out of attachment to a mere
word, neglect that course of action which alone can lead them to freedom
and independence. Gentlemen, I declare that should the next
revolutionary movement in Europe extend to the Turkish provinces of
Moldavia and Servia,--and should Turkey hereby fall,--this would not
become a benefit to those provinces, but would benefit Russia only;
because then, Turkey no more existing, all those provinces will be
naturally absorbed by Russia; whereas, to hold fast to Turkey--that
Turkey, which respects religious liberty, gives them entirely and fully
self-government.

So much, gentlemen, I desired to express. I believe you will excuse me
for the inappropriate manner in which I have acquitted myself of this,
which I considered to be my duty in expressing my thanks to Turkey. I
declare before you that I am fully convinced of the identity of interest
between Hungary and Turkey. We have a common enemy--therefore Hungary
and Turkey are by natural ties drawn into a close alliance against that
enemy. I declare that not only out of gratitude, but also out of a
knowledge of this community of interest, I will never in my life let an
opportunity escape where I in my humble capacity can contribute to the
glory, welfare, and happiness of Turkey, but will consider it the duty
of honour toward my country to be the truest, most faithful friend of
the Turkish empire.

       *       *       *       *       *

XVIII.--ASPECTS OF AMERICA TOWARD ENGLAND.

[_Speech at the Anniversary of the Battle of New Orleans, Jan. 8_.]

F.P. Blair, Esq., in the name of the Democratic Association, pronounced
an elaborate address, vindicating the interposition of the King of
France to aid the American Colonies when they revolted from England, and
pointing out that America, in defence of her institutions, may be called
on to support the masses of the European nations as a breakwater between
herself and Despotism. He showed the certain danger to which English
freedom would be exposed from the triumph of despotism, and asked:--

  What have we to expect from neutrality? We may anticipate
  the treatment which we received from both belligerents
  when Napoleon pressed on to empire over all the nation
  as Russia does now.... Can we hope, that when the war
  is intended to exterminate the principle of which our government
  is the great exemplar, our people will be allowed the immunity
  of free trade with the belligerents to grow rich and
  strong by their calamities?... The impending danger
  can only be averted from us by the ability of the people of
  Europe, now kept down by military mercenaries, to rise and
  assert their own rights. To encourage such efforts is the duty
  of every free people, and of all that would be free....
  Shall our government hesitate to denounce, as a violation of
  the law of nations, the intervention of the Czar? Shall it
  hesitate to declare it a justification of a counter-intervention?...
  Our countrymen will not assent to the one-sided
  doctrine. They will intervene to lift up those stricken down
  by intervention,--

The exiles from Europe--_Liberty_ and _Louis Kossuth_.

The band struck up the well-known Marseilles Hymn, and Kossuth, rising
to respond, was received with prolonged cheers. The music having ceased,
three hearty cheers were given, and Louis Kossuth responded to the toast
and the address in the following remarks, which were received with warm
enthusiasm:--

Gentlemen: I feel sincerely gratified with the honour of being invited
to be present on this solemn occasion, dedicated to the memory of a
glorious as well as highly responsible fact in your history.

There is high political wisdom in the custom yearly to revive the memory
of civil virtue and national glory in the mind of the living generation,
because nothing else is so efficient to keep alive the spirit of
patriotism--that powerful genius, which, like the angels of Scripture,
guards with flaming sword the Paradise of national liberty and
independence. Happy the land where the history of the past is the
history of the people, and not a mere flattery of kings; and
doubly happy the land where the rewards of the past are brightened by
present glory, present happiness; and where the noble deeds of the dead,
instead of being a mournful monument of vanished greatness which saddens
the heart, though it ennobles the mind, are a lasting source of national
welfare to the age and to posterity. But where, as in this your happy
land, national history is the elementary basis of education--where the
very schoolboy is better acquainted with the history of his country than
in monarchies almost the professors are--in such a country it would be
indeed but a ridiculous parading of vanity for a stranger to dwell upon
facts which every child is better acquainted with than he can be. Allow
me therefore, gentlemen, rather briefly to expound what is the practical
philosophy of that great victory which you are assembled to
celebrate--what is the moral of the strain as it presents itself to the
inquirer's mind.

As a man has to pass through several periods of age, each of them marked
with its own peculiarities, before he comes to a settled position in
life, even so a nation. A nation has first to be born, then to grow;
then it has to prove its passive vitality by undergoing a trial of life.
Afterwards it has to prove its active force to rise within its own
immediate horizon. At last, it must take its proper seat amongst the
nations of the world as a power on earth. Every one of these periods of
national life must be gone through. There is no help for it. It is a
necessary process of life. And every one of these life-periods has its
own natural condition, which must be accepted as a necessity, even if we
should not be pleased with it.

Gentlemen, having passed through the ordeal of an earnest life, with the
prospect of yet having to steer through stormy gales, it is natural
that, while I grasp my helm, I gaze at History, as my compass. And there
is no history more instructive than yours, because you have concentrated
within the narrow scope of a few years that natural process of national
life, which elsewhere was achieved only through centuries. It would be a
mistake, and a mistake not without danger, to believe that your nation
is still in its youth because it has lived but seventy-five years. The
natural condition of nations is not measured by years, but by those
periods of the process of life which I have mentioned. And there is no
nation on earth in whose history those periods were so distinctly marked
as in yours. First, you had to be born. That is the period of your
glorious struggle for independence. Endless honour be to those who
conducted it! You were baptized with blood, as it seems to be the
destiny of nations; but it was the genius of Freedom which stood
god-father at your baptism, and gave to you a lasting character by
giving you the Christian name of "_Republic_." Then you had to
grow, and, indeed, you have grown with the luxuriant rapidity of the
virgin nature of the American soil. Washington knew the nature of this
soil, fertilized by the blood of your martyrs and warmed by the sun of
your liberty. He knew it, when he told your fathers that you wanted but
twenty years of peaceful growth to defy any power whatsoever in a just
cause. You have grown through those twenty years, and wisely avoided to
endanger your growth by undertaking a toil not becoming to your growing
age; and there you stood about another twenty years, looking resolutely
but unpretendingly around, if there be anybody to question that you were
really a nation. The question was put in 1812, and decided by that
glorious victory, the anniversary of which you celebrate to-day. That
victory has a deeper meaning in your history than only that of a
repulsed invasion. It marks a period in your national life--the period
of acknowledged, unshakeable security of your national existence. It is
the consummation of your declaration of independence. You have proved by
it that the United States possess an incontestable vitality, having the
power to preserve that independent national position which your fathers
established by the declaration of independence. In reality, it was the
victory of New Orleans by which you took your seat amongst the
independent nations of the world never to be contested through all
posterity.

If the history of New Orleans showed the security of your national
existence, the victorious war against Mexico proved that also your
national interests must be respected. The period of active vitality is
attained. It remains yet to take your seat, not amongst the
_nations_ of the earth, for _that_ you have since the day of
New Orleans, but amongst the _powers_ on earth. What is the meaning
of that word "power on earth?" The meaning of it is, to have not only
the power to guard your own particular interests, but also to have a
vote in the regulation of the common interests of humanity, of which you
are an independent member--in a word, to become a tribunal enforcing the
law of nations, precisely as your supreme court maintains your own
constitution and laws. And, indeed, all argument of statesmanship, all
philosophy of history, would be vain, if I were mistaken that your great
nation is arrived at this unavoidable period of life.

The instinct of the people is in the life of a nation precisely that
which conscience is in the life of man. Before we, in our private life,
arrive at a clear conviction what course we have to adopt in this or
that occurrence, the conscience--that inexplicable spirit in our
breast--tells us in a pulsation of our heart what is right or what is
wrong. And this first pulsation of conscience is very trustworthy. Then
comes the reflective operation of the mind: it now and then lulls
conscience to sleep, now and then modifies particulars, and now and then
raises it to the degree of conviction. But conscience was in advance of
the mind. So is the instinct of the people--the conscience of nations.
Nor needs the highest intellectual power of individuality to feel
offended at the idea that the instinct of the people is always the first
to feel the right and wrong. It is the pulsation of the heart of the
nation; it is the advertisement of conscience, which never heaves
without reason, without necessity.

Indeed, gentlemen, it is not my presence here which elicited that
majestic interest for national law and international rights. Nay, I had
not been here, but for the pre-existence of this interest. It raised
glorious interpreters during the struggles of Greece, when, indeed, I
was yet too young to be in public life. It flashed up, kindled by
Poland's heroic struggles, and it blazed high and broad when we were
fighting the sacred battle of independence for the European continent.
Had this interest and sympathy not existed long ago, I were not now
here. My very freedom is the result of it.

And may I be permitted to mention that there were several concerns quite
unconnected with the cause of Hungary, which have much contributed to
direct public opinion to feel interested in the question of foreign
policy, so naturally connected with the question, What is international
law?

Your relations with Mexico and Central America; the threatened
intervention of European powers in the possible issue of a recent case
which brought so much mourning into many families in the United States;
the question about the Sandwich Islands, which European diplomacy
appeared to contemplate as an appropriate barrier between your Pacific
States and the Indian and Chinese trade; the sad fate of an American
citizen now condemned to the galleys in Africa; and several other
considerations of pressing concern, must necessarily have contributed to
excite the interest of public opinion for the settlement of the
question, What is and what shall be law amongst nations?--law not
dictated by the whims of ambitious despots, but founded upon everlasting
principles, such as republics can acknowledge who themselves live upon
principles.

The cause of Hungary is implicated with the very questions of right, in
which your country in so many respects is concerned. It happens to lie
so broad across the principles of international law, as to occupy not
only the instinct of the people but also the calm reflection of your
statesmen, conspicuous by mature wisdom and patriotism; and herein is
the key, besides the generosity congenial to freemen, why the cause
which I plead is honoured with so rapid a progress in public sentiment.

And let me entreat your permission for one topic more. I received,
during my brief stay in England, some one hundred and thirty addresses
from cities and associations, all full of the same warm sympathy for my
country's cause, which you also have so generously testified. That
sympathy was accorded to me, notwithstanding my frank declaration that I
am a republican, and that my country, when restored to independence, can
be nothing but a republic. Now this is a fact gratifying to every friend
of progress in public sentiment, highly proving that the people are
everywhere honourable, just, noble, and good. And do you know,
gentlemen, which of these numerous addresses were the most glorious to
the people of England and the most gratifying to me? It was one in which
I heard your Washington praised, and sorrow avowed that England had
opposed that glorious cause upon which is founded the noble fame of that
great man; and the addresses--(numerous they were indeed)--in which the
hope and resolution were expressed, that England and the United States,
forgetting the sorrows of the past will in brotherly love go hand in
hand to support the eternal principles of international law and freedom
on earth.

Yes indeed, sir, you were right to say that the justice of your
struggle, which took out of England's hand a mighty continent, is openly
acknowledged even by the English people itself. The memory of the day of
New Orleans must of course recall to your mind the wrongs against which
you so gloriously fought. Oh, let me entreat you, bury the hatred of
past ages in the grave where all the crimes of the past lie mouldering
with the ashes of those who sinned, and take the glorious opportunity to
benefit the great cause of humanity.

One thing let me tell you, gentlemen. _People_ and
_Governments_ are different things in such a country as Great
Britain is. It is sorrowful enough that the people have often to pay for
what the government sinned. Let it not be said in history, that even the
people of the United States made a kindred people pay for the sins of
its government. And remember that you can mightily react upon the public
opinion of Britain, and that the people of Britain can react upon the
course of its own government. It were indeed a great misfortune to see
the government of Great Britain pushed by irritation to side with the
absolutist powers against the oppressed nations about to struggle for
independence and liberty. Even Ireland could only lose by this. And
besides its own loss, this might perhaps be just the decisive blow
against liberty; whereas if the government of England, otherwise
remaining as it is, do but unite with you not to allow foreign
interference with our struggles on the continent this would become
almost a sure guarantee of the victory of those struggles; and,
according as circumstances stand, that would be indeed the most
practical benefit to the noble people of Ireland also, because freedom,
independence, and the principles of natural law could not fail to
benefit their cause, which so well merits the sympathy of every just man
and they have also the sympathy--I know it--of the better half of
England itself.

Hatred is no good counsellor, gentlemen. The wisdom of love is a better
one. What people has suffered more than my poor Hungary has from Russia?
Shall I hate the people of Russia for it? Oh never! I have but pity and
Christian brotherly love for it. It is the government, it is the
principle of the government, which makes every drop of my blood boil and
which must fall, if humanity is to live. We were for centuries in war
against the Turks, and God knows what we have suffered by it! But past
is past. Now we have a common enemy, and thus we have a common interest,
a mutual esteem, and love rules where our fathers have fought.

Gentlemen, how far this supreme duty toward your own interest will allow
you to go in giving life and effect to the principle which you so
generously proclaim, and which your party (as I have understood) have
generously proclaimed in different parts--_that_ you will in your
wisdom decide, remaining always the masters of your action and of your
fate. But that principle will rest; that principle is true; that
principle is just; and you are just, because you are free. I hope
therefore to see you cordially unite with me once more in the
sentiment--"Intervention for non-intervention."

       *       *       *       *       *

XIX.--MEANING OF RECOGNIZING.

[_Last Speech at Washington_.]

In returning thanks to all the citizens here assembled, and to yourself,
sir, in particular,[*] I beg to add some remarks. That I have not here
been honoured with the same demonstrations of local cordiality as in
other places, I do not, with you, attribute to diplomatic influences. I
know well the skill of Russian diplomacy, which indeed at Moldovarica
instructs all its representatives to marry Moldovarican ladies. But I
also know that the framers of your Constitution wisely discouraged the
development of municipal life in the district of Columbia, lest local
influences and pressure from without on the seat of the central
legislature might unduly sway the national councils. Just so, we have
often known a single street in Paris coerce the deliberations of the
nation. Columbia having, as I understand, by an exceptional arrangement,
no true local self-government, is deficient in local movement.
Nevertheless, I have received _private_ expression of sentiment and
of generous kind sympathy from various parts of this district, and
chiefly from the city of Washington.

[Footnote *: Chancellor Walworth of New York.]

In respect to the declaration which you make as to nonintervention, I
have only to thank you, and to express my earnest hope that all those in
whose name you speak, will proceed to give effect to their principle in
public life.

The second right of nations,--that of mutual commerce--still more
closely touches your domestic interests, regard it as a clear national
right of your citizens to hold commerce with the thirty-five millions of
men oppressed by Austria, if those thirty-five millions desire it,
though to Emperor of Austria, having occupied an immoral position refuse
it to you: and if the people of Hungary, Bohemia, and Italy take arms to
punish his atrocities, that is no good reason why your citizens should
submit to abstain from commerce with these injured nations.

In regard to my third desire, to see the _legitimacy_ of our
declaration of Independence acknowledged by Congress that did not mean
that I (a poor exile!) am _de facto_ Governor of Hungary! You
little conceive how valuable to us it would have been, if your Envoy,
who came to inquire and report, during our struggle, had been authorized
to recognize the legitimacy of our cause and of our proceeding. And even
now, the moral effect would be great; for such an act cannot stand
alone, it points to your future policy towards every other nation.
Moreover, it would enlarge the lawful field of action for private
sympathy, and would enable me to accept many things which I cannot now;
I do not mean titles,--which I value not. I care only for my country's
dignity; but it appertains to its dignity that its solemnly expressed
Will be recognized by your government.

Legislatures of your States (with warm gratitude I acknowledge) have
declared these principles: cities and associations have received them;
so have many eminent persons. But if you wish foreign powers to know
that it is not Mr. A. or Mr. B. but the nation itself which pronounces
them, I venture to suggest that it may be convenient in your various
associations of every kind to make separate declarations to this effect,
as by contributions of money ever so small; and this will really be
_national_ aid. If the United States carry out this determination
with their characteristic energy it will be effectual.

       *       *       *       *       *

XX.--CONTRAST OF THE AMERICAN TO THE HUNGARIAN CRISIS.

[_Speech before the Senate at Annapolis, Jan. 13_.]

Kossuth, having arrived at Annapolis, capital of Maryland, was
entertained in the Government House by Governor Lowe, and was next day
introduced to the Senate, who welcomed him with a cordial address. He
responded as follows:--

Mr. President: In the changes of my stormy life, many occasions,
connected with associations of historical interest, have impressed a
deep emotion upon my mind: but perhaps never yet has the memory of the
past made such a glowing impression upon me as here.

I bow reverentially, Senators of Maryland, in this glorious hall, the
sanctuary of immortal deeds, hallowed by immortal names.

Before I thank the living, let me look to those dead whose spirits dwell
within these walls [looking at the portraits that hung upon the walls],
living an imperishable life in the glory, freedom, and happiness of your
great United Republic, which is destined, as I confidently hope, to
become the corner-stone of the future of Humanity.

Yes, there they are, the glorious architects of the independence of this
Republic.

There is _Thomas Stone_; there, your Demosthenes, _Samuel
Chase_; there, _Charles Carroll, of Carrollton_, who designedly
added that epithet to the significance of his name, that nobody should
be mistaken about who was the _Carroll_ who dared the noble deed,
and was rewarded by being the last of his illustrious companions, whom
God called to the Heavenly Paradise, after he had long enjoyed the
paradise of freedom on earth; and here, _William Paca_;--all of
them signers of the Declaration of American Independence--that noblest,
happiest page in mankind's history.

How happy that man must have been [pointing to the portrait of Governor
Paca] having to govern this sovereign State on that day when, within
these very halls the act was ratified which, by the recognition of your
very enemy, raised your country to an independent nation.

Ye spirits of the departed! cast a ray of consolation by the voice of
your nation over that injured land, whose elected chief, a wandering
exile for having dared to imitate you, lays the trembling hopes of an
oppressed continent before the generous heart of your people--now not
only an independent nation but also a mighty and glorious power.

Alas! what a difference in the success of two like deeds!  Have we not
done what ye did? Yes, we have. Was the cause for which we did it not
alike sacred and just as yours?  It was. Or have we not fought to
sustain it with equal resolution as your brethren did? Bold though it be
to claim a glory such as America has, I am bold to claim, and say--yes,
we did. And yet what a difference in the result! And whence this
difference? Only out of that single circumstance that, while you, in
your struggle, meet with _assistance_, we in ours met not even with
_"fair play:"_ since, when we fought, there was nobody on earth to
maintain "the laws of nature's God."

During our struggle, America was silent and England did not stir; and
while you were assisted by a French King, we were forsaken by a French
Republic--itself now trodden down because it has forsaken us?

Well, we are not broken yet. There is hope for us, because there is a
God in heaven and an America on earth. May be that our nameless woes
were necessary, that the glorious destiny of America may be fulfilled;
that after it had been an asylum for the oppressed, it should become, by
regenerating Europe, the pillar of manhood's liberty.

Oh! it is not a mere capricious change of fate, that the exiled governor
of the land whose name, four years ago, was scarcely known on your
glorious shores, and which now (oh, let me have the blessings of this
belief!) is dear to the generous heart of America. It is not a mere
chance that Hungary's exiled chief thanks the Senators of Maryland for
the high honour of public welcome in that very Hall where the first
Continental Congress met; where your great Republic's glorious
constitution was framed; where the treaty of acknowledged independence
was ratified, and where you, Senators, guard with steady hand the rights
of your sovereign States which is now united to thirty others, not to
make you less free, but to make you more mighty--to make you a power on
earth.

I believe there is the hand of God in history. You assigned a place in
this hall of freedom to the memory of Chatham, for having been just to
America, by opposing the stamp act, which awoke your nation to
resistance.

Now, the people of England think as once Pitt the elder thought, and
honours with deep reverence the memory of your Washington.

But suppose the England of Lord Chatham's time had thought as Chatham
did: and his burning words had moved the English aristocracy to be just
towards the colonies: those our men there [turning to the portraits] had
not signed your country's independence. Washington were perhaps a name
"unknown, unhonoured, and unsung," and this proud constellation of your
glorious stars had perhaps not yet risen on mankind's sky--instead of
being now about to become the sun of Freedom. It is thus Providence
acts.

Let me hope, sir, that Hungary's unmerited fate was necessary, in order
that your stars should become such a sun.

Sirs, I stand, perhaps, upon the very spot where your Washington stood,
consummating the greatest act of his life. The walls which now listen
to my humble words, listened to the words of his republican virtue,
immortal by their very modesty. Let me, upon this sacred spot, express
my confident belief that if he stood here now, he would tell you that
his prophecy is fulfilled; that you are mighty enough "to defy any power
on earth in a just cause," and he would tell you that there never was
and never will be a cause more just than the cause of Hungary, being, as
it is, the cause of oppressed humanity.

Sir, I thank the Senate of Maryland, in my country's name for the honour
of your generous welcome. I entreat the Senate kindly to remember my
prostrate fatherland. Sir, I bid you farewell, feeling heart and soul
purified, and my resolution strengthened, by the very air of this
ancient city of Providence.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXI.--THANKS FOR HIS GREAT SUCCESS.

[_Speech at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on his Reception in the Capitol.
Jan. 14th_.]

On Jan. 14th Kossuth was received in Harrisburg, capital of
Pennsylvania, in the Capitol. Governor Johnston in the name of the
State, addressed to him a copious and energetic speech, in the course of
which he said:--

We have declared the law, that man is capable of self government, and
possesses the inherent and indestructible right of altering, amending,
and changing his form of government at his pleasure, and in furtherance
of his happiness. We have sworn hostility against every form of tyranny
over the mind of man. These truths we have made a part of the laws of
nations. Despots combine and interfere by force and fraud, to prevent
the erection of republican institutions by a nation struggling
successfully against its local usurping oppressor, for independence.
Fidelity to our principles and institutions demands that we PREVENT such
interference by solemnly proclaiming that the laws of nations and
humanity SHALL BE PRESERVED inviolate and sacred. In the performance of
this duty the faint-hearted may falter; the domestic despot and cold
diplomatist may linger behind; the man of world-extended and fearful
traffic may hesitate; but the warm and great heart of the American
masses will feel no moment of hesitation and doubt in defence of truth.
The great Author of nations will find the means to carry out His wise
designs. How glorious our destiny, if to us is given the solemn charge
of carrying into effect the beneficent purpose of Heaven in the
establishment upon earth of universal liberty, universal education,
universal happiness, and peace.

When Governor Johnston had concluded with a very cordial welcome,
Kossuth replied as follows:--

Senators and representatives of Pennsylvania.--I came with confidence, I
came with hope to the United States--with the confidence of a man who
trusts to the certainty of principles, knowing that where freedom is
sown, there generosity grows--with the hope of a man who knows that
there is life in his cause, and that where there is life there must be a
future yet. Still hope is only an instinctive throb with which Nature's
motherly care comforts adversity. We often hope without knowing why, and
like a lonely wanderer on a stormy night, direct our weary steps towards
the first glimmering window light, uncertain whether we are about to
knock at the door of a philanthropist or of a heartless egotist. But
the hope and confidence with which I came to the United States was not
such. There was a knowledge of fact in it. I did not know what
_persons_ it might be my fate to meet, but I knew that meet I
should with two living _principles_--with that of FREEDOM and that
of NATIONAL HOSPITALITY.

Both are political principles here. Freedom is expansive like the light:
it loves to spread itself: and hospitality here in this happy land, is
raised out of the narrow circle of private virtue into political wisdom.
As you, gentlemen, are the representatives of your people, so the people
of the United States at large are representative of European humanity--a
congregation of nations assembled in the hospitable Hall of American
liberty. Your people is linked to Europe, not only by the common tie of
manhood--not only by the communicative spirit of liberty--not only by
the commercial intercourse, but by the sacred ties of blood. The people
of the United States is Europe transplanted to America. And it is not
Hungary's woes alone--it is the cause of all Europe which I am come to
plead. Where was ever a son, who in his own happy days could
indifferently look at the sufferings of his mother, whose heart's blood
is running in his very veins? And Europe is the mother of the United
States.

I hope to God, that the people of this glorious land is and will ever
be, fervently attached to this their free, great and happy home. I hope
to God that whatever tongue they speak, they are and will ever be
American, and nothing but American. And so they must be, if they will be
free--if they desire for their adopted home greatness and perpetuity.
Should once the citizens of the United States cease to be Americans, and
become again English, Irish, German, Spanish, Italian, Danish, Swedish,
French--America would soon cease to be what it is now--freedom elevated
to the proud position of a power on earth.

But while I hope that all the people of the United States will never
become anything but Americans; and that even its youngest adopted sons,
though fresh with sweet home recollections, will know here no South, no
North, no East and no West--nothing but the whole country, the common
nationality of freedom--in a word, America; still I also know that blood
is blood--that the heart of the son must beat at the contemplation of
his mother's sufferings. These were the motives of my confident hope.
And here in this place I have the happy right to say, God the Almighty
is with me; my hopes are about to be realized. Sir, it is a gratifying
view to see how the generous sympathy of individuals for the cause which
I respectfully plead is rising into Public Opinion. But nowhere had I
the happy lot to see this more clearly expressed than in this great
commonwealth of Pennsylvania, the mighty "_keystone_ State" of the
Union. The people of Harrisburg spoke first: no city before had so
distinctly articulated the public sympathy into acknowledged principles.
It has framed the sympathy of generous instinct into a political shape.
I will for ever remember it with fervent gratitude. Then came the
Metropolis--a hope and a consolation by its very name to the
oppressed--the sanctuary of American Independence, where the very bells
speak prophecy--which is now sheltering more inhabitants than all
Pennsylvania did, when, seventy-five years ago, the prophetic bell of
Independence Hall announced to the world that free America was born;
which now, with the voice of thunder, will, I hope, tell the world that
the doubtful life of that child has unfolded itself into a mighty power
on earth. Yes, after Harrisburg, the metropolis spoke, a flourishing
example of freedom's self-developing energy; and after the metropolis,
now so mighty a centre of nations, and it ally of international
law--next came Pittsburg, the immense manufacturing workshop, alike
memorable for its moral power and its natural advantages, which made it
a link with the great valley of the West, a cradle of a new world, which
is linked in its turn to the old world by boundless agricultural
interests. And after the people of Pennsylvania have thus spoken, here
now I stand in the temple of this people's sovereignty, with joyful
gratitude acknowledging the inestimable benefits of this public
reception, where--with the elected of Pennsylvania, entrusted with the
Legislative and Executive power of the sovereign people, gather into one
garland the public opinion, and with the authority of their high
position, announce loudly to the world the principles, the resolution,
and the will of the two millions of this great Commonwealth. Sir, the
words your Excellency has honoured me with will have their weight
throughout the world. The jeering smile of the despots, which
accompanied my wandering, will be changed, at the report of these
proceedings, to a frown which may yet cast fresh mourning over families,
as it has cast over mine; nevertheless the afflicted will wait to be
consoled by the dawn of public happiness. From the words which your
Excellency spoke, the nations will feel double resolution to shake off
the yoke of despotism.

[Footnote: Philadelphia (_brotherly love_) is evidently intended.
"Metropolis" strictly means mother city, not chief city.]

The proceedings of to-day will, moreover, have their weight in the
development of public opinion in other States of your united Republic.
Governor! I plead no dead cause, Europe is no corpse: it has a future
yet, because it wills. Sir, from the window of your room, which your
hospitality has opened to me, I saw suspended a musket and a powder
horn, and this motto--"Material Aid." And I believe that the Speaker of
the House of Representatives of Pennsylvania is seated in that chair
whence the Declaration of American Independence was signed. The first is
what Europe wants in order to have the success of the second. Permit me
to take this for a happy augury; and allow me with the plain words of an
earnest mind, to give you the assurance of my country's warm,
everlasting gratitude, in which, upon the basis of our restored
independence, a wide field will be opened to mutual benefit, by friendly
commercial intercourse ennobled by the consciousness of imparted benefit
on your side, and by the pleasant duty of gratitude on the side of
Hungary, which so well deserves your generous sympathy.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXII.--ON THE PRESENT WEAKNESS OF DESPOTISM.
[_Speech at the Harrisburg Banquet_.]

About three hundred persons sat down to dinner, a large portion of them
members of the legislature. Governor Johnston presided, assisted by
Ex-Senator Cameron. A toast complimentary to Governor Johnston having
been drunk with great enthusiasm, the Governor briefly responded. After
returning his thanks for the compliment, he alluded to the mission of
Kossuth. The great Magyar came here not for _sympathy_ alone, but
for _aid_ for the cause of republican freedom. He not only wanted
that, but encouragement of our government in aid of the cause of
down-trodden Hungary. No profession, but action was wanted; and he
exhorted his hearers never to cease acting, until the government took
the high ground necessary to secure to Hungary the simple justice she
demanded. In conclusion he gave the third toast:

"Hungary--Betrayed but not subdued; her constitution violated, her
people in chains, her chief in exile. The star of freedom will yet shine
through the dark night of her adversity."

Kossuth, in response, opened by lamenting that the perpetual claims upon
his time, and the pressure of sorrowful feelings on his heart, made it
impossible for him to study how to address them suitably. He proceeded
to say:

But to what purpose is eloquence here? Have you not anticipated my
wishes? Have you not sanctioned my principles?  Are you not going on to
action, as generous men do, who are conscious of their power and of
their aim? Well, to what purpose, then, is eloquence here? I have only
to thank--and that is more eloquently told by a warm grasp of the hand
than by all the skilful arrangement of words.

I beg therefore your indulgence for laying before you some mere facts,
which perhaps may contribute to strengthen your conviction that the
people of the United States, in bestowing its sympathy upon my cause,
does not support a dead cause, but one which has a life, and whose
success is rationally sure.

Let me before all cast a glance at the enemy. And let those imposed upon
by the attitude of despotism in 1852, consider how much stronger it was
in 1847-8. France was lolled by Louis Philippe's politics, of "peace at
any price," into apathy. Men believed in the solidity of his government.
No heart-revolting cruelty stirred the public mind. No general
indignation from offended national self-esteem prevailed. The stability
of the public credit encouraged the circulation of capital, and by that
circulation large masses of industrious poor found, if not contentment,
at least daily bread. The King was taken for a prudent man; and the
private morality of his family cast a sort of halo around his house. The
spirit of revolution was reduced to play the meagre game of secret
associations; not seconded by any movement of universal interest--the
spirit of radical innovation was restrained into scientific polemic,
read by few and understood by fewer. There was a faith in the patriotic
authority of certain men, whose reputation was that of being liberal.
One part of the nation lived on from day to day without any stirring
passion, in entire passiveness; the other believed in gradual
improvement and progress, because it had confidence in the watchful care
of partizan leaders. The combat of Parliamentary eloquence was
considered to be a storm in a glass of water, and the highest aspiration
of parties was to oust the ministry and take their place. And yet the
prohibition of a public banquet blew asunder the whole complex like mere
chaff.

Germany was tranquil, because the honest pretensions of the ambition of
her statesmen were satisfied by the open lists of parliamentary
eloquence. The public life of the nation had gained a field for itself
in Legislative debates--a benefit not enjoyed for centuries. The
professors being transferred to the legislative floor, and the college
to the parliament, the nation was gratified by improvements in the laws,
and by the oratory of her renowned men, who never failed to flatter the
national vanity. It believed itself to be really in full speed of
greatness, and listened contented and quiet--like an intelligent
audience to an interesting lecture--even in respect to the unity of
great Germany. The custom-association (Zollverein) became an idol of
satisfied national vanity, and of cheerful hopes; science and art were
growing fast; speculative researches of political economy met an open
field in social life; men conscious of higher aims wandered afar into
new homes, despairing to find a field of action in their native land.
Material improvement was the ruling word, and the lofty spirit of
freedom was blighted by the contact of small interests.

And yet a prohibited banquet at Paris shook the very foundation of this
artificial tranquillity, and the princely thrones of Germany trembled
before the rising spirit of freedom, though it was groping in darkness,
because unconscious of its aim.

Italy--fair, unfortunate Italy--looking into the mirror of its ancient
glory, heaved with gloomy grief; but the sky of the heaven was as clear
and blue above, as it ever was since creation's dawn: and it sung like
the bird in a cage placed upon a bough of the blooming orange tree. And
then Pius IX, placing himself at the head of Italian regeneration,
became popular as no man in Rome since Rienzi's time, In 1848 men heard
with surprise, on the coast of the Adriatic, my name coupled in
_vivas_ with the name of Pius IX. But the sarcasm of Madame De
Stael--that in Italy men became women--was still believed true; so that
too many of the Italians themselves despaired of conquering Austria
without Charles Albert.

Austria had not for centuries, and Prussia never yet has, experienced
what sort of a thing a revolution is, and the falling of the vault of
the sky would have been considered less improbable than a popular
revolution in Berlin or Vienna, where Metternich ruled in triumphant
proud security.

The house of Austria was considered as a mighty power on earth;
respected, because thought necessary to Europe against the preponderance
of Russia. No people under the dominion of this dynasty, had a national
army, and all were divided by absurd rivalries of language, kept up by
Metternich's Machiavelism. The nations were divided; none of them was
conscious of its strength, but all were aware of the united strength of
a disciplined and large imperial army, the regiments of which had never
yet fought one against another, and never yet had broken the spell of
the black and yellow flag by tearing it to pieces with their own hands.

And yet, when Paris stirred and I made a mere speech in the Hungarian
Parliament, the house of Austria was presently at the mercy of the
people of Vienna; Metternich was driven away, and his absolutism
replaced by a promise of constitutional life.

In Gallicia the odium connected with the despotic Austrian rule had, by
satanic craft, been thrown upon those classes which represent the
ancient Polish nationality; and the well-deserved hatred of aristocratic
oppression, though living only in traditional remembrances, had
prevailed in the sentiments of the common people over the hatred against
Austria, though despotic and a stranger; so much so, that, to triumph
over the ill-advised, untimely movement of 1846, Austria had nothing to
do but open the field to murder, by granting a two dollars' reward for
every head of a Polish land proprietor.

And in Hungary the people of every race was equally excluded from all
political right--from any share of constitutional life. The endeavours
of myself and my friends for internal improvements--for emancipation of
the peasantry--for the people's restoration to its natural rights in
civil, political, social, and religious respects, were cramped by the
Hapsburg policy. But the odium of this cramping was thrown by Austria
upon our own conservative party: and thus our national force was divided
into antagonistic elements.

Besides, the idea of Panslavism and of national rivalries, raised by
Russia and fostered by Austria, diverted the excitement of the public
mind from the development of common political freedom. And Hungary had
no _national_ army. Its regiments were filled with foreign elements
and scattered over foreign countries, while our own country was guarded
with well-disciplined foreign troops. And what was far worse than all
this, Hungary, by long illegalities corrupted in its own character,
deprived of its ancient heroic stamp, germanized in its saloons, sapped
in its cottages and huts, impressed with the unavoidable _fatality_
of Austrian sovereignty, and the knowledge of Austrian power, secluded
from the attention of the world, which was scarcely aware of its
existence,--Hungary had no hope in its national future, because it had
no consciousness of its strength, and was highly monarchical in its
inclinations, and generous in its allegiance to the King. No man
dreamed of the possibility of a revolution there, and he who would have
suggested it would only have gained the reputation of a madman.

Such was the condition of Europe in the first half of February, 1848.
Never yet seemed the power of despots more steady, more sure. Yet, one
month later, every throne on the continent trembled except the Czar's.
The existence of dynasties depended upon the magnanimity of their
people, and Europe was all on fire.

And in what condition is Europe now? Every man on earth is aware that
things cannot endure as they are. _Formerly millions believed that a
peaceful development of constitutional monarchy was the only future
reserved for Europe. Now nobody on the European continent any longer
believes that constitutional monarchy can have a future there._
Absolutist reaction goes with all that arrogance which revolts every
sentiment, and infuriates the very child in its mother's arms. The
promise, the word, the oath of a king are become equivalent to a lie and
to perjury. Faith in the morality of kings is plucked out, even to the
last root, from the people's heart.

The experiment of constitutional concessions was thought dangerous to
the dynasties, as soon as they became aware that the people of Europe is
no imbecile child, that can be lulled to sleep by mockery; but that it
will have reality. Thus the kings on the greater part of the continent,
throwing away the mask of liberal affectations, deceived every
expectation, broke every oath, and embarked with a full gale upon the
open sea of unrestricted despotism. They know that Love they can no
longer get; so we have been told openly, that _they will not have_
LOVE, _but_ MONEY, to maintain large armies, and keep the world in
servitude. On the other hand, the nations, assailed in their moral
dignity and material welfare, degraded into a flock of sheep kept only
to be shorn--equally with the kings detest the mockery of constitutional
royalty which has proved so ruinous to them.

Royalty has lost its sacredness in France, Germany, Italy, Austria, and
Hungary. Both parties equally recognize that the time has come when the
struggle of principles must be decided. Absolutism or republicanism--the
Czar or the principles of America--there is no more compromise, no more
truce possible. The two antagonist principles must meet upon the narrow
bridge of a knife-edge, cast across the deep gulf which is ready to
swallow him who falls. It is a struggle for life and death.

That is the condition of the European continent in general. A great,
terrible, bloody uprising is unavoidable. That is known and felt by
every one. And every sound man knows equally well that the temporary
success of Louis Napoleon's usurpation has only made the terrible crisis
more unavoidable. Ye men of "peace at any price," do not shut your eyes
wilfully to the finger of God pointing to the _mene, tekel,
upharsin_ written with gigantic letters upon the sky of Europe.
Despots never yield to justice; mankind, inspired with the love of
freedom, will not yield up its manhood tamely. Peace is impossible.

Gentlemen, the success of my mission here may ensure the victory of
freedom; may prevent torrents of martyrs' blood; may weaken the
earthquake of impending war; and restore a solid peace. But be sure, the
certainty of the European struggle does not depend upon your generous
support; nor would my failure here even <DW44> the outbreak of the
hurricane.

Should we, not meeting here with that support, which your glorious
Republic in its public capacity and your generous citizens in their
private capacity can afford without jeopardizing your own welfare and
your own interest (and assuredly it never came into my mind to desire
more)--should we, meeting with no support here, be crushed again, and
absolutism consolidate its power upon the ruins of murdered nations, I
indeed cannot but believe that it would become a historical reproach of
conscience, lying like an incubus upon the breast of the people of the
United States from generation to generation. I mean, the idea, that had
you not withheld that support which you might have afforded consistently
with your own interest, Hungary perhaps would be a free, flourishing
country, instead of being blotted out from the map; and Europe perhaps
free, and absolutist tyranny swept from the earth.

You then would in vain shed a tear of compassion over our sad fate, and
mourn over the grave of nations: nor only so; but the victory of
absolutism could not fail to be felt even here in your mighty and
blessed home. You would first feel it in your commercial intercourse,
and ere long you would become inevitably entangled; for as soon as the
Czar had secured the submission of all Europe, he would not look
indifferently upon the development of your power, which is an embodiment
of republican principles.

I am not _afraid_ to answer the question, as to what are our means
and chances of success--but prudence commands me to be discreet. Still,
some considerations I may suggest.

The spell of Austria is broken. It is now notorious that the might of
the dynasty, though disciplined, well provided, and supported by deluded
races, which had been roused to the fury of extermination against us--it
is now notorious that all this satanically combined power proved unable
to withstand the force of Hungary, though we were surprized and
unprepared, and had no army and no arms, no ammunition, no money, no
friends, and were secluded and forsaken by the whole world. It was
proved that Austria could not conquer us Magyars, when we were taken
unaware; who can believe that we could not match her now that we are
aware and predetermined?  Yes, if unprepared in material resources, we
are yet prepared in self-consciousness and mutual trust; we have learned
by experience what is required for our success.

In former times Hungary was the strength of Austria. Now, Austria is
weak, _because_ it has occupied Hungary. It was strong by the unity
of its army, the power of which was founded upon the confidence in this
unity. That confidence is broken, since one part of that army raised the
tri-colour flag, and cast to the dust the double-headed eagle, the black
and yellow flag, which was the emblem of the army's unity.

Formerly the Austrian army believed that it was strong enough to uphold
the throne; now it knows that it is nothing by itself, and rests only
upon the support of the Czar. That spirit-depressing sentiment is so
diffused among the troops, that, only take the reliance upon Russia
away, or make it doubtful whether Russia will interfere or not, and the
Austrian army will disperse and fall asunder almost without any fight;
because it knows that it has its most dangerous enemies within its own
ranks; and is so far from having any cement, that no man, himself
attached to that perjured dynasty, can trust the man beside him in the
ranks, but watches every movement of his arm. In such an army there is
no hope for tyrants.

The old soldiers feel humiliated by the issue of our struggle. They are
offended by having no share in the reward thrown away on despised court
favourites. The old Croat regiments feel outraged in their national
honour by being deceived in their national expectations. The recruits
brought with them recollections of their bombarded cities and of the
oppression of their families; and in that army are 140,000 Hungarians
who fought under our tri- flag against Austria, and whose
burning feelings of national wrong are inspired by the glorious memory
of their victories.

Oh, had we had in 1848 such an army of disciplined soldiers as Austria
itself keeps now for us, never had one Cossack trod the soil of Hungary,
and Europe would now be free. Or, let Austria dismiss them, and they
will be disciplined soldiers at home. The trumpet of national
resurrection will reach them wherever they are.

Hungary has the conviction of her strength. _The formerly hostile
races, all oppressed like us, now feel themselves to have been deceived,
and unite with us._ We have no opposite party in the nation. Some
there are, ambitious men, or some incorrigible aristocrats perhaps: but
these are no party; they always turn towards the sun, and they melt away
like snow in March.

And besides Hungary, the people in Austria too, in Italy, in Prussia, in
all Germany, is conscious of its strength. Every large city on the
continent has been in the power of the people, and has had to be
regained by bombardings and by martial law. Italy has redeemed its
heroic character, at Milan, Venice, Brescia, and Rome--all of them
immortal pages in Italian history, glorious sources of inspiration,
heroism, and self-conscious strength. And now they know their aim, and
are united in their aim, and burn to show to the world that the spirit
of ancient Rome again rises in them.

And then to take into consideration the financial part. Without money
there is no war. Now, the nations, when once engaged in the war, will
find means enough for home-support of the war in the rich resources of
their own land; whereas the despots lose the disposal of those resources
by the outbreak of insurrection, and are reduced entirely to foreign
loans, which no emperor of Austria will find again in any new
revolution.

And, mark well, gentlemen, every friendly step by which your great
republic and its generous people testifies its lively interest for our
just cause, adding to the prospects of success, diminishes the credit of
the despots, and by embarrassing their attempts to find loans, may be of
decisive weight in the issue.

Though absolutism was much more favourably situated in 1847 than in
1851, it was overtaken by the events of 1848, when, but for the want of
unity and concert, the liberal party must have triumphed everywhere.
That unity and concert is now attained; why should not absolutism in
1852 be as easily shaken as in 1848!

The liberal cause is stronger everywhere, because conscious of its aim
and prepared. Absolutism has no more bayonets now than in 1848. Without
the interference of Russia our success is not only probable, but is
almost sure.

And as to Russia--remember, that if at such a crisis she thinks of
subduing Hungary, she has Poland to occupy, Finland to guard, Turkey to
watch, and Circassia to fight.

Herein is the reason why I confidently state, that if the United States
declare that a new intervention of Russia will be considered by your
glorious republic a violation of the law of nations, that declaration
will be respected, and Russia will not interfere.

Be pleased to consider the consequence of such renewed interference,
after the passive acceptance of the first has proved so fatal to Europe,
and so dangerous even to England itself. We can scarcely doubt, that, if
ever Russia plans a new invasion, England could not forbear to encourage
Turkey, not to lose again the favourable opportunity to shake off the
preponderance of Russia. I have lived in Turkey. I know what enthusiasm
exists there for that idea, and how popular such a war would be. Turkey
is a match for Russia on the continent. The weak point of Turkey lies in
the nearness of Sevastopol, the Russian harbour and arsenal, to
Constantinople. Well, an English fleet, or an American fleet, or both
joined, stationed at the mouth of the Bosphorus, may easily prevent this
danger without one cannon's shot; and if this be prevented, Turkey alone
is a match for Russia. And Turkey would not stand alone. The brave
Circassians, triumphant through a war of ten years, would send down
80,000 of their unconquerable horsemen to the plains of Moscow. And
Poland would rise, and Sweden would remember Finland and Charles the
XII. With Hungary in the rear, screened by this very circumstance from
her invasion, and Austria fallen to pieces from want of foreign support,
Russia _must_ respect your protest in behalf of international law,
or else she will fall never to rise again.

Gentlemen, I thank you for the patience with which you have listened to
this exposition--long and tedious, because I had no time to be brief.
And begging leave to assure you of my lasting gratitude for all the
generous favours you have been and will yet be pleased to bestow upon my
cause, let me proclaim my fervent wishes in this sentiment:

"Pennsylvania, the Keystone State--May it, by its legitimate influence
upon the destinies of this mighty power on earth, and by the substantial
generosity of its citizens, soon become the keystone of European
independence."

Hon. J. H. Walker, Speaker of the Senate, and several other speakers
followed, all decidedly sympathizing with the Hungarians, and advocating
intervention for non-intervention.

The speaking continued until after midnight.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXIII.--AGENCIES OF RUSSIAN ASCENDANCY AND SUPREMACY.

[_Pittsburg Festival, Jan. 26th_.]

Kossuth was received in the Masonic Hall, which was filled to
overflowing. After an eloquent address to him from the Chairman, A. W.
Loomis, Esq., he replied:

Sir, The highly interesting instruction which your kindness has afforded
me about that new and wonderful world of the West, in the entrance of
which I now stand, impresses me with a presentiment of unlooked for
events.

Since I have been in the United States, I have felt as if my guardian
angel whispered, that in _the West_ the hopes of my bleeding
country will be realized. It was an unconscious instinct,--a ray
shooting above the horizon from the yet unseen sun. You, sir, have shown
me the sun itself in full majesty. You have transformed my instinct into
conviction. Here then, upon the threshold of the West, I bow with awe
and joy, as the fireworshipper of old Persia to the source of life and
light.

It is indeed joyful, sir, as you said, to see politicians, sectarians,
philanthropists of all classes uniting in spontaneous sympathy for a
cause pleaded by a stranger. I recognize in it the bounty of Providence.
I see the truth revealed, that as magnetism pervades the universe, so
there is a sentiment, which, independent of party affections and
bubbling passion, pervades the breast of mankind; and that is, the love
of Freedom, Justice, and Right. The chord of Freedom passes through all
hearts, and whoever touches it, elicits harmony. The harmony is in the
chord, not in him who touches it. There is no skill in the breeze which
sweeps over the Aeolian harp, yet a sweet harmony bursts forth from its
vibrations. The harmony of sympathy which I meet is the most decisive
proof, gentlemen, that the cause which I plead is indeed the cause of
liberty, the love of which gushes up spontaneously in human bosoms.

Gentlemen, the cause of Hungary, even were it _not_ the cause of
Europe and of all earthly freedom, deserves your sympathy and active
protection. Like other free nations, we were brave. The Austrian dynasty
was perjured and treacherous; and our bravest bled on the scaffold.
Tyrannies are cruel: only the people knows how to be generous in
victory.--Let me rather say, the People _was_ generous: for the
future I hope it will be _just_. I hope this, not because there is
any deep truth in the Irish poet, who sang

  "Revenge on a tyrant is sweetest of all:"

Not for that reason. But I hope that the oppressed nations will not
again stop half way, and sacrifice their future to untimely generosity;
for they have all paid too cruelly for the lesson, that _with tyrants
there is no faith_. So there must be no dealing with them.

Yet, Gentlemen, it is not for Hungary's worth, nor for Hungary's
sufferings that I claim protection for her; but because as in _her_
the law of nations has been strikingly trampled down, so in _her_
this law must be vindicated. Else, the league of despots will be able to
enforce it as a precedent against all free nations; no law will
henceforth be sure on earth, and oppression will rule the world.

It is indeed a new doctrine that all despots have a right to interfere
with every attempt of a people to regulate its own institutions; and
that oppression in each separate nation is to be upheld by a foreign
Czar. According to this, freedom and independence are everywhere
proscribed, as inconsistent with the security of absolutism,--to which
every other consideration is to yield.

I have been indeed astonished to meet the reply, that the cause which I
plead is not worthy of much consideration, "since, after all, it is only
the cause of _one country_!" I have read that the Borgias were wont
to say, that Italy is like the artichoke, which must be eaten leaf by
leaf. Let me tell those, with whom Hungary is but one leaf of the
artichoke, that the despot who is allowed to nibble each leaf
separately, will manage to dispose of the whole.

My opponents say; I myself confess my cause to be that of one country
only: for in claiming "non-interference," I show my desire to abandon
all other countries but my own to their oppressors! I may be permitted
to ask,--Is there any truth in the world which may not be distorted into
a mockery?

Russia is the strength of oppression. Her force in the background
emboldens every petty tyrant and makes every oppressed nation despond:
_not_ because she is so very powerful, but because all foresee
distinctly that she will act unshrinkingly in the tyrant's favour so
soon as he needs it. We fought, beat, crushed the Austrian emperor, of
course not without sacrifice. You know that your own brave Duquesne
Greys lost in one action more than half their men. Now, if after a
victory gained at such a price, Russia steps in with a fresh force, well
provided with every means of war, though that force be not such as one
could not resist, it is formidable as a rearguard, falling fresh upon a
nation exhausted with its very victories. Suppose that at the close of
your own Mexican victories, you had to meet a fresh host of 100,000
well-disciplined men, what would have been the fate of your gallant
army, which entered the city of Montezuma?

That is the key of Russian preponderance. But consider the consequences
of our defeat. Austria was restored,--_not_ to its independent
position--_that_ is lost forever; but, to the position of a tyrant
at home, obedient to the wink of his master abroad. Relying on the
precedent established by Russia,--Naples, Spain, and degraded France
interfered in ROME. After this, Austria and Prussia quarrelled for
German supremacy, but before they drew the sword, went to the Czar for
permission. The Czar at Warsaw replied: "I forbid you to quarrel.
Reconstruct the German confederacy of 1815 and add to it no
constitutional element. Send your two armies to HESSE CASSEL; crush the
people who there resist by law the Grand Duke's attempt to overthrow the
sworn Constitution. As to SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN, I want to have it reserved
to Denmark, as a satrapy for my servant and nephew. The German
confederacy having dared to countenance its rebellion, shall be punished
by having to request Austria to send an army against it." So ordered the
Czar, and so it was done. And after it was done, the Czar ordered the
withdrawal of the pageant of a Constitution, which in the hour of need
the Emperor of Austria had promised to his empire. It was withdrawn.
When thus every popular movement was crushed, every shadow of freedom
withdrawn, the scaffolds of Hungary and Italy saturated with blood, the
prisons filled with martyrs, the exiles driven from every asylum in the
European continent, and Germany reduced to a condition worse than when
the Unholy Alliance was at the full tide,--_then_ the Czar wrote an
autograph letter to Louis Napoleon, the perjured President of France,
assuring him of his imperial grace and benevolent support, if he would
strike a deathblow to the French Republic. And Louis Napoleon struck the
blow.

Such are the results of the overwhelming preponderance of Russia,
imposed upon Europe by its interference in Hungary. Suppose now that I
succeed in my sacred mission,--sacred, because it is the cause of law
and of all the oppressed;--suppose Russian interference checked; then
Hungary will crush the tottering Austrian dynasty: Italy, delivered from
foreign dominion, will sportively dispose of its petty tyrants. The
nation of Austria will become free, and a valuable ingredient in German
liberty. At the result of a glorious struggle in Hungary, burning shame
will mount to the cheek of the French, and Louis Napoleon will be shaken
off.

Let interference by the combination of despots be checked, let nations
become masters of their own fate,--and rely upon the magic power of your
glorious example. Republican institutions will spread as the light of
the sun. Yes, gentlemen. It is not for _one_ country that I ask
your support. My ground is as broad as the world; for it is the ground
of eternal principles, common to all humanity. No man, on the pretext
that his heart is with some other nation,--German, Italian, Pole,
French; no man, on the pretext that he is a Universal philanthropist,
ought to refuse his sympathies to Hungary; for its cause happens in this
crisis to comprise the rest. If I were a Pole, a German, or an Italian,
egotistically patriotic, I could not serve my country better than by
attacking Russia, the only substantial enemy.

What would the petty princes of Germany have been in 1848 without
Prussia? and what was Prussia, when her capital was in the hands of the
people, but for the certainty of the Czar's support? What were the petty
despots of Italy without Austria? and what was Austria, when her armies,
driven from the soil of Hungary in a series of pitched battles, were so
demoralized, that nothing but the treacherous disobedience of a general
prevented our brave militia from extinguishing in Vienna and Olmutz the
decrepit absolutism of the Hapsburgs? What hindered _me_ from
afterwards crushing it? The intervention of Russian despotism,--always
the primal cause of evil.

Absolutism has understood and declared, that its repose is impossible,
whilst a free press and free institutions exist any where. Formerly the
absolutists adhered to the principle of "legitimacy," or, the Divine
right of an hereditary dynasty; and provided this false principle was
respected, they did not object to the development of constitutions which
preserved attachment to monarchies. But now they have thrown away their
own principle of dynastical legitimacy, and have no rule but to oppress
freedom everywhere. Whoever will join them in that work is welcome,
though he be a usurper. Thus it came to pass, that Henry of Bourbon was
rejected by the despots, while Louis Napoleon has received from the Czar
an autograph letter of approval, and from Austria complimentary gifts.
Will the United States remain inactive, while free institutions are
systematically extinguished? Can they look on indifferently, because
seventy years ago it was a wise doctrine, appropriate to their
childhood, not to care about European politics?

It is publicly reported, that Russia has decided to absorb Turkey; and
means to grant Italy to Austria; Belgium, and the Rhenish provinces to
France; and the rest of Germany to Prussia. The Czar, acting like the
Persian Kings of old when they sent garments of honour to their satraps,
flings in the addition of a few provinces of kingdoms to their
satrapies.

And oh! Almighty father of humanity! is there no power on earth to stop
this execrable annihilation of human and national rights, of freedom and
independence?--though there is a Republic powerful enough to do so--a
Republic founded upon the very principles which the despotic powers have
put under an inexorable ban!

Gentlemen, I have dwelt perhaps too long on the condition of Europe; but
it was necessary to show that though there be no Russian eagles, painted
over the public offices in Germany, Italy, France, still the Russian
frontier is really extended to the Atlantic.

People of free America, beware, ere it be too late! Hurriedly and by
sudden violence, all civil and religious liberty must, for the repose of
absolutism, be trampled out of Europe; and by more deliberate
perpetration, by diplomacy, persuasion, and gold, the way must be
prepared to trample it out elsewhere by ulterior violence.

And here I claim permission to say something about the most dangerous
power of Russia, its DIPLOMACY.

It is worthy of consideration that while Russia starves her armies and
underpays her officials, who live by peculation, still, abroad she
devotes greater resources to her diplomacy than any other power has ever
done.

Acting on the maxim that "men are not influenced by facts, but by
opinions respecting facts"--not by "things as they are," but by "things
as they are believed to be," she finds it easier and cheaper, through a
diplomatic agency, to impress the world with a belief in a strength she
has not, than to try to organize or attain that strength.

And to come to that aim, Russian diplomacy is not restricted to
diplomatic proceedings. Brilliant saloons of fascinating ladies, as well
as marriages, are equally departments of Russian diplomacy.

The secret-service money at the disposal of all other diplomatists, is
always limited, and has only been exceptionably used. But every Russian
diplomatist, in whom confidence is reposed, has _unlimited credit_,
and is allowed to disburse any sum to achieve an adequate result. Their
traditional experience teaches them how to attain their point; their
discretion can be relied on, and they understand every possible means of
reaching men directly and indirectly, pulling frequently the strings of
thoroughly unconscious puppets.

Constantinople is the great workshop of diplomatic skill, worthy of more
close interest than has hitherto been bestowed upon it from
America--because there will be struck the most dreadful blow to the
independence of Europe. In Constantinople, when Russia wishes to turn a
grand vizier out of office, it does not attack him: it praises him
rather, and spreads the rumour of having him in its pay; and it is sure
that foreign influential diplomatists will then turn out for it the
hated grand vizier. When on the other hand a grand vizier is wavering in
his position, and Russia likes him to continue in office, it attacks him
with ostentatious publicity.

Russia hates not always the man whom it appears to hate, and loves not
always the man whom it appears to love. Russian diplomacy is a
subterraneous power, slippery like a snake, burrowing like the mole; and
when it has to come out in broad daylight, it watches to the left when
it looks to the right. Russia gives instructions never to allow her to
be directly defended by the press. That would lead to discussion and
further exposure. With regard to herself, she wants silence--the silence
of the grave. But her agents devote months of scheming, and any sums
required to attack her opponents, to get up discord, or the appearance
of division amongst them, or to popularize any momentary view which
suits her policy, and she delights in doing so through apparently
hostile and therefore unsuspected agents.

Thus Russia is powerful by an army held ready as a rearguard to support
needy despots with; powerful by its ascendancy over the European
continent; powerful by having pushed other despots into extremities
where they have lost all independent vitality, and cannot escape
throwing themselves into the iron grasp of the Czar; but above all,
Russia is powerful by its secret diplomacy. Still this Colossus,
gigantic as it appears to be--like to the idol

  "With front of brass but feet of clay,"

may be overturned--easily overturned, from its fragile pedestal, if the
glorious Republic of the United States opposes to it, with resolute
attitude, THE LAW OF NATIONS, and does not abandon principles in favour
of _accomplished_ criminal _facts_.

The mournful condition of Hungary seems to be pointed out by Providence
to the United States as an opportunity to save mankind from Russia
without any sacrifice at all; whereas if this opportunity be lost--I say
it with the inspiration of prophecy--there are many here in this Hall
who will yet see the day when the United States shall have to wrestle
for life and death with all Europe absorbed by Russia.

I know where I stand, gentlemen; I know your power and the indomitable,
heroic spirit of your people. It is not with the intention to create
apprehension that I say this: the people of the United States fears
nobody on earth. It may be that Russia, even after having absorbed
Europe, will not dare to attack the United States directly. But it may
be that it will dare even this. Some domestic dissension may come--(no
nation is safe against it)--the passion of particular interest may cause
some momentary discord. Russia will foster it, by its secret diplomacy,
to which nothing is sacred on earth; and when irritation comes to the
pitch, and the ties of affection become for a moment loose, then perhaps
Russia may step in at a moment of interior weakness, from which not the
greatest nations are exempt. Russia will begin by "_divido_," and
will perhaps come to "_impero_." All this may happen; I can say
neither yes nor no; but one thing I am sure of, and that is, that Russia
triumphant in Europe can and will attack you in your most vital
interests, and can hurt you mortally, _without even resorting to
war_.

Be sure, gentlemen, so soon as Russia has consolidated its undisputed
preponderance, the first step will be to exclude the commerce of America
from Europe by a prohibitory system of custom duties. It will do it; it
must do it. Firstly, because commerce is the convoyer of principles.
That is more sure yet than what a gentleman of New York so eloquently
said,--that "the _steam engine is a democrat_." Absolutism could
not for a single moment rule Europe with security, if Europe remained in
commercial intercourse with republican America. And secondly, Russia
will exclude your trade from Europe, because (and let the great valley
of the West mark it) because your immensely expanding agriculture is the
most dangerous competitor to Russian wheat, or corn, in the markets of
Europe. Either you must be excluded from the trade with Europe, or
Russia cannot find a market for its corn.

If you ask, _how soon_ is such an exclusion of your produce from
Europe by Russian influence possible? I reply: possibly within a single
year; for within a year, if we cannot recommence the struggle, Russia
may accomplish the partition of Europe. Principles can only be balanced
by principles--absolutism by republican institutions--unrighteous
interference by the law of nations--despotism by civil and religious
liberty. This is the cause which I advocate. It is not the cause of
Hungary alone; it is yours--it is the world's. It has a determination
as absolute and extreme as despotism.

Hungary would have been too content, if Russia had not interfered,
merely to defend herself against Austria, the immediate instrument of
her oppression. Now the independence of Europe, and the independence of
Hungary with it, can only be secured on the Moskwa, and on the Neva, in
the Kremlin, and in the great Hall of St. George.

For this purpose, in which you yourselves are so vitally interested, we
do not claim for you to fight our battles for us. Look to the nations of
Europe, groaning under Russia's weight. Look, in the first line to
Sweden, and from Sweden, across Poland to Hungary, and from Hungary to
Turkey, and to brave Circassia. Pronounce in favor of the law of
nations, with the determination which shows that you mean to act, and I
say, Russia _will_ respect your declaration, or else it will have a
war from Sweden down to Turkey and Circassia. So soon as it moves with
160,000 to 200,000 men against Hungary (and with less it could not), all
those nations will be aware that there is the last opportunity afforded
to them by Providence to shake off Russia's yoke, and they will avail
themselves of this opportunity--be sure of it. The momentary fall of
Hungary was too painful a lesson to them.

But again I am answered, "in case of such a war you will be entangled in
it." To this I say that you will have to fight a war single-handed and
alone, within less than five years against Russia and all Europe, if you
do not take the position which I humbly claim. But if you take this
position, the necessity of this war will be averted from you, and
Russian preponderance will be checked and your protestation respected,
without having to go to war. Because there is another sanction which you
may add to your protestation--a sanction powerful as a threat of war,
and yet no war at all. That sanction will be the declaration of
Congress, that, as the intervention of a foreign power in the domestic
affairs of any nation is a violation of the laws of nations, by the fact
of such intervention your neutrality laws of 1818 are suspended in as
far as the interfering or interference-claiming power is concerned. In
other words, that the citizens of the United States are at liberty to
follow their own inclination in respect to such a foreign power which
violates the laws of nations.

This sanction would be sufficient, because the enterprizing spirit of
your high-minded people is too well known not to be feared by all the
despots of the world.

Your laws, which forbid your citizens to partake in an armed expedition
abroad, are founded upon the sentiment, that to a foreign power with
which you are on terms of _amity_ the regards of friendship are
due. But you, without becoming inconsistent with your own fundamental
principles, cannot consider yourself to be in good friendship with a
power which violates the laws of nations: so you may well withdraw the
regards of friendship from it without resorting to war. Between
friendship and hostility there is yet a middle position--that of being
neither friend nor enemy--therefore permitting to every private
individual to act as he pleases.

Thus the conditional recall of your neutrality laws would enforce the
respect to your protestation without bringing your country into the
moral obligation to maintain your protestation by war. I hope those who
share my principles but hesitate to pronounce on account of the
possibility of a war, will be pleased to consider this humble
suggestion, and will see, that with my principles war will be averted
from the United States, and by opposing my principles the United States
will soon be forced into dangerous difficulties, out of which they
cannot be extricated but by a war, which they will have to fight
single-handed and alone.

[After this, Kossuth proceeded to speak on _Catholicism;_ but this
subject is treated afterwards more amply in his speech at St. Louis
against the Jesuits.]

       *       *       *       *       *

While Kossuth was addressing his audience at Pittsburg, a special envoy
from Massachusetts arrived, Mr. Erastus Hopkins of Northampton, one of
the Representatives of the State Legislature. At the vote of the
Legislature, the Governor (Jan. 15th) deputed Mr. Hopkins to convey to
Kossuth a solemn public invitation; and at the close of Kossuth's speech
(Jan. 27th) permission was granted by the President of the evening to
allow Mr. Hopkins' credentials to be read; upon which that gentleman
said:--

"Mr. President, after the soul-stirring proceedings of this afternoon, I
dare hardly venture to obtrude upon your attention. It was indeed very
far from my expectation, when I came a pilgrim on a toilsome journey at
this inclement season of the year, that I would be enabled to mingle the
congratulations of the citizens of the 'Old Bay State' to Governor
Kossuth with those of the people of Alleghany County. But Sir, my
message, although not addressed to this meeting, is addressed to one,
whom we, in common with you, love, and whom we all delight to honour."

Turning to Kossuth, Mr. Hopkins then addressed him as follows:

"Governor Kossuth: I am directed by his Excellency the Governor of
Massachusetts to present to you the accompanying resolve of the
Legislature, inviting you to visit their capital during the present
session. The resolve is _in fact_, no less than in its terms, _in
the name and in behalf of the people of the commonwealth_.

"Having with this announcement delivered to you the documents entrusted
to my charge, I must be considered as having exhausted my official
functions. Yet, sir, having had the honour of introducing the resolve to
the Legislature of Massachusetts [cheers], and witnessing with pleasure
the unanimous and instant concurrence of her four hundred
representatives [renewed cheers], I will venture to add a few words
beyond the record--only such words, however, as cannot fail to be
consonant with the sentiment and hearts of her people.

"The people of Massachusetts would have you accept this act of her
constituted authorities as _no unmeaning compliment._ Never, in her
history as an independent State, with one single and illustrious
exception, has Massachusetts tendered such a mark of respect to any
other than the chief magistrates of these United States. And even in the
present instance, much as she admires your patriotism, your eloquence,
your untiring devotedness and zeal,--deeply as she is moved by your
plaintive appeals and supplications in behalf of your native and
oppressed land--greatly as she is amazed by the irrepressible elasticity
with which you rise from under the heel of oppression, with fortitude
increased under sufferings, with assurance growing stronger as the
darkness grows deeper [cheers], still, it is not one or all these
qualities combined that can lead her to swerve from her dignity as an
independent State to the mere worship of man. [Applause.] No! But it is
because she views you as the advocate and representative of certain
great _principles_ which constitute her own vitality as a
State;--because she views you as the representative of human rights and
freedom in another and far distant land,--it is because she views you as
the rightful but exiled Governor of a people, whose past history and
whose recent deeds show them to be worthy of some better future than
that of Russian tyranny and Austrian oppression,--that she seeks to
welcome you to her borders: that she seeks to attest to a gazing world
that to the cause of freedom she is not insensible, and that to the
oppression of tyrants she is not indifferent."

Mr. Hopkins then proceeded to recount the public glories of
Massachusetts, which he summed up in "Religion, Education, and
Freedom,--a tricolour for the world." He avowed Massachusetts to be "the
birth-place of American liberty;" and stated that her government is
carried on in 322 cities and townships, literally democratic assemblies,
which levy their own taxes, sustain their own schools, police, tribunals
&c., and receive and pay local funds four or five times larger than
those of the State treasury. "The seat of Government," said he, "is a
fiction in Massachusetts, save as it signifies the hearts of the people.
Come to her borders; witness the truth of all and more than I have
uttered; as you shall find it attested by our institutions, by the
plenitude of our hospitality, and by the acclamations of one million
souls."

Kossuth replied briefly, with thanks and cordial assent.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXIV.--REPLY TO THE PITTSBURG CLERGY.

[_Jan. 26th_.]

The substance of his speech is reported as follows:--

He said that he received with a thankful heart this testimonial of
respect and welcome from the reverend ministers of the Gospel, whose
hearts and minds were deeply imbued with regard and desire for
_truth_. He had been taught to reverence the Word of God, because
it guaranteed freedom to man; and there was nothing more intimately
associated with the idea of freedom than the right of every mind to
search for truth in its own way--the right of private judgment.
Therefore in receiving the approbation of so reverend and learned a
body, he felt that he received the approbation of religion itself; and
as if an angel voice from heaven had declared to him--"The cause you
plead has found favour before Heaven. You may encounter hostility; you
may be overtaken by calumny; you may endure sufferings, and trials, and
temptations; you may even suffer martyrdom;--but the cause will triumph.
Trust to Him who strengthened the arm of David against the mighty
Goliath; and learn to say in truth: Lord, thy will be done!" When he
thought thus, and felt thus, he was not weak, but strong. The sufferings
and trials which he had endured had strengthened his body, even as the
holy influences of religion had strengthened his soul. He was not left
as the fragile flower, that remained bowed and bent before the blast;
for he could now look forward with more of hope and of trust for the
future of his own beloved land, when he heard such glorious truths so
warmly proclaimed; and when he saw such evidences of real sympathy for
the cause of Hungary. They spoke of the Protestant Church. He claimed no
merit on account of his belief; but he, too, was a Protestant--not by
education merely, but from his own studied convictions. He could believe
nothing merely because he might be commanded to do so; but solely as the
result of his own convictions. Truth is as uncorruptible and
imperishable as God himself; and He will spread it throughout all the
world. But the triumph of truth cannot be achieved by persecution,
opposition, or political oppression. This glorious principle can only be
triumphant when the nations of the earth shall become free from
oppression; because it is only under the protection of free
institutions--a free press, free controversy, freedom of speech, and
free popular education,--where it is your privilege to preach and that
of the neighbour to hear,--that the political independence of a people
can be preserved. Oppression is everywhere accompanied by the
demoralization of the masses, and their adoption of infidelity or
fanaticism; while under the teachings of freedom religion becomes a
growth of the soul.

He would urge them to go on and support that cause which they believed
to be sanctified by truth. It has been said that true religion can never
cease to be republican. If this be true, he would ask what could more
promote the glorious cause, than the influence of the United States
exerted among the nations of the world, toward the general
acknowledgment of that doctrine among nations which is laid down for the
government of men,--"What ye would that men should do unto you, do ye
even so to them." This fundamental truth should be declared a part of
the international law of the world; and the Gospel would then become the
bulwark of liberty to all mankind. Thus we may see that the triumph of
genuine liberty can best be secured by recognizing religion as the true
basis of the law of nations. He who shall be instrumental in
incorporating this grand doctrine among those laws, will be equal, or
perhaps superior to, a Luther, or a Melancthon, a Calvin, or a Huss, a
Cranmer, or any other of the world's greatest reformers. The people of
this republic have all this within their grasp; and he hoped the
Almighty would hasten the day when it shall be done. He had often heard
that the people of this country loved to be called a great people, and
he had many times heard them called a great people. To _be_ a great
people, however, the people of this country must really _act_ as a
great people. He urged upon the ministers of the Gospel that they should
warn their flocks against the horrid doctrines of _Materialism_.
Nothing is more hostile to national greatness than when the poor see the
rich governed only by pecuniary considerations--leaving nothing for the
mind and the soul, or undervaluing virtue and talents. He thankfully
acknowledged the deep solemnity of his feelings, when for his humble
self, such solemn manifestations were observed; and while commending his
bleeding country to their love, he could only refer them to the
Saviour's words as the guide for their prayers and their watchfulness.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXV.--HUNGARIAN LOAN.

[_Melodeum, Cleveland_.]

Kossuth having been presented at the Melodeum to the Mayor, was publicly
addressed by Mr. Starkweather in a highly energetic speech, which ended
by saluting him as "rightful Governor of Hungary."

Kossuth replied:--

Sir, if I am not mistaken it is now the 156th time [since I entered
America], I am sure that it is the 34th time since I left Washington on
the 12th of January,--that I have had the honour to address an American
audience in that tongue which I learned from Shakespeare, while confined
in an Austrian prison for having dared to claim the right of a free
press, which now, like the hundred-handed Briareus of old, pours my
words by thousands of channels into the hearts of millions of freemen,
who comprize in their national capacity a mighty Republic, destined to
enforce the Law of Nations, upon which rests the deliverance of the
world from an overwhelming despotism.

The press is nobly recompensing me. The ways of Providence are
wonderful!

May the free press never forget its living principle, "Justice and
Truth." May it always be watchful with its thousand eyes, that the
secret craft of diplomacy may never succeed to degrade one organ of the
American press into an unconscious Russian tool, acted on by blind
animosity or by exclusive predilections.

Sir--after having spoken so often, and so much; and the free press
having conveyed my principles, my arguments, and my prayers, in almost
every homestead of this great Republic; I may be well permitted to
believe, that the stage of speaking is passed, and the stage of
practical action has come.

Almost every packet brings such news of absolutist reaction in Europe,
and almost every new step of the despotic powers is accompanied by such
incidents, that it were indeed unpardonable neglect, if, when Providence
has placed so much influence in my hands by the confidence of nations
bestowed upon me, I should not use all possible energy to circumvent the
influence of evil, to combine the efforts of the good, to check the
plots of vile, and the waywardness of erring or weak characters--often
the unconscious tools of the vile, to direct the action of inconsiderate
friends, and above all, to accomplish those preparations which are
indispensable to meet the exigencies of the future--in short, to attain
that crisis, at which I humbly claim protection for principles from the
people of the United States, in their public capacity, and substantial
aid from their private generosity.

You of course are aware that all these things together present a vast
field, for which every moment of my time would scarcely suffice.

Often am I asked, what are the instrumentalities for this my activity?
But this question cannot be answered publicly, as I am quite unwilling
to let the enemy learn my secrets.

However, so much I may state, that it is not without a definite aim and
clear hope that I devote all that yet remains in me of energy and
strength. If I did not hope,--if under certain conditions I had not an
assurance of success,--I would prefer tranquillity to action, though it
were the tranquillity of the grave.

There are _two_ modes in which free nations may aid the cause of
European Independence,--namely, _politically_ and _privately_.
As to the first, I avow with intense gratitude that the great National
Jury, the PEOPLE, gave and gives incessantly its favourable verdict.
Your State Legislature is pronouncing its vote, and the cause is moved
before the High Court of your national Congress.

In regard to aid by _private funds_ I rejoice to see local
associations clustering round the central one of Northern Ohio, in
Cleveland; but I desire that such efforts may not be delayed until I
come in person: for I can possibly come only to a few.

Already in New York I started the idea of a National Hungarian Loan, in
shares of one, five and ten dollars, with the facsimile of my signature,
and of larger shares of fifty and of a hundred dollars with my
autograph. I prepared the smaller shares for generous men, who are not
rich, yet desire to help the great cause of Freedom. It is a noble
privilege of the richer to do greater good. But remember, it is not a
gift, it is a loan: for either Freedom has no name on earth, or Hungary
has a future yet; and let Hungary be once again independent, and she has
ample resources to pay that small loan, if the people of the United
States, remembering the aid received in their own dark hour, vouchsafe
to me such a loan.

Hungary has no public debt, it has fifteen millions of population, a
territory of more than one hundred thousand square English miles,
abundant in the greatest variety of nature's blessings, if the doom of
oppression be taken from it. The State of Hungary has public landed
property administered badly, worth more than a hundred millions of
dollars, even at the low price, at which it was already an established
principle of my administration to sell it in small shares to suit the
poorer classes.

Hungary has rich mines of gold, silver, copper, quicksilver, antimony,
iron, sulphur, nickel, opal, and other mines. Hungary has the richest
salt mines in the world--where the extraction of one hundred weight of
the purest stone salt, amounts to but little more than one shilling of
your money--and though that is sold by the government at the price of
two to three and a half dollars, and thus the consumption is of course
very restricted, this still yields a net revenue of five millions of
dollars a year--to the Government--but no!  there is not government, it
is usurpation now! sucking out the lifeblood of the people, crushing the
spirit of freedom by soldiers, hangmen, policemen, and harassing the
people in its domestic life and the sanctuary of its family with
oppression worse than a free American can conceive.

You see by this, gentlemen, that when Hungary is once free--and free it
will be--she has ample resources to repay your generous loan within a
year without any taxation of the people itself; and pay it well, because
every shilling of your generous aid will faithfully be employed for its
restoration to freedom and independence. I may point to my whole life as
a guarantee to that purpose. I had millions at my disposal, entrusted to
me by my people's confidence, and here I stand penniless and poor, not
knowing what my children will eat to-morrow, if I die to-day; and I am
proud that I am poor, and I pledge my honour to you, that every shilling
of what your generosity gives for Hungary will be employed for Hungary's
benefit. In fact, as I have provided for the contingency of anything
befalling me, so also I am ready, if it be your people's will, to admit
any control, consistent with the necessary conditions of success.

[After this, Kossuth proceeded to speak on the aspect of republicanism
towards Catholicism and the fortunes of Ireland; a subject more fully
treated in other speeches.]

       *       *       *       *       *

ADDRESS TO KOSSUTH FROM THE STATE COMMITTEE OF OHIO.

Governor Kossuth:--As Chairman of the Committee appointed for that
purpose by a resolution of the General Assembly of the State of Ohio, I
have the honour to tender to you, in the name and in behalf of the
State, a cordial welcome to the capital.

We proffer this greeting as a small tribute of that admiration which
your courage, your integrity, and above all, your self-denying devotion
to the cause of Hungarian freedom has roused in our breasts.

Wonder not, sir, at the enthusiasm which your presence excites in a
people who cherish, with fond recollection and reverence, the smallest
relic of that time, when liberty wrestled with oppression in America,
and who hail the anniversaries of her triumphs with such grateful
remembrance of those brave and patriotic men who wrought out our full
measure of national happiness.

In you we behold a living embodiment of those great principles which we
cherish with such tender affection.

You are the realization of that virtue, that courage, that civil and
military genius, which sheds such lustre on our early history.

You call to mind more freshly than poetic or historic page, song, or
speaking canvass, that glorious record which was graven more than two
centuries ago by the first exiles from European oppression upon the
granite rocks of New England,--_"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to
God."_

Our affection is warmed by the lively interest which we feel in the
spread of this cardinal principle, and the fitness for its championship
which you have evinced, revealing constantly a resemblance to that
immortal man, the impress of whose greatness you behold on every side.

When Liberty, scourged from the old, sought out a new world wherein to
raise her sacred temple, it was to his master hand she confided the
noble work.

Had he been less great, that glorious shrine might never have been
beaconed in the sky, or at least its proportions might have been uncouth
and insecure.

Now therefore, since liberty has secured the manifold blessings that
flow from human equality, and proudly flung back the taunts of tyrants,
it is a joyous reflection to the children of this her first home, that
she has at length found a man in foreign lands fitly gifted to
appreciate those blessings, industrious to search out and follow the
path by which they were attained, and virtuous to take no selfish
advantage from the thanksgiving that her mission will arouse.

Sir, it is a splendid characteristic of our national government, that
Ohioans are as keenly touched by the history of your wrongs as the
borders of the Atlantic States.

Yes, sir, the hearts of two millions of freemen at the centre of our
country's population leap fast at the shrieks of freedom in every clime,
believing in no cold, unbrother-like law of distance; and, sir, we yield
to no State in the sincerity with which the following resolution was
adopted:

Resolved,--That we declare the Russian past intervention in the affairs
of Hungary a violation of the law of nations, which, if repeated, would
not be regarded indifferently by the people of the State of Ohio.

In conclusion, sir, I present to you a copy of the resolutions of the
General Assembly, and again welcome you to the valley of the West,
trusting that the warmth of your reception in Ohio is but an earnest of
that glorious sympathy which will spring in your path should you go
still farther westward in your holy mission.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXVI.--PANEGYRIC OF OHIO.

[_Speech at his Reception at Columbus, Feb. 5th_.]

Kossuth was conducted by Governor Wood to the place fitted up for his
reception, and was there addressed by the Hon. Samuel Galloway in an
ample and glowing speech, which opened by assuring him that the
enthusiasm which he now witnessed was no new creation; inasmuch as, more
than two years before, the General Assembly of the State had resolved
that Congress be requested to interpose for Kossuth's deliverance from
captivity.

Kossuth replied:--

Sir, I thank you for the information of what I owe to Ohio. I stood upon
the ruins of vanquished greatness in Asia, where tidings from young
America are so seldom heard that indeed I was not acquainted with the
fact. Still, I loved Ohio before I knew what I had yet to hear. Now I
will love her with the affection and tenderness of a child, knowing what
part she took in my restoration to liberty and life.

Sir, permit me to decline those praises which you have been pleased to
bestow on me personally. I know of no _merit_--I know only the word
_duty_, and you are acquainted with the beautiful lines of the
Irish poet--

 "Far dearer the grave or the prison,
    Illumed by a patriot's name,
  Than the glories of all who have risen,
    On liberty's ruins, to fame."


I was glad to hear that you are familiar with the history of our
struggles, and of our achievements, and of our aims. This dispenses me
from speaking much,--and that is a great benefit to me, because indeed I
have spoken very much.

Sir, entering the young state of Ohio--though my mind is constantly
filled with homeward thoughts and homeward sorrows, still my sorrows
relax while I look around me in astonishment, and rub my eyes to
ascertain that it is not the magic of a dream, which makes your bold,
mighty, and flourishing commonwealth rich with all the marks of
civilization and of life, here, where almost yesterday was nothing but a
vast wilderness, silent and dumb like the elements of the world on
creation's eve. And here I stand in Columbus, which, though ten years
younger than I am, is still the capital of that mighty commonwealth,
which--again in its turn,--ten years before I was born, nursed but three
thousand daring men, scattered over the vast wilderness, fighting for
their lives with scalping Indians; but now numbers two millions of happy
freemen, who, generous because free, are conscious of their power, and
weigh mightily in the scale of mankind's destiny.

How wonderful that an exile from a distant European nation of Asiatic
origin, which, amidst the raging waves of centuries that swept away
empires, stood for a thousand years like a rock, and protected
Christendom and civilization against barbarism--how wonderful that the
exiled governor of that nation was destined to come to this land, where
a mighty nation has grown up, as it were, over night, out of the very
earth, and found this nation protecting the rights of humanity, when
offended in his person,--found that youthful nation ready to stretch its
powerful arm across the Atlantic to protect all Hungary against
oppression,--found her pouring the balm of her sympathy into the
bleeding wounds of Hungary, that, regenerated by the faithful spirit of
America, she may rise once more independent and free, a breakwater to
the flood of Russian ambition, which oppresses Europe and threatens the
world.

Citizens of Columbus--the namesake of your city, when he discovered
America, little thought that by his discovery he would liberate the Old
World.--And those exiles of the Old World, who sixty-four years ago,
first settled within the limits of Ohio, at Marietta, little thought
that the first generation which would leap into their steps, would make
despots tremble and oppressed nations rise. And yet, thus it will be.
The mighty outburst of popular feeling which it is my wonderful lot to
witness, is a revelation of that future too clear not to be understood.
The Eagle of America flaps its wings; the Stars of America illumine
Europe's night; and the Star-spangled banner, taking under its
protection the Hungarian flag, fluttering loftily and proudly, tells the
tyrants of the world that the right of freedom must sway, and not the
whim of despots but the Law of Nations must rule.

Gentlemen, I may not speak longer. [Cries of _go on!_] Yes,
gentlemen, but I am ill, and worn out. Give me your lungs, and then I
will go on.

Citizens, your young and thriving city is conspicuous by its character
of benevolence. There is scarcely a natural human affliction for which
your young city has not an asylum of benevolence. To-day you have risen
in that benevolence from alleviating private affliction to consoling
oppressed nations. Be blessed for it. I came to the shores of your
country pleading the restoration of the law of nations to its due sway,
and as I went on pleading, I met flowers of sympathy. Since I am in
Ohio I meet fruits; and as I go on thankfully gathering the fruits, new
flowers arise, still promising more and more beautiful fruits. That is
the character of Ohio--and you are the capital of Ohio.

If I am not mistaken, the birth of your city was the year of the trial
of war, by which your nation proved to the world that there is no power
on earth that can dare any more to touch your lofty building of
Independence. The glory of your eastern sister States is, to have
conquered that independence for you. Let it be your glory to have cast
your mighty weight into the scale, that the law of nations, guarded and
protected by you, may afford to every oppressed nation that "fair play"
which America had when it struggled for independence.

Gentlemen, I am tired out. You must generously excuse me, when I
conclude by humbly recommending my poor country's future to your
generosity.

      *       *       *       *       *

XXVII.--DEMOCRACY THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE.

[_Reception by the two Houses of Legislature of Ohio_.]

Kossuth, attended by the Joint Committee, was then introduced, and
addressed by the President of the Senate, Hon. Wm. Medill, as follows:

Governor Kossuth: On learning that you were about to visit the Western
portion of our country, the General Assembly of this State adopted the
following preamble and resolutions:--

Whereas, Louis Kossuth, Governor of Hungary, has endeared himself to the
people of Ohio by his great military and greater civic services rendered
to the cause of Liberty; by the transcendent power and eloquence with
which he has vindicated the right of every nation to determine for
itself its own form of government, by the perils he has encountered and
the suffering he has endured to achieve the freedom of his native
country: therefore, in the name, and on behalf of the people,

_Be it resolved by the General Assembly of the State of Ohio_, That
the war in which Hungary was lately seemingly overcome, was a struggle
in behalf of the great principles which underlie the structure of our
government, vindicated by the bloody battles of eight years, and that we
cannot be indifferent to their fate, whatever be the arena in which the
struggle for their vitality goes on.

_Resolved_, That an attack in any form upon them is implicitly an
attack upon us, an armed intervention against them, is in effect an
insult to us; that any narrowing of the sway of these principles is a
most dangerous weakening of our own influence and power; and that all
such combinations of kings against people should be regarded by us now
as they were in 1776, and so far as circumstances will admit, the
parallel should and will be so treated.

_Resolved_, That we are proud to recognize in Louis Kossuth
constitutional Governor of Hungary, the heroic personification of these
great principles, and that as such, and in token and pledge of our
profound sympathy with him, and the high cause he so nobly represents,
we tender to him, in behalf of two millions of freemen, a hearty welcome
to the capital of the State of Ohio.

_Resolved_, That we declare the Russian past intervention in the
affairs of Hungary, a violation of the laws of nations which, if
repeated, would not be regarded indifferently by the people of the State
of Ohio.

_Resolved_, That a joint committee of three on the part of the
Senate, and five on the part of the House of Representatives, be
appointed to tender Governor Kossuth, in the name and on behalf of the
people of Ohio, a public reception by their General Assembly, now in the
session of the capital of the State.

This preamble, and these resolutions, set forth the views and sentiments
of the people of Ohio in a far more forcible, authoritative, and
enduring form, than can possibly be done by any declaration or
expression of mine. In no part of the United States has your course been
more warmly approved or your great talents, persevering energy, and
devoted patriotism, more universally admired. This, sir, is sufficiently
evinced in the cordial and heartfelt welcome that has everywhere awaited
you, since your entrance into the State.

Free and independent themselves, the people of Ohio can not look with
indifference on the great contest in which you are engaged. The history
of that fearful struggle which resulted in the achievement of their own
independence is still fresh in their recollection. Always on the side of
the oppressed, no cold or calculating policy can suppress or control
their sympathies.

The cause of Hungary, which you so eloquently plead, and which it is
your high and sacred mission to maintain, is the cause of freedom in
every quarter of the world. The principles involved in that cause, form
the basis of our own institutions, the source of our present prosperity
and greatness, and the foundation of all our hopes and anticipations of
the future.

It would be strange, indeed, if a cause so pure and holy, or a champion
so gifted, should fail to command the highest regard and admiration of
freemen.

In the name, then, and on behalf of the General Assembly of Ohio, I bid
you welcome to our midst.

I welcome you, sir, to the capital of a great and flourishing
commonwealth--to its halls of legislation, which, in your own
fatherland, were the scenes of some of your proudest triumphs, and to
the hearts of a free, generous, and sympathizing people.


KOSSUTH'S REPLY.

Mr. President--The General Assembly of Ohio, having magnanimously
bestowed upon me the high honour of this national welcome, it is with
profound veneration that I beg leave to express my fervent gratitude for
it.

Were even no principles for the future connected with the honour which I
now enjoy, still the past would be memorable as history, and not fail to
have a beneficial influence, continuously to develop the Spirit of the
Age. Almost every century has had one predominant idea, which imparted a
common direction to the activity of nations. This predominant idea is
the Spirit of the Age, invisible yet omnipresent; impregnable,
all-pervading; scorned, abused, opposed, and yet omnipotent.

The spirit of our age is Democracy. All _for_ the people and all
_by_ the people. Nothing _about_ the people _without_ the
people. That is Democracy, and that is the ruling tendency of the spirit
of our age.

To this spirit is opposed the principle of Despotism, claiming
sovereignty over mankind, and degrading nations from the position of a
self-conscious, self-consistent aim, to the condition of tools
subservient to the authority of ambition.

One of these principles will and must prevail. So far as one
civilization prevails, the destiny of mankind is linked to a common
source of principles, and within the boundaries of a common
civilization community of destinies exists. Hence the warm interest which
the condition of distant nations awakes now-a-days in a manner not yet
recorded in history because humanity never was yet aware of that common
tie as it now is. With this consciousness thus developed, two opposite
principles cannot rule within the same boundaries--Democracy and
Despotism.

In the conflict of these two hostile principles, until now it was not
Right, not Justice, but only Success which met approbation and applause.
Unsuccessful patriotism was stigmatized with the name of crime.
Revolution not crowned by success was styled Anarchy and Revolt, and
the vanquished patriot being dragged to the gallows by victorious
despotism, men did not consider _why_ he died on the gallows; but
the fact itself, that _there_ he died, imparted a stain to his
name.

And though impartial history, now and then, casts the halo of a martyr
over an unsuccessful patriot's grave, yet even this was not always sure.
Tyrants have often perverted history by adulation or by fear. But
whatever that late verdict might have been; for him who dared to
struggle against despotism at the time when he struggled in vain, there
was no honour on earth.--Victorious tyranny marked the front of virtue
with the brand of a criminal.

Even when an existing "authority" was mere violence worse than that of a
pirate, to have opposed it unsuccessfully was sufficient to ensure the
disapproval of all who held any authority. The People indeed never
failed to console the outcast by its sympathy, but Authority felt no
such sympathy, and rather regarded this very sympathy as a dangerous
symptom of anarchy.

When the idea of justice is thus perverted--when virtue is thus deprived
of its fair renown, and honour is thus attacked--when success like that
of Louis Napoleon's is gained through connivance--all this becomes an
immeasurable obstacle to the freedom of nations, which never yet was
achieved but by a struggle,--a struggle, which success raised to the
honour of a glorious revolution, but failure lowered to the reputation
of a criminal outbreak.

Mr. President, I feel proud at the accident, that in my person public
honours have been restored to that on which alone they ought to be
bestowed--righteousness and a just cause; whereas, until now, honours
were lavished only upon success. I consider this as a highly important
_fact_, which cannot fail to encourage the resolution of devoted
patriots, who, though not afraid of death, may be excused for recoiling
before humiliation.

Senators, Representatives of Ohio, I thank you for it in the name of all
who may yet suffer for having done the duty of a patriot. You may yet
see many a man, who, out of your approbation, will draw encouragement to
noble deeds; for there are many on earth ready to meet misfortune for a
noble aim, but not so many ready to meet humiliation and indignity.
Besides, in honouring me, you have approved what my nation has done. You
have honoured all Hungary by it, and I pledge my word to you that we
will yet do what you have approved. The approbation of our conscience we
have--the sympathy of your generous people has met us--and it is no
idle thing, that sympathy of the people of Ohio--it weighs as the
sovereign will of two millions of freemen. You have added to it the
sanction of your authority. Your people's sympathy you have framed into
a law, sacred and sure in its consequences, on which humanity may rely.

But, sir, high though be the value of this noble approbation, it becomes
an invaluable benefit to humanity by these resolutions by which the
General Assembly of Ohio, acknowledging the justice of those principles
which it is my mission to plead in my injured country's name, declares
that the mighty and flourishing commonwealth of Ohio is resolved to
resist the eternal laws of nations to their due sway, too long contemned
by arbitrary power.

It was indeed a sorrowful sight to see how nations bled, and how freedom
withered in the iron grasp of despotisms, leagued for universal
oppression of humanity. It was a sorrowful sight to see that there was
no power on earth ready to maintain those eternal laws, without which
there is no security for any nation on earth. It was a sorrowful sight
to see all nations isolating themselves in defence, while despots
leagued in offence.

The view has changed. A bright lustre is spreading over the dark sky of
humanity. The glorious galaxy of the United States rises upon oppressed
nations, and the bloody star of despotism fading at your very
declaration, will soon vanish from the sky like a meteor.

Legislators of Ohio, it may be flattering to ambitious vanity to act the
part of an execrated conqueror, but it is a glory unparalleled in
history to protect rights and freedom on earth. The time draws near,
when, by virtue of such a declaration as yours, shared by your sister
States, Europe's liberated nations will unite in a mighty choir of
Hallelujahs, thanking God that his paternal cares have raised the United
States to the glorious position of a first-born son of freedom on
earth.

Washington prophesied, that within twenty years the Republic of the
United States would be strong enough to defy any power on earth _in a
just cause_. The State of Ohio was not yet born when the wisest of
men and purest of patriots uttered that prophecy; and God the Almighty
has made the prophecy true, by annexing, in a prodigiously short period,
more stars to the proud constellation of your Republic, and increasing
the lustre of every star more powerfully, than Washington could have
anticipated in the brightest moments of his patriotic hopes.

Rejoice, O my nation, in thy very woes! Wipe off all thy tears, and
smile amidst thy tortures, like the Dutch hero, De Wytt. There is a
Providence which rules. Thou wast, O my nation, often the martyr, who by
thy blood didst redeem the Christian nations on earth. Even thy present
nameless woes are providential. They were necessary, that the
star-spangled banner of America should rise over a new Sinai--the
Mountain of Law for all nations. Thy sufferings were necessary, that the
people of the United States, powerful by their freedom and free by the
principle of national independence, that common right of all humanity,
should stand up, a new Moses upon the new Sinai, and shout out with the
thundering voice of its twenty-five millions--"Hear, ye despots of the
world, henceforward this shall be law, in the name of the Lord your God
and our God.

Ye shall not kill nations.

Ye shall not steal their freedom.

And ye shall not covet what is your neighbour's."

Ohio has given its vote by the resolutions I had the honour to hear. It
is the vote of two millions, and it will have its constitutional weight
in the councils of Washington City, where the delegates of the people's
sovereignty find their glory in doing the people's will.

Sir, it will be a day of consolation and joy in Hungary, when my
bleeding nation reads these resolutions, which I will send to her. They
will flash over the gloomy land; and my nation, unbroken in courage,
steady in resolution, and firm in confidence, will draw still more
courage, more resolution from them, because it is well aware that the
legislature of Ohio would never pledge a word to which the people of
Ohio will not be true in case of need.

Sir, I regret that my illness has disabled me to express my fervent
thanks in a manner more becoming to this Assembly's dignity. I beg to be
excused for it; and humbly beg you to believe, that my nation for ever,
and I for all my life, will cherish the memory of this benefit.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXVIII.--THE MISERIES AND THE STRENGTH OF HUNGARY.

[_Columbus, Feb. 7th, to the Association of Friends of Hungary_.]

On Feb. 7th was held the first regular meeting of the Ohio Association
of the Friends of Hungary, in the City Hall of Columbus. Governor Wood
addressed the Association, as its President; and in the course of his
speech said:--

This is a cause in which the people of the United States feel much
interest. Much has been said on the doctrine of intervention and
non-intervention. There was a time when if I ventured to speak a word on
any question in this State it was received with authority. The opinions
I now express have been formed with the same deliberation as those I
expressed with authority in another capacity. There has seemed to be a
combined effort on the part of despots in Europe to put down free
institutions. It is the duty of freemen to oppose this effort--to resist
the principle that every civic community has not a right to regulate its
own affairs. Whenever one nation interferes with the internal concerns
of another, it is a direct insult to all other nations.

There is a combined effort in Continental Europe to overthrow all free
and liberal institutions. This accomplished, what next?--The efforts of
tyrants will be directed to our institutions. It will be their aim to
break us down. Must not we prevent this event--_peaceably if we
can--forcibly if we must?_ No power will prevail with tyrants and
usurpers but the power of gunpowder or steel.

Kossuth in reply, turning to Governor Wood, said: Before addressing the
assembly, I humbly entreat your excellency to permit me to express, out
of the very heart of my heart, my gratitude and fervent thanks for those
lofty, generous principles which you have been pleased now to pronounce.
I know those principles would have immense value even if they were only
an individual opinion; but when they are expressed by him who is the
elect of the people of Ohio, they doubly, manifoldly increase in weight.

The restoration of Hungary to its national independence is my aim, to
which I the more cheerfully devote my life, because I know that my
nation, once master of its own destiny, can make no other choice, in the
regulation of its institutions and of its government, than that of a
Republic founded upon democracy and the great principle of municipal
self-government, without which, as opposed to centralization, there is
no practical freedom possible.

Other nations enjoying a comparatively tolerable condition under their
existing governments--though aware of their imperfections, may shrink
from a revolution of which they cannot anticipate the issue, while they
know that in every case it is attended with great sacrifices and great
sufferings for the generation which undertakes the hazard of the change.
But that is not the condition of Hungary. My poor native land is in such
a condition that all the horrors of a revolution, when without the hopes
of happiness to be gained by it, are preferable to what it lives to
endure now. The very life on a bloody battle-field, where every
whistling musket-ball may bring death--affords more security, more ease,
and is less alarming than that life which the people of Hungary has to
suffer now. We have seen many a sorrowful day in our past, We have been
by our geographical position, destined as the breakwater against every
great misfortune, which in former centuries rushed over Europe from the
East. It is not only the Turks, when they were yet a dangerous,
conquering race, which my nation had to stay, by wading to the very lips
in its own heroic blood. No. The still more terrible invasion of Batu
Khan's (the Mongol) raging millions, poured down over Europe from the
Steppes of Tartary,--who came not to conquer but to destroy, and
therefore spared not nature, not men, not the child in its mother's
womb. It was Hungary which had to stay its flood from devouring the rest
of Europe. Nevertheless, all which Hungary has ever suffered is far
less than it has to suffer now from the tyrant of Austria, himself in
his turn nothing but the slave of ambitious Russia.

Oh! it is a fair, beautiful land, my beloved country, rich in nature's
blessings as perhaps no land is rich on earth. When the spring has
strewn its blossoms over it, it looks as the garden of Eden may have
looked, and when the summer ripens nature's ocean of crops over its
hills and plains, it looks like a table dressed for mankind by the Lord
himself; and still it was here in Columbus that I read the news that a
terrible dearth, that famine is spreading over the rich and fertile
land. How should it not? Where life-draining oppression weighs so
heavily, that the landowner offers the use of all his lands to the
government, merely to get free from the taxation--where the vintager
cuts down his vineyards and the gardener his orchard, and the farmer
burns his tobacco seed to be rid of the duties, and their
vexations--there of course must dearth prevail, and famine raise its
hideous head. Yet the tyrant adds calumny to oppression, by attributing
the dearth to a want of industry, after having created it by oppression.
There exists no personal security of property. Nor is the verdict "not
guilty," when pronounced by an Austrian court, sufficient to ensure
security against prison, nay, against death by the executioner--through
a new trial ordered to find a man guilty at any price. Poor Louis
Bathyanyi was thus treated. Even now persecution is going on--hundreds
are arrested secretly and sent to prison and their property confiscated,
though they were already acquitted by the very Haynaus. _Even to whisper
that a man or woman was arrested in the night is considered a crime_,
and punished by prison, or if the whisperer be a young man, by sending him
to the army, there to taste, when he dares to frown, the corporal's
stick. _No man knows what is forbidden, what not_, because there
exists no law but the arbitrary will of martial courts--no protecting
institution--no public life--free speech forbidden--the press
fettered--complaint a crime,--When we consider all this, indeed it is
not possible not to arrive at the conviction, that, come what may, a new
war of revolution in Hungary is not a matter of choice, but a matter of
unavoidable necessity, because all that may come is not by far so
terrible as that which is!

But I am often asked,--"What hope has Hungary should she rise again?"
Pardon me, gentlemen, for saying, that I cannot forbear to be surprized
as often as I hear this question. Why! The Emperor of Austria, fresh
with his bloody victories over Italy, Vienna, Lemberg, Prague, attacked
us in the fulness of his power, when we had no expectation, and were
least in the world prepared to meet it. We were assaulted on several
sides; our fortresses were in the hands of traitors, we had as yet no
army at all. We were secluded from all the world--forsaken by all the
world--without money--without arms--without ammunition--without
friends--having nothing for us but the justice of our cause and the
people burning with patriotism--men who went to the battlefield almost
without knowing how to cock their guns; but still, within less than six
months, we beat all the force of Austria,--we crushed it to the dust,
and in despair, the proud tyrant fled to the feet of the Czar, begging
his assistance for his sacrilegious purpose, and paying him by the
sacrifice of honour, independence, and all his future!

In contemplating these facts, who can doubt that we are now a match for
Austria. Then we had no army--now we have 120,000 brave Magyars, who
fought for freedom and motherland, enlisted in the ranks of Austria,
forming their weakness and our strength. Then hostile nations were
opposed to us, now they are friendly, and are with us. Then no
combination existed between the oppressed nations--now the combination
exists. Then our oppressor took his own time to strike--when he was best
and we were worst prepared:--now we will take our time and strike the
blow when it is best for us and worst for him. In a word, then every
chance was against us, and we almost in a condition that the stoutest
hearts faltered; and we only took up the gauntlet because our very soul
revolted against the boundless treachery;--now every chance is for us,
and it is the native which throws the gauntlet into the tyrant's face.
Our very misfortune ensures our success--because then we had some
something to lose, now we have nothing. We can only gain--for I defy
the sophistry of despotism to invent anything of public or private
oppression which is not already inflicted upon us.

But I was upon the question of success.--When I moot that
question--upon what reposes the success of Hungary, it always occurs to
my mind that the last Administration of the United States sent a
gentleman over to Europe during the Hungarian struggle, _not_ with
orders to recognize the independence of Hungary, but just to look to
what chance of success we had. Now, suppose that the United States,
taking into consideration the right of every nation to dispose of
itself, and true to that policy which it has always followed to take
established facts as they are, and not to investigate what chances there
might or might not be for the future, but always recognize every new
Government everywhere--suppose that it had sent that gentleman with
such an instruction to Hungary: what would have been the consequence? If
the government of Hungary which existed then and indeed existed very
actively, for it had created armies, had beaten Austria, and driven her
last soldier from Hungarian territory,--If that government had been
recognized by the United States, of course commercial intercourse with
the United States, in every respect, would have been lawful, according
to your existing international laws. The Emperor of Austria, the Czar of
Russia, because they are recognized powers, have full liberty to buy
your cannons, gunpowder, muskets--everything. That would have been the
case with Hungary. That legitimate commerce with the people of the
United States with Hungary, of course would have been protected by the
navy of the United States in the Mediterranean. Now, men we had
enough--but arms we had none. That would have given us arms, and having
beaten Austria already, we would have beaten Russia, and I, instead of
having now the honour of addressing you here, would perhaps have
dictated a peace in Moscow. But the gentleman was sent to _investigate
the chances_ of success. Upon his investigation Hungary perished.

Let me entreat you, friends of Hungary, do not much hesitate about
success. While Rome deliberated, Saguntum fell. I fear that by too long
investigating what chances we have, the chances of success will be
compromised, which by speedy help could have been ensured.

Well, I am answered--"there is no doubt about it.--Hungary is a match
for Austria. You have beaten Austria, it is true; but Russia--there is
the rub." Precisely, because there is the rub, I come to the United
States, relying upon the fundamental principles of your great Republic,
to claim the protection and maintenance of the law of nations against
the armed interference of Russia.

That is precisely what I claim. That accorded, no intervention of Russia
can take place; the word of America will be respected, not out of
consideration for your dignity, but because the Czar and the cabinet of
Russia, atrocious and unprincipled as they are, are no fools, and will
not risk their existence. Therefore your word will be respected.

You have an act of Congress, passed in 1818, by which the people of the
United States are forbidden by law to take any hostile steps against a
power with which the United States are at amity. Well, suppose Congress
pronounces such a resolution--that in respect to any power which
violates the laws of nations we recall this neutrality law and give full
liberty to follow its own will. (Applause.) Now, in declaring this,
Congress has prevented a war, because it has been pointed out to the
people in what way that pronunciation of the law of nations is to be
supported, and the enterprizing spirit of the people of the United
States is too well known as its sympathy for the cause of Hungary is
too decidedly expressed, not to impart a conviction to the Czar of
Russia that though the United States do not wish to go to war, so the
law of nations will be enforced, _peaceably if possible_ (turning
to Governor Wood) _forcibly if necessary_.

But as I again and again meet the doubt whether your protest even with
such sanction will be respected, I farther answer--let me entreat you to
try. It costs nothing. You are not bound to go farther than you
will;--try. _Perhaps_ it will be respected, and if it be, humanity
is rescued, and freedom on earth reigns where despotism now rules. It is
worth a trial.

Besides, I beg to remind you of my second and third requests, either of
which might bring a practical solution of this doubt. At present,
whoever will may sell arms to Austria, but you forbid your own citizens
to sell arms to Hungary; and this, though the rule of Austria has no
legitimate basis, but rests on unjust force; while you have avowed the
cause of Hungary to be just. Such a state of your law is not neutrality,
and is not righteous towards _us_ nor is it fair towards your
_own people_. If Venice were to-day to shake off the yoke of
Austria, Austria will forthwith forbid all of you to buy and sell with
Venice. Well: I say that is not fair towards your own citizens, any more
than to the Venetians. True; you have not the right to open any market
by force, towards a nation which is unwilling to deal with you, but you
have a clear right to deal with one which desires it, in spite of any
belligerent who chooses to forbid you. How could the fact of Hungary or
Venice rising up against their oppressor justify Austria in damaging the
lawful commerce of America with those nations? On this turns my second
principle, which I consider of high importance for the coming struggle;
that the United States would declare their resolve to uphold their
commercial intercourse with every nation which is ready to accept it.

Thirdly, I claimed that you would recognize the Hungarian Declaration of
Independence as having been legitimate. My enemies have misrepresented
this, as if I desired to be recognized as _de facto_ the Governor
of Hungary. This is mere absurdity. That is not the question--_am_
I governor or not governor? The question is--_was_ the Declaration
of Independence of Hungary, in the judgment of the people of the United
States, a legitimate one, to which my nation had a right--or was it not?
I believe America cannot answer no, because your very existence rests on
a similar act. And if that declaration is made, what will be the
consequence of it? What will be the practical result?  Why, that very
moment when I or whoever else, upon the basis of this declaration,
recognized to be legitimate by your republic, shall take a stake upon
Hungarian independence, and issue a proclamation declaring that a
national government exists, that very moment the existence of the
government will be recognized, and the gentleman who will be sent to
Europe will not be sent to investigate what chances we have of success,
but into what diplomatic relation we shall come. And what will be the
consequence? A legitimate commercial intercourse of America. Then I can
fit out men of war--steamers and everything--and your laws will not
prevent me. The government of Hungary will then be a friendly power, and
therefore according to your laws everything might be done for the
benefit of my country--and who knows what a benefit it might secure to
yourselves?

As regards my use of any pecuniary aids, I declare that I will respect
the laws of every nation where I have the honour even temporarily to be.
I will employ that aid, which the friends of Hungary may place at my
disposal, for the benefit of my country, to be sure, but only in such a
way as is not forbidden by, or contrary to, your laws. Now, to make an
armed expedition against a friendly power--that is forbidden. But if
Hungary rises upon the basis of a recognized, legitimate independence,
then what is necessary for it to prepare for coming into that position
is lawful. I have taken the advice of the highest authorities in that
respect. I was not so bold as to become the interpreter of your laws,
but I have asked, Is that lawful, or is it not? from the highest
authorities in law matters of the United States.

Now to return to Hungary. In what condition is it! In the beginning of
my talking I mentioned the invasion of Tartarian hordes. Then the wild
beasts spread over the land, and caused the few remnants of the people
to take refuge in some castles, and fortresses, and fortified places and
in the most remote and sterile ground. The wild beasts fed on human
blood. Now again the wild beasts are spreading terribly; and why?
Because to have a single pistol, to have a sword, or a musket, is a
crime which is punished by several years' imprisonment. Such is now the
condition of Hungary! Therefore, you may now see that the country is
disarmed, and of what importance is it for that success, about which I
hear now and then doubts, to have arms prepared in a convenient lawful
manner.

[After this, Kossuth spoke in some detail concerning the pecuniary
contributions; and closed with complaints of his painfully over-worked
chest, which had much impeded his speech.]

       *       *       *       *       *

XXIX.--OHIO AND FRANCE CONTRASTED AS REPUBLICS.

[_Reception at Cincinnati_.]

Kossuth having been received by a vast assemblage of the people of
Cincinnati was addressed in their name by the Honourable Caleb Smith,
from whose speech the following are extracts:--

Your progress through a portion of the whole States which originally
constituted the American confederacy, has called forth such
manifestations of public feeling as leave no doubt that the liberty
enjoyed by the people of those States, has created in their hearts a
generous sympathy for the advocates of civil liberty who have
endeavoured to establish free institutions in Europe.

The brilliant success which attended the first efforts of the Hungarian
Patriots, excited the hope that the tricoloured flag unfurled on the
shores of the Danube, would, like the stars and stripes of our own
Republic, become the emblem and the hope of freedom.

The intervention of Russia, in violation of the law of nations, in
defiance of justice and right, and in disregard of the public sentiment
of the civilized world, for a time, at last, disappointed this hope; and
the exultation it excited was followed by a mournful sadness, when
Russian arms and domestic treason combined, caused the Hungarian flag to
trail in the dust.

Hungary failed to establish her independence, but failed only, when
success was impossible. The efforts she has made have not been wholly
lost. The seed which she has sown in agony and blood, will yet sprout
and bring forth fruit. The memory of her devoted sons who have fallen in
the cause of liberty, will be perpetuated upon the living tablets of the
hearts of freedom's votaries throughout the world. The spirits of the
martyrs shall whisper hope and consolation to the hearts of her
surviving children; and from out the dungeons of her captive patriots
shall go forth the spirit of liberty to cheer and animate their
countrymen.

You are engaged in a high and holy mission. The redemption of your
fatherland from oppression is worthy of your efforts, and may God
prosper them; and may you find in this free land such sympathy and aid
as will strengthen your heart for the stern trials which await you in
your own country.

Kossuth replied:--

Sir,--Before I answer you, let me look over this animated ocean, that I
may impress upon my memory the look of those who have transformed the
wilderness of a primitive forest into an immense city, of which there
exists a prediction that, by the year of our Lord 2000, it will be the
greatest city in the world.

"The West! the West! the region of the Father of Rivers," there thou
canst see the cradle of a new-born humanity. So I was told by the
learned expounders of descriptive geography, who believe that they know
the world, because they have seen it on maps.

The West a cradle! Why? A cradle is the sleeping place of a child
wrapped in swaddling clothes and crying for the mother's milk.

People of Cincinnati, are you that child which, awakening in an
unwatched moment, liberated his tender hands from the swaddling band,
swept away by his left arm the primitive forest planted by the Lord at
creation's dawn, and raised by his right hand this mighty metropolis.
Why, if that be your childhood's pastime, I am awed by the presentiment
of your manhood's task; for it is written, that it is forbidden to men
to approach too near to omnipotence. And that people here which created
this rich city, and changed the native woods of the red man into a
flourishing seat of Christian civilization and civilized
Christianity--into a living workshop of science and art, of industry and
widely spread commerce; and performed this change, not like the drop,
which, by falling incessantly through centuries, digs a gulf where a
mountain stood, but performed it suddenly within the turn of the hand,
like a magician; that people achieved a prouder work than the giants of
old, who dared to pile Ossa upon Pelion; but excuse me, the comparison
is bad.

Those giants of old heaped mountain upon mountain, with the impious
design to storm the heavens. You have transformed the wilderness of the
West into the dwelling-place of an enlightened, industrious, intelligent
Christian community, that it may flourish a living monument of the
wonderful bounty of Divine Providence--a temple of freedom, which
glorifies God, and bids oppressed humanity to hope.

And yet, when I look at you, citizens of Cincinnati, I see no race of
giants, astonishing by uncommon frame: I see men as I am wont to see all
my life, and I have lived almost long enough to have seen Cincinnati a
small hamlet, composed of some modest log-houses, separated by dense
woods, where savage beast and savage Indian lurked about the lonely
settlers, who, as the legend of Jacob Wetzel and his faithful log tells,
had to wrestle for life when they left their poor abode.

What is the key of this rapid wonderful change? The glorious cities of
old were founded by heroes whom posterity called demi-gods, and whose
name survived their work by thousands of years. Who is your hero? Who
stood god-father at the birth of the Queen of the West?

I looked to history and found not his name. But instead of one mortal
man's renowned name, I find in the records of your city's history an
immortal being's name, and that is, _the people_. The word sparkles
with the lustre of a life invigorating flame, and that flame is LIBERTY.
Freedom, regulated by wise institutions, based upon the great principle
of national independence and self-government; this is the magical rod by
which the great enchanter, "_the people_," has achieved this
wonderful work.

Sir, there is a mighty change going on in human development. Formerly
great things were done by great men, whose names stand in history like
milestones, marking the march of mankind on the highway of progress. It
was mankind which marched, and still it passed unnoticed and unknown. Of
him history has made no record, but of the milestones only, and has
called them great men. The lofty frame of individual greatness
overshadowed the people, who were ready to follow but not prepared to go
without being led. Humanity and its progress was absorbed by
individualities; because the people which stood low in the valley got
giddy by looking up to the mountain's top, where its leaders stood. It
was the age of childhood for nations. Children cling to the leading
strings as to a necessity, and feel it a benefit to be led.

But the leaders of nations changed soon into kings. Ambition claimed as
a right what merit had gained as a free offering. Arrogance succeeded to
greatness; and out of the child-like attachment for benefits received,
the duty of blind obedience was framed by the iron hand of violence, and
by the craft of impious hypocrisy, degrading everything held for holy by
men--religion itself--into a tool of oppression on earth. It was the era
of uncontroverted despotism, which, with sacrilegious arrogance, claimed
the title of divine rank; and mankind advanced slowly in progress,
because it was not conscious of its own aim. Oppression was taken for a
gloomy fatality.

The scene has changed. Nations have become conscious of their rights and
destiny, and will tolerate no masters, nor will suffer oppression any
longer. The spirit of freedom moves through the air; and remember, that
you are morally somewhat responsible for it, inasmuch as it is your
glorious struggle for independence which was the first upheaving of
mankind's heart roused to self-conscious life. Even by that first effort
she gloriously achieved the national independence of America. Though
gifted with all the blessings of nature's virginal vitality, you would
never have succeeded to achieve this wonderful growth which we see, if
you had employed your conquered national independence merely to take a
new master for the old one.

And mark well, gentlemen! a nation may have a master even if it has no
king--a nation may be called a republic, and yet be not
free--_Wherever centralization exists, there the nation has either
sold or lent, either alienated or delegated its sovereignty_; and
wherever this is done, the nation has a master--and he who has a master
is of course not his own master. Power may be centralized in many--the
centralization by and by will be concentrated in few, as in ancient
Venice, or in one, as in France at the time of the "_Uncle_," some
forty years ago, and again in France, now that the "_Nephew_" has
his bloody reign for a day.

Yes, gentlemen, if that generation of devoted patriots who achieved the
Independence of the United States, had merely changed the old master for
a new one with the name of an Emperor or a King, or of an omnipotent
President, your country were now just something like Brazil or Mexico,
or the Republic of South America, all of them independent, as you know,
and all except Brazil even Republics, and all rich with nature's
blessings, and offering a new home to those who fly from the oppression
of the Old World--and yet all of them old before they were young, and
decrepit before they were strong. Had the founders of your country's
Independence followed this direction which led the rest of America
astray, Cincinnati would be a hamlet yet as it was in Jacob Wetzel's
time; and Ohio, instead of being a first-rate star in the constellation
of your Republic, would be an appendage of neighbouring Eastern
States--a not yet explored desert, marked in the map of America only by
lines of northern latitude and western longitude.

The people, a real sovereign; your institutions securing real freedom,
because founded on the principles of self-government; union to secure
national independence and the position of a power on earth; and all
together, having no master but God; omnipotence not vested in any man,
in any assembly,--and an open field to every honest exertion--because
civil, political, and religious liberty is the common benefit to all,
not limited but by itself (that is, by the unseen, but not unfelt,
influence of self-given law); that is the key of the living wonder which
spreads before my eyes.

Let me recall to your memory a curious fact. It is just a hundred years
ago, that the first trading house upon the Great Miami was built by
daring English adventurers, at a place later known as Laramie's Store,
then the territory of the Twigtwee Indians. The trade house was
destroyed by Frenchmen, who possessed then a whole world on the
continent of America. Well, twenty-four years later, France aided your
America in its struggle for independence; and oh!  feel not offended in
your proud power of to-day, when I say that independence would not then
have been achieved without the aid of France.

Since that time, France has been twice a Republic, and changed its
constitutions thirteen times; and, though thirty-six millions strong, it
has lost every foot of land on the continent of America, and at home it
lies prostrated beneath the feet of the most inglorious usurper that
ever dared to raise ambition's bloody seat upon the ruins of liberty.
And your Republic? It has grown a giant of power. And Ohio?  out of the
ruins of a trading-house into a mighty commonwealth of two millions of
free and happy men, who shout out with a voice like the thunderstorm, to
the despots of the Old World, "ye shall stop in your ambitious way
before the power of freedom, ready to protect the common laws of all
humanity."

What a glorious triumph of your institutions over the principles of
CENTRALIZED government!

Oh! may all the generations yet unborn, and all the millions who will
yet gather in this New World of the West, which soon will preponderate
in the scale of the Union, where all the west weighed nothing fifty
years ago--may they all ever and ever remember the high instruction
which the Almighty has revealed in this parallel of different results.

Sir, you say that Ohio can show no battle field connected with
recollections of your own glorious revolution. Let me answer, that the
whole West is a monument, and Cincinnati the fair cornice of it. If your
eastern sister States have instructed the world how nations become
independent and free, the West shows to the world what a nation once
independent and really free can become.

Allow me to declare, that by standing before the world as such an
instructive example, you exercise the most effective revolutionary
propaganda; for if the mis-result of French revolutions discourage the
nations from shaking off the 'oppressors' yoke, your victory,--and still
more, your unparalleled prosperity,--has encouraged oppressed nations to
dare what you dared.

Egotists and hypocrites may say that you are not responsible for it; you
have bid nobody to follow you:--and it may be true that you are not
responsible before a tribunal. Still, you are sufficiently free not to
feel offended by a true word; therefore I say you are responsible before
your own conscience, for, your example having started a new doctrine,
the teacher of a new doctrine is morally bound not to forsake his
doctrine when assailed in the person of his disciples.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXX.--WAR A PROVIDENTIAL NECESSITY AGAINST OPPRESSION.

[_To the Clergy of Cincinnati_.]

The clergy of Cincinnati addressed Kossuth by the mouth of the Rev. Mr.
Fisher. Among other topics, this gentleman said:--

We wish to _you_ first, and through you, to the world, to express
our respect for those heroic clergymen who dared to offer public prayers
to Almighty God for the success of your arms. We have not forgotten the
manner in which Austria attempted to dragoon their tongues into silence,
and their souls into abject submission. Nor can we believe that a
country with such pastors--that a country whose religious interests are
confided to men ready to pray against the Despot, will be suffered by
our heavenly Father to remain trodden down, and to have her name blotted
out of the history of nations. If in the great battle of freedom, the
heart of the minister of religion at the Altar, beats in sympathy with
the heart of the minister at the Council Board, and the soldier in the
battle-field, there is then a union of the moral, intellectual, and
physical forces of a nation, which we have been taught to believe would
generally and ultimately be victorious.

We frankly confess to you that our hope that Hungary is not to share the
fate of unhappy Poland, is grounded first on the large element of a
Protestant ministry she embraces, and secondly on the advance which the
nations are making in a true understanding of the principles of
republican freedom. We believe the cause of Hungary to be just. Against
the usurpations of Kings and perjured Princes--against the interference
of foreign powers to assist in treading on the sparks of liberty
anywhere on the earth, and especially in such a land as yours, we claim
the privilege at the fit time of entering our protest and expressing
toward such acts our deepest abhorrence. And while we desire most
earnestly the advent of universal peace, and rejoice that the power of
moral principles is increasing in the world, and anticipate the day when
the nations shall learn war no more, yet we are fully convinced, both
from the Holy Scriptures and the history of the past, that under the
overruling providence of God wars occasioned by the oppression, the
ambition, and the covetousness of men, are often the means of breaking
up the stagnant waters of superstition and irreligion, and securing to
the truth a position from which it may most successfully send abroad its
light, and mould the heart of a nation to religion and peace.
_Despotism is_ in our view _a perpetual war of a few upon the
many_; and we must unlearn some of the earliest lessons that our
mothers taught us and our fathers illustrated in their lives, before we
can cease to sympathize with the assertors of their rights against the
force or the fraud of their fellow-men. And since the sad issue of
revolution after revolution in infidel France, there are not a few of
us, who have indulged the hope (especially since your visit to our
shores), that in central Europe, in your native land, among an
undebauched and a Bible-reading people, a government might arise that
would accord freedom of conscience to all, and shine as a light of
virtuous republicanism upon the darkness around.

In meeting you thus we design no mere display, no ineffective parade of
words. We wish to give whatever weight of influence we may bear in this
community, to the cause of freedom in your native land, to assist in
securing to you and your nation, such aid as a nation situated as we are
can _wisely_ give, so as best to subserve the interests of liberty
and humanity in all the world. We regard the moral influence of this
country as of the first importance; and the peaceful working of
republican institutions as a daily protest against despotism. And for
ourselves we pledge to you and your country, that we will, in public and
private, bear your cause upon our hearts, and invoke in your behalf, the
intervention of an arm that no earthly power can resist.

Kossuth replied at length. The following is an extract from his
speech:--

You have been pleased to refer to war as, under certain circumstances,
an instrumentality of Divine Providence--and indeed so it is. Great
things depend upon the exact definition of a word. There is, I suppose,
nobody on earth who takes war for a moral or happy condition. Every man
must wish peace; but peace must not be confounded with oppression. It
is our duty, I believe, to follow the historical advice of the
Scriptures, which very often have pointed out war as an instrumentality
against oppression and injustice.

You have very truly said that despotism is a continued war of the few
against the many, of ambition against mankind. Now if that be
true--(and true it is--for war is nothing else than an appeal to
force)--then how can any persons claim of oppressed nations not to
resort to war? Who makes war?  those who defend themselves? or those who
attack others?  Now if it be true that despotism is a continued attack
upon mankind, then war comes from that quarter, and I have no where in
the world heard that an unjust attack should not be opposed by a just
defence. It is absurd to entreat nations not to disturb a peace which
does not exist. What would have become of Christianity in Europe (and in
further consequence, also in America), if in those times, when
Mohammedanism was yet a conquering power, Hungary out of love of peace
had not opposed Mohammedanism in defence of Christianity?  What would
have become of Protestantism when assailed by Charles V, by Philip II,
and others? Did Luther or others forbid the use of arms against arms, to
protect for men the right of private judgment in matters of salvation.
I have seen war. I know what an immense machine it is. What an immense
misfortune and with what sufferings it is connected. Believe me, there
is no nation which loves war, but many that fear war less than they hate
oppression, which prevents both their happiness on earth and the
development of private judgment for salvation in eternity.

You have been pleased to assure me that you take the cause of Hungary
for a just cause. I most respectfully thank you for it. I consider your
judgment of immense value in that respect. Why? Because you are too
deeply penetrated by the sacred mission to which you have devoted your
lives, ever to approve anything which you would not consider consistent
and in harmony with your position as ministers of the gospel; and
therefore when you give me the verdict of justice for the cause of
Hungary, I take your approbation as a sanction from the principles of
the Christian religion.

Let me therefore entreat you, gentlemen, to bestow your action, your
prayers, and that which in the gospel is connected with
prayers--watchfulness, upon my country's cause. It is not without
design that I mention this word watchfulness; for it would be not
appropriate for me to speak any word which might excite mere passion. I
rely upon principles in their plainness, and make no appeal to blind
excitement; but I venture to throw out the hint, that in certain
quarters even the word _religion_ is employed as a tool against
that cause which you pronounce to be just; and therefore I may be
permitted to claim from ministers of Christ--from Protestant
clergymen--from American Protestant clergymen, that they will not only
pray for that cause, but also be watchful against that abuse of religion
for the oppression of a just cause.

You have farther stated that as American clergymen, you entertain the
conviction that a free Gospel can only be permanently enjoyed under a
free civil government. Now what is free Gospel? The trumpet of the
Gospel is of course sounded from the moral influence of the truths,
which are deposited by Divine Providence in the holy Scriptures. No
influence can be more powerful than that of the truth which God himself
has revealed, and nevertheless you say, that for permanent enjoyment of
this moral influence, the field of free civil government is necessary.
So it is. Now, let me make the application of these very truths in
respect to the moral institutions of your country. I entirely trust that
all other institutions which we know now will by and bye disappear
before the moral influence of _your_ institutions, as is proved by
the wonderful development of this country--but under one condition, that
the nations be restored to national independence: since, so long as
absolutist power rules the world, there is no place, no field _for_
the moral influence of your institutions. Precisely as the moral
influence of the Gospel cannot spread without a free civil government,
so the influence of your institutions can spread only upon the basis of
national independence, as a common benefit to every nation.

You will, I hope, generously excuse me for having answered your generous
sentiments in such a plain manner. My indisposition has given me no time
to prepare for the honour of meeting you in such a way as I would have
wished. You have given joy, consolation, and hope to my heart, and
encouragement to go on in that way which you honour with your welcome
and your sympathy; and I shall thank this your generosity in the most
effective manner, by following your advice and by further using those
exertions which have met your approbation.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXI.--ON WASHINGTON'S POLICY.

[_Speech on the Anniversary of Washington's Birthday, Cincinnati_.]

A splendid entertainment was prepared, to which six hundred persons sat
down. After the toasts many energetic speeches were made. Mr. Corry
said:--

The time has come for our mighty Republic to stand by its friends and
brave its enemies. There is a confederation of tyrants now marching
across the cinders of Europe. Are we to take no heed of their
aggressions at our doors? It is for us to aid the people of the old
world against their tyrants, as we were aided to get rid of ours. Ohio
will not fail in her duty.

The president of the evening, Mr. James J. Foran, observed:--

In 1849 we held in this city the first meeting, I believe, in the United
States on this subject, and expressed our indignation at the
unwarrantable interference of Russia. We declared it to be our duty, as
a free and powerful government, to notify to Russia, that her
interference in the affairs of Hungary must cease, or the United States
would cast their strength on the side of justice and right against
tyranny and oppression.... In the great struggle which is approaching
between liberty and absolutism we shall be compelled to act a part. It
will not do to rely altogether on either a just cause or the
interposition of Providence. It is well to have both of these; but to
add to them our own exertions, is indispensable to human success.

Here, "in the wilderness," in the bosom of the Great West, in the city
of one hundred and fifty thousand inhabitants, whence emanated the first
public move in America for his personal cause, and also his liberation
from captivity, do we welcome Louis Kossuth, the champion of
self-government in Europe.

Kossuth in response said:--

Mr. President: I consider it a particular favour of Providence that I am
permitted to partake, on the present solemn occasion, in paying the
tribute of honour and gratitude to the memory of your immortal
Washington.

An architect having raised a proud and noble building to the service of
the Almighty, his admirers desired to erect a monument to his memory.
How was it done? His name was inscribed upon the wall, with these
additional words: "You seek his monument--look around."

Let him who looks for a monument of Washington, look around the United
States. The whole country is a monument to him. Your freedom, your
independence, your national power, your prosperity, and your prodigious
growth, is a monument to Washington.

There is no room left for panegyric, none especially to a stranger whom
you had full reason to charge with arrogance, were he able to believe
that his feeble voice could claim to be noticed in the mighty harmony of
a nation's praise. Let me therefore, instead of such an arrogant
attempt, pray that that GOD, to whose providential intentions Washington
was a glorious instrument, may impart to the people of the United States
the same wisdom for the conservation of the present prosperity of the
land and for its future security which he gave to Washington for the
foundation of it.

Allow me, sir, to add, Washington's wisdom consisted in doing all which,
according to the circumstances _of his time_ and the condition of
his country, was necessary to his country's freedom, independence,
welfare, glory, and future security. I pray to God that the people of
this Republic, and all those whom the people's confidence has entrusted
with the honourable charge of directing the helm of the commonwealth,
may be endowed with the same wisdom of doing all which _present_
circumstances and the _present_ condition of your country point out
to be not only consistent with but necessary to your country's present
glory, present prosperity, and future security.

Surely, that is the fittest tribute to the memory of Washington, that is
the most faithful adherence to the doctrine which he bequeathed to you,
by far a better tribute, and by far a more faithful adherence, than to
do, literally, the same that he did, amid circumstances quite different
from those you are now surrounded with, and in a condition entirely
different from that in which you and the world are now.

The principles of Washington are for ever true, and should for ever be
the guiding star to the United States. But to imitate literally the
accidental policy of Washington, would be to violate his principles. If
the spirit of Washington could raise its voice now, in this
distinguished circle of American patriots, it would loudly and
emphatically protest against such a course, and would denounce it as not
only injurious to his memory, but also as dangerous to the future of
this Republic which he founded with such eminent wisdom and glorious
success.

I have seen, sir, the people of the United States advised to regard the
writings of Washington as the Mahommedan regards the Koran, considering
everything which is not to be found in the Koran as useless to heed. Now
this parallel I, indeed, take for a very curious compliment to the
_memory of Washington_--a compliment at which his immortal spirit
must feel offended, I am sure.

Why? to what purpose is the immortal light of Heaven beaming in man's
mind, if it be wise not to make any use of it? To what purpose all that
assiduous care about public instruction, and about the propagation of
knowledge and intelligence, if the writings of Washington are the Koran
of America; forbidding the right of private judgment, which the great
majority of your nation claim as a natural right, even in respect to the
Holy Bible, that book of Divine origin?  Look to the east where the
Koran rules, obstructing with its absolutism the development of human
intellect: what do you behold there? You behold mighty nations, a noble
race of men, interesting in many respects, teeming with germs of
vitality, and still falling fast into decay, because doomed to
stagnation of their intelligence by that blind faith in their Koran's
absolute perfection, which we see recommended as a model to the people
of this Republic, whose very existence rests on progress.

Indeed, gentlemen, I dare to say that I yield to nobody in the world, in
reverence and respect to the immortal memory of Washington. His life and
his principles were the guiding star of my life; to that star I looked
up for inspiration and advice, during the vicissitudes of my stormy
life. Hence I drew that devotion to my country and to the cause of
national freedom, which you, gentlemen, and millions of your
fellow-citizens and your national government, are so kind as to honour
by unexampled distinction, though you meet it not brightened by success,
but meet it in the gloomy night of my existence, in that helpless
condition of a homeless wanderer, in which I must patiently bear the
title of an "_imported rebel_" and of a "_beggar_" in the very
land of Washington, for having dared to do what Washington did; for
having dared to do it with less skill and with less success, but, Heaven
knows, not with less honesty and devotion than he did.

Well, it is useless to remark that Washington would probably have ended
with equal failure, had his country not met that foreign aid for which
they honourably _begged_. It is useless to remark that he would
undoubtedly have failed, if after the glorious battle of Yorktown he had
met a fresh enemy of more than two hundred thousand men, such as we met,
and had been forsaken in that new struggle by all the world. It is
useless to remark that success should not be the only test of virtue on
earth, and fortune should not change the devotion of a patriot into an
outrage and a crime; and particularly not, when success is only torn out
of the hands of patriotism by foreign violence, and by the most
sacrilegious infraction of the common laws of all humanity. All this is
useless to say. I must bear many things--must bear even malignity--but
can bear it more easily, because against the insult of some who plead
the cause of despots in your republic, I have for consolation the
tranquillity of my conscience, the love of my countrymen, the
approbation of generous friends, and the sympathy of millions in that
very land where I meet the title of an "_imported rebel_."

I was saying, sir, that I yield to no man on earth in reverence to the
memory of the immortal WASHINGTON! Indeed, I consider it not
inconsistent with this reverence to say: Never let past ages bind the
life of future;--let no man's wisdom be _Koran_ to you, dooming
progress to stagnation, and judgment to the meagre task of a mere
rehearsing memory.

Thus I would speak, should even that which I advocate, be contrary to
what Washington taught--even then I would appeal from the thoughts of a
man, to the spirit of advanced mankind, and from the eighteenth century
to the present age.

But fortunately I am not in that necessity; what I advocate is not only
not in contradiction, but in strict harmony with Washington's
principles, so much so that I have nothing else to wish than that
Washington's doctrine should be quoted fairly as a system, and not by
picking out single words, and concealing that which gives the
interpretation to these words.

Indeed I can wish nothing more than that the _principles_ of
Washington should be followed. And I may also be permitted to say, that
not every word of Washington is a principle, and that what he
recommended as a policy according to the exigencies of his time, he
never intended to recommend as a rule for ever to be followed even in
such circumstances which he, with all his wisdom, could neither foresee
nor imagine. And I may be perhaps permitted to wish the people of the
United States should take for a truth, even in respect to the writings
of Washington, what we are taught by the ministers of the Gospel in
respect to the Holy Scriptures--that, by the discretion of private
judgment, a distinction must be made between what is essential and what
is not, between what is substantial and what is accidental, between what
is a principle and what is but a history.

[Kossuth proceeded to argue concerning the just interpretation of
Washington's words, as in his New York speech; and continued:]

But what is the present condition upon the basis of which I humbly
plead? Allow me, in answer, to quote the words of one of your most
renowned statesmen, the present Secretary of State. You will find then,
gentlemen, that every word he then spoke, is yet more true and more
appropriate to-day.

"The holy alliance," says Mr. Webster, "is an alliance of crowns against
the people--of sovereigns against their own subjects;--the union of the
physical force of all governments against the rights of all people, in
all countries. Its tendency is to put an end to all Nations as such.
Extend the principles of that alliance, and the nations are no more.
There are only kings. It divides society horizontally, and leaves the
sovereigns above, and all the people below; it sets up the one above all
rule, all restraint, and puts down the others to be trampled beneath our
feet."

This is the condition of things to which I claim the attention of
Republican America: moreover, for its own interest's alike, I claim its
attention to the following words from the same statesman, worthy of the
most earnest consideration precisely now-a-days to every American.

"The declaration of ---- says: the powers have an undoubted right to
take a hostile attitude in regard to those states in which the overthrow
of the government may operate as an example."

Mark! oh! mark! gentlemen, how this abominable doctrine is carried out
in Hungary, in Prussia, in Schleswig Holstein, and in Hesse Cassel.

Now, the American statesman proceeds to maintain, that every sovereign
in Europe who goes to war _to repress an example_, is monstrous.
Indeed, if this principle be allowed, what becomes of the United States?
Are you not as legitimate objects for the operation of that principle as
any we attempt to set an example on the other side of the Atlantic. You
thought that when oppressed you might lawfully resist oppression. We, in
Hungary, thought the same; but against us is that monstrous principle of
armed intervention _against setting up an example_. So let me
therefore ask with Mr. Webster: Are you so sick of your liberty and its
effects, as to be willing to part with that doctrine upon which your
very existence rests? Do you forget what you, as a people, owe to
_lawful resistance_? and are you willing to abandon the law and
rights of society to the mercy of the allied despots, who have united to
crush them everywhere? Neutrality? Why, indeed, that would be a strange
explanation of neutrality, if you would sanction by your indifference,
the hostile alliance of all despots against republican, nay, against
constitutional principles on earth.

But suppose Hungary rises once more to do what Washington did (and be
sure it will), and Russia interferes again and you remain again (what
some of you call) neutral--that is, you remain indifferent--what is the
consequence? Czar Nicholas and Emperor Francis-Joseph may buy and carry
away arms, ammunition, armed ships--nay, even armed sympathizers (if
they find them)--to murder Hungary with and you will protect that
commerce, and consider it a lawful one. But if I buy the same, you don't
protect that commerce; and if I would enlist an "armed expedition," for
what the Czar may do against Hungary, you would send me to prison for
ten years.

Is that neutrality? The people of Hungary crushed by violence, shall be
nothing, its sovereign right nothing; but the piracy of the Czar,
encroaching upon the sacred rights of mine and many other nations, shall
be regarded as legitimate, against which the United States, though grown
to mighty power on earth, able without any risk of its own security to
maintain the law of nations and the influence of its glorious example,
should still have nothing to object, only because Washington, more than
half a century ago, declared neutrality appropriate to the infant
condition of his country then; and was anxious to gain time, that your
country might settle and mature its recent institutions, and progress to
that degree of strength, when it would be able to defy any power on
earth in a just cause.

No, gentlemen, my principles may be rejected by the United States, but
never will impartial history acknowledge that by doing thus the United
States followed the principles of Washington. The ruling policy of
Washington may be summed up in the word "_national self-preservation_,"
to which he, as the generous emotions of his noble breast prompted, was
ever inclined to subordinate everything.

And he was right. Self-preservation must be the chief principle of every
nation. But the _means_ of this self-preservation are different in
different times. To-day, I confidently dare state, the duty of
self-preservation commends to the United States, not to allow that the
principle of absolutism should become omnipotent by having a charter
guaranteed to violate the laws of nature and of nature's God, which
Washington and his heroic associates invoked, when they proclaimed the
independence of this Republic.

A second principle of Washington, and precisely in regard to foreign
nations, is, to extend your commercial relations. That is, again, a
principle, gentlemen, which I boldly can invoke to the support of my
humble claims; because if the league of despots becomes omnipotent in
Europe, it is certain that the commerce of Republican America will very
soon receive a death blow on the other side of the Atlantic; whereas,
the maintenance of the law of nations, by affording a fair field to
Hungary, Italy, and Germany, to settle their accounts with their own
domestic oppressors, would open a vast field to your commercial
relations, larger than imagination can conceive.

The third principle of Washington is to steer clear of permanent
alliances with any portion of the foreign world. Well, sir, I do not
solicit alliances; I solicit the maintenance of the laws of nations,
that the unholy alliance of despots may not interfere with the natural
right of nations, upon which yourselves have established the lofty hall
of your national independence.

It is on the stream of these rights that you are borne on in a rapid and
irresistible course of prosperity. Believe me, gentlemen, that course
you cannot check--you could not abandon the privileges upon which you
embarked, without exposing to a shipwreck the glorious future of your
existence and allow me to state that my poor country has some particular
claim to be protected by the consistency of your principles, because
_we are the first nation towards which you have not exercised your
principles._ You say you recognize every _de facto_ government.
Well, why was this not done with Hungary? We shook off the yoke of the
Austrian dynasty, we declared our national independence, and did thus
not in an untimely movement of popular excitement, but after we became
_de facto_ independent, after we had, by crushing our enemy in our
struggle of legitimate defence and driving him out from our country,
proved to the world that we have sufficient strength to take our
position amongst the independent nations of the earth.

And still the United States (which they never yet have done) withheld
the benefit of their recognition, which we have full reason to believe
would have been immediately followed by other recognitions, and thus
would have prevented the foreign interference of Russia, by encouraging
our national independence within those boundaries of diplomatic
communication which no isolated power dared yet to disregard.

Sir, I have studied the history of your immortal Washington and have,
from my early youth, considered his principles as a living source of
instruction to statesmen and to patriots.

I now ask you to listen to Washington himself.

When, in that very year, in which Washington issued his Farewell
Address, M. Adet, the French Minister, presented him the flag of the
French Republic, Washington, as president of the United States, answered
officially, with these memorable words:

"Born in a land of liberty, having early learned its value, having
engaged in a perilous conflict to defend it, having devoted the best
years of my life to secure its permanent establishment in my country, my
anxious recollections, my sympathetic feelings, and my best wishes, are
irresistibly attracted, whensoever in any country I see an oppressed
nation unfurl the banner of freedom."

Thus spoke Washington. Have I not then full reason to say, that if he
were alive his generous sympathy would be with me, and the sympathy of a
Washington never was, and never would be, a barren word. Washington who
raised the word "honesty" as a rule of policy, never would have
professed a sentiment which his wisdom as a statesman would not have
approved.

Sir! here let me end. I consider it already as an immense benefit that
your generous attention connected the cause of Hungary with the
celebration of the memory of Washington.

Spirit of the departed! smile down from heaven upon this appreciation of
my country's cause; watch over those principles which thou hast taken
for the guiding star of thy noble life, and the time will yet come when
not only thine own country, but liberated Europe also, will be a living
monument to thy immortal name.

[Many other toasts, and highly energetic speeches followed, which our
limits force us to exclude.]

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXII.--KOSSUTH'S CREDENTIALS.

[_Farewell to Ohio, Feb. 25th_.]

Sir,--I am about to bid an affectionate farewell to Cincinnati, and
through Cincinnati to the commonwealth of Ohio--that bright morning star
of consolation and of hope risen from the West over the gloomy horizon
of Hungary's and of Europe's dark night!

Ohio! how that name thrills through the very heart of my heart, with
inexpressible pleasure, like the first trumpet sound of resurrection in
the ears of the chosen just!

Ohio! how I will cherish that very name, the dearest of my soul, after
the name of my beloved own dear fatherland.

How I long for words of flame to express all the warmth of my heartfelt
gratitude! And still how poor I feel in words, precisely because my
heart is so full; so full, that I can scarcely speak--because every
pulsation of my blood is fervent prayer to God for Ohio's glory and
happiness.

Let me dispense with empty words--let what Ohio _did_, _does_, and _will
do_, for the cause of European freedom, be its own monument!

I have met many a fair flower of sympathy in this great united Republic,
but all Ohio has been to me a blooming garden of sympathy. From the
first step on Ohio's soil to the last,--along all my way up to Cleveland
down to Columbus, and across to Cincinnati, and also beyond the line of
my joyful way,--in every city, in every town, in every village, in every
lonely farm, I have met the same generosity, the same sympathy.

The people, penetrated by one universal inspiration of lofty principles,
told me everywhere that Hungary must yet be free; that the people of
Ohio will not permit the laws of nations, of justice, and of humanity,
to be trampled down by the sacrilegious combination of despotism; that
the people of Ohio takes the league of despots against liberty and
against the principle of national self-government, for an insult offered
to the great republic of the West; that it takes it for an insult which
Ohio will not bear, but will put all the weight of its power into the
political scale. Would that all the United States with equal resolution
might spurn that insult to humanity.

That is the language which Ohio spoke to me through hundreds of
thousands of freemen--that is the language which Ohio spoke to me
through her senators and representatives in their high legislative
capacity--that is the language which Ohio spoke to me through her chief,
whom it has elevated to govern the commonwealth and to execute the
people's sovereign will.

The executive power, the legislature, the people, all united in that
harmony of generous protection to the just cause which I humbly plead;
but that is not all yet. Sympathy and political protection I have met
also everywhere; and have met it as well in the public opinion of the
people as in the executive and legislative departments of several
States, though it is a due tribute of acknowledgment to say, that
nowhere to that extent and in equal universality as in Ohio, but that
is yet not all.

The sympathy of Ohio was rich in fair fruits of substantial aid--from
the hall of the State legislature down to the humble abode of
noble-minded working men--and associations of the friends of Hungary,
spread through that powerful commonwealth, promise a permanent, noble
protection to the cause I plead.

Even the present occasion of bidding farewell to Ohio is of such a
nature as to entitle me, by its very organization to the hope that you
consider your noble task of aiding the cause of Hungary not yet done;
but that you have determined to go on in a practical direction, till
the future, developed by your active protection, proves to be richer yet
in fruit than the present is.

Considering the almost universal pronouncement of public opinion in this
great and prosperous commonwealth--considering the practical character
of the people of the West, the natural efficiency of this organization,
and _who_ are those who with generous zeal have devoted themselves
to carry it out on a large extent,--I may be well excused for
entertaining some expectations of no common success--of a success which
also in other parts of this great Union, may prove decisive in its
effects. No greater misfortune could be met with than disappointment in
such expectations, which we have been by the strongest possible motives
encouraged to conceive. To be disappointed in hopes we have justly
relied on, would be beyond all imagination terrible in its consequences.
I shudder at the very idea of the boundless woes it could not fail to be
attended with, not for myself--I attach not much value to my own
life,--but for thousands, nay for millions of men.

I know, gentlemen, that _here_ the question is entirely matter of
time. But in regard to time, I am permitted to say so much.

The outbreak of the unavoidable, decisive struggle between the two
opposite principles of freedom and despotism is hurried on in Europe by
two great impulses. The first is the insupportability of oppression
connected with the powerfully developed organization of the oppressed,
which by its very progress imposes the necessity of no delay. Be pleased
earnestly to reflect upon what I rather suggest than explain. And be
pleased also to read between the lines. I, of course, speak not of
anything relating to your country. I state simply European fact, of
which every thinking man, the Czars and their satellites themselves, are
fully aware, though the how and the where they cannot grasp.

The second impulse, hurrying events to a decision, is that very combined
scheme of activity which the despots of Europe too evidently display.
They know full well that they are on the brink of an inevitable
retribution; that their crimes have pushed them to the point, where
either their power will cease for ever to exist, or they must risk all
for all. In former times they relied at the hour of danger upon the
generous credulity of nations. By seemingly submitting, when the people
arose irresistible, they conjured the fury of the storm They saved
themselves by promises, and when the danger was over, they restored
their abused power by breaking their oath and by deceiving their
nations. By this atrocious impiety you have seen several victorious
revolutions in Europe deprived of their fruits and sinking to nothing
by having made compromise with royal perjury. I am too honest,
gentlemen, not to confess openly, that I myself shared this error of the
Old World--I myself plead guilty of that fatal European credulity. The
tyrants who by falsehood have gained their end, are aware that they have
no security; that the nations have lost faith in their oaths, and will
never be cheated again.

Hence, gentlemen, a very essential novelty in the present condition of
Europe. Formerly every revolution was followed by some slight progress
in the development of constitutionalism. A little more liberty to the
press, some sort of a trial by jury, a nominal responsibility of
ministers, or a mockery of popular representation in the
Legislature--something of that sort always resulted, momentarily, out of
former revolutions; and then the consciousness of being deceived by vile
mockery led to new revolutions.

But when in 1848 and 1849, our victories in Hungary had shaken to the
very foundation the artificial building of oppression, so that there was
no more hope left to tyranny, but to shelter itself under the wings of
Russia, the Czar told them--well, I accept the part of becoming your
master, ye kings, and I will help you, but _you must be obedient_
You, yourselves have encouraged revolutions, by making concessions to
them. I like not this everlasting resurrection of revolutions; it
disturbs my sleep. I am not sure not to find it at my own home some fine
morning. I therefore will help you, my servants, but under the
condition, that it is not only the bold Hungarians who must be crushed,
it is _revolution_ which must be crushed, its very spirit, in its
very vitality, everywhere; and to come to this aim, you must abandon all
shame as to sworn promises; withdraw every concession made to the spirit
of revolution; not the slightest freedom, no privilege, no political
right, no constitutional aspirations must be permitted; all and
everything must be levelled by the equality of passive obedience and
absolute servitude.

"Look to my Russia; I make no concessions, I rule with an iron rod, and
I am obeyed. All you must do the same and not govern, but domineer by
universal oppression. That is my sovereign will--obey."

Thus spoke the Czar. It is no opinion which I relate. It is a fact, a
historical fact, which the Czar openly proclaimed on several occasions,
particularly in that characteristic declaration, to which the
high-minded General Cass alluded in his remarkable speech on
"_non-intervention_" in the Senate of the United States, on the
10th day of February. The Czar Nicholas, complaining, that
"_insurrection has spread in every nation with an audacity which has
gained new force in proportion to the concessions of the
Governments_" declares that he considers it his divine mission to
crush the _Spirit of Liberty_ on earth, which he arrogantly terms
the spirit of insurrection and of anarchy.

By this you have the definition of what is meant by the words of "war
for what principle shall rule." _The issue must be felt, not only in
Europe, but here also and everywhere_; the issue will not leave a
chance for a new struggle, either to kings or to nations, for a long
time perhaps, and probably for centuries.

In that condition you can see the key of the remarkable fact, that when
I left my Asiatic prison under the protection of the star-spangled
flag--nations of different climates, different languages, different
institutions, different inclinations, united in the pronunciation of
sympathy, expectation, encouragement, and hope around my poor humble
self,--Italians, French, Portuguese, the people of England, Belgians,
Germans, Swiss and Swedes. It was the instinct of common danger, it was
the instinct of necessary union. It was no mere tribute of recognition
paid to the important weight of Hungary in the scale of this intense
universal struggle. It was still more a call of distress, entrusted by
the voice of mankind to my care, to bring it over to free America, as to
the natural and most powerful representative of that "Spirit of Liberty"
against which the leagued tyrants are waging a war of extermination with
inexorable resolution. Yes, it was a call of distress entrusted to my
care, to remind America that there is a tie in the destinies of nations;
and that those are digging a bottomless abyss who forsake the Spirit of
Liberty, when within the boundaries of common civilization half the
world utters in agony the call of universal distress.

That is the mission with which I come to your shores; and believe me,
gentlemen, that is the key of that wonderful sympathy with which the
people of this republic answers my humble appeal. There is blood from
our blood in these noble American hearts; there is the great heart of
mankind which pulsates in the American breast; there is the chord of
liberty which vibrates to my sighs.

Let ambitious fools, let the pigmies who live on the scanty food of
personal envy, when the very earth quakes beneath their feet, let even
the honest prudence of ordinary household times, measuring eternity with
that thimble with which they are wont to measure the bubbles of small
party interest, and, taking the dreadful roaring of the ocean for a
storm in a water glass, let those who believe the weather to be calm
because they have drawn a nightcap over their ears, and, burying their
heads into pillows of domestic comfort, do not hear Satan sweeping in a
hurricane over the earth; let envy, ambition, blindness, and the
pettifogging wisdom of small times, artistically investigate the
question of my official capacity, or the nature of my public authority;
let them scrupulously discuss the immense problem whether I still
possess, or possess no longer, the title of my once-Governorship; let
them ask for credentials, discuss the limits of my commission, as
representative of Hungary. I pity all such frog and mouse fighting.

I claim no official capacity--no public authority--no representation;
boast of no commission, of no written and sealed credentials. I am
nothing but what my generous friend, the Senator of Michigan, has justly
styled me, "a private and banished man." But in that capacity I have a
nobler credential for my mission than all the clerks of the world can
write, the credential that I am a "man,"--the credential that I am "a
patriot"--the credential that I love with all sacrificing devotion my
oppressed fatherland and liberty; the credential that I hate tyrants,
and have sworn everlasting hostility to them; the credential that I feel
the strength to do good service to the cause of freedom; good service as
perhaps few men can do, because I have the iron will, in this my breast,
to serve faithfully, devotedly, indefatigably, that noble cause.

I have the credential that I trust to God in heaven, to justice on
earth; that I offend no laws, but cling to the protection of laws. I
have the credential of my people's undeniable confidence and its
unshaken faith, to my devotion, to my manliness, to my honesty, and to
my patriotism; which faith I will honestly answer without ambition,
without interest, as faithfully as ever, but more skilfully, because
schooled by adversities. And I have the credential of the justice of the
cause I plead, and of the wonderful sympathy, which, not my person, but
that cause, has met and meets in two hemispheres.

These are my credentials, and nothing else. To whom this is enough, he
will help me, so far as the law permits and is his good pleasure. To
whom these credentials are not sufficient, let him look for a better
accredited man.

I have too lively a sentiment of my own modest dignity, ever to
condescend to polemics about my own personal merits or abilities. I
believe my life has been public enough to appertain to the impartial
judgment of history, but it may have perhaps interested you to hear,
how, in a small and inconsiderable circle of the Hungarian emigration,
the idea was started that I must be opposed, because I have declared
against all compromise with the House of Austria, or with royalty, and
because by declaring that my direction will be in every case only
republican, I make every arrangement, without revolution, impossible.
That I should be thus attacked at this crisis, does look like an
endeavour to check a benefit to my country, but I cannot forbear humbly
to beseech you, do not therefore think less favourably of my nation and
of the Hungarian emigration, for which I am sorry that I can do very
little, because I devote myself and all the success I may meet with to a
higher aim--to my country's freedom and independence. Believe me,
gentlemen, that my country and its exiled martyr sons are highly worthy
of your generous sympathy, though some few of the number do not always
act as they should.

They are but few who do so, and it would be unjust to measure all of us
by the faults of some few. Upon the whole, I am proud to say that the
Hungarian emigration was scrupulous to merit generous sympathy, and to
preserve the honour of the Hungarian name. Remember that though you are
Republicans, still here, in the very metropolis of Ohio, a man was found
to lecture for Russo-Austrian despotism, and to lecture with the
astonishing boldness of an immense ignorance.

But that good man I can dismiss with silence, the more because it is
with high appreciation and warm gratitude that I saw an honourable
gentleman, animated with the most generous sentiments of justice and
right, take immediately upon himself the task of refutation. I may
perhaps be permitted to remark, that that learned and honourable
gentleman, besides having nobly advocated the cause of freedom, justice,
and truth, has also well merited of his co-religionaries, who belong
together with himself, _to the Roman Catholic Church_.

Gentlemen, I have but one word yet, and it is a sad one--the word of
farewell. Cincinnati, Ohio, farewell! May the richest blessings of the
Almighty rest upon thee! In every heart, and in the hearts of my people,
thy name will for ever live, a glorious object for our everlasting love
and gratitude.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXIII.--HARMONY OF THE EXECUTIVE AND OF THE PEOPLE IN AMERICA.

[_Speech at Indianapolis_.]

Kossuth was received at the State House of Indianapolis by Governor
Wright, who, in the course of his address said:

Although I participate with my fellow-citizens in the pleasure
occasioned by your presence among us, yet it is not as an
_individual_ that I greet you with the words of welcome and
hospitality. No, sir,--it is in the name of the people of the State,
whom I represent, and whose warrant I feel that I have; and I bid you
welcome to-day, and assure you not only of my own but of their sympathy
and encouragement in the great cause you so ably represent.

He closed with the words:

If it shall be your fortune to lead your countrymen again in the contest
for liberty, be assured that the people of the United States, at least,
will not be indifferent, nor, if need be, inactive spectators of a
conflict that may involve, not only the independence of Hungary, but the
freedom of the world.

Again I bid you a most cordial welcome to the State of Indiana.

Kossuth replied:--

Governor,--Amongst all that I have been permitted to see in the United
State's, nothing has more attracted my attention than that part of your
democratic institutions which I see developed in the mutual and
reciprocal relations between the people and the constituted public
authorities.

In that respect there is an immense difference between Europe and
America, for the understanding of which we have to take into account the
difference of the basis of the political organization, and together with
it what the public and social life has developed in both hemispheres.

The great misfortune of Europe is, that the present civilization was
born in those cursed days when Republicanism set and Royalty rose. It
was a gloomy change. Nearly twenty centuries have passed, and torrents
of blood have watered the red-hot chains, and still the fetters are not
broken; nay--it is our lot to have borne its burning heat--it is our lot
to grasp with iron hand the wheels of its crushing car. Destiny--no;
Providence--is holding the balance of decision; the tongue is wavering
yet; one slight weight more into the one, or into the other scale, will
again decide the fate of ages, of centuries.

Upon this mischievous basis of royalty was raised the building of
authority; not of that authority which commands spontaneous reverence by
merit and the value of its services, but of that authority which
oppresses liberty. Hence the authority of a public officer in
unfortunate Europe consists in the power to rule and to command, and not
in the power to serve his country well--it makes men oppressive
downwards, while it makes them creeping before those who are above. Law
is not obeyed out of respect, but out of fear. A man in public office
takes himself to be better than his countrymen, and becomes arrogant and
ambitious; and because to hold a public office is seldom a claim to
confidence, but commonly a reason to lose confidence; it is not a mark
of civic virtue and of patriotic devotion, but a stain of civic apostacy
and of venality; it is not a claim to be honoured, but a reason to be
distrusted; so much so, that in Europe the sad word of the poet is
indeed a still more sad fact.--

  "When vice prevails and impious man bears sway
  The post of honour is a private station."

So was it even in my own dear fatherland. Before our unfortunate but
glorious revolution of 1848, the principle of royalty had so much
spoiled the nature and envenomed the character of public office, that
(of course except those who derived their authority by election--which
we for our municipal life conserved amongst all the corruption of
European royalty through centuries) no patriot accepted an office in the
government: to have accepted one was to have resigned patriotism.

It was one of the brightest principles of our murdered Revolution--that
public office was restored to the place of civic virtue, and opened to
patriotism, by being raised from the abject situation of a tool of
oppression, to the honourable position of serving the country well.
Alas! that bright day was soon overpowered by the gloomy clouds of
despotism, brought back to our sunny sky by the freezing gale of Russian
violence. And on the continent of Europe there is night again. There is
scarcely one country where the wishes and the will of the people are
reflected in the government. There is no government which can say:

"My voice is the echo of the people's voice--I say what my people feels;
I proclaim what my people wills; I am the embodiment of his principles,
and not the controller of his opinion: the people and myself--we are
one."

No, on the continent of Europe people and governments are two hostile
camps. What immense mischief, pregnant with oppression and with nameless
woe, is encompassed within the circle of this single fact!

How different the condition of America! It is not _men_ who rule,
but _the law;_ and law is obeyed, because the people is respecting
the general will by respecting the law. Public office is a place of
honour, because it is the field for patriotic devotion. Governments have
not the arrogant pretension to be the masters of the people; but have
the proud glory to be its faithful servants. A public officer ceases not
to be a citizen; he has doubly the character of a citizen, by sharing in
and by executing the people's will. And whence this striking difference?
It is because the civilization of America is founded upon the principle
of Democracy. It was born when Royalty declined, and Republicanism rose.
Hence the delightful view, not less instructive than interesting, that
here in America, instead of the clashing dissonance between the words
"government" and "people" we see them melting into one accord of
harmony.

Thus here the public opinion of the people never can fail to be a direct
rule for the government, and reciprocally the word of the government
has the weight of a fact by the people's support. When your government
speaks, it is the people which speaks.

Sir, I most humbly thank your Excellency, that you have been pleased to
afford to me the benefit of hearing and seeing that delightful as well
as happy harmony between the people and the government of the State of
Indiana, in the support of that noble and just cause which I plead, on
the issue of which, not the future of my country only depends, but
together with it, the future condition of all those parts of our globe
which are confined within the boundaries of Christian civilization,
which, be sure of it, gentlemen, in the ultimate issue, will have the
same fate.

Sir, it is not without reason, that at Indianapolis in particular,--and
to your Excellency, the truly faithful, the high-minded, and the
deservedly popular Chief Magistrate of this Commonwealth, I speak that
word. It is not the first time that your Excellency, surrounded as now,
has spoken as the honoured organ of the public opinion of Indiana. It is
not yet two years since your Excellency did the same on the occasion of
a visit of the favourite son of Kentucky, Governor Crittenden. I well
remember the topic of your eloquence. It was the solicitude of Indiana
in regard to the glorious Union of these Republics. May God preserve it
for ever!  But precisely because you, the favourite son of Indiana and
the honoured representatives of the sovereign people of Indiana--in one
accord of perfect harmony esteem the Gordian knot of the Union above
all, allow me to say once more, that if the United States permit the
principle of non-interference to be blotted out from the code of nations
on earth, foreign interference mingling with some domestic discord,
perhaps with that which two years ago called forth your patriotic
solicitude for the Union; yes, foreign interference mingling with some
of your domestic discords, will be the Alexander who will cut asunder
the Gordian knot of your Union, in this our present century.

Republics exist upon principles: they are secure only when they act upon
principles. He who does not accept a principle, asserted by another,
will not long enjoy the benefit of it himself; and nations always perish
by their own sin. Oh may those whom your united people entrusted with
the noble care to be guardians of your Union--be pleased to consider
that truth ere it be too late.

Sir, to the State of Indiana I am in many respects particularly obliged.
True, I have had invitations to visit many other States, but the
invitation from the State of Indiana was first received. Please to
accept my warmest thanks. I have seen in other States a harmony between
the people and the government, but nowhere has the Governor of a State
condescended to represent the people in a public welcome, nowhere
stepped out as the orator of the people's sympathy and its sentiment. I
most humbly thank you for this honour.

In Maryland, the Governor introduced me to the Legislature. In
Pennsylvania the chief Magistrate was the organ of a common welcome of
the Legislature and Citizens. In Massachusetts he took the lead as the
people's elect in recommending my principles to the Legislature--and in
Ohio the chief Magistrate, by accepting the Presidency of the
Association of the friends of Hungary, became generally the executive of
the people's practical sympathy, which so magnanimously responded to the
many political manifestations of its Representatives in the Legislature.

Let me hope, sir, that as you have been generously pleased to be the
interpreter of Indiana's welcome and sympathy, you will also not refuse
to become the Chief Executive Magistrate to the practical development of
the same.

I may cordially thank, in the name of my cause, the people of Indiana,
its Governor, and Representatives, for the high honour of the
Legislature's invitation, and of this public welcome.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXIV.--IMPORTANCE OF FOREIGN POLICY, AND OF STRENGTHENING ENGLAND.

[_Speech at Louisville, March 6th_.]

At the Court House, Louisville, Kossuth was addressed by Bland Ballard,
Esq., and replied as follows:

Whatever be the immediate issue of that discussion about foreign policy,
which now so eminently occupies public attention throughout the United
States, from the Capitol and White-house at Washington down to the
lonely farms of your remotest territories, one fact I have full reason
to take for sure, and that is: That when the trumpet-sound of national
resurrection is once borne over the waves of the Atlantic announcing to
you that nations have risen to assert those rights to which they are
called by nature and nature's God--when the roaring of the first
cannon-shot announces that the combat is begun which has to decide which
principle is to rule over the Christian world--absolutism or national
sovereignty--there is no power on earth which could induce the people of
the United States to remain inactive and indifferent spectators of that
great struggle, in which the future of the Christian world--yes, the
future of the United States themselves is to be decided. The people of
the United States will not remain indifferent and inactive spectators
and will not authorize, will not approve, any policy of indifference.
You yourself have told me so, sir.

In the position of every considerable country there is a necessity of a
certain course, to adopt which cannot be avoided, and may be almost
called destiny. The duty as well as the wisdom of statesmen consists in
the ability to steer, in time, the vessel into that course, which, if
they neglect to do in time, the price will be higher and the profit
less.

There is scarcely anything which has more astonished me than the
fact--that, for the last thirty-seven years, almost every Christian
nation has shared the great fault of not caring much about what are
called foreign matters, foreign policy. Precisely the great nations,
England, France, America, which might have regulated the course of their
governments for a very considerable period, abandoned almost entirely
that part of their public concerns, which with great nations is the most
important of all, because it regulates the position of the country in
its great national capacity. The slightest internal interest was
discussed publicly and regulated previously by the nation, before the
government had to execute it; but, as to the most important
interest--the national position of the country and its relations to the
world, Secret Diplomacy, a fatality of mankind, stepped in, and the
nations had to accept the consequences of what was already done, though
they subsequently reproved it. In England, I four months ago, avowed
that all the interior questions together cannot equal in importance the
exterior; _there_ is summed up the future of Britain: and if the
people of England do not cut short the secrecy of diplomacy--if it do
not in time take this all absorbing interest into its own hands, as it
is wont to do with every small home interest, it will have to meet
immense danger very soon, as this danger has already seriously
accumulated by former neglect. Here too, in the United States, there is
no possible question equal in importance to foreign policy, and
especially in regard to European matters. And I say that, if the United
States do not in due time adopt such a course, as will prevent the Czar
of Russia, and his despotic satellites, from believing that the United
States give them entirely free field to regulate the condition of
Europe, which cannot fail to react morally and materially on your
condition, then indeed embarrassments, sufferings, and danger will
accumulate in a very short time over you.

Great Britain, it is clear as matters now stand, can avoid a war with
the continental powers of Europe only by joining their alliance, or at
least by giving them security, that England will not only not support
the liberal movement on the Continent, but that it will submit to the
policy of the absolutist powers. It is not impossible that England will
yield. Do not forget, gentlemen, that an English ministry, be it Tory or
Whig, is always more or less aristocratic, and it is in the nature of
aristocracy that it may love its country well, but indeed aristocracy
more. There is therefore always some inclination to be on good terms
with whoever is an enemy to what aristocracy considers its own enemy,
that is, democracy. This consideration, together with the above
mentioned carelessness of the people about foreign policy, gives you the
key to many events which else it would be impossible to understand.
People against another people should never feel hatred, but brotherly
sympathy. The memory of oppression suffered from governments should
never be imparted to nations, and children should never be hated,
despised, or punished, because their fathers have sinned. We Hungarians
wrestled for centuries with Turkey, and now we are friends, true
friends, and natural allies against a common enemy. Several of my own
ancestors lost their lives in Turkish wars, or their property in ransom
out of Turkish captivity; yet to me it is a Turkish Sultan who saved my
life and gave bread to thousands of my countrymen, which no other power
did on earth. Such is the change of time. It is Russia which crushed my
bleeding fatherland, yet the inexorable hatred of my heart does not
extend to the people of Russia. I love that people--I pity its poor,
unfortunate instruments of despotism. Wherever there is a people, there
is my love. Therefore, let the passionate excitement of past times
subside before the prudent advice of present necessities. You are blood
from England's blood, bone from its bone, and flesh from its flesh. The
Anglo-Saxon race was the kernel around which gathered this glorious
fruit--your Republic. Every other nationality is oppressed. It is the
Anglo-Saxon alone which stands high and erect in its independence. You,
the younger brother, are entirely free, because Republican. They, the
elder brother, are monarchical, but they have a constitution, and they
have many institutions which even you retained, and, by retaining them,
have proved that they are institutions congenial to freedom, and dear to
freemen. The free press, the jury, free speech, the freedom of
association, the institution of municipalities, the share of the people
in the legislature, are English institutions; the inviolability of
person and the inviolability of property are English principles. England
is the last stronghold of these principles in Europe. Is this not enough
to make you stand side by side with those principles in behalf of
oppressed humanity?

If the United States and England unite in policy now and make by their
imposing attitude a breakwater to the ambitious league of despotism, the
Anglo-Saxon race, with all who gathered around that kernel, will not
only have the glorious pleasure of having saved the Christian world from
being absorbed by despotism, but you especially will have the noble
satisfaction of having contributed to the progress and to the
development of freedom in England, Scotland, and Ireland themselves: for
the principles of national sovereignty, independence, and
self-government, when restored on the continent of Europe, must in a
beneficent manner reach upon those islands themselves. They may remain
monarchical, if it be their will to do so, but the parliamentary
omnipotence, which absorbs all that _you_ call _State_ rights
and self-government, will yield to the influence of Europe's liberated
continent. England will govern its own domestic concerns by its own
parliament, and Scotland its own, and Ireland its own, just as the
states of your galaxy do; the three countries are destined to mutual
connection, by their geographical relations, by far more than New York
with Louisiana or Carolina with California. By conserving the
state-rights of self-government to all of them they will unite in a
common government for the common interest, as you have done. _Union,
and not unity, must be the guiding star of the future_ with every
power composed of several distinct bodies, and though I am a republican
more perhaps than thousands who are citizens of a republic, inasmuch as
I have known all the curse of having had a king--still such a
development of Great Britain's future, were it even connected with
monarchy, I, a true republican, would hail with fervent joy. To
contribute to such a future, I indeed should consider more practical
support to the cause of freedom, to the cause of Ireland itself, than,
out of passionate aversions either for past or present wrongs, to
discourage, nay, almost force Great Britain to submit to the threatening
attitude of despots or even to side with them against liberty. Out of
such a submission there can never result any good to any one in the
world, and certainly none to you--none to the nations of Europe--none to
Ireland--but increased oppression to Europe and Ireland, and danger to
you yourselves.

I therefore say that a war side by side with England against the leagued
despots, if war should become a necessity, is not an idea to look on in
advance with aversion. You have united with England on a far less
important occasion. And should England _not_ yield to the despots,
I most confidently ask whoever in the United States inclines to judge
matters according to the true interests of his country and not by
private passion, whether you _could_ remain indifferent in a
struggle, the issue of which either would make England omnipotent on
earth, or crush liberty down throughout the world, leave America exposed
to the pressure of victorious despotism, and before all, exclude
republican America from every political and commercial relation with all
Europe. Should England see that she will not stand alone in protesting
against interference, she will, she must protest against it, because it
is the condition of her own future. But if the United States should
again adhere to the policy of indifference (which is no policy at all),
then indeed England may perhaps yield to the threatening attitude of the
absolutist powers. The policy of the United States may now decide the
direction of the policy of England, and thus prevent immense mischief,
incalculable in its consequences, even for the future of the United
States themselves.

It is here I take the opportunity briefly to refer to an assertion of an
American statesman, who holds a high place in your affections and in my
respect. He advances the theory, that, should, you now take the course
which I humbly claim, the despots of Europe would be provoked by your
example to interfere with your institutions and turn upon you in the
hour of your weakness and exhaustion, because you have set an example of
interference.

I indeed am at a loss to understand that. Is it interference I claim?
No; precisely the contrary, if you now declare "that your very existence
being founded on that principle of the eternal laws of nature and of
nature's God--that every nation has the independent right to regulate
its domestic concerns, to fix its institutions and its government"--you
cannot contemplate with indifference that the absolutist powers form a
league of mutual support against this principle of mankind's common law.
You therefore protest against this principle of "foreign interference."
I indeed cannot understand by what logic such a protest could be taken
up by the despotic powers as a pretext for interference in your domestic
concerns. My logic is entirely different. It runs thus; If your country
remains an indifferent spectator of the violation of the laws of nations
by foreign interference, _then_ it has established a precedent--it
has consented that the principle of interference become interpolated
into the book of international law, and you will see the time when the
league of despots commanding the whole force of oppressed Europe will
remind you thus:

"Russia has interfered in Hungary, because it considered the example set
up by Hungary dangerous to Russia. America has silently recognized the
right of that interference. France has interfered in Rome, because the
example of the Roman democracy was dangerous to Prance. America has
silently agreed. The absolutist governments, in protection of their
divine right, have leagued in a saintly alliance, with the openly avowed
purpose to aid one another by mutual interference against the spirit of
revolution and the anarchy of republicanism. America has not protested
against it; therefore the principle of foreign interference against
every dangerous example has, by common consent of every power on
earth--contradicted by none, not even by America--become an established
international law."

And reminding you thus, they will speak to you in the very words of that
distinguished statesman to whom I respectfully allude.

"You have quitted the ground upon which your national existence is
founded. You have consented to the alteration of the laws of
nations--the existence of your republic is dangerous to us; _we
therefore, believing that your anarchical (that is, republican)
doctrines are destructive of, and that monarchical principles are
essential to, the peace and security and happiness of our subjects, will
obliterate the bed which has nourished such noxious weeds; we will crush
you down as the propagandists of doctrines too destructive to the peace
and good order of the world."_

I have quoted the very words, very unexpectedly given to
publicity,--words, which I out of respect and personal affection, did
not answer then, precisely because I took the interview for a private
one. Even now I refrain from entering into further discussion, out of
the same considerations of respect, though I am challenged by this
unlooked for publicity. I will say nothing more. But after having
quoted the very words, I leave to the public opinion to judge whether
their authority is against or for a national protest against the
principle of foreign interference.

Let once the principle become established with your silent consent and
you will soon see it brought home to you, and brought home in a moment
of domestic discord, which Russian secret diplomacy and Russian gold
will skilfully mix. You may be sure of it; and this mighty Union will
be shaken by that very principle of foreign interference which you
silently let be established as an uncontroverted rule for the despots of
the earth.

Great countries are under the necessity of holding the position of a
power on earth. If they do not thus, foreign powers dispose of their
most vital interests. Indifference to the condition of the foreign world
is a wilful abdication of their duty, and of their independence.
Neutrality, as a constant rule, is impossible to a great power. Only
small countries, as Switzerland and Belgium, can exist upon the basis of
neutrality.

Great powers may remain neutral in a particular case, but they cannot
take neutrality for a constant principle, and they chiefly cannot remain
neutral in respect to principles.

Great powers can never play with impunity the part of no power at all.

Neutrality when taken _as a principle_ means indifference to the
condition of the world.

Indifference of a great power to the condition of the world is a chance
given to foreign powers to regulate the interests of that indifferent
foreign power.

Look in what light you appear before the world with your policy of
indifference. Look at the instructions of your navy in the
Mediterranean, recently published, forbidding American officers even to
speak politics in Europe. Look at the correspondences of your commodores
and consuls, frightened to their very souls that a poor exile on board
an American ship is cheered by the people of Italy and France, and
charging him for the immense crime of having met sympathy without any
provocation on his part. Look at the cry of astonishment of European
writers, that Americans in Europe are so little republican. Look how
French Napoleonist papers frown indignantly at the idea that the
Congress of the United States dare to honour my humble self. Look how
they consider it almost an insult, that an American Minister, true to
his always professed principles, dares to speak about European politics.
Look how one of my aristocratical antagonists, who quietly keeps house
in France, where I was not permitted to pass, and who, a tool in other
hands, would wish to check my endeavours to benefit my country, because
he would like to get home in some other way than by a revolution and
into a republic--look how he, from Paris in London papers, dares to
scorn the idea that America could pretend to weigh anything in the scale
of European events.

Do you like this position, free republicans of America?  And yet that is
your position in the world now, and that position is the consequence of
your adhering to your policy of indifference, at a time when you needed
to act like a power on earth.

Remember the Sibylline books. The first three were burned when you
silently let Russian interference be accomplished in Hungary, and did
not give us your recognition when we had achieved and declared our
independence.

Six books yet remain. The spirit of the age, the Sibylla of opportunity,
holds a second three books over the fire. Do not allow her to burn
them--else only the last three remain, and I fear you will have, without
profit, more to pay for them than would have bought all the nine, and
with them the glory and happiness of an _eternal, mighty Republic!_

Gentlemen, I humbly thank you for your kindness, and bid you an
affectionate farewell.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXV.--CATHOLICISM _VERSUS_ JESUITISM.

[_At St. Louis, (Missouri.)_]

Mr. Kasson addressed Kossuth in an ample speech; in which he said:--

Everywhere have the untrammelled masses of this people, as you passed,
lifted up their hands and voices, and supplicated the Almighty to give
to you blessing, and to your country redemption. Let this be some
recompense for the privations you have encountered, while, like Aeneas,
you have been wandering an exile from your native, captured, prostrate
Troy.

I should not do my whole duty without saying, in behalf of the thousands
assembled here, that we have an unshaken confidence in Hungary's chosen
leader. We are not so blind that we cannot observe how no envenomed
shaft was fixed to the bow-string against him, in England and America,
while he was yet a helpless and powerless refugee, within Turkish
hospitality. But when the people were gathering around him in free
countries, shoulder to shoulder--when even the hearts of statesmen began
to open to him, and hope dawned in the Hungarian sky once more, then it
was these arrows of detraction darkened the air, shot from the Court of
the French Usurper, or from the pensioners of autocratic bounty. Your
patient labours and forbearance in your country's cause, while thus
assailed, have won for you, sir, our sincere respect, and another wreath
at the hand of the Muse of History.

Kossuth replied:

Gentlemen,--During my brief sojourn in your hospitable city, I have
heard so much local pettiness and so much hypocritical tactics of men
imported from Austria to advocate the cause of Russo-Austrian despotism
in Republican America, and chiefly in your city here, that indeed I
began to long for the pure air where the merry sunshine, as well as the
melancholy drop of rain, the roaring of the thunder storm, equally as
the sigh of the breeze, tell to the oppressors and their tools, and not
only to the oppressed, that there is a God in heaven who rules the
universe by eternal laws; the Almighty Father of humanity, omnipotent in
wisdom, bountiful in His omnipotence, just in His judgment, and eternal
in His love; the Lord who gave strength to the boy David against
Goliath, who often makes out of humble individuals efficient instruments
to push forward the condition of mankind towards that destiny which His
merciful will has assigned to it--His will, against which neither the
proud ambition of despots, nor the skill of their obsequious tools can
prevail--in Him I put my trust and go cheerfully on in my duties. I am
in the right way to benefit the cause, noble and just and great, to
which I devoted my life; for if there were no success in what I am
engaged, the despots would neither fear, nor hate, nor persecute me.

Their persecution imparts more hope to my breast than all your kindness;
and I give you my word that if I have the consciousness of having well
merited in my past the hatred and the fear of tyrants and their
instruments, so may God bless me as I will do all a mortal man can do to
merit that hatred and that fear still more.

Why? Am I not standing on the banks of the Mississippi, cheered,
welcomed, and supported, as warmly and as heartily as when I stepped
first upon your glorious shores? Opposition, hostility, venomous
calumny, have exhausted all means to check the sympathy of the people.
And has that sympathy subsided? has it abated? is it checked? No, it
rolls on swelling as I advance--here I have again an imposing evidence
before my eyes, here in St. Louis, my namesake city, where so much, and
that so perseveringly, was done to prevent this evidence.

Yes, it rolls, and will roll on, swelling till it will finally submerge
all endeavours to mislead the instincts of freemen, to fetter the
energies of the nation, to stifle its spirit, and to check the growing
aspirations of the people's upright heart.

When the struggle is about principles, indifference is suicide. Nay,
indifference is impossible: for indifference about the fate of that
principle upon which your national existence and all your future
rests--is passive submission to the opposite principle--it is almost
equivalent to an alliance with the despots. _He who is not for freedom
is against freedom_. There is no third choice.

The people's instinct feels the danger of losing an irreparable
opportunity, and hence the fact, never yet met in history, that a
homeless exile becomes an object of such sympathy, rolling on like a
sea, in spite of all the passionate rage of my enemies, and all the
Christian tolerance of the Reverend Father Jesuits, which they in such
an evident manner show to me. It is time to advertise them by a few
remarks that I am aware of their hostility, and ready to meet it openly.
I make this advertisement by design here, because it is not my custom to
attack from behind or in the dark. Mine is not the famous doctrine,
_that the end sanctifies the means_. I like to meet the enemy face
to face--a fair field and fair arms.

And in one thing more I will not imitate my reverend opponents. I will
never indulge in any personalities, never act otherwise than becoming to
a gentleman. If they choose to pursue a different course, let them do
so, and let them earn the fruits of it.

My humble person I entirely submit to the good pleasure of their
passion. If they tell you, gentlemen, that I am no great man, they speak
the truth. Being on good terms with my conscience, I do not much care to
be on bad terms with Czars and Emperors, their obedient servants, and
the reverend father Jesuits. Nay, if I were on good terms with them, I
scarcely could remain on good terms with my conscience. So much for
myself--now a few words as to the question between us.

I am claiming moral and material aid against that Czar of Russia who is
the most bloody persecutor of Roman Catholics. The present Pope himself,
before the revolution, when he was yet more of a High Priest than of an
Italian Despot, and cared more about spiritual than temporal business,
openly and bitterly complained in the councils of the Cardinals against
that bloody persecution which the Roman Catholics have suffered from the
Czar of Russia. Now, considering that I plead for republican principles,
to which the Reverend Father Jesuits should be _here_ warmly
attached, if they are willing to have the reputation of good citizens,
and not to be traitors to your Republic, which affords to them not only
the protection of its laws, but also the full enjoyment of all the
privileges of your republican freedom;--it is indeed a strange, striking
fact, to see these reverend fathers here in a Republic so warmly
advocating the cause of despotism, and so passionately persecuting the
cause I humbly plead, which at the same time is the cause of political
freedom and religious liberty for numerous millions of Roman Catholics
throughout Europe.

As I am somewhat acquainted with the terrible history of that Order, I
thought to find the explanation of this striking fact, in the historical
ambition of that Order to rule the world--this, their everlasting
standard idea, to which they in all times sacrificed everything, and
misused even the holiest of all religion, as an instrument to that
ambition. But here in St. Louis I got hold of a definite circumstance
which makes the matter quite clear.

I hold in my hand the printed Catalogue of the Society of Jesuits in the
province of Missouri, as they term your state. Herein I see that
amongst the thirty-five members officiating in the college of the Father
Jesuits, in St. Louis, there are not less than _eight_ Reverend
Father Jesuits imported from Austria. Now you see why I am so persecuted
here. This plain fact tells the story of a big book.

But amongst all that the reverend gentlemen oppose to me there are only
two considerations to which the honour of my cause and of my nation
forces me to answer in a few remarks. They charge against me that my
cause is hostile to the Roman Catholic religion, and to get the Irish
citizens to side with them for the support of Russo-Austrian despotism
they charge me that I am no friend of Ireland.

I. As to the Catholic religion--I indeed am a Protestant, not only by
birth, but also by conviction; and warmly penetrated by this conviction,
I would delight to see the same shared by the whole world. But before
all, I am mortally opposed to intolerance and to sectarism. I consider
religion to be a matter of conscience which every man has to arrange
between God and himself. And therefore I respect the religious
conviction of every man. I claim religious liberty for myself and my
nation, and must of course respect in others the right I claim for
myself. There is nothing in the world capable to rouse a greater
indignation in my breast than religious oppression. But particularly I
respect the Catholic religion, as the religion of some seven millions of
my countrymen, to whom I am bound in love, in friendship, in home
recollections, in gratitude, and in brotherhood, with the most sacred
ties. And I am proud to say, that as in general it is a pre-eminent
glory of my country, to be attached to the principle of full religious
liberty without any restriction, for all to all, so it is the particular
glory of my Roman Catholic countrymen not to be second to any in the
world, on the one side in attachment to their own religion, and on the
other side in toleration for other religions.

The Austrian dynasty having been continually encroaching upon the
chartered right of Protestantism, who were those who struggled in the
first rank for our rights? Our Roman Catholic countrymen! It was a
glorious sight, almost unparalleled in history, but was also fully
appreciated by the Hungarian Protestants. All of us, man by man, would
rather sacrifice life, and blood, and goods, than to allow that a hair's
breadth should be crushed from the religious liberty of our Roman
Catholic countrymen.

Now, what position took the Roman Catholics of Hungary in our past
struggle? There was not only no difference between them and the
Protestants in their devotion for our country's freedom and
independence, but they, according to the importance of their number,
took in the struggle a very pre-eminent part. The Roman Catholic Bishops
of Hungary protested against the perjurious treachery of the dynasty;
many of them suffer even now for their devotion to justice, liberty, and
right; and who is the Jesuit who dares to affirm that he is more devoted
to the Catholic religion than the Bishops of Hungary? Our battalions
were filled with Roman Catholic volunteers; Catholic priests led their
faithful flocks to the battle field; our National Convention was
composed in majority of Catholics--all the Catholic population, without
any exception, consented to and cheered enthusiastically my being
elected Governor of Hungary, though I am a Protestant. I had and I have
their friendship, their devotion, their support; and when I formed the
first Ministry of Independent Hungary, not only a full half of the new
Ministry I entrusted to Roman Catholics, but especially I nominated a
Roman Catholic Bishop to be Minister of public instruction, and all the
Protestants of my country hailed the nomination with applause. Such is
the cause of Hungary. Who dares now to charge me that that cause is
hostile to the Roman Catholic religion?

But I am allied with Mazzini, with the Romans, and with the Italians;
thus goes on the charge: and these cursed Italians are enemies to the
Pope. Not to the Pope as High Priest of the Roman Catholic Church, but
as despotic sovereign of Rome and his corrupted temporal government--the
worst of human inventions. How long has it been a principle of the Roman
Catholic religion, that the Romans should not be Republicans? and that
the high priest of the Roman church should be a despotic sovereign over
the Roman nation? and in that capacity be a devoted ally and obedient
servant to the Czar of Russia, the sworn enemy and bloody persecutor of
Roman Catholicism? Why, when in 1849, the French Republic sent an army
against the Roman Republic to restore the Pope, not to his spiritual
authority, because that was by nobody contradicted, but to his temporal
despotism, the whole danger could have been averted by the Romans by
becoming, _en masse_, Protestants. The idea was pronounced in Rome
and not a single Roman accepted it. They preferred to struggle without
hope of victory--they preferred to bleed and to die rather than to
abandon their faith.

Now, who can dare to insult that people--who can dare to insult the
Roman Catholics of Hungary, Croatia, Italy, Germany, Poland, France--who
can dare to insult the thousands of thousands of Roman citizens of the
United States--Senators, Governors, Judges--men of all public and
private positions--who can dare to insult them, as hostile to their own
religion, because they unite to support that cause which I plead? And
because they side with republican freedom, with civil and religious
liberty, against Russo-Austrian despotism?

Who can dare to affirm that he represents the Catholic religion, if
three millions of Catholic Romans do not represent it? The Reverend
Father Jesuits perhaps!

I take the liberty to say in a few words: They are that society which
Clement XIV, the high priest of the Roman Catholic Church, abolished as
dangerous to the Roman Catholic religion; they are those whom every
Roman Catholic King excluded from his territories as dangerous to
religion and social order; they are those, the ascendancy of whom has
always been a period of disaster and confusion to the Roman Catholic
church; they are those who now make an alliance or rather a compact of
submission with the Czar of Russia, like that which evil-doers,
according to the superstition of past ages, made with the evil spirit.
And here, in free republican America, they plead the cause of Russian
despotism; the cause of that Czar, who is the relentless persecutor of
Catholicism; who forced the United Greek Catholics, in the Polish
Provinces, by every imaginable cruelty, to abjure their connection with
Rome, and carried out, at a far greater expense of human life than
Ferdinand and Isabella or Louis XIV, the most stupendous proselytism
which violence has yet achieved. More than a hundred thousand human
beings had died of misery, or under the lash, as the Minsk nuns were
proved to have been killed, before he terrified these unhappy millions
into a submission against which their consciences revolted. Yet with
this man, red with Catholic blood, and damned with the million curses of
their co-religionists, the Rev. Father Jesuits are in alliance; and why?
Because it is a characteristic of that Order, to be ambitious to rule
the world. To achieve this, they have now made the Pope the obedient
satrap of the Czar. Into the enormity of this, enlightened Catholics see
clearly. Roman Catholics of Hungary, of Poland, of Italy, Germany, and
France have understood this. Is it possible that those of this republic
should less understand it? Why, in Italy and Rome itself, a majority of
the Catholic clergy are hostile to the temporal authority of the Pope,
and sympathize with Mazzini so generally, that of _seventeen_
conspirators recently arrested for conspiring in favour of the Republic
against Austria, _sixteen_ were _priests_ belonging to the
humbler orders of the clergy.

Gentlemen, I am sorry to have to argue such a question in the United
States. If it be indeed true, that amongst the Roman Catholics here an
opposition is got up against our cause, let them remember that in
opposing me, they oppose the independence and freedom of millions of
Hungarian Catholics,--of Catholic Italy,--of the Catholic half of
Germany, and of Catholic France; they are supporting the Czar, the most
bloody enemy of their religion. Yet I am glad to be able to say, that
not all the Roman Catholics here are opposed to me. I have warm friends
and kind protectors among them. The gallant General Shields,--Mr. Downs,
the Senator from Louisiana,--the warm-hearted Governor of
Maryland,--Judge Le Grand at Baltimore, and many other of my kindest
friends, are Roman Catholics. From New York onward, multitudes of Roman
Catholics have shared the general sympathy. And why not? surely freedom
is a treasure to every religious denomination whatsoever.[*]

[Footnote *: Some sentences have been added from the Pittsburg speech,
at the end of which the same subject was treated.]

So much for the charge that the cause which I plead--the cause of
millions of Roman Catholics--is hostile to the Roman Catholic religion.
Should I be forced to enter upon this topic once more, I will take the
heart-revolting history of those who have thus calumniated our cause,
into my hands, and recall to the memory of public opinion the terrible
pages of blood, ambition, countless crimes, and intolerance; but I hope
there will be no occasion for it.



II. Now as to Ireland. Where is a man on earth, with uncorrupted soul
and with liberal instincts in his heart, who would not sympathize with
poor, unfortunate Ireland? Where is a man, loving freedom and right, in
whom the wrongs of Green Erin would not stir the heart? Who could
forbear warmly to feel for the fatherland of the Grattans, of
O'Connells, and of Wolfe Tones? I indeed am such, that wherever is
oppression and a people, there is my love.

But why do I not plead Erin's wrongs? I am asked. My answer is: am I not
pleading the principle of Liberty? and is the cause of freedom not the
cause of Ireland?

I see all the despots of the European continent united in a crusade
against liberty; there are two powers still neutral, the position of
which may well decide for or against despotism; these two powers are
Great Britain and America. If the Almighty blessed my endeavours--if I
could succeed to contribute something, that America, and by its
influence over the public opinion of the people of England, Great
Britain itself, should side with Liberty, from whatever consideration--
from whatever interest, against despotism--then indeed I boldly declare
before God and men, that I have achieved a greater benefit and done a
better service to the future of Ireland, than all who go about loudly
crying about Erin's wrongs, and not doing anything for the triumph of
that cause which is about to be decided, and is the cause of all
nations, who are oppressed, and of all who are, or will be free.
Whereas, if, by uniting in the chorus of empty words, I should
contribute to alarm not only the government, but also the people of
England, and to force that government to side with despotism in the
decisive struggle against liberty, (to which that government, being as
it is, aristocratical, feels but too much inclined,) then indeed I am
sure I should do such a wrong to the future of Ireland, as the sacrifice
of my life and torrents of blood, and the sufferings of generations,
could not expiate.

Be sure therefore, gentlemen, that every man who pleads for liberty,
pleads for Ireland; be sure, that every blow stricken for liberty is
stricken also for Ireland; that not always the most noisy are the best
friends; and prudent activity is often better service than any show of
eloquent words.

And so let me hope, that while it is sure that he who is for freedom is
for Ireland, it also will be found that Irish blood can never be against
liberty.

And as to you all, gentlemen, let me hope that, however the advocates of
despotism may try to mislead public opinion in free America, the
uncorrupted noble instinct of the people will prove to the world that it
is not in vain, that the down-trodden spirit of liberty raises the sign
of distress towards you, and that the wronged and the oppressed can
confidently appeal for help, for justice and for redress, to the free
and powerful Republic of America.

I thank you, gentlemen, for the patience with which you have listened
during this torrent of rain. It shows that your sympathy is warm and
sincere--one which cannot be cooled down or washed away.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXVI.--THE IDES OF MARCH.


[_Farewell Speech at St. Louis, March 15th_.]

Ladies and gentlemen: To-day is the fourth anniversary of the Revolution
in Hungary.

Anniversaries of Revolutions are almost always connected with the
recollection of some patriots, death-fallen on that day, like the
Spartans at Thermopylae, martyrs of devotion to their fatherland.

Almost in every country there is some proud cemetery, or some modest
tomb-stone, adorned on such a day by a garland of evergreen, the pious
offering of patriotic tenderness.

I past the last night in a sleepless dream. And my soul wandered on the
magnetic wings of the past, home to my beloved bleeding land, and I saw
in the dead of the night, dark veiled shapes, with the paleness of
eternal grief upon their brow, but terrible in the tearless silence of
that grief, gliding over the churchyards of Hungary, and kneeling down
to the head of the graves, and depositing the pious tribute of green and
cypress upon them; and after a short prayer rising with clenched fists,
and gnashing teeth, and then stealing away tearless and silent as they
came--stealing away, because the blood-hounds of my country's murderer
lurks from every corner on that night, and on this day, and leads to
prison those who dare to show a pious remembrance to the beloved.
To-day, a smile on the lips of a Magyar is taken for a crime of defiance
to tyranny, and a tear in his eye is equivalent to a revolt. And yet I
have seen, with the eye of my home-wandering soul, thousands performing
the work of patriotic piety.

And I saw more. When the pious offerers stole away, I saw the honoured
dead half risen from their tombs, looking to the offerings, and
whispering gloomily, "still a cypress, and still no flower of joy! Is
there still the chill of winter and the gloom of night over thee,
fatherland? are we not yet revenged? and the sky of the east reddened
suddenly, and quivered with bloody flames, and from the far, far west, a
lightning flashed like a star-spangled stripe, and within its light a
young eagle mounted and soared towards the quivering flames of the east,
and as he drew near, upon his approaching, the flames changed into a
radiant morning sun, and a voice from above was heard in answer to the
question of the dead:

"Sleep yet a short while; mine is the revenge. I will make the stars of
the west, the sun of the east; and when ye next awake, ye will find the
flower of joy upon your cold bed."

And the dead took the twig of cypress, the sign of resurrection, into
their bony hands and lay down.

Such was the dream of my waking soul, and I prayed, and such was my
prayer: "Father, if thou deemest me worthy, take the cup from my people,
and give it in their stead to me." And there was a whisper around me
like the word "Amen." Such was my dream, half foresight and half
prophecy; but resolution all. However, none of those dead whom I saw,
fell on the 15th of March. They were victims of the royal perjury which
betrayed the 15th of March. The anniversary of our revolution has not
the stain of a single drop of blood.

We, the elect of the nation, sat on that morning busily but quietly in
the legislative hall of old Presburg, and without any flood of
eloquence, passed our laws in short words, that the people shall be
free; the burdens of feudality cease; the peasant become free
proprietor; that equality of duties, equality of rights, shall be the
fundamental law; and civil, political, social, and religious liberty,
the common property of all the people, whatever tongue it may speak, or
in whatever church pray, and that a national ministry shall execute
these laws, and guard with its responsibility the chartered ancient
independence of our Fatherland.

Two days before, Austria's brave people in Vienna had broken its yoke;
and summing up despots in the person of its tool, old Metternich, drove
him away, and the Hapsburgs, trembling in their imperial cavern of
imperial crimes, trembling, but treacherous, and lying and false, wrote
with yard-long letters, the words, "Constitution" and "Free Press," upon
Vienna's walls; and the people in joy cheered the inveterate liars,
because the people knows no falsehood.

On the 14th I announced the tidings from Vienna to our Parliament at
Presburg. The announcement was swiftly carried by the great democrat,
the steam-engine, upon the billows of the Danube, down to old Buda and
to young Pesth, and while we, in the House of Representatives, passed
the laws of justice and freedom, the people of Pesth rose in peaceful
but majestic manifestation, declaring that the people should be free. At
this manifestation, all the barriers raised by violence against the
laws, fell of themselves. Not a drop of blood was shed. A man who was in
prison because he had dared to write a book, was carried home in triumph
through the streets. The people armed itself as a National Guard, the
windows were illuminated, and bonfires burnt; and when these tidings
returned back to Presburg, blended with the cheers from Vienna, they
warmed the chill of our House of Lords, who readily agreed to the laws
we proposed. And there was rejoicing throughout the land. For the first
time for centuries the farmer awoke with the pleasant feeling that his
time was now his own--for the first time went out to till his field with
the consoling thought that the ninth part of his harvest will not be
taken by the landlord, and the tenth by the bishop. Both had fully
resigned their feudal portion, and the air was brightened by the lustre
of freedom, and the very soil budding into a blooming paradise.

Such is the memory of the 15th of March, 1848.

One year later there was blood, but also victory, over the land; the
people, because free, fought like demi-gods. Seven great victories we
had gained in that month of March. On this very day, the remains of the
first 10,000 Russians fled, over the frontiers of Transylvania, to tell
at home how heavily the blow falls from free Hungarian arms. It was in
that very month that one evening I lay down in the bed, whence in the
morning Windischgraetz had risen: and from the battle-field (Isaszeg) I
hastened to the Congress at Debreczin, to tell the Representatives of
the nation: "It is time to declare our national independence, because it
is really achieved. The Hapsburgs have not the power to contradict it
more." Nor had they. But Russia, having experienced by the test of its
first interference, that there was no power on earth caring about the
most flagrant violation of the laws of nations, and seeing by the
silence of Great Britain and of the United States, that she may dare to
violate those laws, our heroes had to meet a fresh force of nearly
200,000 Russians. No power cheered our bravely won independence, by
diplomatic recognition; not even the United States, though they always
professed their principle to be that they recognise every de-facto
government. We therefore had the right to expect a speedy recognition
from the United States. Our struggle rose to European height, but we
were left alone to fight for the world; and we had no arms for the new
battalions, gathering up in thousands with resolute hearts and empty
hands.

The recognition of our independence being withheld, commercial
intercourse for procuring arms abroad was impossible--the gloomy feeling
of entire forsakedness spread over our tired ranks, and prepared the
field for the secret action of treachery; until the most sacrilegious
violation of those common laws of nations was achieved and the code of
"nature and of nature's God," was drowned in Hungary's blood. And I,
who on the 15th of March, 1848, saw the principle of full civil and
religious liberty triumphing in my native land--who, on the 15th of
March, 1849, saw this freedom consolidated by victories--one year later,
on the 15th of March, 1850, was on my sorrowful way to an Asiatic
prison.

But wonderful are the works of Divine Providence.

It was again in the month of March, 1851, that the generous
interposition of the United States cast the first ray of hope into the
dead night of my captivity. And on the 15th of March, 1852, the fourth
anniversary of our Revolution, guided by the bounty of Providence, here
I stand in the very heart of your immense Republic; no longer a captive,
but free in the land of the free, not only not desponding, but firm in
confidence of the future, because raised in spirits by a swelling
sympathy in the home of the brave, still a poor, a homeless exile, but
not without some power to do good to my country and to the cause of
liberty, as my very persecution proves.

Such is the history of the 15th of March, in my humble life. Who can
tell what will be the character of the next 15th of March?

Nearly two thousand years ago the first Caesar found a Brutus on the
Ides or 15th of March. May be that the Ides of March, 1853, will see the
last of the Caesars fall under the avenging might of a thousand-handed
Brutus--the name of whom is "the people"--inexorable at last after it
has been so long generous. The seat of Caesars was first in the south,
from the south to the east, from the east to the west, and from the west
to the north. That is their last abode. None was lasting yet. Will the
last, and worst, prove luckier?  No, it will not. While the seat of
Caesars was tossed around and thrown back to the icy north, a new world
became the cradle of a new humanity, where in spite of the Caesars, the
genius of freedom raised (let us hope) an everlasting throne. The
Caesar of the north and the genius of freedom have not place enough upon
this earth for both of them; one must yield and be crushed beneath the
heels of the other. Which is it? Which shall yield?--America may decide.

Allow me to add a few remarks in dry and plain words, on other subjects.
It is not necessary to explain why I am attacked by Russia, Austria, and
their allies. But some of you, gentlemen, may have felt surprised to see
that two Hungarians have joined in the attack, both of whom accepted of
the office of ministers from my hands, and held that office under my
good pleasure, and from my will, till we all three proceeded into exile
on the same evening. My two assailants now live and act under the
protection of Louis Napoleon, who did not permit me even to pass through
France.

You may yet find perhaps some more joining them, but the number will not
be large. Oh! the bitter pangs of an exile's daily life are terrible. I
have seen many a character faltering under the constant petty care of
how to live, which stood firm like a rock under the storm of a quaking
world, therefore I should not be surprised to find yet some few joining
in those attacks, as I have neither means nor time to care for the wants
of individuals, not even of my own children. What I get is not mine, but
my country's; and must be employed to secure its future prospects; and
it may be that others may avail themselves of this circumstance, and
show some temporary compassion to private misfortune, _under the
condition of secession from me_, with the purpose of being then able
to say that the cause of Hungary is hopeless, because not even the
Hungarian exiles live in concord. That may happen thus with some few;
for hunger is painful: but few they will be. The immense majority of my
brother exiles will rather starve than yield to such a snare.

There may be some also that will fall victims to the craft of skilful
aristocratic diplomatists, who would fain keep or get the reputation of
liberal men, but without the necessity of becoming really liberal. That
class of influential persons may give some hope--even some half
indefinite promise of support to the cause of Hungary (which they never
intend to fulfil), under the condition of a peaceful compromise with the
House of Austria upon a monarchical-aristocratical basis, and not in
that way which I have proclaimed openly in England, knowing that every
root of the monarchical principle is torn out from the breasts of the
people of Hungary, so that we can never be knit again. Therefore the
future of Hungary can only be republican, and there is no door to that
future, but to continue the struggle. There may perhaps be some few
honest but weak men, who, weary of a homeless life, would fain return
home, even under the condition of monarchical-aristocratical compromise
which some skilful diplomatists make glitter into their eyes.

But as to those two who do good service to the tyrant of their and my
country, the very circumstance that they were silent when I (because a
prisoner) was not able to work much, but are trying to check my
endeavours, now that I am about to achieve something which can only
prove to be a benefit to Hungarians,--smaller or greater, but only a
benefit and in no case a harm; this very circumstance shows the nature
of their attacks. But as to the pretence, by which they try to lull to
sleep their own consciences, that was revealed to me by a copy of a
confidential communication of one of their silent associates to a
private circle of friends, where it is stated, that, as I have declared
exclusively for a republic, a party must be got up under the nominal
leadership of Bathyanyi, on a monarchical basis, _because my views
leave no hope to get home in an honourable manner, otherwise than by a
revolution_.

That is the key of the dispute. As to myself, I am a republican, and
will never be a subject to a king, any more than be a king myself. But I
love my country too sincerely to favour the course I would pursue, on my
own private sentiments alone. I know the Hapsburg, and I know my
country. I have weighed my people's revolution, wishes and will, and
weighed the condition of the only possible success. Upon this basis I
act, and am happy to say that the considerate prudence of a statesman,
and the duties of a patriot, not only act in full harmony with my own
personal republican convictions, but indeed cannot allow me in any other
course. Either freedom and our popular rights have no future, not only
in Hungary, but indeed in Europe, or that future will be, can be, and
shall be only republican for the Hungarians. It is more than foolish to
think that either an insurrectionary war can be prevented in Europe, or
that that war can terminate otherwise than either by a consolidated
despotism or republicanism. No other issue is possible. Therefore,
however mean be the private motives of the hostility of those, my very
few Hungarian enemies, I pity them. Out of too great a desire to get
home, they have made their return in every case impossible. Not all the
power of earth could afford them security at home against the
indignation of the people. Not, if I succeed to liberate my country,
for the people will consider them as traitors, who have done all they
could to prevent that liberation; not, if I should fail, because then
the people will believe that their counter-machinations are what caused
me to fail.

So much for them. But the confidence with which I look to the republican
freedom of Hungary has been confirmed, by considering how weak must the
case be of those who urge you to indifference, when they are forced to
resort to the argument that we have no chance of success.

I have often answered that objection, which in itself is a distrust in
God, in justice, in right, and in the blessings of humanity. Allow me
to-day in addition, only one remark. Two days ago the rumour was spread
that Louis Napoleon was killed. It was remarkable to see how those who
countenance despotism, grew livid by despair, and how those who doubt
about our success rose in spirits and in confidence. Some time ago a
similar false rumour caused almost a commercial crisis in the cotton
market of New Orleans. Now how can the security of that cause be
trusted, where the mere possible death of a single individual, and of
such an individual, can so crush every calculation upon the solidity of
the peace of oppression?

Allow me to draw your attention to a circumstance which one of your
countrymen, William Henry Trescott, of South Carolina, has recommended
to public attention, already in the year 1849, in his pamphlet, entitled
'A few Thoughts on the Foreign Policy of the United States.' The
position of the United States underwent an immense change, as soon as
your boundaries extended to the Pacific; extensive commercial relations
with Asia became a necessity. You feel it--the very movements now
commenced in respect to Japan bear witness to it. Let those movements be
completed, and whom will you meet? Russia. That is the old story.
Everybody who is willing to have some influence in the East must meet
Russia, whose sterling thought is to exclude all other powers from the
East.

England is to you the competitor in the commerce of the East; and
competitors may well have a fair field for them both; but Russia is not
a competitor there, she is an _enemy_. Look to the Mediterranean
Sea, and remember the everlasting thought of Russia to crush Turkey, and
to get hold of Constantinople. What is the key of this eternal fond
desire, inherited from Peter the Great? It is not the mere desire of
territorial aggrandizement; the real key is, that it is only by the
possession of Constantinople that Russia, a great territorial power
already, can become also a great maritime power. The Mediterranean is
what Russia wants, to be the mistress of Europe, Asia, of Africa, and of
the world. But the Sultan, sitting on the Bosphorus, confines the navy
of the Czar to the Black Sea, an interior lake, without any outlet but
by the beautiful Bosphorus. Constantinople taken, it is Russia which
controls the Mediterranean:--a circumstance of such immense importance,
that Mr. Trescott says, it would be a sufficient reason for direct and
positive interference--that is, for war.

There--there--_in Turkey, will be decided the fate of the world_.
Perhaps there will be not only the end, but also the beginning of the
end; and some American politicians say, the United States can do nothing
for Europe's liberty, but Turkey can,--holding only the Bosphorus
against an inroad from Sebastopol!--Turkey, with its brave four hundred
thousand men--the natural ally of all those European nations who will,
who must, struggle against Russian preponderance. How wonderful! The
Bosphorus in the hands of the Sultan, saves the world from Russian
dominion; and yet I am asked, what can America do for Europe? How many
men-of-war have you in the Mediterranean? I would you had more. Would
you had some other anchorage in the Mediterranean for your glorious
flag! Turkey has many a fine harbour, and a great deal of good will. The
Turkish Aghas now would not be afraid to see cheered, for instance, by
the inhabitants of Mytilene, the American flag, should it ever happen
that that flag were cast in protection around my humble self; nay, I am
sure they would smilingly join in the harsh but cordial "_khosh
guelden, sepa gueldin_," which is more than a thrice welcome in your
language. But the word welcome reminds me that I have to say to you
farewell--and that is a sad word in the place where I have met so warm a
welcome, but it must be done. Can I hope to have the consolation of
knowing that in bidding farewell to my namesake city, I leave
high-minded men, who, remembering that they have seen the Hungarian
exile on the Ides of March, will have faith in the future of freedom's
just cause, and make the central city of the great United Republic the
centre of numerous associations of the friends of Hungary in the Great
West, whence I confidently hope the sun of freedom will move towards the
East.

Ladies and gentlemen, I bid you farewell, a heartfelt, affectionate
farewell.

[From St. Louis, Kossuth proceeded farther south; but we do not find any
novelty in his speech at New Orleans, March 30th. The most notable thing
in that meeting, is the cordial pronouncement of the Hon. E. W. Moise,
in the name of the City Authorities and People of New Orleans, in favour
of Hungary and Governor Kossuth: thus distinctly showing that the
commercial metropolis of the South sympathizes with European liberty
equally as the North. But it is sufficient here to have indicated the
fact.]

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXVII.--HISTORY OF KOSSUTH'S LIBERATION.

[_Jackson, Mississippi--(Visit to Senator Foote) April 1st_.]

Kossuth had felt it a duty of gratitude, on his return from New Orleans,
to visit Jackson, the chief city of Mississippi, in order to express his
thanks in person to Senator Foote, then Governor of the State, for
having moved a resolution in the Senate to send a steamer to
Constantinople for Kossuth, and afterwards, a resolution tendering to
him a cordial national welcome at Washington. On his proposing this
visit, he received an enthusiastic invitation from the citizens at
large, as was expounded to him by Governor Foote in a very cordial
speech, which ended with the words:

In the name of the sovereign people of Mississippi, and by the special
request of those of our citizens whom you see before you and around you,
I now bid you welcome to our own Capital, and pray that a bounteous
Providence may vouchsafe to you and the sacred cause of which you are
the advocate, its most auspicious countenance and protection.

Kossuth replied:

Your Excellency has been pleased to bestow a word of approbation upon
the manner in which I have spoken and acted since I am here in the
United States, especially as to frankness: which frankness, on another
side, has occasioned much hostility toward me. Allow me, on the present
occasion, to exercise that same frankness. If I were less frank, I
should perhaps tell you I had a fond desire to see Mississippi, and
thank the citizens for sympathy to my country. But I claim not a merit
which I do not possess. I did not come to meet the people. My only
motive was one of gratitude toward YOU, sir.

One anxiety has weighed upon my breast ever since I have been in the
United States, and that is, lest I lose the opportunity to say to you,
with a warm grasp of the hand, and in a few but heartfelt words, how
thankful I feel for the important part you have been pleased to take in
my liberation from captivity. I hope to God, you will never have reason
to regret what you have done for me. Allow me to state that there was
something Providential in the fact, and in the time of intercession in
my behalf.

The Sultan is a generous man; I can bear testimony to that. When Russia
and Austria, proudly relying upon their armies and the flush of victory,
arrogantly demanded that we should be surrendered to the hangman of my
fatherland; and when the majority of the Divan (the great Council of
Turkey) taking a shortsighted view of the case, and influenced by the
impending danger, had already consented to the arrogant demand, and
when, in consequence thereof, the abandonment of our religion was
proposed as the only means to save our lives, then the Sultan, informed
of the matter, and following the noble impulse of his generous heart,
declared that he would prefer to perish rather than dishonour his
name--he would therefore accept the dangers of war rather than disregard
the great duty of humanity--thus if he be doomed to perish, he would at
least perish in an honourable way. By that noble resolution our lives
were saved. But European diplomacy stepped in, to convert the accorded
hospitality into a prison;[*] the Sultan being left alone, not
supported, not encouraged by any one soever, but assailed by
complications, ill advised by fear, and threatened by many, yielded at
last, but yielded with the intention to restore us to our natural
rights, as soon as he could be sure that he stood not forsaken and alone
in acknowledging the right of humanity. For a long while, no
encouragement came, and we lingered in our prison, forsaken and without
hope. You, sir, moved a resolution in the Senate of the United States.
In consequence thereof, the great Republic of the West, by its generous
offer, cast a ray of consolation into my prison, and gave encouragement
to the Sublime Porte. The English and the French governments, unwilling
to appear less liberal, both approved the course of the United States.
England made even a similar offer as America, and the Sultan, glad to
see that he was no longer alone in asserting what is right, agreed to
the offer, notwithstanding all the machinations of my enemies, and I and
my countrymen became free.

[Footnote *: I am permitted to explain, that Kossuth had in view not the
action of one power only, but the total result of all the powers. While
the Sultan knew what the arms of Russia were meant for, and could not
learn whether the fleet of England was meant for anything but _a mere
show_ (for Sir Stratford Canning "had no orders" to _use_ it),
the practical advice of diplomacy was, not, to do what was just, but, to
make the least disgraceful and least dangerous compromise.]

Now suppose, sir, you had not introduced that resolution then, and the
star-spangled flag had not been cast in protection around me--suppose
that the _coup d'etat_ of Louis Napoleon had found me in prison
still--that _coup d'etat_ which caused a change of the ministry in
England,--what would have been the consequence? England would probably
have remained indifferent, and France would have certainly opposed the
proposition of the United States--or rather, supported the cause of
Austria; and the Sultan abandoned by the constitutional powers of
Europe, would have been forced to make Kutaya what the arrogant despots
desired--a physical, or at least, a moral grave for me--and instead of
the new hope and fresh resolution which my liberation inspired into
nations groaning under the weight of a common oppression, there would be
now a gloom of despondency spread over all who united with me in spirit,
in resolution, and in sentiments.

Therefore, in whatsoever I may yet be _useful through my regained
activity, it is due to you, sir_. Without the intercession of the
United States, there would have been no field of activity left me.

Allow me now to speak on another matter connected with this. Among the
calumnies perpetually thrown out at me, is one which I cannot pass in
silence, because it charges me with ingratitude to the United States,
saying that I misuse the generosity of your country, which granted me
protection and an asylum, _upon my accepting the condition not to
meddle any more with politics_, but to abandon the cause to which I
have devoted my life--to retire from public life, and to lay down my
head to rest.

Now, before God and man, this representation is entirely false. No such
condition was added to the generous offer of the United States; and I
declare, that however much I regard such an offer, had this condition
been attached, I would in no case, have accepted it. Life is of no value
to me, except inasmuch as I can do some service to my country's cause.

Therefore, under the condition of forsaking my country, I would not
accept happiness--not liberty--not life. This I have said before.

It is due from me to the honour of the Turkish Government to declare,
that the Sublime Porte not only attached no condition at all to my
liberation, but explicitly and officially intimated to me, that having
once decided to set us free, it was unwilling to do things by
halves;--we had therefore full and unrestricted liberty, on leaving
Turkey, to go and to stay where we pleased--to take such a course as we
chose, and that to that purpose, an American and an English vessel would
be ready at the Dardanelles, and it would depend on our choice, on board
of which we embarked. Indeed I have an official communication on the
part of the English Government in my hands, by which I was informed,
that the only reason why the appointed English vessel came not to the
Dardanelles was, that I and my associates had declared that we preferred
to embark on board the American ship.

But again: in respect to that embarkation, I must state that, in the
resolution of the Congress, one word being contained which might have
been subject to different interpretation, I considered it my duty to
declare frankly to the legation of the United States at Constantinople,
that I neither was, nor would be, willing to assume the character of an
_emigrant_; but would only be considered an _exile_, driven
away by foreign violence from my native land, but not without the hope
to get home again to free and independent Hungary; therefore, that I not
only would not pledge my word to go directly to the United States, or to
remove thither permanently, but, upon regaining my liberty, intended to
devote it to win back for my country its sovereign independence, which
we had achieved and proclaimed, and which was wrested from us by the
most sacrilegious violation of the laws of nations. I got an answer
fully satisfactory on the part of your legation, assuring me that the
United States would never consent to give me a new prison, instead of
liberty; and that there was, and could be, no intention on the part of
the United States to restrain my freedom or my activity, beyond the
limits of your common laws, which are equally obligatory and equally
protective to every one, so long as he chooses to stay in the United
States. Upon this. I accepted thankfully the generous offer of the
United States. I wrote a letter of thanks to His Excellency the
President, and ordered my diplomatic agent in England to write a similar
one to the Honourable Secretary of State, expressing, that I considered
the struggle for our national independence not yet finished, and that I
would devote my regained liberty to the cause of my fatherland.

_Nearly three months after these declarations_, the Mississippi
steam-ship arrived, and I embarked, having again, previously and on
board, constantly declared, that it was my fervent wish to visit the
United States, but not without previously visiting England, on board the
same frigate, if the favour should be granted to me; else on board
another ship from a Mediterranean port, if needs must be. This is the
true history of the case.

I hope you will excuse me for having answered for once a
misrepresentation which charges me with bad faith and ingratitude, such
as neither have I merited, nor can I bear * * *

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXVIII.--PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE SOUTH.

[_Mobile, Alabama, April 3d_.]

Ladies and gentlemen,--I did not expect to have either the honour of a
public welcome, or the opportunity of addressing such a distinguished
assembly at Mobile--not as if I had entertained the slightest doubt
about the generous sentiments of this enlightened community, but because
I am called by pressing duties to hasten back to the east of the United
States. Indeed only the accident of not finding a vessel ready to leave
when I arrived here, has enabled me to see the fair flower of your
generosity added to the garland of sympathy which the people of your
mighty Republic has given me, and which will shine from the banner of
resistance to all-encroaching despotism, that banner which the
expectations of millions call me to raise.

But however unexpected my arrival, the congenial kindness of your warm
hearts left me not unnoticed and uncheered; and besides the joyful
consolation which I feel on this occasion, there is also important
benefit in the generous reception you honour me with.

Firstly, because one of the United States Senators of Alabama, Mr.
Clemens, was pleased to pronounce himself not only opposed to my
principles, but hostile to my own humble self. I thank God for having
well deserved the hatred of Czars and Emperors; and so may God bless me,
as I will all my life try to deserve it still more; but I cannot equally
say, that I have deserved the inclemency of Mr. Clemens, though it be
not the least passionate of all. Well, ladies and gentlemen, after the
spontaneous sympathy which I here so unexpectedly meet, I may be
permitted to believe that it is not the State of Alabama, but Mr.
Clemens only whom I have to count amongst my persecutors and my enemies.

Secondly, I must mention, that it is my good fortune not often to meet
arguments opposed to my arguments, but only personal attacks. Well, that
is the best acknowledgment which could have been paid to the justice of
my cause. For even if I were all that my enemies would like to make me
appear, would thereby the cause I plead and the principles I advocate be
less just, less righteous, and less true? Now amongst those personal
attacks there is one which says, that I am so impertinent as to dare
appeal from the government to the people: and that _I try to sow
dissension between the people and the government_. I declare in the
most solemn manner, this imputation to be entirely unfounded and
calumniatory. Who ever heard me say one single word of complaint or
dissatisfaction against your national government? When have I spoken
otherwise than in terms of gratitude, high esteem, and profound
veneration about the Congress and Government of the United States? and
how could I have spoken otherwise; being, as I am, indebted to Congress
and Government, for my liberation, for the most generous protection, and
for the highest honours a man was ever yet honoured with?  And besides,
I have full reason to say that _it is entirely false to insinuate that
in political respects I had been disappointed with my visit to
Washington City_,--no, it is not respect alone, but the intensest
gratitude that I feel. The principles and sentiments of the Chief
Magistrate of your great republic, expressed to the Congress in his
official messages; the principles of your government so nobly
interpreted by the Hon. Secretary of State, at the congressional
banquet, confirming expressly the contents of his immortal letter to
Mons. Hulsemann; the further private declarations, in regard to the
practical applications of those governmental principles; all and
everything could but impress my mind with the most consoling
satisfaction and the warmest gratitude;--as may be seen in the letter of
thanks which on the eve of my departure I sent to His Excellency the
President and to both Houses of Congress.

That being my condition, who can charge me with sowing dissension
between the people and the government, when I, accepting such
opportunities, as you also have been pleased kindly to offer to me,
plead the cause of my down-trodden country (for which both people and
government of the United States have manifested the liveliest sympathy;)
and advocate principles, entirely harmonizing with the official
declarations of your government? And what is it I say to the people in
my public addresses? I say, "the exigency of circumstances has raised
the question of foreign policy to the highest standard of
importance,--the question is introduced to the Congress, it must
therefore be brought to a decision, it cannot be passed in silence any
more. Your representatives in Congress take it for their noblest glory
to follow the sovereign will of the people; but to be able to follow it,
they must know it; yet they cannot know it without the people
manifesting its opinion in a constitutional way; since they have not
been elected upon the question of foreign policy, that question being
then not yet discussed. I therefore humbly entreat the sovereign people
of the United States to consider the matter, and to pronounce its
opinion, in such a way as it is consistent with law, and with their
constitutional duties and rights." May I not be tranquillized in my
conscience, that in speaking thus I commit no disloyal act, and do in no
way offend against the high veneration due from me to your constituted
authorities?

If it be so, then the generous manifestation of your sympathy I am
honoured with in Mobile, is again a highly valuable benefit to my cause,
because it has such a character of spontaneity, that, here at least, no
misrepresentation can charge me with having even endeavoured to elicit
that high-minded manifestation from the metropolis of the State of
Alabama.

So doubly returning my thanks for it, I beg leave to state what it is I
humbly entreat.

Firstly, when the struggle which is to decide on the freedom of Europe
has once broken out, Hungary has resources to carry it on: but she wants
initial aid, because her finances are all grasped by our oppressors. You
would not refuse to me, a houseless exile, _alms_ and commiseration
if I begged for myself. Surely then you cannot refuse it for my bleeding
fatherland, when I beg of you, as individuals, trifling sums, such as
each can well spare, and the gift of which does not entangle your
country in any political obligation.

Whatever may be my personal fate, millions would thank and coming
generations bless it as a source of happiness to them, as once the
nineteen million francs, 24,000 muskets, and thirty-eight vessels of war
which France gave to the cause of your own independence, have been a
source of happiness to you. I rely in that respect upon the republican
virtue which your immortal Washington has bequeathed to you in his
memorable address to M. Adet, the first French republican minister sent
to Washington. "_My anxious recollections and my best wishes are
irresistibly attracted whensoever in any country I see an oppressed
nation unfurl the banner of freedom_."

So spoke Washington; and so much for _private_ material aid; to
which nothing is required but a little sympathy for an unfortunate
people, which even Mr. Clemens may feel, whatever his personal aversion
for the man who is pleading not his own, but his brave people's cause.

As to the _political_ part of my mission, I humbly claim that the
United States may pronounce what is or should be the law of
nations--such as they can recognize consistently with the basis upon
which their own existence is established, and consistently with their
own republican principles.

And what is the principle of such a law of nations, which you as
republicans can recognize? Your greatest man, your first President,
Washington himself, has declared in these words: "_Every nation has a
right to establish that form of government under which it conceives it
may live most happy, and no government ought to interfere with the
internal concerns of another._"

And according to this everlasting principle, proclaimed by your first
President, your last President has again proclaimed in his last message
to the Congress, that "_the United States are forbidden to remain
indifferent to a case, in which the strong arm of a foreign power is
invoiced to repress the spirit of freedom in any country."

It is this declaration that I humbly claim to be sanctioned by the
sovereign will of the people of the United States, in support of that
principle which Washington already has proclaimed. And in that respect,
I frankly confess I should feel highly astonished, if the Southern
States proved not amongst the first, and amongst the most unanimous to
join in such a declaration. Because, of all the great principles
guaranteed by your constitution, there is none to which the southern
states attach a greater importance,--there is none which they more
cherish,--than the principle of self-government; the principle that
their own affairs are to be managed by themselves, without any
interference from whatever quarter, neither from another state, though
they are all estates of the same galaxy, nor from the central
government, though it is an emanation of all the states, and represents
the south as well as the north, and the east and the west; nor from any
foreign power, though it be the mightiest on earth.

Well, gentlemen, this great principle of self-government, is precisely
the ground upon which I stand. It is for the defence of this principle
that my nation rose against a world in arms; to maintain this principle
in the code of "nature and of nature's God," the people of Hungary spilt
their blood on the battlefield and on the scaffold. It is this principle
which was trodden down in Hungary by the centralization of Austria and
the interference of Russia. It is the principle which, if Hungary is not
restored to her sovereign independence, is blotted out for ever from the
great statute book of the nations, from the common law of mankind.

Like a pestilential disease, the violation of the principle of
self-government will spread over all the earth until it is destroyed
everywhere, in order that despots may sleep in security, for they know
that this principle is the strongest stronghold of freedom, and
therefore it is hated by all despots and all ambitious men, and by all
those who have sold their souls to despotism and ambition.

Gentlemen, you know well that the principle of self-government has two
great enemies--CENTRALIZATION and FOREIGN INTERFERENCE. Hungary is a
bleeding victim to both.

You have probably perceived, gentlemen, that the great misfortune of
Europe is the spirit of centralization encroaching upon all municipal
institutions and destroying self-government, not only by open despotism,
but also under the disguise of liberty. Fascinated by this dangerous
tendency, even republican France went on to sweep away all the traces of
self-government, and this is the reason why all her revolutions could
not assert liberty for her people, and why she lies now prostrate under
the feet of a usurper, without glory, without merit, without virtue.

Blind to their interests, the nations abandoned their real liberty, the
municipal institutions, for a nominal responsibility of ministers and
for parliamentary omnipotence. Instead of clinging to the principle of
self-government--the true breakwater against the encroachments of kings,
of ministers, of parliaments--they abandoned the principle which
enforces the real responsibility of ministers and raises the parliament
to the glorious position of the people's faithful servant; they
exchanged the real liberty of self-government for the fascinating
phantom of parliamentary omnipotence, making the elected of the people
the masters of the people, which, if it is really to be free, cannot
have any master but God. The old Anglo-Saxon municipal freedom has even
in England been weakened by this tendency; parliament has not only
fought against the prerogative of the crown, but has conquered the
municipal freedom of the country and of the borough. Green Erin sighs
painfully under this pressure, and English statesmen begin to be
alarmed. Hungary, my own dear fatherland, was the only country in Europe
which, amidst all adversaries, amidst all attacks of foreign
encroachment and all inducements of false new doctrines, remained
faithful to the great principle of self-government, at which the
perjurious dynasty of Austria has never ceased to aim deadly blows. To
get rid of these incessant attacks we availed ourselves of the condition
of Europe in 1848, and got our old national self-government guarantied
in a legal way, with the sanction of our then king, by substituting
_individual_ for collective responsibility of ministers; having
experienced that a board of ministers, though responsible by law and
composed of our own countrymen, was naturally and necessarily in
practice irresponsible. When the tyrants of Austria, whom our
forefathers had elected in an ill-fated hour to be our constitutional
kings, saw that their designs of centralization were obstructed, they
forsook their honour, they broke their oath, they tore asunder the
compact by which they had become kings; the diadem had lost its
brightness for them if it was not to be despotic.

They stirred up robbers and rebels against us: and when this failed,
then with all the forces of the empire attacked Hungary unexpectedly,
not thinking to meet with a serious opposition, because we had no army,
no arms, no ammunition, no money, no friends. They therefore declared
our constitution and our self-government, which we have preserved
through the adversities of ten centuries, at once and for ever
abolished.

But my heart could not bear this sacrilege. I and my political friends,
we called our people to arms to defend the palladium of our national
existence, the privilege of self-government, and that political, civil,
and religious liberty, and those democratic institutions, which, upon
the glorious basis of self-government, we had succeeded to assert for
all the people of Hungary. And the people nobly answered my call. We
struck down the centralizing tyrant to the dust; we drove him and his
double-faced eagle out from our country; our answer to his impious
treachery was the declaration of our independence and his forfeiture of
the crown.

Were we right to do so, or not?

We were; and _we had accomplished already our lawful enterprise
victoriously_; we had taken our competent seat amongst the
independent nations on earth. But the other independent powers, and
alas! even the United States, lingered to acknowledge our dearly but
gloriously bought independence; and beaten Austria had time to take her
refuge under the shelter of the other principle, hostile to
self-government, of the sacrilegious principle of FOREIGN ARMED
INTERFERENCE.

The Czar of Russia declared that the example of Hungary is dangerous to
the interests of absolutism! He interfered, and aided by treason, he
succeeded to crush freedom and self-government in Hungary, and to
establish a centralized absolutism there, where, through all the ages of
the past, the rule of despotism never had been established, and the
United States let him silently accomplish this violation of the common
law of nations.

Gentlemen, the law of nations, upon which you have raised the lofty hall
of your independence, does not exist any more. The despots are united
and leagued against national self-government. They declare it
inconsistent with their divine (rather Satanic) rights; and upon this
basis all the nations of the European Continent are held in fetters; the
government of France is become a vanguard to Russia, St. Petersburg is
transferred to Paris, and England is forced to arm and to prepare for
self-defence at home.

These are the immediate consequences of the downfall of the principle of
self-government in Hungary, by the violence of foreign interference. But
if this great principle is not restored to its full weight by the
restoration of Hungary's sovereign independence, then you will see yet
other consequences in your own country. _Your_ freedom and
prosperity is hated as dangerous to the despots of Europe. If you do not
believe me, believe at least what the organs of your enemies openly avow
themselves. Pozzo di Borgo, the great Russian diplomatist, and
Hulsemann, the little Austrian diplomatist, repeatedly in 1817 and 1823,
published that despotism is in danger, unless yourselves become a
king-ridden people. If you study the history of the Hungarian struggle,
you can also see the way by which the despots will carry their design.
The secret power of foreign diplomacy will foster amongst you the
principle of centralization; and, as is always the case, many who are
absorbed in some special aims of your party politics will be caught by
this snare; and when you, gentlemen of the south, oppose with energy
this tendency, dangerous to your dear principle of self-government, the
despots of Europe will first foment and embitter the quarrel and kindle
the fire of domestic dissensions, and finally they will declare that
your example is dangerous to order. Then foreign armed interference
steps in for centralization here, as for monarchy in the rest of
America.

Indeed, gentlemen, if there is any place on earth where this prospect
should be considered with attention, with peculiar care, it is here in
the southern states of this great union, because their very existence is
based on the great principle of self-government.

But some say there is no danger for the United States, in whatever
condition be the rest of the world. I am astonished to hear that
objection in a country, which, by a thousand ties, is connected with and
interested in the condition of the foreign world.

It is your own government which prophetically foretold in 1827, that
_the absolutism of Europe will not be appeased until every vestige of
human freedom has been obliterated even here_.

And is it upon the ruins of Hungary that the absolutist powers are now
about to realize this prophecy?

You are aware of the fact that every former revolution in Europe was
accompanied by some constitutional concessions, promised by the kings to
appease the storm, but treacherously nullified when the storm passed.
Out of this false play constantly new revolutions arose. It is therefore
that Russian interference in Hungary was preceded by a proclamation of
the Czar,--wherein he declares "that insurrection having spread in every
nation with an audacity which has gained new force in proportion to the
concessions of the governments," every concession must be withdrawn; not
the slightest freedom, no political rights, and no constitutional
aspirations must be left, but everything levelled by the equality of
passive obedience and absolute servitude; he therefore takes the lead of
the allied despots, to crush the spirit of liberty on earth.

It is this impious work, which was begun by the interference in Hungary,
and goes on spreading in a frightful degree; it is this impious work
which my people, combined with the other oppressed nations, is resolved
to oppose. It is therefore no partial struggle which we are about to
fight; it is a struggle of principles, the issues of which, according as
we triumph or fall, must be felt everywhere, but nowhere more than here
in the United States, because no nation on earth has more to lose by the
all-overwhelming preponderance of the absolutist principle than the
United States. If we are triumphant, the progress and development of the
United States will go on peacefully, till your Republicanism becomes the
ruling principle on earth (God grant it may soon become); but if we
fail, the absolutist powers, triumphant over Europe, will and must fall
with all their weight upon you, precisely because else you would grow to
such a might as would decide the destinies of the world. And since the
absolutistical powers, with Russia at their head, desire themselves to
rule the world, it is natural for her to consider you as their most
dangerous enemy, which they must try to crush, or else be crushed sooner
or later themselves. The _Pozzo di Borgos_ tell you so: the
_Hulsemanns_ tell you so: and it were indeed strange if the people
of the United States, too proudly relying upon their power and their
good luck, should indifferently regard the gathering of danger over
their head, and hereby invite it to come home to them, forcing them to
the immense sacrifices of war, whereas we now afford to them an
opportunity to prevent that danger, without any entanglement, and
without claiming from you any moral and material aid, except such as is
not only consistent with, but necessary to your interests.

Allow me to make yet some remarks about the commercial interests as
connected with the cause I plead. Nothing astonishes me more than to see
those whose only guiding star is commerce, considering its interests
only from the narrow view of a small momentary profit, and disregarding
the threatening combination of next coming events.

Permit me to quote in this respect one part of the public letter which
Mr. Calhoun, the son of the late great leader of the South, the
inheritor of his fame, of his principles, and of his interests, has
recently published. I quote it because I hope nobody will charge him
with partiality in respect to Hungary.

Mr. Calhoun says:

"There is a universal consideration that should influence the government
of the United States. The palpable and practical agricultural,
manufacturing, commercial and navigating interests, the pecuniary
interests of this country, will be promoted by the independence of
Hungary more than by any other event that could occur in Europe. If
Hungary becomes independent it will be her interest to adopt a liberal
system of commercial policy. There are fifteen millions of people
inhabiting what is or what was Hungary, and the country between her and
the Adriatic. These people have not now, and never had, any commerce
with the United States. Hungarian trade and commerce has been stifled by
the 'fiscal barriers' of Austria that encircle her. She has used but few
of American products. Your annual shipments of cotton and cotton
manufactures to Trieste and all other Austrian ports, including the
amount sent to Hungary, as well as Austria, has never exceeded nine
hundred thousand dollars per annum. All other merchandize and produce
sent by you to Austria and Hungary do not exceed one hundred thousand
dollars a year. Hungary obtains all her foreign imports through Austrian
ports. The import and transit duties levied by Austria are exceedingly
onerous, and nearly prohibitory as to Hungary of your cotton and cotton
goods." Hungary independent, and a market is at once opened for your
cotton, rice, tobacco, and manufactures of immense value. That market
is now closed to you, and has always been, by Austrian restrictions. And
can it be doubted that besides supplying the fifteen millions of
_industrious and intelligent_ people of Hungary (_and they are,
as a people, perhaps, the most intelligent of any in Europe_), the
adjacent and neighbouring countries, will not also be tempted to
encourage trade with you? Hungary needs your cotton. She is rich in
resources--mineral, agricultural, manufacturing, and of every kind. She
is rich in products for which you can exchange your cotton, rice, &c.
Will it, I ask, injuriously affect you if the English should compete
with you and send their manufactures of cotton thither? Not, I presume,
as long as the raw material is purchased from America; but in fact, your
market will be extended through her. "If therefore those of our
statesmen (says Mr. Calhoun), who can only be influenced by the almighty
dollar, will cypher up the value of this trade--this new market for our
products, worth perhaps twenty millions of dollars yearly--they may find
an excuse for incurring even the tremendous and awful risk of a war with
Austria, but which there is less danger of than there is with Governor
Brigham Young, in Utah. They may find a substantial interest involved
that is worth taking care of. Governor Kossuth may be assured it is of
more consequence than sympathy. It is a wonderfully sensitive nerve in
this country: it controls most of the others.--Sympathy, in this case,
can take care of itself. It does not require any nursing. The interests
involved should be attended to. It seems to me that this position as to
our commerce with Hungary cannot be attacked in front, in rear, or on
either flank. It is by far more forcible and powerful than the _ex
post facto_ argument in favour of the Mexican war, that it got us
California and its gold. So far as the general welfare of the country is
concerned, free trade with independent Hungary, and its certain ultimate
results, would be more invaluable than all the cargoes of gold that may
be brought from the Pacific coast, if ten times the present amount."

That is the opinion of a distinguished American citizen, identified
chiefly with the interests of the South.

As to me, I beg permission to sketch in a few lines the reverse of the
picture. If we fail in our enterprize to check the encroaching progress
of absolutism, if the despots of Europe succeed to accomplish their
plot, the chief part of which for Russia is to get hold of
Constantinople, and thus to become the controlling power of the
Mediterranean sea, what will be the immediate result of it in respect to
your commerce?

No man of sound judgment can entertain the least doubt that the first
step of Russia will and must be, to exclude America from the markets of
Europe by the renewal of what is called the continental system. Not a
single bushel of wheat or corn, not a single pound of tobacco, not a
single bale of cotton, will you be permitted to sell on the continent of
Europe. The leagued despots must exclude you, because you are
republicans, and commerce is the conveyer of principles; they must
exclude you, because by ruining your commerce they ruin your prosperity,
and by ruining this they ruin your development, which is dangerous to
them. Russia besides must exclude you, because you are the most
dangerous rival to her in the European markets where you have already
beaten her. And it will be the more the interest of Russia to exclude
you, because by taking Constantinople, she will also become the master
of Asiatic and African regions, where also cotton is raised.

Well, you say, perhaps, though you be excluded from the European
continent, England still remains to your cotton commerce.--Who could
guarantee that the English aristocracy will not join in the absolutist
combination, if the people of the United States, by a timely
manifestation of its sentiments, does not encourage the public opinion
of England itself?  But suppose England does remain a market to your
cotton, you must not forget that if English manufacture is excluded from
all the coasts of Europe and of the Mediterranean, she will not buy so
much cotton from you as now, because she will lose so large a market for
cotton goods.

Well, you say neither England nor you will submit to such a ruin of your
prosperity. Of course not; but then you will have a war, connected with
immense sacrifices; whereas now, you can prevent all that ruin, all
those sacrifices, and all that war. Is it not more prudent to prevent a
fire, than to quench it when your own house is already in flames?

Ladies and Gentlemen, let me draw to a close. I most heartily thank you
for the honours of this unlooked-for reception, and for your generous
sympathy. I feel happy that the interests, political as well as
commercial, of the United States, are in intimate connexion with the
success of the struggle of Hungary for independence and republican
principles; and I bid you a sincere and cordial farewell, recalling to
your memory, and humbly recommending to your sympathy that toast, which
the more clement Senator of Alabama, Colonel King, as President of the
United States Senate, gave me at the Congressional Banquet, on the 7th
of January, in these words:--

"Hungary having proved herself worthy to be free, by the virtue and
valour of her sons, the law of nations and the dictates of justice alike
demand that she shall have fair play in her struggle for independence."

It was the honourable Senator of Alabama who gave me this toast,
expressing his conviction that to this toast every American will
cordially respond. His colleague has not responded to it, but Mobile has
responded to it, and I take, with cordial gratitude, my leave of Mobile.

       *       *       *       *       *

XXXIX.--KOSSUTH'S DEFENCE AGAINST CERTAIN MEAN IMPUTATIONS.

[_Jersey City_.]

Kossuth was here welcomed with an address by the Hon. D. S. Gregory,
whose guest he became. Great efforts had been made to prejudice the
public against him; notwithstanding which he was received with
enthusiasm. In the evening, in his speech at the Presbyterian Church, he
alluded to the attacks of his opponents as follows:

Mr. Mayor, and Ladies and Gentlemen,--There have been some who, to the
great satisfaction of despots, and their civil and religious
confederates, have moved Heaven and Hell to lower my sacred mission to
the level of a stage-play; and to ridicule the enthusiastic outburst of
popular sentiments, by defaming its object and its aim.

That was a sorrowful sight indeed. To meet opposition we must be
prepared. There is no truth yet but has been opposed: the car which
leads truth to triumph must pass over martyrs; that is the doom of
humanity. Mankind, though advanced in intellectual skill, is pretty much
the same in heart as it was thousands of years ago--if not worse; for
wealth and prosperity do not always improve the heart. It is sorrowful
to see that not even such a cause as that which I plead, can escape from
being dragged down insultingly into the mud. With the ancient Greeks,
the head of an unfortunate was held sacred even to the gods. Now-a-days,
with some,--but let us be thankful! only with some few degenerate
persons,--even calamity like ours is but an occasion for a bad joke.
Jesus Christ felt thirsty on the cross, and received vinegar and
wormwood to quench the thirst of his agony. Oh ye spirits of my
country's departed martyrs, sadden not your melancholy look at mean
insult. The soil which you watered by your blood will yet be free, and
that is enough!  Ye will hear glad tidings about it when I join your
ranks.

But now, as for myself. When I was in private life, I despised to become
rich, and sacrificed thousands to the public, and often saw my own
family embarrassed by domestic cares. I refused indemnifications, and
lived poor. When raised to the highest place in my country, and provided
with an allowance four times as great as your President's, I still lived
in my old modest way. I had millions at my disposal, yet I went into
exile penniless. Who now are _ye_, or what like proof have
_ye_ given of not adoring the "Almighty Dollar," who dare to insult
my honour and call me a sturdy beggar, and ask in what brewery I will
invest the money I get from Americans? And why? because I ask a poor
alms to prepare the approaching struggle of my country; because I cannot
and may not tell the public (which is to tell my country's enemy), how I
dispose of the sums which I receive. And Americans, pretending to be
republicans, pretending to sympathize with liberty, and wield that light
artillery of Freedom,--the Press,--try to put on me mean stigmas, in
order to make it impossible for me to aid the contest of Hungary for its
own and mankind's liberty.

Indeed, it is too sad. The consul of ancient Rome, Spurius Postumius,
was once caught in a snare by the Samnites, and was ordered to pass
under the yoke with all his legions. When he hesitated to submit, a
captain cried to him: "Stoop, and lead us to disgrace for our country's
sake." And so he did. The word of the captain was true: our country may
claim of us, to submit even to degradations for its benefit. But I am
sorry that it is in America I had to learn, there are in a patriot's
life trials still bitterer than even that of exile.

Well: I can bear all this, if it be but fruitful of good for my beloved
fatherland. But I look up to Almighty God, and ask in humility, whether
unscrupulous and mean suspicion shall succeed in stopping the flow of
that public and private aid to me, from republican America and from
American republicans, without which I cannot organize and combine our
forces.

Mr. Mayor and citizens of Jersey, I indeed apprehend you will have much
disappointed those who endeavoured by ridicule to drive our cause out of
fashion. You have shown them to-day that the cause of liberty can never
be out of fashion with Americans. I thank you most cordially for it; the
more because I know that long before yesterday sympathy with the cause
of liberty has been in fashion with you. I am here on the borders of a
state noted for its fidelity and sacrifices in the struggle for your
country's freedom and independence: to which the State of New Jersey
has, in proportion to its population, sacrificed a larger amount of
patriotic blood and of property, than any other of your sister states.
I myself have read the acknowledgment of this in Washington's own yet
unedited hand-writings. And I know also that your state has the
historical reputation of having been a glorious battle-field in the
struggle for the freedom you enjoy.

There may be some in this assembly with whom the sufferings connected
with one's home being a battle-field, may be a family tradition yet. But
is there a country in the world where such traditions are more largely
recorded than my own native land is? Is there a country, on the soil of
which more battles have been fought--and battles not only for ourselves,
but for all the Christian, all the civilized world? Oh, home of my
fathers! thou art the Golgotha of Europe.

I defy all the demoniac skill of tyranny to find out more
tortures,--moral, political, and material,--than those which now weigh
down my fatherland. It will not bear them, it cannot bear them, but will
make a revolution, though all the world forsake us. But I ask, is there
not private generosity enough in America, to give me those funds,
through which my injured country would have to meet fewer enemies, and
win its rights with far less bloodshed; or shall the venom of calumny
cause you to refuse that, which, without impairing your private fortunes
or risking your public interests, would mightily conduce to our success?

Allow me to quote a beautiful but true word which ex-Governor Vroom
spoke in Trenton last night. He said: "Let us help the man; his
principles are those engrafted into our Declaration of Independence. We
cannot remain free, should all Europe become enslaved by absolutism. The
sun of freedom is but one, on mankind's sky, and when darkness spreads
it will spread over all alike." The instinct of the people of Hungary
understood, that to yield at all to unjust violence, was to yield
everything; and to my appeals they replied, Cursed be he who yields!
Though unprepared, they fought; our unnamed heroes fought and
conquered,--until Russia and treachery came. And though now I am an
exile, again they will follow me; I need only to get back to them and
bring them something sharper than our nails to fight with for fatherland
and humanity; then in the high face of heaven we will fight out the
battle of freedom once more. This is my cause, and this my plea. It is
there in your hearts, written in burning words by God himself, who made
you generous by bestowing on you freedom.

       *       *       *       *       *

XL.--THE BROTHERHOOD OF NATIONS.

[_Newark_.]

The Rev. Dr. Eddy introduced Kossuth to the citizens of Newark, and made
an address to him in their name. After this, Kossuth replied:

Gentlemen,--It was a minister of the Gospel who addressed me in your
name: Let me speak to you as a Christian who considers it to be my
heartfelt duty to act, not only in my private but also in my public
capacity, in conformity with the principles of Christianity, as I
understand it.

I have seen the people of the United States almost in every climate of
your immense territory. I have marked the natural influence of geography
upon its character. I have seen the same principles, the same
institutions assuming in their application the modifying influences of
local circumstances; I have found the past casting its shadows on the
present, in one place darker, in the other less; I have seen man
everywhere to be man, partaking of all aspirations, which are the bliss
as well as the fragility of nature in man,--but in one place the bliss
prevailing more and in the other the fragility. I saw now and then small
interests of the passing hour, less or more encroaching upon the sacred
dominion of universal principles; but so much is true, that wherever I
found a people, I found a great and generous heart, ready to take that
ground which by your very national position is pointed out to you as a
mission. Your position is to be a great nation; therefore your
necessity is to act like a great nation; or, if you do not, you will not
be great.

To be numerous, is not to be great. The Chinese are eight times more
numerous than you, and still China is not great, for she has isolated
herself from the world. Nor does the condition of a nation depend on
what she likes to call herself. China calls herself "Celestial," and
takes you and Europe for barbarians. Not what we call ourselves, but how
we act, proves what we are. Great is that nation which acts greatly.
And give me leave to say, what an American minister of the Gospel has
said to me: "_Nations_, by the great God of the Universe, are
individualized, as well as men. He has given each a mission to fulfil,
and He expects every one to bear its part in solving the great problem
of man's capacity for self-government, which is the problem of human
destiny; and if any nation fails in this, He will treat it as an
unprofitable servant, a barren fig-tree, whose own end is to be rooted
up and burnt."

Jonah sat under the shadow of his gourd rejoicing, in isolated, selfish
indifference, caring nothing for the millions of the Ninevites at his
feet. What was the consequence?  God prepared a worm to smite the gourd,
that it withered. God has privileged you, the people of the United
States, to repose, not under a gourd, but beneath the shadow of a
luxuriant vine and the outspreading branches of a delicious fig-tree.
Give him praise and thanks! But are you, Jonah-like, on this account to
wrap yourselves up in the mantle of insensibility, caring nothing for
the nations smarting under oppression?  stretching forth no hand for
their deliverance, not even so much as to protest against a conspiracy
of evil doers, and give an alms to aid deliverance from them? Are you to
hide your national talent in a napkin, or lend it at usury? Read the
Saviour's maxim:

"_Do unto others as ye would that others do unto you!_" This is the
Saviour's golden rule, applicable to nations as well as to individuals.
Suppose when the United States were struggling for their independence,
the Spanish Government had interfered to prevent its achievement
--sending an armament to bombard your cities and murder your
inhabitants. What would your forefathers have thought--how felt?
Precisely as Hungary thought and felt when the Russian bear put down his
overslaughtering paw upon her. They would have invoked high heaven to
avenge the interference--and had there been a people on the face of the
earth to protest against it, that people would have shown out, like an
eminent star in the hemisphere of nations--and to this day you would
call it blessed. What you would have others do unto you, do so likewise
unto them.

And though you met no foreign interference, yet you met far more than a
protest in your favour; you met substantial aid: thirty-eight vessels of
war, nineteen millions of money, 24,000 muskets, 4,000 soldiers, and the
whole political weight of France engaged in your cause. I ask not so
much, by far not so much, for oppressed Europe from you.

It is a gospel maxim "_Be not partaker of other men's sins._" It is
alike applicable to individuals and nations. If you of the United States
see the great law of humanity outraged by another nation, and see it
_silently_, raising no warning voice against it, you virtually
become a party to the offence; as you do not reprove it, you embolden
the offender to add iniquity unto iniquity.

Let not one nation be partaker of another nation's sins. When you see
the great law of humanity, the law upon which your national existence
rests, the law enacted in the Declaration of your Independence, outraged
and profaned, will you sit quietly by? If so (excuse me for saying) part
of the guilt is upon you, and while individuals receive their reward in
the eternal world, nations are sure to receive it here. There is
connection of cause and effect in a nation's destiny.

A nation should not be a mere _lake_, a glassy expanse, only
reflecting foreign, light around--but a _river_, carrying its rich
treasures from the fountain to distant regions of the earth.

A nation should not be a mere _light-house_, a stationary beacon,
erected upon the coast to warn voyagers of their danger--but a moving
_life-boat_, carrying treasures of freedom to the doors of
thousands and millions in their lands.

I confess, gentlemen, that I shared those expectations, which the
nations of Europe have conceived from America. Was I too sanguine in my
wishes to hope, that in these expectations I shall not fail? So much I
dare say, that I conceived these expectations not without encouragement
on your own part.

With this let me draw to a close. One word often tells more than a
volume of skilful eloquence. When crossing the Alleghany mountains, in a
new country, scarcely yet settled, bearing at every step the mark of a
new creation, I happened to see a new house in ruins. I felt astonished
to see a ruin in America. There must have been misfortune in that
house--the hand of God may have stricken him, thought I, and inquired
from one of the neighbours, "What has become of the man?" "Nothing
particular," answered he: "he went to the West--he was too comfortable
here. American pioneers like to be uncomfortable." It was but one word,
yet worth a volume. It made me more correctly understand the character
of your people and the mystery of your inner prodigious growth, than a
big volume of treatises upon the spirit of America might have done. The
instinct of indomitable energy, all the boundless power hidden in the
word "_go ahead_," lay open before my eyes. I felt by a glance what
immense things might be accomplished by that energy, to the honour and
lasting welfare of all humanity, if only its direction be not
misled--and I pray to God that he may preserve your people from being
absorbed in materialism. The proud results of egotism vanish in the
following generation like the fancy of a dream; but the smallest real
benefit bestowed upon mankind is lasting like eternity. People of
America! thy energy is wonderful; but for thy own sake, for thy future's
sake, for all humanity's sake, beware! Oh!  beware from measuring good
and evil by the arguments of materialists.

I have seen too many sad and bitter hours in my stormy life, not to
remember every word of true consolation which happened to brighten my
way.

It was nearly four months ago, and still I remember it, as if it had
happened but yesterday, that the delegation, which came in December last
to New York, to tender me a cordial welcome from and to invite me to
Newark, called _me a brother, a brother in the just and righteous
appreciation of human rights and human destiny; brother in all the
sacred and hallowed sentiments of the human heart_. These were your
words, and yesterday the people of Newark proved to me that they are
your sentiments; sentiments not like the sudden excitement of passion,
which cools, but sentiments of brotherhood and friendship, lasting,
faithful, and true.

You have greeted me by the dear name of brother. When I came, you
entitled me to the right to bid you farewell in a brother's way. And
between brethren, a warm grasp of hand, a tender tear in the eye, and
the word "_remember_," tells more than all the skill of oratory
could do. And remember, oh remember, brethren! that the grasp of my hand
is my whole people's grasp, the tear which glistens in my eyes is their
tear. They are suffering as no other people--for the world, the
oppressed world. They are the emblem of struggling liberty, claiming a
brother's love and a brother's aid from America, who is, happily, the
emblem of prosperous liberty!

Let this word "_brother_," with all the dear ties comprized in that
word, be the impression I leave upon your hearts. Let this word,
"_brethren, remember!_" be my farewell.

       *       *       *       *       *

XLI.--THE HISTORY AND HEART OF MASSACHUSETTS.

[_Worcester,[*] Massachusetts_.]

[Footnote *: "Heart of the Commonwealth," is the American title of the
town of Worcester.]

Gentlemen,--Just as the Holy Scriptures are the revelation of religious
truth, teaching men how to attain eternal bliss, so history is the
revelation of eternal wisdom, instructing nations how to be happy, and
immortal on earth. Unaccountable changes may alter on a sudden the
condition of individuals, but in the life of nations there is always a
close concatenation of cause and effect--therefore history is the book
of life, wherein the past assumes the shape of future events.

The history of old Massachusetts is full of instruction to those who
know how to read unwritten philosophy in written facts. Besides, to me
it is of deep interest, because of the striking resemblances between
your country's history and that of mine. In fact, from the very time
that the "colonial system" was adopted by Great Britain, to secure the
monopoly of the American trade, down to Washington's final
victories;--from James Otis, pleading with words of flame the rights of
America before the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, breathing into the
nation that breath of life out of which American Independence was born;
down to the Declaration of Independence, first moved by a son of
Massachusetts;--I often believe I read of Hungary when I read of
Massachusetts. But next, when the kind cheers of your generous-hearted
people rouse me out of my contemplative reveries, and looking around me
I see your prosperity, a nameless woe comes over my mind, because that
very prosperity reminds me that I am not at home. The home of my
fathers--the home of my heart--the home of my affections and of my
cares, is in the most striking contrast with the prosperity I see here.
And whence this striking contrast in the results, when there exists such
a striking identity in the antecedents?  Whence this afflicting
departure from logical coherence in history?

It is, because your struggle for independence met the good luck, that
monarchical France stipulated to aid with its full force America
struggling for independence, whereas republican America delayed even a
recognition of Hungary's independence at the crisis when it had been
achieved. However!  the equality of results may yet come. History will
not prove false to poor Hungary, while it proves true to all the world.
I certainly shall never meet the reputation of Franklin, but I may yet
meet his good luck in a patriotic mission. It is not yet too late. My
people, like the damsel in the Scriptures, is but sleeping, and not
dead. Sleep is silent, but restores to strength. There is apparent
silence also in nature before the storm. We are downtrodden, it is true:
but was not Washington in a dreary retreat with his few brave men,
scarcely to be called an army, when Franklin drew nigh to success in his
mission?

My retreat is somewhat longer, to be sure, but then our struggle went on
from the first on a far greater scale; and again, the success of
Franklin was aided by the hatred of France against England; so I am
told, and it is true; but I trust that the love of liberty in republican
America will prove as copious a source of generous inspiration, as
hatred of Great Britain proved in monarchical France. Or, should it be
the doom of humanity that even republics like yours are more mightily
moved by hatred than by love, is there less reason for republican
America to hate the overwhelming progress of absolutism, than there was
reason for France to hate England's prosperity? In fact, that prosperity
has not been lessened, but rather increased by the rending away of the
United States from the dominion of England; but the absorption of Europe
into predominant absolutism, would <DW36> your prosperity, because you
are no China, no Japan.

America cannot remain unaffected by the condition of Europe, with which
you have a thousand-fold intercourse. A passing accident in Liverpool, a
fire in Manchester, cannot fail to be felt in America--how could then
the fire of despotic oppression, which threatens to consume all Europe's
freedom, civilization, and property, fail to affect in its results
America?  How can it be indifferent to you whether Europe be free or
enslaved?--whether there exists a "Law of Nations," or no such thing any
more exists, being replaced by the caprice of an arrogant mortal who is
called "Czar?" No! either all the instruction of history is vanity, and
its warnings but the pastime of a mocking-bird, or this indifference is
impossible; therefore I may yet meet with Franklin's good luck.

Franklin wrote to his friend Charles Thompson, after having concluded
the treaty of peace--"If we ever become ungrateful to those who have
served and befriended us, our reputation, and all the strength it is
capable of procuring, will be lost, and new dangers ensue."

Perhaps I could say, poor Hungary has well served Christendom, has well
served the cause of humanity; but indeed we are not so happy as to have
served your country in particular. But you are generous enough to
permit our unmerited misfortunes to recommend us to your affections in
place of good service. It is beautiful to repay a received benefit, but
to bestow a benefit is divine. It is your good fortune to be _able_
to do good to humanity: let it be your glory that you are _willing_
to do it.

Then what will be the tidings I shall have to bear back to Europe, in
answer to the expectations with which I was charged from Turkey, Italy,
France, Portugal, and England?  Let me hope the answer will be fit to be
reanswered by a mighty hallelujah, at the shout of which the thrones of
tyrants will quake; and when they are fallen, and buried beneath the
fallen pillars of tyranny, all the Christian world will unite in the
song of praise--"Glory to God in Heaven, and peace to right-willing men
on earth, and honour to America, the first-born son of Liberty. For no
nation has God done so much as for her; for she proved to be well
deserving of it, because she was obedient to his Divine Law--She has
loved her neighbour as herself, and did unto others as, in the hour of
her need, she desired others to do unto herself."

Gentlemen,--I know what weight is due to Massachusetts in the councils
of the nation; the history, the character, the intelligence, the
consistent energy, and the considerate perseverance of your country,
give me the security that when the people of Massachusetts raises its
voice and pronounces its will--it will carry its aim.

I have seen this people's will in the manifestation of him whom the
people's well-deserved confidence has raised to the helm of its
Executive Government; I have seen it in the sanction of its Senators; I
have seen it in the mighty outburst of popular sentiments, and in the
generous testimonials of its sympathy, as I moved over this hallowed
soil. I hope soon to see it in the Legislative Hall of your
Representatives, and in the Cradle of American Liberty.

I hope to see it as I see it now here, throbbing with warm, sincere,
generous, and powerful pulsation, in the very heart of your
Commonwealth. I know that where the heart is sound the whole body is
sound--the blood is sound throughout all the veins. Never believe those
to be right who, bearing but a piece of metal in their chests, could
persuade you, that to be cold is to be wise. Warmth is the vivifying
influence of the universe, and the warm heart is the source of noble
deeds. To consider calmly what you have to do is well. You have done
so. But let me hope that the heart of Massachusetts will continue to
throb warmly for the cause of liberty, till that which you judge to be
right is done, with that persistent energy, which, inherited from the
puritan pilgrims of the Mayflower, is a principle with the people of
Massachusetts. Remember the afflicted,--farewell.

       *       *       *       *       *

XLII.--PANEGYRIC OF MASSACHUSETTS.

[_Speech at Faneuil Hall_.]

Kossuth entered Boston on the 27th April, escorted by twenty-nine
companies of infantry and four of artillery, in the midst of flags and
other festive display. He was welcomed by Gov. Boutwell at the State
House. In the afternoon he reviewed the troops on the common, in the
midst of an immense multitude. The members of the legislature and of the
council came in procession from the State House, and joined him in the
field. In the evening he was entertained at the Revere House, as the
guest of the Legislative Committee.

On April 28th he was escorted by the Independent Cadets to the State
House, where Governor Boutwell received him with a brief but emphatic
speech, avowing that Kossuth had "imparted important instruction" to the
people of the United States. The governor then conducted Kossuth to the
Senate, where he was warmly welcomed by the President, General Wilson;
and thence again to the House of Representatives, where the Speaker, Mr.
Banks, addressed him in words of high honour, in the name of the
representatives. To each of these addresses Kossuth replied; but the
substance of his speeches has scarcely sufficient novelty to present
here.

On the evening of the 29th of April it was arranged that he should speak
in Faneuil Hall. The hall filled long before his arrival, and an
incident occurred which deserves record. The crowd amused itself by
calling on persons present for speeches: among others Senator Myron
Lawrence was called for, who, after first refusing, stept on the
platform and declared that _he had some sins to confess_. He had
been guilty of thinking Kossuth to be what is called "a humbug;" but he
had seen him now, and thought differently. He had seen the modest,
truthful bearing of the man,--that he had no tricks of the orator, but
spoke straightforward. Mr. Lawrence now believed him to be sincere and
honest, and prayed Almighty God to grant him a glorious success. This
frank and manly acknowledgment was received with unanimous and hearty
applause.

At eight o'clock Governor Boutwell, his council, and the committee of
reception, as also the vice-presidents and secretaries, received Kossuth
in Faneuil Hall.[*] When applause had ceased, the Governor addressed
Kossuth as follows:--

[Footnote *: Faneuil Hall is entitled by the Americans "the cradle of
American Liberty."]

Gentlemen,--We have come from the exciting and majestic scenes of the
reception which the people of Massachusetts have given to the exiled son
of an oppressed and distant land, that on this holy spot, associated in
our minds with the eloquence, the patriotism, the virtue of the
revolution, we may listen to his sad story of the past and contemplate
his plans and hopes for the future. And shall these associations which
belong to us, and this sad story which belongs to humanity, fail to
inspire our souls and instruct our minds in the cause of freedom? Europe
is not like a distant ocean, whose agitations and storms give no impulse
to the wave that gently touches our shore. The introduction of steam
power and the development of commercial energy are blending and
assimilating our civilities and institutions. Europe is nearer to us in
time than the extreme parts of this country are to each other. As all of
us are interested in the prevalence of the principles of justice among
our fellow men, _so_, as a nation, we are interested in the
prevalence of the principles of justice among the nations and states of
Europe.

Never before was the American mind so intelligently directed to European
affairs. We have not sought, nor shall we seek, the control of those
affairs. But we may scan and judge their character and prepare ourselves
for the exigencies of national existence to which we may be called. _I
do not hesitate to pronounce the opinion that the policy of Europe will
have a visible effect upon the character, power, and destiny of the
American Republic_. That policy as indicated by Russia and Austria,
is the work of centralization, consolidation and absolutism. American
policy is the antagonist of this.

We are pledged to liberty and the sovereignty of States. Shall a
contest between our own principles and those of our enemies awaken no
emotions in us? We believe that government should exist for the
advantage of the individual members of the body politic, and not for the
use of those who, by birth, fortune, or personal energy, may have risen
to positions of power. We recognize the right of each nation to
establish its own institutions and regulate its own affairs. Our
revolution rests upon this right, and otherwise is entirely
indefensible. The policy of this nation, as well foreign as domestic,
should be controlled by American principles, that the world may know we
have faith in the government we have established. While we cannot adopt
the cause of any other people, or make the quarrels of European nations
our own, it is our duty to guard the principles peculiar to America, as
well as those entertained by us in common with the civilized world.

One principle, which should be universal in States as among individual
men is, that each should use his own in such a way as not to injure that
which belongs to another. _Russia violated this principle when she
interfered in the affairs of Hungary_, and thus weakened the
obligations of other States to respect the sovereignty of the Russian
Empire.

The independent existence of the continental States of Europe, is of
twofold importance to America. Important politically, important
commercially.

As independent States they deprive Russia, the central and absorbing
power of Europe, of the opportunity on the Mediterranean to interfere in
the politics and civilities of this Continent. Russia and the United
States are as unlike as any two nations which ever existed. If Russia
obtains control of Europe by the power of arms, and the United States
shall retain this Continent by the power of its principles, war will be
inevitable. As inevitable as it was in former days that war should arise
between Carthage and Rome,--Carthage, which sought to extend her power
by commerce, and Rome, which sought to govern the world by the sword.
The independence of the States of Europe is then the best security for
the peace of the world. If these States exist, it must be upon one
condition only--that each State is permitted to regulate its own
affairs. If the voice of the United States and Great Britain is silent,
will Russia allow these States to exist upon this principle?--Has she
not already partitioned Poland--menaced Turkey--divided with the Sultan
the sovereignty of Wallachia--infused new energy into the despotic
councils of Austria--and finally aided her in an unholy crusade against
the liberties of Hungary? Have we not then an interest in the affairs of
Europe? And if we have an interest, ought we not to use the rights of an
independent State for its protection?

The second consideration is commercial.

Centralization, absolutism, destroys commerce. The policy of Russia
diminishes production and limits markets. Whenever she adds a new State
to her dominions the commerce of the world is diminished. Great Britain
and the United States, which possess three-fourths of the commercial
marine of the globe, are interested to prevent it. Our commerce at this
moment with despotic States is of very little importance, and its
history shows that in every age it has flourished in proportion to the
freedom of the people.

These, gentlemen, are poor words and barren thoughts upon the great
European question of the time. A question which America in her own name,
and for herself, must meet at some future day, if now she shall fail to
meet it firmly, upon well settled principles of national law, for the
protection and assistance of other States.

I have done. The exiled patriot shall speak for himself. Not for
himself only, nor for the land and people of Hungary he loves so well,
but for Europe, and America even, he speaks. Before you he pleads your
own cause. It is to a just tribunal I present a noble advocate. And to
him it shall be a bright spot in the dreary waste of the exile's life,
that to-night he pleads the cause of Hungary and humanity, where once
Otis and Adams, and Hancock and Quincy, pleaded the cause of America and
liberty.

I present to you Governor Kossuth of Hungary.

In reply to Governor Boutwell, when the tumultuous applause had
subsided, Kossuth spoke, in substance as follows:--

He apologized for profaning Shakespeare's language in Faneuil Hall, the
cradle of American liberty. Yet he ventured to criticize that very
phrase; for liberty ought not to be _American_, but _human_;
else it is no longer a right, but a privilege; and privilege can nowhere
be permanent. The nature of a privilege (said he) is exclusiveness, that
of a principle is communicative. Liberty is a principle: its community
is its security; exclusiveness is its doom.

What is aristocracy? It is exclusive liberty; it is privilege; and
aristocracy is doomed, because it is contrary to the destiny of men. As
aristocracy should vanish within each nation, so should no nation be an
aristocrat among nations. Until that ceases, liberty will nowhere be
lasting on earth. It is equally fatal to individuals as to nations, to
believe themselves beyond the reach of vicissitudes. By this proud
reliance, and the isolation resulting therefrom, more victims have
fallen than by immediate adversities. You have grown prodigiously by
your freedom of seventy-five years; but what is seventy-five years as a
charter of immortality? No, no, my humble tongue tells the records of
eternal truth. A _privilege_ never can be lasting. Liberty
restricted to one nation never can be sure. You may say, "We are the
prophets of God;" but you shall not say, "God is only our God." The Jews
said so, and their pride, old Jerusalem, lies in the dust. Our Saviour
taught all humanity to say, "Our Father in heaven," and his Jerusalem is
lasting to the end of days.

"There is a community in mankind's destiny"--that was the greeting which
I read on the arch of welcome on the Capitol Hill of Massachusetts. I
pray to God, the Republic of America would weigh the eternal truth of
those words, and act accordingly; liberty in America would then be sure
to the end of time; but if you say, "American Liberty," and take that
grammar for your policy, I dare to say the time will yet come when
humanity will have to mourn a new proof of the ancient truth, that
without community national freedom is never sure.

However, the cradle of American Liberty is not only famous from the
reputation of having been always on the lists of the most powerful
eloquence; it is still more conspicuous for having seen that eloquence
attended by practical success. To understand the mystery of this rare
circumstance one must see the people of New England, and especially the
people of Massachusetts.

In what I have seen of New England there are two things, the evidence of
which strikes the observer at every step--prosperity and intelligence. I
have seen thousands assembled, following the noble impulses of a
generous heart: almost the entire population of every town, of every
village where I passed, gathered around me, throwing flowers of
consolation on my path. I have seen not a single man bearing that mark
of poverty upon himself which in old Europe strikes the eye sadly at
every step. I have seen no ragged poor--have seen not a single house
bearing the appearance of desolated poverty. The cheerfulness of a
comfortable condition, the result of industry, spreads over the land.
One sees at a glance that the people work assiduously, not with the
depressing thought just to get through the cares of a miserable life
from day to day by hard toil, but they work with the cheerful
consciousness of substantial happiness. And the second thing which I
could not fail to remark, is the stamp of intelligence impressed upon
the very eyes and outward appearance of the people at large. I and my
companions have seen them in the factories, in the workshops, in their
houses, and in the streets, and could not fail a thousand times to think
"how intelligent this people looks." It is to such a people that the
orators of Faneuil Hall had to speak, and therein is the mystery of
success. They were not wiser than the public spirit of their audience,
but they were the eloquent interpreters of the people's enlightened
instinct.

No man can force the harp of his own individuality into the people's
heart, but every man may play upon the chords of his people's heart, who
draws his inspiration from the people's instinct. Well, I thank God for
having seen the public spirit of the people of Massachusetts, bestowing
its attention on the cause I plead, and pronouncing its verdict. In
respect to the question of national intervention, his Excellency the
high-minded Governor of Massachusetts wrote a memorable address to the
Legislature; the Joint Committee of the Legislative Assembly, after a
careful and candid consideration of the subject, not only concurred in
the views of the Executive government, but elucidated them in a report,
the irrefutable logic and elevated statesmanship of which will for ever
endear the name of Hazewell to oppressed nations; and the Senate of
Massachusetts adopted the resolutions proposed by the Legislative
Committee. After such remarkable and unsolicited manifestations of
conviction, there cannot be the slightest doubt that all these Executive
and Legislative proceedings not only met the full approbation of the
people of Massachusetts, but were the solemn interpretation of public
opinion. A spontaneous outburst of popular sentiment tells often more
in a single word than all the skill of elaborate eloquence could; as
when, amidst the thundering cheers of a countless multitude, a man in
Worcester greeted me with the shout: "_We worship not the man, but we
worship the principle_." It was a word, like those words of flame
spoken in Faneuil Hall, out of which liberty in America was born. That
word reveals the spirit, which, applying eternal truth to present
exigencies, moves through the people's heart--that word is teeming with
the destinies of America.

Give me leave to mention, that having had an opportunity to converse
with leading men of the great parties, which are on the eve of an
animated contest for the Presidency--I availed myself of that
opportunity, to be informed of the principal issues, in case the one or
the other party carries the prize; and having got the information
thereof, I could not forbear to exclaim--"All these questions together
cannot outweigh the all-overruling importance of _foreign policy_."
It is there, in the question of foreign policy, that the heart of the
immediate future throbs. Security and danger, prosperity and stagnation,
peace and war, tranquillity and embarrassment--yes, life and death, will
be weighed in the scale of Foreign Policy. It is evident things are come
to the point where they were in ancient Rome, when old Cato never spoke
privately or publicly about whatever topic, without closing his speech
with these words: "_However, my opinion is that Carthage must be
destroyed_"--thus advertising his countrymen, that there was one
question outweighing in importance all other questions, from which
public attention should never for a moment be withdrawn.

Such, in my opinion, is the condition of the world now. Carthage and
Rome had no place on earth together. Republican America and
all-overwhelming Russian absolutism cannot much longer subsist together
on earth. Russia active--America passive--there is an immense danger in
that fact; it is like the avalanche in the Alps, which the noise of a
bird's wing may move and thrust down with irresistible force, growing
every moment. I cannot but believe it were highly time to do as old Cato
did, and finish every speech with these words--"_However, the law of
nations should be maintained, and absolutism not permitted to become
omnipotent._"

It is however a consolation to me to know, that the _chief_
difficulty with which I have to contend,--viz. the overpowering
influence of domestic questions with you,--is neither lasting, nor in
any way an argument against the justice of our cause.

Another difficulty which I encounter is rather curious. Many a man has
told me that if I had only not fallen into the hands of
_abolitionists_ and _free soilers_, they would have supported
me; and had I landed somewhere in the South, instead of at New York, I
should have met quite different things from that quarter; but being
supported by the free-soilers, of course I must be opposed by the South.
On the other side, I received a letter, from which I beg leave to quote
a few lines:--

"You are silent on the subject of slavery. Surrounded as you have been
by slaveholders ever since you put your foot on English soil, if not
during your whole voyage from Constantinople, and ever since you have
been in this country surrounded by them, whose threats, promises, and
flattery made the stoutest hearts succumb, your position has put me in
mind of a scene described by the apostle of Jesus Christ, when the devil
took him up into a high mountain," &c.

Now, gentlemen, thus being charged from one side with being in the hands
of abolitionists, and from the other side with being in the hands of
slaveholders, I indeed am at a loss what course to take, if these very
contradictory charges were not giving me the satisfaction to feel that I
stand just where it is my duty to stand--on a truly American ground.

And oh, have I not enough upon these poor shoulders, that I am desired
yet to take up additional cares? If the cause I plead be just, if it is
worthy of your sympathy, and at the same time consistent with the
impartial consideration of your own moral and material interests, (which
a patriot never should disregard, not even out of philanthropy,) then
why not weigh that cause in the scale of its own value, and not in a
foreign one? Have I not difficulties enough before me here, that I am
desired to increase them with my own hands?--Father Mathew goes on
preaching temperance, and he may be opposed or supported on his own
ground; but who ever thought of opposing him because he takes not into
his hands to preach fortitude or charity? And indeed, to oppose or to
abandon the cause I plead, only because I mix not with the agitation of
an interior question, is a greater injustice yet, because to discuss the
question of foreign policy I have a right,--my nation is an object of
that policy; we are interested in it;--but to mix with interior party
movements I have no right, not being a citizen of the United States.

[After this Kossuth proceeded to urge, as in former speeches, that the
interests of American commerce were not opposed to, but were identified
with, the cause of Hungary and of European Liberty. He also adduced new
considerations, which are afterwards treated more fully in his speech at
Buffalo.]

       *       *       *       *       *

XLIII.--SELF-GOVERNMENT OF HUNGARY.

[_Banquet in Faneuil Hall_.]

On April 30th, Kossuth was entertained at a Grand Banquet, by the
Governor and Council, and the Members of the two Houses. Eight hundred
and seventy tickets besides were issued, and were all taken up. The
Honourable Henry Wilson, President of the Senate, was President for the
evening. It is not possible here to print all the speeches, but it may
be noted that Governor Boutwell, in reply to a toast, elicited
affirmative replies from the guests to many questions directed to show
the necessity of American armed interference on the side of Hungary.
Also, the venerable Josiah Quincy, aged eighty, in reply to a toast,
declared that liberty remained only in the United States and Great
Britain, and that in Great Britain herself the spirit of freedom is
weakened. "Let Great Britain fail and be beaten down, and all the navies
of Europe will be bristling against the United States." Finally,
President Wilson, introducing the guest of the evening, said:--

"Gentlemen, allow me to present to you the illustrious guest of
Massachusetts, Governor Kossuth. He has won our admiration as a man by
the advocacy of the cause of his country, and he has won all our hearts
by the purity of his principles."

Kossuth, in reply, noticed that the toast with which he had been
honoured was almost entirely personal; and while disclaiming merit, he
was nevertheless induced to advert to personal incidents, (now generally
known,) as,--how he published in MS. the Hungarian debates,--was
unlawfully imprisoned for it, and learned English in prison by means of
Shakespeare; how when he was necessarily released, the government
imposed an unlawful censorship on his journal, which journal
nevertheless became the basis of the great and extensive reforms which
received their completion in the laws of March and April, 1848. After
this he proceeded as follows:--

Gentlemen, allow me to say a few words on the ancient institutions of
Hungary. I have often heard it said that the people of Europe are
incapable of self-government. Let me speak of the people of Hungary, to
show whether they are capable of self-government or not. In thirty-six
years, with God's help, and through your generous aid, the free people
of Hungary will celebrate the 1000th anniversary of the establishment of
their home--the millennium of Hungary in Europe. Yes, gentlemen, may I
hope that celebration will take place under the blessings of liberty in
the year 1889?

It is a long period--one thousand years--and Oh! how it has teemed with
adversities to my countrymen! and yet through this long time, amid all
adversities there was no period when the people of Hungary did not
resist despotism. Our boast is, that through the vicissitudes of a
thousand years there was not a moment when the popular will and the
legal authorities had sanctioned the rule of absolutism. And, gentlemen,
what other people, for 1000 years, has not consented to be ruled by
despotism? Even in the nineteenth century I am glad to look back to the
wisdom of our fathers through a thousand years--who laid down for
Hungarian institutions a basis which for all eternity must remain true.
This basis was upon that Latin proverb _nil de nobis, sine
nobis_--"nothing about us without us." That was, to claim that every
man should have a full share in the sovereignty of the people and a full
share in the rights belonging to his nation. In other times a theory was
got up to convince the people that they might have a share in
_legislation_ just so far as to control that legislation, but
denying the right of the people to control the _executive_ power.
The Hungarian people never adopted that theory. They ever claimed a full
share in the _executive_ as well as in the legislative and judicial
power. Out of this idea of government rose the municipal system of
Hungary. In respect to Hungarian aristocracy, you must not consider it
in the same light as the aristocracy of England. The word
_nobleman_ in Hungary originally was equivalent to _soldier_.
Every man who defended his country was a nobleman, and every man who had
a vote was called to defend his country. I believe the duty of
defending a man's country, and also political right, should be common.

After our people had conquered a home, the leaders took the lion's
share, of course. But it should be considered that those who had the
largest share of the property, were compelled to furnish soldiers
according to the extent of their possessions. Therefore such men gave a
part of their land to people to cultivate, and desired aid of them
whenever the necessity for war came. So all who defended their country
were considered noblemen. Hungary was divided into fifty-two counties,
but not counties like yours--some of them were so populous as to be
comparable to your States, containing perhaps half a million or more of
people, and those who became the aristocracy in some of these counties
amounted to 35,000. In every county was a fortress, and whenever defence
became necessary, the rich men went into these fortresses under their
own banner, and the others went under the King's colours, and were
commanded by the sheriff of the county, who might be here Governor--at
least who was the chief of the Executive. Certain of the cities were
raised to constitutional rights. A smaller city, if surrounded by
fortifications, or if an important post, was represented in the Diet,
whilst larger places, if not posts of importance for national defence,
were represented only by the County Delegates. Every place that had the
elements of defence had political rights. So it came to pass that the
aristocracy were not a few men, but half a million. I had contended to
beat down this barrier of aristocracy. Before the Revolution, in
municipal governments only the nobility had a share--they only were the
men who could vote: but the change was easy. The frame of
self-government was ready. We had only to say, _the people_ instead
of _the nobility_ had the right to vote; and so, in one day, we
buried aristocracy, never to rise again. Each county elected its
Representatives to the Diet, and had the right of intercourse with other
counties by means of letters on all matters of importance to these
counties; and therefore our fifty-two primary councils were normal
schools of public spirit. We elected our Judicatory and Executive, and
the government had not a right to send instructions or orders to our
Executive; and if an order came which we considered to be inconsistent
with our constitutional rights, it was not sent to the Executive, but to
the Council; and therefore the arbitrary orders of the Government could
not be executed, because they came not into the hands of the Executive.
Thus were our Councils barriers against oppression.

When the French took Saragossa, it was not enough to take the city--they
had to take every house. So also _we_ went on, and though some
counties might accept the arbitrary orders of the government, some
resisted; and, by discussing in their letters to the other counties the
points of right, enlightened them; and it was seen that when the last
house in Saragossa had been beaten down, the first stood erect again. In
consequence of the democratic nature of our institutions, our Councils
were our Grand Juries. But after having elected our Judges, we chose
several men in every county meeting, of no public office, but
conspicuous for their integrity and knowledge of the law, to assist the
Judges in their administration.

Believe me, these institutions had a sound basis, fit to protect a
nation against an arbitrary government which was aiming at
centralization and oppression. Now, these counties having contended
against the Austrian Government, it did everything to destroy them. The
great field was opened in the Diet of 1847. Having been elected by the
county of Pest, I had the honour to lead the party devoted to national
rights and opposed to centralization and in defence of municipal
authority. It was my intention to make it impossible that the Government
should in future encroach upon the liberties of the people. We had the
misfortune in Hungary to be governed by a Constitutional King, who at
the same time was the absolute monarch of another realm--by birth and
interests attached to absolutism and opposed to constitutional
government. It was difficult to be an absolute monarch and behave as
King of Hungary. There is on record a speech of mine, spoken in the
Hungarian Diet, about the inconsistency of these two attributes in one
man--that either Austria must become constitutional, or Hungary
absolutistical. That speech virtually made the Revolution of 1848 at
Vienna. After this Revolution, I was sent to Vienna to ask that our
laws be established, releasing the people from feudal rights and
demanding a constitutional ministry. Then it was that a circumstance
occurred, to which I heard an allusion in the toast offered to me. I was
told the King would grant our request; only, there was agitation in
Vienna, and it would look as if the King were yielding to pressure. If
the people would be quiet, the King would sanction our laws. Then I
said, that if the King would give his sanction to our legislative
measures, peace would be made for the House of Austria in twenty-four
hours. But when that consent was given in one Chamber, in another
Chamber that wicked woman, Sophia, the mother of the present Emperor,
who calls himself King of Hungary--no, he does _not_ call himself
King of Hungary, for he thinks the national existence of Hungary is
blotted out--plotted how to ruin my people and destroy that sanction
which was nothing but a necessary means to secure a just cause. Next
came the Hungarian ministry--and, strange to say, I saw myself placed
close to the throne.

When in Vienna, after the sanction was granted, steps were taken to
retract it; I went to the Arch-Duke Stephen, the Palatine of Hungary,
the first constitutional authority of Hungary,--the elective viceroy,
and told him he ought to return to Hungary if he wished to preserve his
influence.

He answered that he could not return to Hungary, for if the King did not
sanction our laws--he (the Arch-Duke Stephen) might be proclaimed King
instead of the Emperor of Austria, and he would never dethrone his
cousin.

I answered, that he spoke like an honest man, but perhaps the time would
come when he would find an empty seat on that throne, and he had better
take it, for I could assure him, if he did not, no other man ever would
with the consent of the people. When five months later, in Hungary, we
met for the last time, he called me to his house on a stormy night, and
desired of me to know what would be the issue of matters. I answered: I
can see no issue for you, but the crown or else the scaffold, and then
for the people a Republic. But even from this alternative I will relieve
you: for you the crown, for me the scaffold, if the Hungarian
independence is not achieved.--I make no hesitation here to confess that
such was the embarrassed state of Hungarian affairs that I should have
felt satisfied for him to have accepted the crown. Remember that your
fathers did not design at first to sever the ties which bound the
colonies to England, but circumstances forced the issue. So it was with
us. We asked at first only Democratic institutions, but when it was
possible we were glad to throw away our Kings.

The Arch-Duke did not accept, but was rather a traitor to his country.
Such is the connection of tyrants with each other, they desire not to
prevent others from oppressing. He is now an exile like myself. If he
had accepted the proposal, no doubt the independence of Hungary would
have been recognized by even Russia, especially if he had formed a
family alliance with despotism, and then for centuries the establishment
of a Republic would have been impossible; whereas, now, as sure as there
is a God in Heaven, no King will ever rule Hungary; but it must be one
of those Republics, wherein Republicanism is not a mere romance but a
reality, founded upon the basis of municipal authorities, to which the
people are attached. We could never have such a movement as disgraced
France in December.

Excuse me, gentlemen, if I abuse your kindness. I am anxious to make
known my ideas upon the future organization of my country. The
organization which alone we could propose, is one founded upon the
sovereignty of the people, not only in a _legislative_ capacity
--for it is not enough that we know that sovereignty by casting
a vote once in three or four years: we must feel it every day,
everywhere. The sovereignty of the people asserts, that men have certain
rights, not depending on any power, but natural rights. I mean such as
religious liberty--free thought--a free press, and the right of every
family to regulate its own affairs: but not only every family; also
every town, city, and county. Our sovereignty shall be such, that the
higher government will have no power to interfere in the domestic
concerns of any town, city, or county. These are the principles upon
which our government will be founded--not only sovereignty in
Legislation, but a particular share in the executive Government.--Judge
whether such a people is worthy to meet the sympathy of Republicans like
you, who have shown to the world that a nation may be powerful without
centralization. Believe me, there is harmony in our _ancient_
principles and your _recent_ ones. Judge whether my people is
capable of self-government.

The venerable gentleman (Josiah Quincy) spoke a word about England. I
believe the Anglo-Saxon race must have a high destiny in the history of
mankind. It is the only race, the younger brother of which is free while
the elder brother has also some freedom. You, gentlemen, acknowledge
that from the mother country you obtained certain of your principles of
liberty--free thought and speech, a free press, &c.--and I am sure,
gentlemen, the English people are proud of liberty. Called to pronounce
against the league of despots, if the Republican United States and
constitutional England were in concord, what would be the consequence?

I answer, it would be exactly as when the South American Republic was
threatened--as when Russia forbade American vessels to approach within a
hundred miles of its American shores. I have often met in the United
States an objection against an alliance with England; but it is chiefly
the Irish who are opposed to being on good terms with England. In
respect to the Irish, if I could contribute to the future unity in
action of the United States and England, I should more aid the Irish
than by all exclamations against one or other. If the United States and
England were in union, the continent of Europe would be republican.
Then, though England remained monarchical, Ireland would be freer than
now. If I were an Irishman, I would not have raised the standard of
_Repeal_, which offended the people of England, but the standard of
municipal _self-government_ against parliamentary omnipotence--not
as an Irish question, but as a common question to all--and in this
movement the people of England and Scotland would have joined; and now
there would have been a Parliament in England, in Ireland, and Scotland.
Such is the geographical position of Great Britain, that its countries
should be, not one, but united; each with its own Parliament, but still
one Parliament for all. If I could contribute to get England to oppose
the encroachments of absolutism, I should be doing more to aid Ireland,
in aiding freedom, than if I so acted as to induce England to look
indifferently at the approach of absolutism. I was glad to hear the
words of that venerable gentleman (Josiah Quincy). They brought to my
mind the words of John Adams, first minister of the United States to
England. When he addressed the King, he said:--"_He would be happy
could he restore entire esteem, confidence, and affection between the
United States and England_," and King George III. replied: "_I was
the last to conform to the separation, and I am the first to meet the
friendship of the United States. Let the communities of language,
religion, and blood have their full and natural effect._"

'Let this precedent, belonging to the intelligence not of to-day
only--let those words become now considered of particular interest to
both countries, and it would be of the greatest benefit to mankind.
There is nothing more necessary to secure the freedom of Europe than
consent to act together, on the part of the United States and England.

It is not necessary to say how far they will go, but only necessary to
say they will do as much as their interests allow, and what may be
necessary that the law of nations should be protected and not abandoned.

When I was in England nothing gave me more delight than to hear
delegations addressing me, mention your Washington, and confess
themselves sorry that he had to manifest his greatness in contending
against England; but they were more proud to see the greatness of such a
man, than not to have been opposed by him. They entrusted me to bring
word to the United States, that they wished to be united to you for the
benefit of all Humanity.

I was charged particularly by one hundred men connected with commerce at
Manchester--the least wealthy of whom was _worth_, as they express
it in England, L10,000 a year--these gentlemen told me it would be a
great result of my mission in the United States, if I could convince
Americans that Englishmen thought all differences had vanished; and they
desired to go hand in hand with the people of the United States, as
regards foreign policy. Now, I have observed in New England less
objection to the policy of an alliance with England than in many other
parts of the United States, and I take it for an evidence of the
intelligence and liberality of the people.

I know, gentlemen, you have been pleased to honour me, not for myself
(for the people of Massachusetts are not man-worshippers, but reverence
principles only)--therefore I cannot better express my thanks than to
pledge my word, relying, as on another occasion of deep interest I said,
_upon the justice of our cause, the blessing of God, iron wills, stout
arms, and good swords_--and upon your generous sympathy, to do all in
my power, with my people, for my country and for humanity; for which
indeed in my heart, though, it is somewhat old, there is yet warmth.

After many other toasts, President Wilson called on Judge Hoar to speak.
The reply of the Judge had several striking sentences. He closed by
saying to Kossuth:

"It is because you, Sir, have learned the truth that _Peace is the
first interest of no people,--that there are other things more sacred
than human life,--that without Justice and Freedom life is only a
mockery, and peace a delusion and a burden,_--it is _because_,
when tyranny had terminated every duty of a subject, you too[*] have
dared to become the MOST NOTORIOUS REBEL of our time, _therefore_
does Massachusetts welcome you to the home of Hancock and of Adams, and
the majestic spirit of Washington sheds its benediction upon the scene."

[Footnote *: The Judge alludes to Hancock and Adams, who were excepted
by name as "notorious rebels," from General Gage's proclamation of
amnesty.]

       *       *       *       *       *

XLIV.--RUSSIA THE ANTAGONIST OF THE U.S.

[_Salem, May 6_.]

Ladies and gentlemen,--When four years ago, the tidings of our struggle
made the scarcely before known name of Hungary familiar to you, sympathy
for a nobly defended noble cause moved your hearts to rejoice at our
victories, to feel anxiety about our dangers. Yet, so long as our
struggle was but a domestic contest, a resistance against oppression by
a perjurious king, you had no reason to think that the sympathy you felt
for us, being a generous manifestation of the affections of free men,
was at the same time an instinctive presentiment of a policy, which you
in your national capacity will be called upon by circumstances, not only
to consider, but, as I firmly believe, also to adopt.

You were far from anticipating that the issue of our struggle would
become an opportunity for your country to take that position which
Divine Providence has evidently assigned to you; I mean the position of
a power, not restricted in its influence to the Western Hemisphere, but
reaching across the earth. You had not thought that it is the struggle
of Hungary which will call on you to fulfil the prophecy of Canning; who
comprehended, that it is the destiny of the New World to redress the
balance of power in the Old.

The universal importance of our contest has been but late revealed. It
has been revealed by the interference of Russia, by our fall, and by its
more threatening results.

Now, it has become evident to all thinking men, that the balance of
power cannot be redressed unless Hungary is restored to national
independence. Consequently if it be your own necessity to weigh in the
scale of the powers on earth, if it be your destiny to redress the
balance of power, the cause of Hungary is the field where this destiny
will have to be fulfilled.

And it is indeed your destiny. Russian diplomacy could never boast of a
greater and more fatal victory than it had a right to boast, should it
succeed to persuade the United States not to care about her--Russia
accomplishing her aim to become the ruling power in Europe; the ruling
power in Asia; the ruling power of the Mediterranean sea. That would be
indeed a great triumph to Russian diplomacy, greater than her triumph
over Hungary; a triumph dreadful to all humanity, but to nobody more
dreadful than to your own future.

All sophistry is in vain, gentlemen; there can be no mistake about it.
Russian absolutism and Anglo-Saxon constitutionalism are not rival but
antagonist powers. They cannot long continue to subsist together.
Antagonists cannot hold equal position; every additional strength of the
one is a comparative weakening of the other. One or the other must
yield. One or the other must perish or become dependent on the other's
will.

You may perhaps believe that that triumph of diplomacy is impossible in
America. But I am sorry to say, that it has a dangerous ally, in the
propensity to believe, that the field of American policy is limited
geographically; that there is a field for American, and there is a field
for European policy, and that these fields are distinct, and that it is
your interest to keep them distinct.

There was a time in our struggle, when, if a man had come from America,
bringing us in official capacity the tidings of your brotherly greeting,
of your approbation and your sympathy, he would have been regarded like
a harbinger of heaven. The Hungarian nation, tired out by the hard task
of dearly but gloriously bought victories, was longing for a little
test, when the numerous hordes of Russia fell upon us in the hour of
momentary exhaustion. Indignation supplied the wanted rest, and we rose
to meet the intruding foe; but it was natural that the nation looked
around with anxiety, whether there be no power on earth raising its
protesting voice against that impious act of trampling down the law of
nations, the common property of all humanity? no power on earth to cheer
us by a word of approbation of our legitimate defence? Alas! no such
word was heard. We stood forsaken and alone! It was upon that ground of
forsakenness that treason spread its poison into our ranks. They told my
nation, "Your case is hopeless. Kossuth has assured you that if you
drive out the Austrians from your territory, and declare your
independence, it perhaps will be recognized by the French Republic,
probably by England, and certainly by America; but look! none has
recognized you; not even the United States, though with them it was from
the time of Washington always a constant principle to recognize every
government. You are not recognized. You are forsaken by the whole world.
Kossuth has assured you, that it is impossible the constitutional powers
of the world should permit without a word of protest Russia to interfere
with the domestic concerns of Hungary; and look! Russia has interfered,
the laws of nations are broken, the political balance of power is upset.
Russia has assumed the position of a despotic arbiter of the condition
of the world, and still nobody has raised a single word of protest in
favour of Hungary's just and holy cause." Such was the insinuation,
which Russian diplomacy, with its wonted subterraneous skill, instilled
drop by drop into my brave people's manly heart; and alas! I could not
say that the insinuation was false. _The French Republic_, instead
of protesting against the interference of Russia, _followed its
example and interfered itself at Rome_. _Great Britain_, instead
of protesting, _checked Turkey in her resolution to oppose that new
aggrandizement of Russia_; and _the United States of America_
remained silent, instead of protesting against the violation of those
"laws of nature and of nature's God," in the maintenance of which nobody
can be more interested than the great Republic of America.

In short, it was by our feeling forsaken, that the skill of our enemies
spread despondency through our ranks; and this despondency, not the arms
of Russia, caused us to fall. Self-confidence lost is more than half a
defeat. Had America sent a diplomatic agent to Hungary, greeting us
amongst the independent powers on earth, recognizing our independence,
and declaring Russian interference to be contrary to the laws of
nations, that despondency, that loss of self-confidence, had never
gained ground among us; without this, treason would have been
impossible, and without treason all the disposable power of Russia would
never have succeeded to overcome our arms;--never! I should rather have
brought the well-deserved punishment home to her, should have shaken her
at home. Poland--heroic, unfortunate Poland would now be free, Turkey
delivered from the nightmare now pressing her chest, and I, according to
all probability, should have seen Moscow in triumph, instead of seeing
Salem in exile!

Well, there is a just God in heaven, and there will yet be justice on
earth;--the day of retribution will come!

Such being the sad tale of my fatherland, which, by a timely token of
your brotherly sympathy might have been saved, and which now has lost
everything except its honour, its trust in God, its hope of
resurrection, its confidence in my patriotic exertions, and its steady
resolution to strike once more the inexorable blow of retribution at
tyrants and tyranny;--if the cause I plead were a particular cause, I
would place it upon the ground of well-deserved sympathy, and would try
to kindle into a flame of excitement the generous affections of your
hearts: and I should succeed.

But since a great crisis, which is universally felt to be approaching,
enables me to claim for my cause a universality not restricted by the
geographical limits of a country or even of Europe itself, or by the
moral limits of nationalities, but possessing an interest common to all
the Christian world; it is calm, considerate conviction, and _not_
the passing excitement of generous sentiments, which I seek. I hope
therefore to meet the approbation of this intelligent assembly, when
instead of pleasing you by an attempt at eloquence, for which, in my
sick condition, I indeed have not sufficient freshness of mind--I enter
into some dry but not unimportant considerations, which the citizens of
Salem, claiming the glory of high commercial reputation, will kindly
appreciate.

Gentlemen, I have often heard the remark, that if the United States do
not care for the policy of the world, they will continue to grow
internally, and will soon become the mightiest realm on earth, a
Republic of a hundred millions of energetic freemen, strong enough to
defy all the rest of the world, and to control the destinies of mankind.
And surely this is your glorious lot; but _only under the
condition_, that no hostile combination, before you have in peace and
in tranquillity grown so strong, arrests by craft and violence your
giant-course; and this again is possible, only under the condition that
Europe become free, and the league of despots become not sufficiently
powerful to check the peaceful development of your strength. But Russia,
too, the embodiment of the principle of despotism, is working hard for
the development of _her_ power. Whilst you grow internally, her
able diplomacy has spread its nets all over the continent of Europe.
There is scarcely a Prince there but feels honoured to be an underling
of the great Czar; the despots are all leagued against the freedom of
the nations: and should the principle of absolutism consolidate its
power, and lastingly keep down the nations, then it must, even by the
instinct of self-preservation, try to check the further development of
your Republic. In vain they would have spilt the blood of millions, in
vain they would have doomed themselves to eternal curses, if they
allowed the United States to become the ruling power on earth. They
crushed poor Hungary, because her example was considered dangerous. How
could they permit you to become so mighty, as to be not only dangerous
by your example, but by your power a certain ruin to despotism? They
will, they must, do everything to check your glorious progress. Be
sure, as soon as they have crushed the spirit of freedom in Europe, as
soon as they command all the forces of the Continent, they will marshal
them against you. Of course they will not lead their fleets and armies
at once across the Ocean. They will first damage your prosperity by
crippling your commerce. They will exclude America from the markets of
Europe, not only because they fear the republican propagandism of your
commerce, but also because Russia requires those markets for her own
products.

[He proceeded to argue, that Russian policy, like that of the Magyars in
their time of barbarism, is essentially encroaching and warlike; that to
be _feared_, is often more important to Russia than to enjoy a
particular market; that the Russian system of commerce is, and must be,
prohibitory to republican traffic; that England alone in Europe has
large commerce with America, and that the despots, if victorious on the
continent, would make it their great object to damage, <DW36>, and ruin
both these kindred constitutional nations. He continued:]

The despots are scheming to muzzle the English lion. You see already how
they are preparing for this blow--that Russia may become mistress of
Constantinople, by Constantinople mistress of the Mediterranean, and by
the Mediterranean of three-quarters of the globe. Egypt, Macedonia,
Asia-Minor, the country and early home of the cotton plant, are then the
immediate provinces of Russia, a realm with twenty million serfs,
subject to its policy and depending on its arbitrary will.

Here is a circumstance highly interesting to the United States.
Constantinople is the key to Russia. To be preponderant, she knows it is
necessary for her to be a maritime power. The Black Sea is only a lake,
like Lake Leman; the Baltic is frozen five months in a year. These are
all the seas she possesses. Constantinople is the key to the palace of
the Czars. Russia is already omnipotent on the Continent; once master of
the Mediterranean, it is not difficult to see that the power which
already controls three-quarters of the world, will soon have the fourth
quarter.

Whilst the victory of the nations of Europe would open to you the
markets, till now closed to your products, the consolidation of
despotism destroys your commerce unavoidably. If your wheat, your
tobacco, your cotton, were excluded from Europe but for one year, there
is no farm, no plantation, no banking-house, which would not feel the
terrible shock of such a convulsion.

And hand-in-hand with the commercial restrictions you will then see an
establishment of monarchies from Cape Horn to the Rio Grande del Norte.
Cuba becomes a battery against the mouth of the Mississippi; the
Sandwich Islands a barrier to your commerce on the Pacific; Russian
diplomacy will foster your domestic dissensions and rouse the South
against the North, and the North against the South, the sea-coast
against the inland States, and the inland States against the sea-coast,
the Pacific interests against the Atlantic interests; and when discord
paralyzes your forces, then comes at last the foreign interference,
preceded by the declaration, that the European powers having, with your
silent consent, inscribed into the code of international law, the
principle that every foreign power has the right to interfere in the
domestic affairs of any nation when these become a dangerous example,
and your example and your republican principles being dangerous to the
absolutist powers, and your domestic dissensions dangerous to the order
and tranquillity of Europe, and therefore they consider it their "duty
to interfere in America." And Europe being oppressed, you will have,
single-handed, to encounter the combined forces of the world! I say no
more about this subject. America will remember then the poor exile, if
it does not in time enter upon that course of policy, which the
intelligence of Massachusetts, together with the young instinct of Ohio,
are the foremost to understand and to advance.

A man of your own State, a President of the United States, John Quincy
Adams, with enlarged sagacity, accepted the Panama Mission, to consider
the action of the Holy Alliance upon the interests of the South American
Republics.

Now, I beg you to reflect, gentlemen, how South America is different
from Europe, as respects your own country. Look at the thousand ties
that bind you to Europe. In Washington, a Senator from California, a
generous friend of mine, told me he was _thirty_ days by steamer
from the Seat of Government. Well, you speak of distance--just give me
a good steamer and good sailors, and you will in _twenty_ days see
the flag of freedom raised in Hungary.

I remember that when one of your glorious Stars (Florida, I think it
was) was about to be introduced, the question of discussion and
objection became, that the distance was great. It was argued that the
limits of the government would be extended so far, that its duties could
not be properly attended to. The President answered, that the distance
was not too great, if the seat of government could be reached in thirty
days. So far you have extended your territory; and I am almost inclined
to ask my poor Hungary to be accepted as a Star in your glorious galaxy.
She might become a star in this immortal constellation, since she is not
so far as thirty days off from you.

What little English I know, I learned from your Shakespeare, and I
learned from him that "there are more things in heaven and earth than
are dreamed of in our philosophy." Who knows what the future may bring
forth? I trust in God that all nations will become free, and that they
will be united for the internal interests of humanity, and in that
galaxy of freedom I know what place the United States will have.

One word more. When John Quincy Adams assumed for the United States the
place of a power on earth, he was objected to, because it was thought
possible that that step might give offence to the Holy Alliance. His
answer was in these memorable words: "The United States must take
counsel of their rights and duties, and not from their fears."

The Anglo-Saxon race represents constitutional governments. If it be
united for these, we shall have what we want, Fair Play; and, relying
"upon our God, the justness of our cause, iron wills, honest hearts and
good swords," my people will strike once more for freedom, independence,
and for Fatherland.

       *       *       *       *       *

XLV.--THE MARTYRS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION.

[_Lexington, May 11th_.]

Kossuth having been invited to visit the first battle fields of the
Revolution, was accompanied by several members of the State Committee,
on May 11th, to West Cambridge, Lexington, and Concord. He had already
visited Bunker Hill on the 3d of May, but we have not in these pages
found room for his speech there. At West Cambridge he was addressed by
the Rev. Thomas Hill, and replied: at Lexington also he received two
addresses, and the following was his reply:--

Gentlemen,--It has been often my lot to stand upon classical ground,
where the whispering breeze is fraught with wonderful tales of devoted
virtue, bright glory, and heroic deeds. And I have sat upon ruins of
ancient greatness, blackened by the age of centuries; and I have seen
the living ruins of those ancient times, called men, roaming about the
sacred ground, unconscious that the dust which clung to their boots, was
the relic of departed demigods--and I rose with a deep sigh. Those
demigods were but men, and the degenerate shapes that roamed around me,
on the hallowed ground, were also not less than men. The decline and
fall of nations impresses the mark of degradation on nature itself. It
is sad to think upon--it lops the soaring wings of the mind, and chills
the fiery arms of energy. But, however dark be the impression of such
ruins of vanished greatness upon the mind of men who themselves have
experienced the fragility of human fate, thanks to God, there are bright
spots yet on earth, where the recollections of the past, brightened by
present prosperity, strengthen the faith in the future of mankind's
destiny. Such a spot is this.

Gentlemen, should the reverence which this spot commands allow a smile,
I might feel inclined to smile at the eager controversy whether it was
at Lexington or Concord that the fire of the British was first returned
by Americans. Let it be this way or that way,--it will neither increase
nor abate the merit of the martyrs who fell here. It is with their blood
that the preface of your nation's history is written. Their death was,
and always will be, the first bloody revelation of America's destiny;
and Lexington, the opening scene of a revolution, of which Governor
Boutwell was right to say, that it is destined to change the character
of human governments, and the condition of the human race.

Should the Republic of America ever lose the consciousness of this
destiny, that moment would be just so surely the beginning of America's
decline, as the 19th of April, 1775, was the beginning of the Republic
of America.

Prosperity is not always, gentlemen, a guarantee of the future, if it be
not accompanied with a constant resolution to obey the call of the
genius of the time. Nay, material prosperity is often the mark of real
decline, when it either results in, or is connected with, a moral
stagnation in the devoted attachment to principles. Rome was never
richer, never mightier, than under Trajan, and still it had already the
sting of death in its very heart.

To me, whenever I stand upon such sacred ground as this, the spirits of
the departed appear like the prophets of future events. The language
they speak to my heart is the revelation of Providence.

The struggle of America for independence was providential. It was a
necessity. Those circumstances which superficial consideration takes for
the motives of the glorious Revolution, were but accidental
opportunities for it. Had those circumstances not occurred, others would
have occurred, and might have presented perhaps a different opportunity;
but the Revolution would have come. It was a necessity, because the
colonies of America had attained that lawful age in the development of
all the elements of national existence, which claims the right to stand
by itself, and cannot any longer be led by a child's leading-strings, be
the hand which leads it a mother's or a step-mother's. Circumstances and
the connection of events were such, that this unavoidable emancipation
had to pass the violent concussion of severe trials. The immortal glory
of your forefathers was, that they did not shrink to accept the trial,
and were devoted and heroic to sacrifice themselves to their country's
destiny. And the monuments you erect to their memory, and the religious
reverence with which you cherish the memory, are indeed well deserved
tributes of gratitude.

But allow me to say, there is a tribute which those blessed spirits are
still more eager to claim from you as the happy inheritance of the
fruits they have raised for you; it is, the tribute of always remaining
_true to their principle_; devoted to the destiny of your country,
which destiny is to become the corner-stone of LIBERTY on earth. Empires
can be only maintained by the same virtue by which they have been
founded. Oh! let me hope that, while the recollections connected with
this hallowed ground, inspire the heart of a wandering exile with
consolation, with hope, and with perseverance (from the very fact that I
have stood here, brought with the anxious prayers and expectations of
the Old World's oppressed millions), you will see the finger of God
pointing out the appropriate opportunity to act your part in America's
destiny, by maintaining the laws of _Nature and of Nature's God_,
for which your heroes fought and your martyrs died; and to regenerate
the world.

  "Proclaiming freedom in the name of God,"

till--to continue in the beautiful words of your Whittier--

  ----"Its blessings fall
  Common as dew and sunshine over all."

[From Lexington Kossuth proceeded to Concord, and was there addressed by
the well-known author, Ralph Waldo Emerson. His reply was at greater
length, and on the same subject as at Lexington; yet a part of it may
here be printed.]

Kossuth said:--

In my opinion, there is not a single event in history so distinctly
marked to be providential--and providential with reference to all
humanity--as the colonization, revolution, and republicanism of the now
United States of America.

This immense continent being peopled with elements of European
civilization, could not remain a mere appendix to Europe. But when it is
connected with Europe by a thousand social, moral, and material ties, by
blood, religion, language, science, civilization, and commerce, to
believe that it can rest isolated in politics from Europe, would be just
such a fault as it was that England did not believe in time the
necessity of America's independence. Yes, gentlemen, this is so sure to
me, that I would pledge life, honour, and everything dear to man's heart
and honourable to man's memory, that either America must take her
becoming part in the political regeneration of Europe, or she herself
must yield to the pernicious influence of European politics. There was
never yet a more fatal mistake, than it would be to believe, that by not
caring about the political condition of Europe, America may remain
unaffected by the condition of Europe. I could perhaps understand such
an opinion, if you would or could be entirely isolated from Europe; but
as you are not isolated, as you cannot be, as you cannot even have the
will to be (for that very will would be a paradox, a logical absurdity,
impossible to be carried out, being contrary to the eternal laws of God,
which he for nobody's sake will change); therefore to believe that you
can go on to be connected with Europe in a thousand respects, and still
remain unaffected by its social and political condition, would be indeed
a fatal delusion.

You stretch out your gigantic hands a thousandfold every day over the
waves; your relations with Europe are not only commercial as with Asia,
they are also social, moral, spiritual, intellectual; you take Europe
every day by the hand. How then could you believe, that if that hand of
Europe, which you grasp every day, remains dirty, you can escape from
soiling your own hands? The cleaner they are, all the more will the
filth of old Europe stick to them. There is no possible means to escape
from being soiled, than to help us, Europeans, to wash the hands of our
old world.

You have heard of the ostrich, that when persecuted by an enemy, it is
wont to hide its head, leaving its body exposed; it believes that by not
regarding it, it will not be seen by the enemy. That curious aberration
is worthy of reflection. It is _typical_.

Yes, gentlemen, either America will _re_generate the condition of
the old world, or it will be _de_generated by the condition of the
old world.

Sir, I implore you (Mr. Emerson), give me the aid of your philosophical
_analysis_, to impress the conviction upon the public mind of your
nation that the Revolution, to which CONCORD was the preface, is full of
a higher destiny--of a destiny broad as the world, broad as humanity
itself. Let me entreat you to apply the analytic powers of your
penetrating intellect, to disclose the character of the American
Revolution, as you disclose the character of self-reliance, of spiritual
laws, of intellect, of nature, or of politics. Lend the authority of
your judgment to the truth, that the destiny of American revolution is
not yet fulfilled; that the task is not yet completed; that to stop half
way, is worse than would have been not to stir: repeat those words of
deep meaning which once you wrote about the monsters that looked
backward, and about the walking with reverted eye, while the voice of
the Almighty says, "_up and onward for ever more_," while moreover
the instinct of your people, which never fails to be right, answered the
call of destiny by taking for its motto the word _ahead_.

Indeed, gentlemen, the monuments you raised to the heroic martyrs who
fertilized with their hearts' blood the soil of liberty--these monuments
are a fair tribute of well-deserved gratitude, gratifying to the spirits
who are hovering around us and honourable to you. Woe to the people
which neglect to honour its great and good men; but believe me,
gentlemen, those blessed spirits would look down with saddened brows to
this free and happy land, if ever they were doomed to see that the happy
inheritors of their martyrdom imagined that the destiny to which that
martyr blood was consecrated, is accomplished, and its price fully paid
in the already achieved results, because the living generation dwells
comfortably and makes TWO DOLLARS out of _one_.

No, gentlemen, the stars in the sky have a higher aim than merely to
illumine the night-path of some lonely wanderer. The course your nation
is called to run, is not yet half performed. Mind the fable of
Atalanta: it was a golden apple thrown into her way which made her fall
short in her race.

Two things I have met here in these free and mighty United States, which
I am at a loss how to make concord. The two things I cannot harmonize
are:--First, that all your historians, all your statesmen, all your
distinguished orators, who wrote or spoke, characterize it as AN ERA in
mankind's history, destined to change the condition of the world, upon
which it will rain an everflowing influence. And secondly, in
contradiction to this universally adopted creed, I have met in many
quarters a propensity to believe that it is conservative wisdom not to
take any active part in the regulation of the outward world.

These two things do not agree. If that be the destiny of America, which
you all believe to be, then that destiny can never be fulfilled by
acting the part of passive spectators, and by this very passivity
granting a charter to ambitious Czars to dispose of the condition of the
world.

I have met distinguished men trusting so much to the operative power of
your institutions and of your _example_, that they really believe
they will make their way throughout the world merely by their _moral
influence_. But there is one thing those gentlemen have disregarded
in their philanthropic reliance; and that is, that the ray of the sun
never yet made its way by itself through well-closed shutters and
doors--they must be drawn open, that the blessed rays of the sun may get
in. I have never yet heard of a despot who yielded to the moral
influence of liberty. The ground of Concord itself is an evidence of it;
the doors and shutters of oppression must be opened by bayonets, that
the blessed rays of your institutions may penetrate into the dark
dwelling-house of oppressed humanity.

There are men who believe the position of a power on earth will come to
you by itself; but oh! do not trust to this fallacy; a position never
comes by itself; it must be taken, and taken it never will be by
passivity.

The martyrs who have hallowed by their blood the ground of Concord,
trusted themselves and occupied the place Divine Providence assigned
them. Sir, the words are yours which I quote. You have told your people
that they are now men, and must accept in the highest mind the same
destiny, that they are not minors and invalids in a protected corner;
but guides, redeemers, and benefactors, advancing on chaos and on the
dark.

I pray God to give to your people the sentiment of the truth you have
taught.

Your people, fond of its prosperity, loves peace. Well, who would not
love peace; but allow me again, sir, to repeat with all possible
emphasis, the great word you spoke, "Nothing can bring you peace but the
triumph of principles."

       *        *        *        *       *

XLVI.--CONDITION OF EUROPE.

[_Last Speech in Boston_.]

On May 14th, Kossuth, in obedience to a distinct invitation, delivered,
in Faneuil Hall, the following ample Speech or Lecture, on the present
condition of Europe.

Ladies and gentlemen,--The gigantic struggle of the first French
Revolution associated the name of FRANCE so much with the cause of
freedom in Europe, that all the world got accustomed to see it take the
lead in the struggle for European liberty; and to look to it as a power
entrusted by Providence with the initiation of revolutions; as a power,
without the impulse of which, no liberal movement had any hope on the
European continent.

I, from my earliest days, never shared that opinion. I felt always more
sympathy with the Anglo-Saxon character and Anglo-Saxon institutions,
which raised England, notwithstanding its monarchy and its aristocracy,
to a position prouder than Rome ever held in its most glorious days: and
which, free from monarchical and aristocratical elements here in
America, lie at the foundation of a political organization, upon which
the first true democratic Republic was consolidated and developed into
freedom, power, and prosperity, in such a short time, as to make it a
living wonder to the contemporary age, and a book full of instruction to
the coming generations.

However, that opinion about the French initiative prevailed in Europe,
and it was a great misfortune; for you know that France has always as
yet forsaken the movement which it raised in Europe, and the other
nations acting not spontaneously, but only following the impulse which
the French had imparted to them, faltered and stopped at once, as soon
as the French failed them. With that opinion of the French supremacy, no
revolution in Europe could have a definite, happy issue.

Freedom never yet was given to nations as a gift, but only as a reward,
bravely earned by one's own exertions, own sacrifices, and own toil; and
never will, never shall it be attained otherwise.

I speak therefore out of profound conviction, when I say that, though
the heart of the philanthropist must feel pained at the new hard trials
to which the French nation is, and will yet be exposed, by the momentary
success of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte's inglorious usurpation, still that
very fact will prove advantageous to the ultimate success of liberty in
Europe. Louis Napoleon's _coup d'etat_, much against his will, has
emancipated Europe from its reliance upon France. The combined
initiative of nations has succeeded to the initiative of France;
spontaneity and self-reliance have replaced the depending on foreign
impulse and reliance upon foreign aid. France is reduced to the level
amongst nations, obliged to join general combinations, instead of
regulating them; and this I take for a very great advantage. Many have
wondered at the momentary success of Louis Napoleon, and are inclined to
take it for an evidence that the French nation is either not capable or
not worthy to be free. But that is a great fallacy. The momentary
success of Louis Napoleon is rather an evidence that France is
_thoroughly democratic_. All the revolutions in France have
resulted in the preponderance of that class which bears the denomination
of _bourgeoisie_. Amongst all possible modifications of
oppression, none is more detested by the people than oppression by an
Assembly. The National Assembly of France was the most treacherous the
world has ever yet known. Issued from universal suffrage, it went so far
as to abolish universal suffrage, and every day of its existence was a
new blow stricken at democracy for the profit of the bourgeoisie. Louis
Napoleon has beaten asunder that Assembly, which the French democracy
had so many reasons to hate and to despise, and the people applauded him
as the people of England applauded Cromwell when he whipped out the Rump
Parliament.

But by what means was Louis Napoleon permitted to do even what the
people liked to see done? By no other means, but by flattering the
principle of Democracy; he restored the universal suffrage; it is an
execrable trick, to be sure--it is a shadow given for reality; but still
it proves that the democratic spirit is so consolidated in France, that
even despotic ambition must flatter it. Well, depend upon it, this
democracy, which the victorious usurper feels himself constrained to
flatter in the brightest moments of his triumph--this democracy will
either make out of Louis Napoleon _a tool_, which in spite of
itself serves the democracy, or it will crush him.

France is the country of sudden changes, and of unthought of accidents.
I therefore will not presume to tell the events of its next week, but
one alternative I dare to state: Louis Napoleon either falls or
maintains himself. The fall of Louis Napoleon, even if brought about by
the old monarchical parties, can have no other issue than a Republic--a
Republic more faithful to the community of freedom in Europe than all
the former Revolutions have been. Or if Louis Napoleon maintains
himself, he can do so only either by relying upon the army, or by
flattering the feelings and interests of the masses. If he relies upon
the army, he must give to it glory and profit, or, in other words, he
must give to it war. Well, a war of France, against whomsoever it be, or
for whatever purposes, is the best possible chance for the success of a
European Revolution. Or if Louis Napoleon relies upon the feelings of
the masses--as indeed he appears willing to do--in that case, in spite
of himself, he becomes a tool in the hands of democracy; and if, by
becoming such, he forsakes the allegiance of his masters--the league of
absolutistical powers--well, he will either be forced to attack them, or
be attacked by them.

So much for France; now as to ITALY.

Italy! the sunny garden of Europe, whose blossoms are blighted by the
icy north wind from St. Petersburg--Italy, that captured nightingale,
placed under a fragrant bush of roses, beneath an ever blue sky! Italy
was always the battlefield of the contending principles, since, hundreds
of years ago, the German emperors, the kings of Spain, and the kings of
France, fought their private feuds, their bloody battles on her much
coveted soil; and by their destructive influence, kept down all
progress, and fostered every jealousy. By the recollections of old, the
spirit of liberty was nowhere so dangerous for European absolutism as in
Italy. And this spirit of republican liberty, this warlike genius of
ancient Rome, was never extinguished between the Alps and the Faro.

We are taught by the scribes of absolutism to speak of the Italians as
if they were a nation of cowards, and we forget that the most renowned
masters of the science of war, the greatest generals up to our day, were
Italians,--Piccolomini, Montecucculi, Farnese, Eugene of Savoy, Spinola,
and Bonaparte--a galaxy of names whose glory is dimmed only by the
reflection that none of them fought for his own country. As often as the
spirit of liberty awoke in Italy, the servile forces of Germany, of
Spain, and of France poured into the country, and extinguished the
glowing spark in the blood of the people, lest it should once more
illumine the dark night of Europe. Frederic Barbarossa destroyed Milan
to its foundations, when it attempted to resist his imperial
encroachments by the league of independent cities; and led the plough
over the smoking ruins. Charles the Fifth had to gather all his powers
around him to subdue Florence, when it declared itself a democratic
republic. Napoleon extinguished the last remnants of republican
self-government by crushing the republics of Venice, Genoa, Lucca,
Ragusa, and left only, to ridicule republicanism, the commonwealth of
San Marino untouched. The Holy Alliance parted the spoils of Napoleon,
riveted afresh the iron fetters which enslave Italy, and forged new
spiritual fetters; prevented the extension of education, and destroyed
the press, in order that the Italians should not remember their past.

Every page, glorious in their history for twenty-five centuries, is
connected with the independence of Italy; every stain upon their honour
is connected with foreign rule. And the burning minds of the Italians,
though all spiritual food is denied to them, cannot be taught not to
remember their past glory and their present degradation. Every stone
speaks of the ancient glory; every Austrian policeman, every French
soldier, of the present degradation. The tyrants have no power to unmake
history, and to silence the feelings of the nation. And amongst all the
feelings powerful to stir up the activity of mankind, there is none more
penetrating than unmerited degradation, which impels us to redeem our
lost honour. What is it therefore that keeps those petty tyrants of
Italy, who are jealous of one another, on their tottering thrones,
divided as they are among themselves, whilst the revolutionizing spirit
of liberty unites the people?  It is only the protection of Austria,
studding the peninsula with her bayonets and with her spies. And Austria
herself can dare this, only because she relies upon the assistance of
Russia. She can send her armies to Italy, because Russia guards her
eastern dominions. Let Russia stand off, and Austria is unable to keep
Italy in bondage; and the Italians, united in the spirit of
independence, will easily settle their account with their own weak
princes. Keep off the icy blast which blows from the Russian snows, and
the tree of freedom will grow up in the garden of Europe; though cut
down by the despots, it will spring anew from the roots in the soil,
which was always genial for the tree. Remember that no insurrection of
Italians has been crushed by their own domestic tyrants without foreign
aid; remember that one-third of the Austrian army which occupies Italy
are Hungarians who have fought against and triumphed over the
yellow-black flag of Austria--under the same tri-colour which, having
the same colours for both countries, show emblematically that Hungary
and Italy are but two wings of the same army, united against a common
enemy. Remember that even now neither the Pope nor the little Princes of
middle Italy can subsist without an Austrian and a French garrison; and
remember that Italy is a half isle, open from three sides to the
friendship of all who sympathize with civil and religious liberty on
earth; but from the sea not open to Russia and Austria, because they are
not maritime powers; and so long as England is conscious of the basis of
its power, and so soon as America gets conscious of the condition upon
which its future depends, Austria and Russia will never be allowed to
become maritime powers.

And when you feel instinctively that the heart of the Roman must rage
with fury when he looks back into the mirror of his past,--that the
Venetian cannot help to weep tears of fire and of blood from the
Rialto;--when you feel all this, then look back how the Romans have
fought in 1849, with a heroism scarcely paralleled in the most glorious
day of ancient Rome. And let me tell, in addition, upon the certainty of
my own positive knowledge, that the world never yet has seen such
complete and extensive revolutionary organization as that of Italy
to-day--ready to burst out into an irresistible storm at the slightest
opportunity, and powerful enough to make that opportunity, if either
foreign interference is checked, or the interfering foreigners occupied
at home. The revolution of 1848 has revealed and developed the warlike
spirit of Italy. Except a few wealthy proprietors, already very
uninfluential, the most singular unanimity exists, both as to aim and to
means. There is no shade of difference of opinion, either to what is to
be done or how to do it. All are unanimous in their devotion to the
Union and Independence of Italy. With France or against France, by the
sword, at all sacrifices, without compromise, they are bent on renewing
the battle over and over again, with the confidence that, even without
aid, they will triumph in the long run.

The difficulty in Italy is not how to make a revolution, but how to
prevent its untimely outbreak; and still even in that respect there is
such a complete discipline as the world never yet has seen. In Rome,
Romagna, Lombardy, Venice, Sicily, and all the middle Italy, there
exists an invisible government, whose influence is everywhere
discernible. It has eyes and hands in all departments of public service,
in all classes of society--it has its taxes voluntarily paid--its
organized force, its police, its newspapers regularly printed and
circulated, though the possession of a single copy would send the holder
to the galleys. The officers of the existing government convey the
missives of the invisible government, the diligences transport its
agents. One line from one of these agents opens to you the galleries of
art, on prohibited days--gives you the protection of uniformed
officials.

That this is the condition of all Italy is shown on one side, in the
fact that there the King of Naples holds fettered in dungeons 25,000
patriots, and Radetzky has sacrificed nearly 4,000 political martyrs on
the scaffold; still the scaffold continues to be watered with blood, and
still the dungeons receive new victims, evidently proving what spirit
exists in the people of Italy.

And still Americans doubt that we are on the eve of a terrible
revolution; and they ask, What use can I make of any material aid? when
Italy is a barrel of powder, which the slightest spark may light.

In respect to foreign rule, GERMANY is more fortunate than Italy. From
the times of the treaty of Verdun, when it separated from France and
Italy, through the long period of more than a thousand years, no foreign
power ever has succeeded to rule over Germany; such is the resistive
power of the German people to guard its national existence. The tyrants
who swayed over them were of their own blood. But to subdue German
liberty, those tyrants were always anxious to introduce foreign
institutions. First, they swept away the ancient Germanic right, the
common law so dear to the English and American, an eternal barrier
against the encroachments of despotism, and substituted for it the iron
rule of the imperial Roman law. The rule of papal Rome over the minds of
Germany crossed the mountains together with the Roman law, and a
spiritual dependency was to be established all over the world. The wings
of the German eagle were bound, that it should not soar up to the sun of
truth. But when the oppression became too severe, the people of Germany
rose against the power of Rome;--not the princes,--though they too were
oppressed: but the son of the miner of Eisenach, the poor friar, Martin
Luther, defied the Pope on his throne, and at his bidding the people of
Germany proved, that it is strong enough to shake off oppression; that
it is worthy, and that it knows how, to be free. And again, when the
French, under their Emperor, whose genius comprehended everything except
freedom, extended their moral sway over Germany, when the princes of
Germany thronged around the foreign despot, begging kingly crowns from
the son of the Corsican lawyer, with whom the Emperors were happy to
form matrimonial alliances--with the man who had no other ancestors than
his genius,--then it was again the people, which did not join in the
degradation of its rulers, but jealous to maintain their national
independence, turned the foreigner out though his name was Napoleon, and
broke the yoke asunder, which weighed as heavily upon their princes as
upon themselves. And still there are men in America who despair of the
vitality of the Germans, of their indomitable power to resist
oppression, of their love of freedom, and of their devotion to it,
proved by a glorious history of two thousand years. The German race is a
power, the vitality and influence of which you can trace through the
_world's_ history for two thousand years; you can trace it through
the history of science and heroism, of industry, and of bold
enterprizing spirit. Your own country, your own national character, bear
the mark of German vitality. Other nations, now and then, were great by
some great men--the German people was always great by itself.

But the German princes cannot bear independence and liberty; they had
rather themselves become slaves, the underlings of the Czar, than allow
that their people should enjoy some liberty. An alliance was therefore
formed, which they blasphemously called the Holy Alliance,--with the
avowed purpose to keep the people down. The great powers guaranteed to
the smaller princes--whose name is Legion, for they are many,--the power
to fleece and torment their people, and promised every aid to them
against the insurrection of those, who would find that for liberty's
sake it is worth while to risk their lives and property. It was an
alliance for the oppression of the nations, not for the maintenance of
the princely prerogative. When the Grand-Duke of Baden, in a fit of
liberality, granted his people the liberty of the press, the Emperor of
Austria and the King of Prussia abolished the law, though it had been
carried unanimously by the Legislature of Baden and sanctioned by the
prince.--The Holy Alliance had guaranteed to the princes the power to
oppress, but not the power to benefit their people.

But though the great powers interfered often in the principalities and
little kingdoms of Germany, indeed as often as the spirit of liberty
awoke, yet they themselves avoided every occasion which would have
forced them to request the aid of their allies, and especially of
Russia. They knew too well, that to accept foreign aid against their own
people, was nothing else than to lose independence, and was morally the
same as to kneel down before the Czar and to take the oath of
allegiance. A government which needs foreign aid against its own people,
avows that it cannot stand without foreign aid. Take that foreign
aid--interference!--away, and it falls.

The dynasties of Austria and Prussia were aware of this. They therefore
yielded, as often as their encroachments met a firm resistance from the
people. When my nation so resolutely resisted in 1823 the attempt to
abolish the constitution, Prince Metternich himself advised the Emperor
Francis to yield, and even humbly to apologize to the Diet of 1825. The
King of Prussia granted even a kind of constitution rather than claim
the assistance of the Czar. Herein you may find the explanation of the
fact that the continent of Europe is not yet republican. The spirit of
freedom, when roused by oppression, was lulled into sleep by
constitutional concessions. The Czar of Russia was well aware, that this
system of compromise prevents his intruding into the domestic concerns
of Europe, which would lead him to the sovereign mastership over all; he
therefore did everything to push the sovereigns to extremities. But this
did not succeed, until by a palace-revolution in Vienna a weak and cruel
youth was placed on the throne of Austria, and a passionate woman got
the reins of government in her hand, and an unprincipled, reckless
adventurer was ready to carry out every imperial whim, regardless of the
honour of his country and the interests of his master. Russia at last
got her aim. Rather than acknowledge the rights of Hungary, they bowed
before the Czar, and gave up the independence of the Austrian throne;
they became the underlings of a foreign power, rather than allow that
one of the peoples of the European Continent should be really free.
Since the fall of Hungary, Russia is the real sovereign of all Germany;
for the first time Germany has a foreign master! and you believe that
Germany will bear that in the nineteenth century which it never yet has
borne? Bear that in fulness of age which it never bore in childhood?
Soon after, and through the fall of Hungary, the pride of Prussia was
humiliated. Austrian garrisons occupied Hamburg; Schleswig-Holstein was
abandoned, Hessia was chastised, and all that is dear to Germans
purposely affronted. Their dreams of greatness, their longing for unity,
their aspirations of liberty, were trampled down into the dust, and
ridicule was thrown upon all elevation of mind, upon all manifestation
of patriotism. Hassenburg, convicted of forgery by the Prussian courts,
became Minister in Hessia; the once outlawed Schwarzenbeg, and Bach, a
renegade republican, Ministers of Austria. The peace of the graveyard,
which tyrants, under the name of order, are trying to enforce upon the
world, has for its guardians outlawed reprobates, forgers, and
renegades. Could you believe that with such elements the spirit of
liberty can be crushed?  Tyrants know that to habituate nations to
oppression, the moral feeling of the people has to be killed. But could
you really believe that the moral feeling of such a people as the
German, stamped in the civilization of which it was one of the
generating elements, can be killed, or that it can bear for a long while
such an outrage? Do you think that the people which met the insolent
bulls of the Pope in Rome by the Reformation and the thirty years' war,
and the numberless armies of Napoleon by a general rising--that this
people will tamely submit to the Russian influence, more arrogant than
the Papal pretensions, more disastrous than the exactions of the French
Empire? They broke the power of Rome and of Paris; will they agree to be
governed by St. Petersburg?  Those who are accustomed to see in history
only the Princes, will say Aye, but they forget that since the
Reformation it is no longer the Princes who make the history, but the
People; they see the tops of the trees are bent by the powerful northern
hurricane, and they forget that the stem of the tree is unmoved.
Gentlemen, the German princes bow before the Czar, but the German people
will never bow before him.

Let me sum up the philosophy of the present condition of Germany in
these few words: 1848 and 1849 have proved that the little tyrants of
Germany cannot stand by themselves, but only by their reliance upon
Austria and Prussia. These again cannot stand by themselves, but only by
their reliance upon Russia. Take this reliance away, by maintaining the
laws of nations against the principle of interference,--(for the joint
powers of America and England can maintain them)--and all the despotic
governments, reduced to stand by their own resources of power, must fall
before the never yet subdued spirit of the people of Germany, like
rotten fruit touched by a gale.

Let me now speak about the condition of my own dear native land. I hope
not to meet any contradiction when I say that no condition can and will
endure, which is so bad, so insupportable, that, by trying to change it,
a people can lose nothing, and may gain everything. No condition can and
will endure, the maintenance of which is contrary to every interest of
every class. A revolution on the contrary is unavoidable, when every
interest of every class wishes and requires it. I will first speak of
the lower, and still the most powerful of all, of the material interest.

There are some countries, where, however insupportable the condition of
the masses, still the government has an ally in the mighty and
influential class of bankers, who lend their money to support despotism,
and in those who have invested their fortunes in the shares of these
loans, negotiated by bankers, who speculate on and with the fortunes of
small capitalists. That class of men, partly tools of oppression,
partly the fools of the tools, exists not in Hungary. We have no such
bankers in Hungary, and but a very small inconsiderable number who have
invested their fortunes in such loan-shares. And even the few who had
been playing in the fatal loan-share game have withdrawn from it, at any
price, because they feared to lose all. From that quarter therefore the
House of Austria has no ally in Hungary.

As to our former aristocracy, a class influential by its connections,
and by its large landed property: you remember that, when we succeeded
to abolish the feudal charges, and converted millions of our countrymen,
of different religion and different language, out of leaseholders into
free landed proprietors, we guaranteed an indemnification to the
landowners for what they lost. From a farm of about thirty-five to fifty
acres of land, the farmer had to work one hundred and two days a year
for the landowner; to give him the ninth part of all his crops, half a
dollar in ready money, besides particular fees for shopkeeping, brewery,
mill, &c. We freed the people from all the encumbrances, and, thanks to
God!  that benefit never more can be torn from the people's hands. The
aristocracy consented to it, because we had guaranteed full
indemnification. The very material existence of this class of former
landowners is depending on that indemnification, to defray their debts,
(which they formerly had the habit wantonly to contract,) and to provide
for the cultivation of their own large allodial property, which they
formerly cultivated by the hands of their leaseholders, but now have to
invest capital into.

Now this indemnification, amounting to one hundred millions of dollars,
the House of Austria never can realize. You know, with its centralized
government, which is always very expensive, with its standing army of
600,000 men, the only support of its precarious existence, with its army
of spies and secret police, with its system of corruption and robbery,
with its fourteen hundred millions of debt, with its eternal deficit in
its current expenditures, with its new loans to pay the interest of the
old, and an unavoidable bankruptcy impending,--this indemnification
Austria never can pay to the former aristocracy of Hungary. The only
means to get this indemnification is the restoration of Hungary to its
independence by a new revolution. Independent Hungary can pay it,
because it has no debts, will want no large standing armies, and will
have a cheap administration, because not centralized, but municipal, the
people governing itself in and through municipalities, the cheapest of
all governments.

Hungary has already pointed out the fund, out of which that
indemnification can and will be paid, without any imposition upon the
people, or any loss to the commonwealth. Hungary has large State lands,
belonging to and administered by the commonwealth. I have mathematically
proved that the landed property of the State, sold in small parcels to
those who have yet no land, connected with a banking operation founded
upon that property itself, to facilitate the payment of the price, is
more than sufficient for that indemnification; besides, a small land tax
(which the new owners of that immense property, divided into small
farms, will have to pay, as other landed proprietors), will yield more
revenue to the Commonwealth than all the proceeds of domestic
administration.

This my proposition, having been submitted to the National Assembly, was
accepted and approved, and has attached to the Revolution the numerous
class of farm-labourers who have not yet their own farms, but who
contemplated with the liveliest joy this benevolent provision, which
Austria can never execute; since, financially ruined as she is, she
cannot be contented either with the tax revenue or the banking
arrangement, to defray the indemnification; she sells the stock whenever
she can find a man to buy it.

But here is a remarkable fact, proving how little is the future of
Austria contemplated as sure even by its votaries. When any one is
willing to sell landed property in Hungary, foreign bankers, Austrian
capitalists buy it readily at an enormous price, because they know that
private transactions will be respected by our revolution; but _from
the Government_, nobody buys a single acre of land, because every man
knows that such a transaction must be considered void. Nay more, not
even as a gift is an estate accepted by any one from the present
government. Haynau himself was offered in reward a large landed property
by the government; he did not accept it, but preferred a comparatively
small sum of money, not amounting to one-tenth of the value of the
offered land, and he bought from a private individual a landed property,
for the money, because that, being a private transaction, is sure to
stand: whereas in the future of the Austrian government in Hungary not
even its Haynaus have confidence.

The manufacturing interests in Hungary anxiously wish, and must wish, a
revolution, because manufacturing industry is entirely ruined now by
Austria. All favour, encouragement, and aid, which the national
government imparted to industry, is not only withdrawn, but replaced by
the old system,--which is, neither to allow Hungary free trade, so as to
buy manufactured articles where they can be had in the best quality or
at the cheapest price, nor to permit manufacturing at home; but to
preserve Hungary in the position of a colonial market--a condition
always regarded as insupportable, and sufficient motive for a
revolution, as you yourselves from your own history know.

The commercial interest anxiously desire a revolution, because there
exists, in fact, no active commerce in Hungary, the Hungarian commerce
being degraded into a mere broker-ship of Vienna.

All those who have yet in their hands the Hungarian bank notes issued by
my government, must wish a revolution; because Austria, alike foolish as
criminal, has declared them to be without value--thus they cannot be
restored to value but by a revolution. The amount of those bank notes in
the hands of the people is yet about twenty millions of dollars. No
menaces, no cruelty can induce the people to give it up to the usurper;
they put it into bottles and bury it in the earth. They say: it is good
money when Kossuth comes home. But while no menaces of Austria can
induce the people to give up this treasure of our impending revolution,
a single line of mine, sent home, is obeyed, and the money is treasured
up where I have designated.

Do you now understand, gentlemen, by what motive I say that once at home
in command--if once our struggle is commenced, I do not want your
material aid, and neither wish nor would accept all your millions--but
that I want your material aid to get home, and to get home _in such a
way_ as will inspire confidence in my people, by seeing me bring home
the only thing which it has not--ARMS!

But I am asked, where will I land? That, of course, I will not
say--perhaps directly at Vienna, like a Montgolfier, in a balloon; but
one thing I may say, because that is no secret:--remember that all Italy
is a sea-coast, and that Italy has the same enemy as Hungary--that Italy
is the left wing of that army of which Hungary is the right wing, and
that in Italy 40,000 Hungarian soldiers exist, as also, in general, in
the Austrian army 140,000 Hungarians. More I can, and will not say on
the subject.

But I will say that all the amount of taxation the people of Hungary
formerly had to pay was but four and a half million dollars, and now it
has to pay sixty-five million dollars; that landowners offer their land
to the government, to get rid of the land tax, which is larger than all
the revenue; that we have raised 600,000 hundredweight of tobacco--now,
the monopoly of tobacco being introduced, the people no longer smokes
and has burnt its tobacco seed. We have raised 120 million gallons of
wine. Gentlemen, I come not to interfere with the domestic concerns of
America. I have no opinion about the Maine liquor-law. For myself I am
very fond of water, but still may say it is my opinion, it will be many
years before the Maine liquor-law will pass through all Europe. Well,
gentlemen, I was about to say, one half of the vineyards are cut
down;--hundreds of thousands live upon horticulture and fruit
cultivation; yet the trees are cut down to escape the heavy taxation
laid upon them. The stamp tax is introduced, the most insupportable to
freemen--village is divided from village, town from town, city from
city, by custom-lines--the poor peasant woman, bringing a dozen of eggs
to the market, has to pay the consumption-tax, before she is permitted
to enter; and when she brings medicine home for her sick child she has
again to pay before permitted to enter her home.

And besides this material oppression, and the daily and nightly
vexations connected with it,--the Protestants deprived of the
self-government of their church and school, for which they have thrice
taken up arms victoriously in three centuries,--the Roman Catholics
deprived of the security of their church property,--the people of every
race deprived of its nationality, because there exists no public life
wherein to exert it, no national existence, no constitution, no
municipalities, no native law, no native officials, no security of
person and of property, but arbitrary power, martial law, and the
hangman and the jail,--and on the other side Hungarian patriotism,
Hungarian honour, Hungarian heroism, Hungarian vitality, stamped in the
vicissitudes of one thousand years, and _the consciousness that we
have beaten Austria_, when we had no army, no money, no friends, and
the knowledge that now we have an army, and for home purposes have money
in the safe-guarded bank notes, and have America for a friend; and in
addition to all this, the confidence of my people in my exertions, and
the knowledge of these exertions; of which my people is quite as well
informed as yourselves, nay, more, because it sees and knows what I do
at home, whereas you see only what I do here--well, if with all this you
still doubt about the struggle in Europe being nigh, and still despair
of its chance of success, then God be merciful to my poor brains, I know
not what to think.

Some here take me for a visionary. Curious, indeed, if that man who, a
poor son of the people, took the lead in abolishing feudal injustices a
thousand years old, created a currency of millions in a moneyless
nation, and suddenly organized armies out of untrained masses of
civilians; directed a revolution so as to fix the attention of the whole
world upon Hungary, beat the old, well-provided power of Austria, and
crushed its future by his very fall, and forsaken, abandoned, in his
very exile is feared by Czars and Emperors, and trusted by foreign
nations as well as his own--if that man be a visionary, then for so much
pride I may be excused that I would like to look face to face into the
eyes of a practical man on earth.

Gentlemen, I had many things yet to say. The condition, change, and
prospects of Europe are not spoken of so easily, as you have seen, when
only the condition of my own country is touched. I don't know that I
shall succeed, but I will try to say something about TURKEY.

Turkey! which deserves your sympathy because it is the country of
municipal institutions, the country of religious toleration. Turkey,
when she extended her sway over Transylvania and half of Hungary, never
interfered with the way in which the inhabitants chose to govern
themselves; she even allowed those who lived within her dominions to
collect there the taxes voted by independent Hungary, with the aim to
make war against the Porte. Whilst in the other parts of Hungary,
Protestantism was oppressed by the Austrian policy, and the Protestants
several times compelled to take up arms for the defence of religious
liberty in Transylvania, under the sovereignty of the Porte the
Unitarians got political rights, and Protestantism grew up under the
protecting wings of the Ottoman power.

The respect for municipal institutions is so deeply rooted in the minds
of the Turks, that at the time when they became masters of the Danubian
provinces of Moldavia and Wallachia, they voluntarily excluded
themselves from all political rights in the newly acquired provinces;
and up to the present day, they do not allow that a mosque should be
built, or that a Turk should dwell and own landed property across the
Danube. They do not interfere with the taxation or with the internal
administration of these provinces; and the last organic law of the
Empire, the Tanzimat, is nothing but the re-declaration of the rights of
municipalities, guaranteeing them against the centralizing encroachment
of the Pashas. Whilst Czar Nicholas is about to convert the Protestant
population of Livonia and Estland to the Greek church by force and by
alluring promises, the liberal Sultan Abdul Medjid grants full religious
liberty to all sects of Protestantism. But we are accustomed to look
upon Turkey as upon a third-rate power, only because in 1828 it was
defeated by Russia. Let us now see how the balance stood at that time,
and how it stands now.

In 1828 the Turkish population was full of hatred on account of the
extermination of the Janissaries. The Christian population were ready to
rise against the government, on account of the events of the Greek war.
Albania was in revolt, because it was opposed to the system of
conscriptions for regular military service. Anatolia was discontented on
the same ground. Mehemet Ali possessed Egypt, and paralyzed the action
of the government in Arabia and Syria. Servia had just laid down arms,
but had not yet concluded peace. The Danubian principalities, though
unfavourable to Russia, were not hearty in support of the Porte, and
remained apathetic under the occupation of Russia. The revenue did not
exceed 400,000,000 piastres (20,000,000 dollars), and was insufficient
for a second campaign. The new army was not yet organized, and amounted
only to 32,000 men, without tried generals. The fleet had been destroyed
at Navarino. The foreign diplomatists had left the empire, and the
capital was exposed to an attack of the enemy. In such a position no
European government could have risked a war.

Russia had just defeated Persia, and by this victory got access to the
Asiatic provinces of the Turkish empire; it had therefore to defend the
frontiers on both sides. Russia had not yet entered into Circassia, and
could therefore rally all her forces; she had not yet abolished the
Poland of 1815, and could leave it without garrisons; she had not yet
roused the hatred or the jealousies of Europe. She had engaged all the
natural allies of the Porte into a combination for rousing the
populations of her enemy, and by her diplomacy she gained the power of
bringing her fleet into the Mediterranean, for blockading the ports of
Turkey; and Navarino opened for her the Black Sea, where she had
thirteen men-of-war. Not disturbed by the Porte, by Circassia, by
Poland, by France, or by England, she had prepared two years for this
war, whilst her enemy, passing through a terrible crisis, was without
money, without an organized army, without a fleet, without other
resources than the feeble Mussulman population on the seat of war.

Twenty-four years have altered the balance.--Turkey has now the
enthusiastic support of her Mussulman population. The Christian
population, with the only exception of Bulgaria, partakes of this
enthusiasm. All the warlike tribes, from Albania to Kurdistan, are now
supporting the authority of the Sultan. Mehemet Ali is gone; Arabia and
Syria are again under the dominion of the Sultan. Servia has made peace,
and has become the support of Turkey, offering her, in case of a Russian
war, 80,000 men. The Principalities have become the enemies of Russia;
they had too long to suffer from her oppression. The public revenue has
doubled. Turkey has organized a regular army of 200,000 men, equal to
any other, and besides, the militia, She has distinguished
generals--Omer Pasha, Gruyon. Her fleet is equal to the Russian fleet in
the Black Sea, and her steam-fleet superior to the Russian. She has for
allies all the people from the Caucasus to the Carpathians. The
Circassians, the Tartars under Emir Mirza, the Cossacks of the Dobroja,
by whom the electric shock is transmitted to Poland and Hungary, form an
unbroken chain, by which the spark is carried into the heart of Europe,
where all the combustible elements wait for the moment of explosion.
Twenty-four years ago Turkey was believed to be in a decaying state; it
is now stronger than it has been for the last hundred years.

Russia, during this time, has been unable to overcome the resistance of
Circassia; and, cut off from her south-eastern provinces, she cannot
attack Turkey in the rear. The Caucasian lines furnished her, in 1828,
with 30,000 men; Poland with 100,000; the two countries require now an
army of observation and occupation of 200,000 men; the Danubian
principalities absorb again 50,000.

The Russian fleet remains as it was in 1828--thirteen men-of-war then,
thirteen now: and whilst, in 1828, she had scarcely an enemy in Europe,
she has now scarcely one friend, except the kings. All her enemies, whom
she has defeated one by one, have combined against her--Poland, Hungary,
the Danubian principalities, Turkey, Circassia.

Where is now the force of Russia! Does she not remind us of the golden
image of Nebuchadnezzar, standing on feet of clay?

And yet, gentlemen, this Russia can make doubtful the struggle in
Europe--not because powerful in arms, but because it stands ready to
support tyrants, when nations are tired out in a struggle, or before
they have time to make preparations for resistance: then only is Russia
a power to be feared. Well, gentlemen, shall not America stand up, and
with powerful voice forbid Russia to interfere when nations have shaken
off their domestic tyrants? Gentlemen, remember that Peter the Czar left
a last will and testament to the people, that Russia must take
Constantinople. Why? that Russia might be a great power: and that it may
be so Constantinople is necessary, because no nation can be a great
power which is not a maritime power. Now see how Turkey has grown in
twenty-four years. The more Russia delays, the stronger Turkey becomes,
and therefore is Russia in haste to fulfil the destiny of being a
maritime power.

You can now see why is my fear, that this week, or this month, or this
year, Russia will attack Turkey, and we shall not be entirely prepared:
but though you do not give us "material aid," still we must rise when
Turkey is attacked, because we must not lose its 400,000 soldiers. The
time draws nigh when you will see more the reason I have to hasten these
preparations, that they may be complete, whenever through the death of
Nicholas or Louis Napoleon or a thousand other things,--most probably a
war between Russia and Turkey,--we want to take time by the forelock.

But, gentlemen, let me close. I am often told, let only the time come
when the Republican banner is unfurled in the Old World, then we shall
see what America will do. Well, gentlemen, your aid may come too late to
be rendered beneficial. Remember 1848 and 1849. Had the nations of
Europe not your sympathy? Were your hearts less generous than now?  It
was not in time--it came after, not before. Was your government not
inclined to recognize nations? It sent Mr. Mann to Hungary to
_inquire_--would that when he inquired he had been authorized to
_recognize_ our achieved independence!

Gentlemen, let me end. Before all, let me thank you for your generous
patience. This is my last meeting. Whatever may be my fate, so much I
can say, that the name of Boston and Massachusetts will remain a dear
word and a dear name, not only to me but to my people for all time. And
whatever my fate, I will, with the last breath of my life, raise the
prayer to God that he may bless you, and bless your city and bless your
country, and bless all your land, for all the coming time and to the end
of time; that your freedom and prosperity may still grow and increase
from day to day; and that one glory should be added to the glory which
you already have: the glory that America, Republican America, may unite
with her other principles the principle of Christian brotherly love
among the family of nations; and so may she become the corner stone of
Liberty on earth! That is my farewell word to you.

       *       *       *       *       *

XLVII.--PRONOUNCEMENT OF ALL THE STATES.

[_Albany, May 20th_.]

On May 20th, Kossuth was received in Albany, the chief city of New York
State, by Governor Hunt, in the name of the citizens. In reply to his
address, Kossuth then addressed the audience substantially as follows:--

Gentlemen,--More than five months have passed since my landing in New
York. The novelty has long since subsided, and emotion has died away.
The spell is broken which distance and misfortune cast around my name.
The freshness of my very ideas is worn out. Incessant toils spread a
languor upon me, unpleasant to look upon. The skill of intrigues,
aspersing me with calumny; wilful misrepresentations, pouring cold water
upon generous sympathy; Louis Napoleon's momentary success, shaking the
faith of cold politicians in the near impendency of a European struggle
for liberty; and in addition to all this, the Presidential election,
absorbing public attention, and lowering every high aspiration into the
narrow scope of party spirit, busy for party triumph; all these
circumstances, and many besides too numerous to record, joined to make
it _probable_ that the last days of my wanderings on American soil
would be entirely different from those in which the hundred thousands of
the "Empire City,"[*] thundered up to the high heaven the cheers of
their hurrahs, till they sounded like a defiance of a free people to the
proud despots of the world. And yet, notwithstanding all these
disadvantageous concurrencies, NO change has taken place in the public
spirit of America. I may have lost in your kind estimation of my humble
self, but my cause has not lost. It is standing higher than ever it
stood, and the future in your country's policy is ensured to it.

[Footnote *: New York.]

Gentlemen, present bounty will never weaken in my mind the thankful
appreciation of former benefits. The generous manifestation of sympathy
I met on my arrival, will always remain recorded with unfading gratitude
in my heart; but no just man can feel offended when I say, that it is
the manner of the "_farewell_" which decides upon the value of the
"_welcome_." The result of my endeavours in America will not be
measured by how I was received when I came, but by how I am treated when
I leave. You know, "All's well that ends well," and to be well, things
must end well. And being about to close my task in America, I cannot
help to say, that the generous reception you have honoured me with, is
doubly gratifying to my countrymen, who have watched with intense
interest my progress in America--and doubly dear to my heart, because it
is an evidence that the "_farewell_" given to the wandering
exile's, course, confirms the expectations which the _"welcome"_
had roused.

The warm reception Albany has given me is like the point upon the letter
_"i"_--it decides its meaning. The metropolis of the Empire State
gave abundantly the first flowers to the garland of America's sympathy
for the condition of the Old World. Many a flower was added to it from
many a place. Wherever there is a people there was a new garden of
sympathy: and wherever be the obligations I owe--and gladly own--to many
a quarter of the United States, it is but a tribute due to justice
publicly to avow, that _Ohio_, with the bold resolution of its
youthful strength, and _Massachusetts_, with its consistent
traditional energy, stood pre-eminent in the decided comprehension of
America's destiny--and now the Capitol of the Empire State winds up the
garland of America. _New York_ achieves what New York has begun,
and thus, in leaving America, I have an answer to bring to Europe's
oppressed millions; and the answer is satisfactory, because I know what
position America will take in the approaching crisis of the world.

There are moments in the national life of a people, when to adopt a
certain course becomes a natural necessity: and in such moments the
people always gets instinctively conscious of the necessity, and answers
it by adopting a direction spontaneously. That direction is decisive. It
must be followed: and it is followed. Pre-eminent patriots, joining in
the people's instinct, may become either the interpreters or the
executors of it; but they can neither impart their own direction to the
people, nor alter that which public opinion has fixed. There are no
other means to become a great man and a great patriot but by becoming
the impersonification of the public sentiment, conscious of a surpassing
public necessity. Those who would endeavour to measure great things by
a small individual scale, would always fall short in their calculations,
and be left behind.

There have been already several such moments in your country's brief but
glorious history. I will only mention your glorious Revolution of 1775.
Who made that Revolution?  The People; the unarmed heroes; the Public
Opinion. If the question had been left to the decision of some few,
though the best and the wisest of all, _they never would have advised
a struggle_; but would have arranged matters diplomatically. You
remember what anxious endeavours were made to prove that it was not the
Americans who fired the first shot, and how exculpations were sent to
England with protestations of allegiance. All those little steps were
vain. The people felt that it was time to become an independent nation;
and feeling the necessity of the moment, it took a direction by itself,
and made the Revolution by itself.

Now-a-days it is of an equally pregnant necessity to the United States,
to take the position of a power on earth. Nobody can hereafter make the
people believe that it is possible for America to remain unaffected by
the condition of the Old World,--to advise that the United States shall
still abstain from mixing up their concerns with those of Europe. The
question to be decided is not whether America shall mix its concerns
with those of the Old World; because that is done. But the question is,
whether the United States shall take a seat in the great Amphictyonic
Council of the nations or not? And whether it shall be permitted to some
crowned mortals to substitute the whims of their ambition in the place
of international law;--to set up and to upset the balance of power as
they please; and to regulate the common concerns of the world? And shall
the United States accept whatever the Czar may be pleased to decide
about those common concerns?  And shall the United States silently look
on, however the Czar may grow upon the ruins of common international
law, to an all-overwhelming preponderance?

That is the question. And that being the question, the people has
answered it, and has pronounced about it in a manner too positive and
too evident to be mistaken. It is already more than a year ago, that a
distinguished American diplomatist publicly advertised his
fellow-statesmen, "that it is the popular voice which will henceforth
decide, without appeal, the great coming questions in your foreign
policy, before the Executive or Congress can consider them." Some have
reproached me for unprecedented arrogance in trying to change the
hereditary policy of the United States. But it is not so. I did but
engage public attention to consider the exigencies of time and
circumstances. The _finger of the clock_ only shows the hour, but
makes not the time. And so did I. And allow me to say, that the coming
of such a time was already anticipated by many of your own
fellow-citizens, long before my humble name, or even the name of my
country, was known in America. Please to read the works of your own
distinguished countryman WAYLAND, who for more than thirty years was
engaged at one of your high schools in the noble task of instilling
sound political principles and enlightened patriotism into the heart and
mind of your rising generation. You will find that already in 1825,
after having spoken of the effects which this country might produce upon
the politics of Europe simply by her example, he thus proceeds:--

"It is not impossible, however, that this country may be called to exert
an influence still more direct on the destinies of men. Should the
rulers of Europe make war upon the principles of our Constitution,
because its existence '_may operate as an example_,' or should a
universal appeal be made to arms on the question of civil and religious
liberty, it is manifest that we must take no secondary part in the
controversy. The contest will involve the civilized world, and the blow
will be struck which must decide the fate of men for centuries to come.
Then will the hour have arrived, when, uniting with herself the friends
of Freedom throughout the world, this country must breast herself to the
shock of congregated nations. Then will she need the wealth of her
merchants, the powers of her warriors, and the sagacity of her
statesmen. Then on the altar of our God, let each one devote himself to
the cause of the human race, and in the name of the Lord of Hosts go
forth unto the battle! If need be, let our choicest blood flow freely,
for life itself is valueless when such interests are at stake. Then,
when a world in arms is assembling to the conflict, may this country be
found fighting in the vanguard for the liberties of man! God himself has
summoned her to the contest, and she may not shrink back. For this hour
may He by His grace prepare her!"

Thus wrote a learned American Patriot as early as 1825; and he stands
high even to-day in the estimation of his fellow-citizens; and no man
ever charged him with being presumptuously arrogant for having shown
such a perspective of coming necessities to America. His profound
sagacity, pondering the logical issue of America's position, has
penetrated into the hidden mystery of future events; and he has seen his
country summoned, by God himself, to fight in the vanguard for mankind's
civil and religious liberty.

       *       *       *       *       *

XLVIII.--SOUND AND UNSOUND COMMERCE.

_Speech at Buffalo.]_

On the 27th of May thirty thousand persons assembled in the Park at
Buffalo, where Kossuth had a magnificently enthusiastic reception. In
the evening he was escorted to American Hall by the mayor and others.
For a portion only of his Speech, in reply to the address of the Hon.
Thomas Love, can we here find room.

The Austrian minister (said he) has left the United States. Proud
Austria has no longer a representative here, but down-trodden Hungary
has. The Chevalier Hulsemann has at last taken his departure, without
even a chivalrous farewell; the Secretary of State let him depart,
without either alarm or regret.

"All right!" gentlemen. Two years ago there was much alarm in certain
quarters, when the idea of such a rupture was first suggested. Five
months ago, when in one of my public addresses I wished a good journey
to Mr. Hulsemann, some thought it rather presumptuous. But now that he
has left, no man cares about it, scarcely any man takes notice of it.
The time may yet come, when Mr. Hulsemann's masters will be fully aware,
that what he is pleased to call _the Kossuth episode_ is a serious
drama--a drama in which, I trust, America will so act its part, that in
the catastrophe justice and freedom shall triumph, violence and
oppression shall fall.

In my many speeches I have dwelt largely on the necessity that there is
for America to act this part. I have not concealed that I am informed
that many gentlemen of commerce are timid concerning it, and I have
ventured to warn this young but great republic against _materialism_.
But commerce involves this danger only when it is bent on
instant profit at any price, and cares nothing for the future,
nothing about that solidity of commercial relations on which permanent
prosperity depends. Adventurous _money-hunting_ is not commerce.
Commerce, republican commerce, raised single cities to the position of
mighty powers on earth, and maintained them there for centuries. It is
merchants whose names shine with immortal lustre from the glorious book
of Venice and Genoa. Commerce, as I understand it, does indeed apply its
finger to the pulsations of present conjunctures, but not the less fixes
its eye steadily on the future. Its heart warms with noble patriotism
and philanthropy, connecting individual profit with the development of
natural resources and of national welfare; so that it spreads over the
multitudes like a dew of Heaven upon the earth, which blossoms through
it with the flower of prosperity. _Such_ a commercial spirit is a
rich source of national happiness;--a guarantee of a country's future, a
pillar of its power, a vehicle of civilization and convoyer of its
principles.

Let me exemplify the difference between that noble beneficent spirit of
commerce and the merely material money hunting, which falsely usurps the
name of commerce.

Since the fatal arithmetical skill of Rothschilds has found out how to
gain millions by negotiating, out of the pockets of the public, loan
after loan for the despots, to oppress the blind-folded nations, a sort
of speculation has gained ground in the Old World, worthy of the
execration of humanity--I mean the speculation in _loan
shares_;--the paper commerce called stock-jobbing. It is the
shame-brand upon our century's brow, that such a commerce is become a
political power on earth; and unscrupulous gamesters, speculating upon
the ruin of their neighbours, hold the political thermometer of peace
and war in their criminal hands. But it is not commerce--it deserves not
the name of commerce--it does not contribute to public welfare--it does
not augment the elements of public prosperity--it is but immoral
GAMBLING, which transfers an unproductive imaginary wealth from one hand
into another, without augmenting the stock of national property:--that
is not commerce: and _it is a degradation of the character of a
nation, when the interests of that speculation have the slightest
influence, or are made of the slightest consideration in the regulation
of a country's policy_. Such an example has its full weight with
every other kind of mere money-hunting. It would be the greatest fault
to regulate a country's policy according to the momentary interests of
worshippers of the almighty dollar, who look but for a momentary profit,
not caring for their fatherland and humanity--nothing for the
principles--nothing about the tears and execration of millions, if only
that condition remains intact which gives them individual profit--though
that condition be the misfortune of a world. Wherever that class of
money-hunters is influential, there is a disease in the constitution of
the community. It is vain to complain against the dangerous doctrines of
socialism, so long as such money-hunters have any influence upon
politics. The genus of Rothschilds has done more for the spread of
socialism than its most passionate sectarians.

Take on the other side the contrasting fact of the Erie Canal. I
remember well that some were terrified, when in the councils of the
Empire State first was started the idea of that gigantic enterprise. And
now when we hear that its nett proceeds amount to about three millions
of dollars a year--when we see the almost unbroken line of boats on
it--when we see Buffalo becoming the heart of the West, the pulsation of
which conveys the warm tide of life to the East; and by the
communication of that artery, bringing the wonderful combination of the
great western lakes into immediate connection with the Atlantic, and
through the Atlantic with the Old World--when we see Buffalo, though at
four hundred miles distance from the ocean, without a navigable river,
living, acting, and operating like a seaport; and New York, situated on
the shores of the Atlantic, acting as if it were the metropolis of the
West--when we consider how commerce becomes a magic wand, and transforms
a world of wilderness into a garden of prosperity, and spreads the
blessing of civilization where some years ago only the wild beasts and
the Indian roamed--then indeed we bow with reverential awe before the
creating power of that commerce. We feel that the spirit of it is not a
mere money-hunting, but a mighty instrumentality of Providence for the
moral and social benefit of the world; and we at once feel that the
interests of such a commerce underlie so much the foundation of your
country's future, that not only are they entitled to enter into the
regulating considerations of your country's policy, but they must
enter--they must have a decisive weight--and they will have it, whatever
be the declamations of learned politicians who have so much looked to
the authority of past times that they have found no time to see the
imperious necessity of present exigencies.

There are still some who advise you to follow the policy of separation
from Europe, which Washington wisely advised in his days--wisely,
because it was a necessity of those times. I have on many occasions
adduced arguments against this, which to me are quite convincing. Yet to
some minds custom is of so much more power than argument, that I could
not forbear to feel some uneasiness. But to-day, gentlemen, I no longer
feel such uneasiness. I am entirely tranquillized. I want no more
arguments, because I have the knowledge of facts, and to those who still
advocate the policy of separatism I will say, "Have you seen the city of
Buffalo? Go! and look at it; when you have seen what Buffalo is,
consider what are the interests which created that city, and are
personified by that city; then trace those interests back to New York,
and from New York across the Atlantic to the Old World; and again, the
returning interests of intercourse from the Old World to New York and
hence to Buffalo, and from Buffalo to the West, and then speak of the
wisdom of separatism!"--What exists, exists. The facts will laugh at your
reflections; they will tell you that, they cannot be undone. They will
tell you that you are like Endymion, whom Diana made sleep until the
twig on which he leaned his head had become a tree. They, will tell you
that you could as well reduce Buffalo to the log-house of MIDDEAU and
LANE; the mighty democrat the steam-engine to the horse on the back of
which EZRA METCALF brought the first public mail to the sixteen
dwelling-houses, which some forty years ago composed all Buffalo; you
could as well reduce the Erie Canal to where it was when GOVERNOR MORRIS
first mentioned the idea of tapping Lake Erie, or reduce the West to a
desert, and western New York to the condition in which Washington saw it
when journeying towards the Far West.

All this you could as easily do as adhere any longer to the policy of
separatism, or persuade the people of the United States not to take any
part in the great political transactions of the Old World.

In that respect, gentlemen, I am entirely tranquillized; and
tranquillized also I am in this respect, that it is impossible the
active sympathies of your people should not side with freedom and right
against oppression and violence. That will be done. I want no assurance
about it,--being an imperative corollary of existing facts. Public
opinion is aroused to the appreciation of these facts and of their
necessary exigencies. The only thing which I in that respect have yet to
desire, is, to see the people of the United States persuaded that _it
is time_ to prepare _already_ to meet those exigencies; and that
it is wise not to let themselves be overtaken by impending events.

[Kossuth then proceeded to speak of subjects elsewhere very fully
treated, and continued:]

Once more, I repeat, a _timely_ pronouncement of the United States
would avert and prevent a second interference of Russia. She must
sharpen the fangs of her Bear, and get a host of other beasts into her
menagerie, before she will provoke the Eagle of America. But beware,
beware of loneliness. If your protest be delayed too long, you will
have to fight alone against the world: while now, you will only have to
watch, and others will fight.

Allow me to ask, are the United States interested in the laws of
nations? can they permit any interpolation in the code of these laws
without their consent? I am told by some that America had best not
intermeddle with European politics, and that you have always avoided to
meddle with them. But it is not so. Those who make this assertion forget
history--they forget that the United States have always claimed and
asserted the right to have their competent weight and authority about
the maritime law of nations--it was one of your Presidents who held this
emphatic language to the Potentates of Europe:

"_We cannot consent to interpolations in the maritime code of nations
at the mere will and pleasure of other Governments--we deny the right of
any such interpolation, to any one or all the nations of the earth
without our consent--we claim to have a voice in all alterations of that
code_."

Thus spoke the United States, at a time when they were not yet so
powerful as they are now. And they thus spoke not for themselves only,
but for all the nations on earth. And to what purpose did they speak
these words so full of dignity and full of effect? For the maintenance
of the laws of nations, or one part of them, the maritime code.
Dauntless and full of resolution, _they_ alone vindicated natural
rights for every nation on earth, while Europe sacrificed them.
_They_ vindicated for every nation the proud motto they have
emblazoned on their banner--"_Free Trade and Sailors' Rights_," and
_free ships and free goods_:

Now who can any longer charge me that I advance a new policy, with that
precedent before your eyes? Would you be willing to resign, now that you
are powerful, in respect to other parts of the laws of nations, that
which you have boldly taken in respect to one part of them, when you
were yet comparatively weak? Or would you do less for the end than you
have done for the means?

The maritime part of the international code is no end, but only a means
to an end. No ship takes sail for the purpose merely of sailing on the
ocean, but for the purpose of arriving somewhere. The ocean is but the
highway, and not the intended terminus. Russian intervention in Hungary
has blocked up your terminus: and the maritime code would be of no
avail, if the other provisions of international law are to be still
blotted out from the code of nations by Russian ambition. Let the
slightest eruption of the political volcano in Europe take place, and
you will see. You might have seen already during our past struggle, that
your proud principle of "_free ships, free goods_" is a mere
mockery unless the other parts of the laws of nations are also
maintained.

That is what I claim from the young and dauntless nation of America. I
claim that she shall not abandon that position in the proud days of her
power, which she so boldly took in the days of her feebleness. Or are
you already declining?  Has your prodigious prosperity weakened instead
of strengthening your nation's nerves? So young! and a Republic!  and
already declining! when its opposing principle, Russia, rises so boldly
and so high! Oh, no! God forbid! That would be a sorrowful sight,
fraught with the grief of centuries for all humanity!

       *       *       *       *       *

XLIX.--RUSSIA AND THE BALANCE OF POWER.

[_Syracuse_.]

At Syracuse, in New York State, Kossuth was received with an address of
the usual cordiality by the ex-Mayor, Harvey Baldwin. Of his ample reply
a portion may here be presented to the reader. After alluding to
Dionysius and Timoleon, he came back to the subject of Russian
interference in Hungary, and declared that he would not appeal to their
passions, but to their calm reason, although he approved of excitement
in a good cause, and at any rate trusted that Truth and Hope would never
be out of fashion at Syracuse. He continued:--

Gentlemen, as the destination of laws in a well-regulated community is
to uphold right, justice, and security of every individual, rich or
poor, powerful or weak, and to protect his life against violence and his
property against the encroachments of fraud and crime--so the
destination of the laws of _nations_ is to secure the independence
even of the smallest States, from the encroachments of the most powerful
ones. Force will prevail instead of right, so long as _all_
independent nations do not unite for the maintenance of those laws upon
which the security of all nations rests.

I say _all_ nations, because weakness is always comparative, not
absolute. A combination of several leagued powers can reduce to the
condition of comparative weakness even the strongest power on earth.
Without the law of nations there is therefore no security for nations.
But the European powers have long ago substituted for the rule of
justice the so-called _balancing system_--that is to say, the
political balance of power among nations. That system is iniquitous, for
it is founded, not upon the national _right_ even of the smallest
nation to be maintained in its independence, but upon the natural
jealousy of the great powers. With this system the independence of the
smallest States is not sure by right and by law, but only depends on the
consideration that the absorption of such smaller States might
aggrandize one of the great powers too much. In this system humanity is
taken for nothing--the mutual jealousy of the powerful is all, and the
implicit guarantee for the security of the weaker ceases, wherever the
powerful can devise a plan of spoliation which leaves the relative
forces of the spoliators the same as before. It is thus the world has
seen the partition of Poland--that most iniquitous--most guilty
spoliation ever witnessed.

The balancing system would have protected Poland from absorption by
_one_ power, but it has not protected it from partition between
these rival powers. Formerly, separate leagues between several States
have been as a protecting barrier against the ambition of a single
powerful oppressor. In the case of Poland, the world saw with
consternation a confederacy of great powers formed to perpetrate those
very acts of spoliation which hitherto had been prevented by similar
means. I therefore am certainly no advocate of this false system of
political balance of power, and I believe the time will come when that
idol will be thrown down from the place which it usurps, and law and
right will be restored to their sovereign sway. But still I may say, it
is an imperious necessity for all the world in general, as also for the
United States, that something should be done to prevent the measureless
territorial aggrandizement of one single power, chiefly when that power
is the mighty antagonist of your own Republic, as indeed Russia is.

I have on many occasions spoken of the necessary antagonism between
despotic Russia and republican America. Allow me here to recapitulate
some facts concerning Russia.

No man familiar with the history of the last hundred years is ignorant
that the Czars of Russia take it for their destiny to rule the world. It
is their hereditary policy, in which they are brought up from generation
to generation, till that infatuation becomes a point of their character.
To come to that aim--Russian preponderance steps forth alike with
protocols, with emissaries, and with war--in two directions westward and
eastward, against Europe and against Asia.

As to Europe, after having completed her arrondisement on the
Baltic--her earnest aim is partly direct conquest, and partly sovereign
preponderance. Direct conquest, so far as the Sclave race is spread;
which the Czars desire to unite under their despotic sceptre. To attain
that end, the house of Romanoff has started the idea of Pansclavism, the
idea of union of the Sclavish nationality under Russian
protectorate.--Protectorate is always the first step which Russia takes
when desiring to conquer.

She has styled that ambitious design the regeneration of the Sclave
nationality; and to blindfold those deluded nations that they may not
see that without independence and freedom no nationality exists, she has
flattered their ambition with the prospect of dominion over the world.
The Latin race had its turn, and the German race had, and now it is the
Sclave race which is called to rule and master the world. Such was the
Satanic temptation of pride, by which Russia advanced in that ambitious
scheme. I will not now speak of the mischief she has succeeded to do in
that respect: I will only mark the fact that the ambition of Russia aims
at the direct dominion of Europe, so far as it is inhabited by the
Sclave race. The slightest knowledge of geography is sufficient to make
it understood that this would be such an accession to the power of
Russia, that, were they united under one man's despotic will, the
independence of the rest of Europe, should even Russia prudently decline
a direct conquest of it, would be but a mockery. The Czar would be
omnipotent over it, as indeed he is near to be already, at least on the
Continent.

Yet, without the conquest of Constantinople, Russia could never carry
the idea of Pansclavism: for in European Turkey a vast stock of the
Sclavonic race dwells, from Bulgaria over Servia and Bosnia down to
Montenegro, and across through Rumelia. Moreover, the conquest of
Constantinople is the hereditary leading idea of Russian policy. Peter,
called the Great, the founder of the Russian Empire, in making it from a
half-Asiatic a European State, bequeathed this policy as a sacred legacy
to all his posterity, in his political testament, which is the Magna
Charta of Russian power and despotism. All his successors have
energetically followed that inherited direction. Alexander movingly
avowed that Constantinople _is the key to his own house_, and his
brother did and does more than all his predecessors to get that key.

When the Empress Catharine visited the recently conquered Krimea,
Potemkin raised to her honour a triumphal arch, with the motto--"Hereby
is the road to Constantinople." Czar Nicholas has since learned that it
is by Vienna, rather. Russia therefore decided to get rid of this
obstacle, and to convert it out of an obstacle into a TOOL. A direct
conquest would have been dangerous, because it would have met the
opposition of all Europe. Russia therefore tried it first by monetary
influence, and had pretty well advanced in it. Metternich himself was a
pensioner to Russia. But the watchful, independent spirit of
constitutional Hungary still hindered the practical result of that
bribery.

And, mark well, gentlemen, in consequence of the geographical situation
of her dominions, and being also sovereigns of Hungary, it was chiefly
the house of Austria which was considered to be and cherished as the
great bulwark against Russia--charged especially with a jealous
guardianship of Turkish rights. And indeed had the house of Austria
comprehended the conditions of her existence, attached Hungary to
herself by respecting her independence and her constitutional rights,
and developed the power of her hereditary dominions, and placed herself
upon a constitutional basis, she could have maintained her respectable
position of guardianship for centuries. Russia was aware of that fact.

It is the intrigue of Russia, which by money and emissaries for years
before infused the notion of Pansclavism among the Bohemians, Poles,
Croats, Serbs, under the crown of Austria, equally as among the Sclave
population of Turkey; which encouraged Austria to attack Hungary, by
promising her aid in case of need. If Austria succeeded, the
constitutional life of Hungary, in many ways so offensive to Russia, was
overthrown: if Austria failed, she became a dependency of Russia. And
by the unwarrantable carelessness of some powers, the complicity of
others, the latter alternative is achieved. Austria, who was to have
_balanced_ Russia, is thrown into her scale: instead of being a
barrier, she is her vanguard, and her tool--her high road to
Constantinople, her auxiliary army to flank it.

It would be not without interest to sketch the history of Russia step by
step, advancing towards that aim by war and by emissaries, and by
diplomatic corruption and corrupted diplomacy, from the time of Mahomet
Baltadji, of cursed memory, through all subsequent wars--at the treaties
of Kutsuk Kaynardje, Balta Liman, Jassy, Bucharest, Ackierman,
Adrianople, Unkhiar Iskelessi, down to the treaty as to the Dardanelles
and the Bosphorus, and to the treaty of commerce which made two-thirds
of Constantinople itself in their daily bread dependent upon Russian
wheat, to the amount of thirty-five millions of piastres a year, while
Turkish wheat was rotting in the stores of Asia Minor. By each of these
treaties Russia advanced its frontiers, and pressed Constantinople more
closely within its iron grasp; with such perseverant consistency
pursuing her aim, that even in other political transactions, apparently
unconnected with Turkey, it was constantly this which she kept in view.

As for instance, at the conference of Tilsit, when she surrendered
continental Europe to the momentary domains of Napoleon, provided Turkey
were consigned to her. And still she did not succeed--and still
Stamboul stands a barrier to her dominion over the world. And why did
she not succeed?  Because the European powers, conscious of the fact
that the conquest of Constantinople involves their own submission to
Russia, have in the last instant always prevented it, by uniting to
treat the Eastern question as one of life and death for their own
independence.

The whole Anglo-Saxon race are bound by every consideration of policy to
check the ambitious encroachments of Russia. It is not in Europe only,
but in Asia, that you meet her. She knows that her dominion over the
world must be short, while the Anglo-Saxon race bold a mighty empire in
India. Moreover, you yourselves, by the extension of your territory to
the Pacific Ocean, are drawn by a thousand natural ties of activity to
Asia. Your expedition to Japan has a world of meaning in it. Great
powers _must_ have broad views in their policy: you cannot contain
your activity, nor therefore your policy, within a domestic circle of
your own. You are for the world what Germany is for Europe. As without
the freedom of Hungary, Europe cannot _become_ free, so without the
freedom of Germany, Europe cannot _remain_ free; for Germany is the
heart of Europe. You, by having extended your dominion to the Pacific,
become the heart of the world. You are brought into the compass of
Russian hatred and Russian ambition. Either you or Russia must fall.

The balance of power, and thereby the independence of the world, has
been overthrown by the connivance of the great powers at the overthrow
of Hungary; and it can only be restored by the restoration of Hungary.
As for Austria, she never more can be restored--she is not only doomed,
she is dead. No skill, no tending can revive her. Having previously
broken every tie of affection and of allegiance, she cannot maintain
even a vegetable life, but by Russian aid. Let the reliance upon that
aid relax, and there is no power on earth which could prevent the
nations who groan under her oppressive and degrading tyranny from
shattering to pieces the rotten building of her criminal existence. And
as to my nation, I declare solemnly, that should we be left forsaken and
alone to fight once more the battle of deliverance for the world, and
should we in consequence of it fail in that honourable strife, we will
rather choose to be Russians than subject to the house of
Austria--rather submit to open, manly force of the Czar, than to the
heart-revolting perjury of the Hapsburg--rather be ruled directly by the
master, than submit to the shame of being ruled by his underlings. The
fetters of force may be broken once, but the affection of a morally
offended people to a perjurious dynasty can never be restored. Russia
we hate with inconceivable hatred, but the House of Hapsburg we hate and
we despise.

I have been often asked, what may be, amidst the present conjunctures,
an opportunity to renew our struggle for liberty?  and I have answered
that the very oppression of our country, the heroism of my people, our
resolute will, and the intolerable condition of the European Continent,
is an opportunity in itself; but if too cautious men, having too little
faith in the destiny of mankind, desire yet another opportunity, there
is the prospect of a war between Turkey and Russia. This is a fatality,
pointed out by the situation of Russia, and by the pressing motives,
heaped up since the time of Peter the Great: and Russia will hasten to
try the decisive blow, since she knows that Turkey becomes more powerful
every day. Now, gentlemen, that will be an imperious opportunity to
raise once more the standard of freedom in Hungary; and, so may God
bless us, we are prepared for it. We cannot allow that our natural ally,
Turkey, be flanked from the frontiers of Hungary at the order of the
Czar. Turkey, by curious change of circumstances, having become
necessary to European freedom and civilization, will find the kindred
race of the Magyars to aid her, and by aiding her, to save the world.

The only question is, will the United States remain indifferent at the
overthrow of the balance of power on earth?  No, they will not, they
cannot remain indifferent. Their position on the coast of the Pacific
answers "No." Their Republican principle answers "No." The voice of the
people, clustering in thundering manifestations around my own humble
self, answer "No." You yourself, Sir, in the name of the people of
Syracuse, which is but one tone in the mighty harmony of all the
people's voice, have told me "No."

Before these assurances, and upon the conditions of your destiny, I
rely; and I venture humbly to advise you to strengthen your fleet in the
Mediterranean. Sir, look for a port of your own, not depending upon the
smiles of petty Italian despots, but one where the stripes and stars of
America will be able to protect the principles of FREE SHIPS, FREE
GOODS. Determine the character of your country's future administration
from a broad American view, and not from any petty considerations of
small party follies. With these humble suggestions I cordially thank you
for your sympathy, and bid you an affectionate farewell!

       *       *       *       *       *

L.--RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT.

[_Utica._]

At Utica, in New York State, the elegant Saloon of the Museum was
arranged for Kossuth's reception: and the Hon. W. Bacon made a powerful
address to him. Kossuth in the course of his reply, said:--

Ladies and gentlemen,--The history and the institutions of the United
States were not only the favourite study of my life, from my early
youth, strengthening my conviction that with centralization and with
parliamentary omnipotence, which absorb all independence of municipal
life, there is no practical freedom possible:--but the history and
institutions of the United States exerted also a real influence upon the
resolution of my people to resist oppression, and not to shrink before
the dangers and sacrifices of a terrible conflict.

Never yet was there a people against which all the arts of hell had been
combined worse than against the people of Hungary in 1848. Neither
dreaming to attack any, nor suspecting to be attacked, never yet was a
people less prepared for a war of defence, or more surprised by the
danger than my country was.

In those frightful days, when many of the stoutest hearts prepared
mourningly to submit to the imperious necessity, I called Hungary to
arms; and while on the one side I pronounced a curse against those who
would forsake the fatherland, and were willing to bow cowardlike before
a sacrilegious violence, and accept the degradation of servitude,--on
the other side, in order to cheer up the manly resolution of my
countrymen, I pointed to the heart-raising example of your history. And
that history became the guiding star to us, from the lustre of which we
have drawn self-reliance and resolution to bear up against all danger
and all adversities.

But while we on our part readily yielded to the heart-ennobling
influence of your history, we were disappointed in some expectations
which we derived from it. We saw that you were not forsaken in the hour
of need; yet your grievances were by far less heart-stirring than ours,
and should _you_ have failed in the noble enterprize of
independence, such a failure, at that time, would by no means have
teemed with such immediate results of positive mischiefs to the world
outside of you, as every considerate mind might have foreseen from
_our_ fall.

I therefore confess that I trusted to that instruction also of your
history, and hoped that should we prove worthy of the attention of the
world, that attention would not be restricted to a mere looking at our
contest with barren sympathies. But allow me to mention that it was not
from America alone that I hoped our struggle would not be regarded with
indifference: the example of former political transactions in Europe
entitled me to just expectations from other quarters also in that
respect.

When Greece heroically rose to assert its independence, Great Britain,
France, and even Russia herself, interposed together to pacify the two
contending parties, on the basis of the establishment of an independent
Greece. And so very anxious were those great powers to stop the effusion
of blood, that they solemnly declared they would insist upon the
pacification, should even the conflicting parties decline to consent to
the proposed arrangements. And thus Greece took its seat among the
independent States, though that was possible only by reducing the
territory of the Ottoman Empire, the integrity of which was considered
essential to the equilibrium of political power on earth.

Besides, what were those powers which interposed their mediation in
favour of bleeding Greece? It was Russia, despotical as she is: it was
legitimist France, then scarcely to be called constitutional; for it was
before the revolution of 1830: and it was the ministry of Great Britain,
then, if I am not mistaken, a Tory one.

Now was I not entitled with this precedent before my eyes, to hope that
the bloody struggle in Hungary would not be regarded with indifference?
We had not risen from any reckless excitement to assert new rights, or
to experiment on new theories; we should have been contented to keep
what we lawfully possessed. It was not we who broke the peace; we were
assailed with a perjury more sacrilegious than the world has ever
seen:--we merely took up arms to defend ourselves against national
extermination, against the nameless cruelties inflicted upon our
people,--men, women, children,--by fire, murder, war, and royal perjury.
And besides, when we took up arms in legitimate defence, it so happened
that in France there was a republic established which proclaimed the
principle of universal fraternity; and there was in England a ministry
claiming to be liberal, which on a former occasion had solemnly vouched
its word to the British parliament, that _constitutional independence
of any country, great or small, would never be a matter of indifference
to the English government;_ adding emphatically, that _whoever
might be in office, conducting the affairs of Great Britain, he would
not perform his duty if he were inattentive to the interests of such
States._ Am I to blame for having thought that there is and should be
morality in politics?

And besides, there was republican America, quite in another shape than
she was twenty years before, at the time of the war of independence in
Greece. Then she had not yet extended her sway to the Pacific, and was
not yet exposed to be so much affected by the political issues of Europe
and Asia as she now is: then she had not yet a population of more than
twenty millions, who now are in the necessity to claim the position of a
power on earth: then she was indeed a new world teeming with the
mysteries of the future, but yet was far from being what she is to-day;
nay, even the Erie Canal, the great artery which now acts as a
miraculous link between Europe and the interior of your republic, was
only about to be completed at the time. And still what mighty sympathy!
a sympathy warm in expression, and not barren in facts, thrilled through
all America, much like that which I now meet, and pervaded even your
_national_ councils:--would I were entitled to say, much like as
now! Although the question of Greece was of course worthy of all
interest (as the cause of liberty always and everywhere is), yet it was
only an isolated cause, and by no means of such surpassing influence
upon the condition of the world as the cause of Hungary was, and is.

And yet I was disappointed in the expectation which I derived from your
own history, that a just cause will find supporters and never will be
forsaken by all. Oh, we were forsaken, gentlemen! We were forsaken even
at the crisis, when, single-handed, we had defeated our cruel enemy. And
Russia, that personification of despotism, stepped in with its iron
weight, tearing to pieces the law of nations, and overthrowing upon our
ruins the balance of power on earth.

That Russia, if invited, would snatch at the opportunity to gain
preponderance amongst the powers on earth--of this I entertained not the
slightest doubt; but I must confess, I did not believe either that
Austria would claim, or that the other powers of the earth, and chiefly
Great Britain and America, would permit the intervention of Russia. I
could not believe that Austria would resort to this desperate remedy,
because (and it is a remarkable circumstance which I mention now for the
first time) it was Austria which but a few years before, when, in the
transactions with Turkey, the question of foreign interference for the
maintenance of the integrity of the Turkish empire was agitated in the
councils of the world (and from which you of course were excluded, as to
the present day you always yet have been, as if you were nothing but a
patch of earth); yes, it was Austria, which objecting that the guarantee
of interference should be even claimed, pronounced in a solemn
diplomatic note these memorable words:--

_"A State ought never to accept, and still less request, of another
State, a service for which it is unable to offer in return a strict
reciprocity; else by accepting such favour she loses the flower of her
own independence--a State accepting such a favour becomes a mediatized
State: it makes an act of submission to the will of the State which
takes the charge of its defence; this State becomes a protector, and to
be dependent upon a protector is insupportable."_

Thus spoke Austria. How then could I imagine that the same Austria which
thus spoke would accept the degradation of Russian interference? And
should even the house of Austria, ruled by a guilty woman, under the
name of a witless, cruel child, be willing thus to ruin itself; how
could I imagine that England, that America, that the World, would allow
such a preponderance to Russia as makes her almost the mistress over the
world; at least opens the way to become such? No, that indeed I could
not imagine.

And still it was done. We fell, not "unwept, unhonoured, and unsung,"
but still we fell. Well: sad though be our fate, it is but a trial, and
no death. Perhaps it was necessary that the destinies of mankind should
be fulfilled. I have an unbroken faith in Him, the Heavenly Father of
all; the heart of mortal men may break, but what he does, that is well
done.

The ways of Providence are mysterious. The car of destiny goes on
unrestrained, and the weight of its wheels often crushes the happiness
of generations; floods of tears and of blood often mark its track.
Mankind looks up to heaven, and while measuring eternity with the rule
of the passing moment, sometimes despairs of the future, and believes
the sun of Freedom sunk for ever! It is a delusion: it is the folly of
anxiety! Night is the darkest before dawn, and the misfortune of the
moment often leads to the happiness of eternity.

Yes, gentlemen! the ways of Providence are miraculous. Let me cast a
look backwards into the last struggles for freedom in Europe, that their
history may become the book of future, and that, when we perceive the
salutary action of Providence even in our misfortunes, we may be
strengthened in our faith in the future freedom, and that you may see
that for us, down-trodden but not broken, there is full reason to pursue
our way, not only with the resoluteness of duty, but also with the
cheerfulness of a sure success, courageous as strength, untired as
perseverance, unshaken as religious faith, self-sacrificing as maternal
love, cautious as wisdom, but resolute as desperation itself.

But where is the action of Providence visible in the failure of 1848? is
your question. Gentlemen, I will tell you. The continent of Europe was
afflicted with three diseases in 1848--monarchical inclination,
centralization, and the antagonism of nationalities. With such elements
and in such direction, deception was unavoidable, lasting liberty was
not to be achieved.

It was the lot of the peoples to be freed from these diseases, because
God had designed the peoples to freedom and not to deception; therefore
the revolution of 1848 had to fail, but it was still not a mere accident
in history; it was a necessary step in the development of mankind's
destiny, and it will shine for ever in history as a glorious preparation
for the ultimate triumph of liberty, to carry which a positive,
practical direction is necessary. And that now exists.

France, Germany, and Italy are no more to fight for the deception of
monarchical principles, not for the triumph of dynasties, but for
republics. Hungary took this direction already in 1849, by dethroning
the Hapsburgs. France, Germany, and Italy will not follow in the track
of centralization. Hungary never followed it. And the governments may
ally themselves for the oppression of the world's liberty;--they have
already allied themselves--but nations will no more rise in arms against
one another. They will rise, not to dominate, but to be independent and
free. Instead of the antagonism of nationalities, it is now the idea of
the solidarity and fraternity of nations, which is become the character
of our times. And this is to be the source of our success in future;
this explains the fear of the tyrants which manifests itself in such
blind rage. This is the direction which I pursue; this is the secret of
the sympathy of the people, unparalleled yet in history, which I met in
both hemispheres, and of the coalition of despots, aristocrats, and
ambitious intriguers, to persecute me.

I hope, gentlemen, with these considerations before your eyes, you will
not share in the opinions of those who despair of the cause of freedom
in Europe, because the revolution of 1848 has failed.

          *         *          *          *           *

LI.--THE TRIPLE BOND.

[_Address before the German Citizens of New York_.]

At the Broadway Tabernacle, on Wednesday evening, Kossuth delivered a
farewell address, before the German citizens of New York. It was spoken
in the German language, and was received with the hearty plaudits of an
immense assemblage. A small portion only of it can here find place.

Dear friends,--Allow me to address you with this sweet name of brotherly
love, hallowed by deep feeling, by the power of principles, and by the
combination of circumstances,--but likewise weighty in regard to the
determination linked to it in my grateful heart, in life as in death, to
serve the cause faithfully which you honour by such generously noble
sympathy.

To me this moment is one of solemn importance. I stand at the close of
my wanderings in America. My words are those of farewell.

In these six months I have been enriched by many an experience. I had
much to unlearn, but I have likewise learnt much.

Whatever be the result of my exertions, so much is sure, that they have
linked more closely the hearts of the Germans and Hungarians, and have
matured the instinct of solidarity into self-conscious conviction. This
result alone is worth a warm utterance of thanks; it will heavily weigh
in the future of the world.

And this result, dear friends, is it not achieved? The hearts of the
German and the Hungarian are linked more closely; they throb like the
hearts of twins which have rested under the same mother's breast; they
throb like the hearts of brothers, who, hand in hand, attain the baptism
of blood; they throb like the hearts of two comrades, on the eve of the
battle, decided to hold together like the blade and the handle.

The echo of this harmony of German song fills yet the air of this hall;
it thrills yet through the soul of the ladies and through the bosom of
the resolute men. Let the word harmony between the Germans and
Hungarians be the consecration of the present moment, which melts
together our feelings, in order that, self-conscious of the sublime aim,
which unites our nations and us all in brotherhood, we may unite in
intention, unite in resolution, unite in endurance, unite in activity
for the aim which fills your souls and mine.

And what is this aim which thrills through our bosoms like a magnetic
current? The aim is the solidarity and independence of nations;--the
freedom of our people--their liberation from the yoke of tyranny.

With this aim before my eyes and decided resolution in my heart, I feel
here amidst you as Werner Stauffacher felt, when, in the hour of the
night, on the Ruettli, God above him and the sword in his hand, he made
the covenant with his two friends against tyrannical Austria.

Let this meeting here become the symbol of a similar covenant; three[*]
were the men who made it, and Switzerland became free. Let us three
nations make a similar covenant, and the world becomes free. Germany,
Hungary, and Italy! hurrah for the new Ruettli-covenant! God increase the
number of them, as he increased the number of those on the Ruettli, and
our triune band, strong in itself, will readily greet every one, and
meet him as a brother, having the same rights in the great council of
the Amphictyons, where the nations will give their verdict against
tyrants and tyranny, on the battle-field, with the thunder of the
cannons and the clashing of swords; and will put the independence of
every nation under the common guarantee of all, in order that every one
of them may regulate her own domestic affairs, without foreign
interference, and every people may govern itself, not acknowledging any
master but the Almighty. They, will increase the members of this
covenant, but Germany, Hungary, and Italy, they are neighbours, and have
the same enemy. Hurrah! for the new covenant of Stauffacher!

[Footnote *: Werner Stauffacher, Walter Fuerst, and Arnold of the Melchthal;
November 11th, 1307.]

Now, by the God who led my people from the prairies of far Asia to the
banks of the Danube--of the Danube, whose waves have brought religion,
science, and civilization from Germany to us, and in whose waves the
tears of Germany and Hungary are mingled; by the God who led us, when on
the soil watered by our blood we were the bulwark of Christendom; by the
God who gave strength to our arm in the struggle for freedom, until our
oppressor, this godless House, which weighed so heavily on the liberties
of Germany for centuries, was humbled, and sunk down to be the underling
of the Muscovite Czar; by the ties of common oppression which tortures
our nation--by the ties of the same love of liberty, and of the same
hatred of tyranny which boils in the veins of our people--by the
remembrance of the day[*] when the Germans of Vienna rose to bar the way
toward Hungary against the hirelings of despotism--and by the blood
which flowed on the plain of Schwechat[**] from Hungarian hearts for the
deliverance of Vienna; by the Almighty Eye which watches the fate of
mankind--by all these, I pledge myself, I pledge that the people of
Hungary will keep this covenant honestly, faithfully, and truly, in life
and death.

[Footnote *: October 5th, 1848]
[Footnote **: October 30th, 1848]

I tender the brother-hand of Hungary to the German people, because I am
convinced that it is essentially necessary for the freedom and
independence of my country. Destined as we are to be the vanguard of
freedom, I know well that as long as Germany remains enslaved, even the
victory of our liberty would remain insecure; as long as Germany remains
an army, whose power is wielded by the criminal hand of the house of
Hapsburg; as long as Russia has nothing to fear from Germany, because
the two masters of Germany are but underlings of Russia--obeying the
command of their master, because he maintains them on their tottering
thrones against their own people; so long Russia will always have the
arrogance to throw her despotic sword into the scale against the freedom
of the world.

I am not the first who say it, that the freedom of Germany is the
condition of the liberty of the world; history tells it with a thousand
tongues, every statesman acknowledges it, and all the despots know it.

Twenty years past, when the German Princes recovered from the stunning
blow of the July Revolution, by finding out that LOUIS PHILIPPE was not
in earnest with his phrases of liberty, when, in the year 1832, they
united to enslave the German people, and to retract the concessions
which they had given in the fright of their hearts; when they curtailed
all the Constitutional guarantees, then HENRY LYTTON BULWER, the same
who was Ambassador in Washington during the last year, rose in the
English Parliament, and claimed that England should not permit the
liberty and independence of the German people to be crushed. He claimed
the attention of the world to the great truths that _the peace of
Europe cannot be secured without a strong Germany, and that Germany
cannot be strong without freedom._ A free Germany is a bulwark
against the encroachments of France and the arrogance of Russia.
Germany enslaved, is either the prey of the former or the tool of the
other. His prophecy is fulfilled; Germany is become half the prey and
wholly the tool of Russia. Who then can calculate on security and peace
and freedom, as long as Germany is thus enslaved.

You see, dear friends, that the brotherly union with Germany must be of
sacred importance to me, and that my heart must beat as fervently for
Germany's freedom, as for that of my own people. Therefore, I
necessarily wished to bequeath the care of the seed which I have sown,
to men urged to this task of love, not only by enlightened American
patriotism--not only by the conscience of right and duty and prudence,
but likewise especially by love for their old German fatherland. And do
I not express only the sentiments of your own hearts, when I say, "The
German may wander from his father's house, and may build for himself a
new home in a distant country, yet he ever loves truly and faithfully
his own old German fatherland"?

I request you to exert your influence, that the idea of the solidarity
of the struggle for European liberty may be well understood, and that
preparations be made to support the revolution, whenever it breaks out.
There is nothing more dangerous than to say: "The Hungarian, the
Italian, or the German fights; let us see whether he succeeds; if he
succeeds, we too will try the same." By the isolation of the nations the
combined despots become victorious. Let everybody support Liberty,
wherever she struggles. But, on the other side, the forces of the
revolution cannot so pledge and tie themselves, as to be thrown into the
abyss by every ill-combined premature outbreak. _Not an_ "EMEUTE,"
_but a_ REVOLUTION _is our aim_; and therefore the leaders of
the movement of the different nations must combine either in a
simultaneous outbreak, or to mutual support; and in this combination
there must be absolute freedom and equality.

There are persons in this country who did me the honour to mention that
I would lead the German movement. No!  gentlemen; that would be a
presumptuous arrogance, even if it were practical, which it is not. This
idea itself is the most antagonistical to my principles. No!--No! No
foreign interference with the domestic affairs of a nation. I will not
bear it in Hungary, nor obtrude it abroad. Full independence is my
watchword.

But you will ask who are, or who were, the leaders of Germany, with whom
I still combine? The question is easily answered; you will acknowledge
them from their works. Whoever comes to tender me his hand as a
confederate, I do not ask who he is, where he comes from?--but I ask,
"What do you weigh? what power do you command? what forces have you
organized? or what are your prospects or means of organization?" and
then I inquire into the truth myself. I judge the vitality of the
intention, and accept or decline the proffered brotherly alliance of
mutual support.

This is my way. I do not think that Germany will ever combine under the
leadership of one man; but there are many Germans in the different parts
of Germany who enjoy the confidence of their countrymen, and have a
leading influence. Every one of these can act in his sphere. I, my
friends, will be always ready to combine with every one who does, and
who has some forces to tender to the league. I do not care for names,
for petty party disputes, or for those which belong to the domestic
questions.

[Kossuth proceeded, in assent to a special request, to give his advice
as to the method of proceeding suitable to the German voters in America;
and closed by saying:]

Those are the principles, my dear friends, which should lead you,
according to my humble opinion, in the present crisis. And if you take
into kind consideration my bequest, and exert your influence and active
aid on behalf of the movement for freedom in Europe, I can but assure
you, for my grateful farewell, that there are hundreds of thousands in
Europe who take those words for their device, which the other day, the
German singers sang, as if from the depth of my heart.

  "And never shall rest the shield and the spear,
  Till destroyed we see, and laid in the dust,
  The enemies all."

May God help me! This is my oath, and this oath my farewell!

       *       *       *       *       *

LII.--THE FUTURE OF NATIONS.

[_A Lecture in New York_.]

The following Lecture was delivered at the Broadway Tabernacle by
request of a large number of ladies and gentlemen of New York, for the
purpose of obtaining the means necessary to secure to the exiled family
of Kossuth, consisting of his aged mother, his sisters and their
children, an establishment by which they might earn an independent
livelihood.

The New York 'Evening Post' says of the Lecture:--

"Kossuth appears nowhere greater than in this able discourse. His
comprehensive politics, his beautiful sympathies, his power over
language, his poetic imagination, his magnetic and melting earnestness
of purpose, are blended with that depth of religious feeling which gives
to his character as a patriot the sanctity and unction of the prophet.
His moral and intellectual faculties are shown in harmony, working out
the great and beneficent purposes of his commanding will.

"It would be difficult to select any portion of this speech as better
than another, and we therefore commend the whole to the reader's careful
examination."

Ladies and gentlemen,--During six months I appeared many times before
the tribunal of public opinion in America. This evening I appear before
you in the capacity of a working man. My aged mother, tried by more
sufferings than any living being on earth, and my three sisters, one of
them a widow with two fatherless orphans, together a homeless family of
fourteen unfortunate souls, have been driven by the Austrian tyrant from
their home, that Golgotha of murdered right, that land of the oppressed,
but also of undesponding braves, and the land of approaching revenge.
When Russian violence, aided by domestic treason, succeeded to
accomplish what Austrian perjury could not achieve, and I with bleeding
heart went into exile, my mother and all my sisters were imprisoned by
Austria; but it having been my constant maxim not to allow to whatever
member of my family any influence in public affairs, except that I
intrusted to the charitable superintending of my youngest sister the
hospitals of the wounded heroes, as also to my wife the cares of
providing for the furniture of these hospitals, not even the foulest
intrigues could contrive any pretext for the continuation of their
imprisonment. And thus when diplomacy succeeded to fetter my patriotic
activity by the internation to far Asia, after some months of unjust
imprisonment, my mother and sisters and their family have been released;
and though surrounded by a thousand spies, tortured by continual
interference with their private life, and harassed by insulting police
measures, they had at least the consolation to breathe the native air,
to see their tears falling upon native soil, and to rejoice at the
majestic spirit of our people, which no adversities could bend and no
tyranny could break.

But at last by the humanity of the Sultan, backed by American
generosity, seconded by England, I once more was restored to personal
freedom, and by freedom to activity. Having succeeded to escape the
different snares and traps which I unexpectedly met, I considered it my
duty publicly to declare that the war between Austrian tyranny and the
freedom of Hungary is not ended yet, and swore eternal resistance to the
oppressors of my country, and declared that, faithful to the oath sworn
solemnly to my people, I will devote my life to the liberation of my
fatherland. Scarcely reached the tidings of this my after resolution the
bloody Court of Vienna, than two of my sisters were again imprisoned; my
poor old mother escaping the same cruelty only on account that bristling
bayonets of the bloodhounds of despotism, breaking in the dead of night
upon the tranquil house, and the persecution of my sisters, hurried away
out of Hungary to the prisons of Vienna, threw her in a half-dying
condition upon a sick bed. Again no charge could be brought against the
poor prisoners, because, knowing them in the tiger's den, and surrounded
by spies, I not only did not communicate any thing to them about my
foreign preparations and my dispositions at home, but have expressly
forbidden them to mix in any way with the doings of patriotism.

But tyrants are suspicious. You know the tale about Marcius. He dreamt
that he cut the throat of Dionysius the tyrant, and Dionysius condemned
him to death, saying that he would not have dreamt such things in the
night if he had not thought of it by day. Thus the Austrian tyrant
imprisoned my sisters, because he suspected that, being my sisters, they
must be initiated in my plans. At last, after five months of
imprisonment, they were released, but upon the condition that they, as
well as my mother and all my family, shall leave our native land. Thus
they became exiles, homeless, helpless, poor. I advised them to come to
your free country--the asylum of the oppressed, where labour is
honoured, and where they must try to live by their honest work.

They followed my advice, and are on their way; but my poor aged mother
and my youngest sister, the widow with the two orphans, being stopped by
dangerous sickness at Brussels, another sister stopped with them to
nurse them. The rest of the family is already on the way--in a sailing
ship of course, I believe, and not in a steamer. We are poor. My mother
and sisters will follow so soon as their health permits.

I felt the duty to help them in their first establishment here. For this
I had to work, having no means of my own.

Some generous friends advised me to try a lecture for this purpose, and
I did it. I will not act the part of crying complainants about our
misfortunes; we will bear them. Let me at once go to my task.

       *       *       *       *       *

There is a stirring vitality of busy life about this your city of New
York, striking with astonishment the stranger's mind. How great is the
progress of Humanity! Its steps are counted by centuries, and yet while
countless millions stand almost at the same point where they stood, and
some even have declined since America first emerged out of an unexplored
darkness which had covered her for thousands of years, like the gem in
the sea; while it is but yesterday a few pilgrims landed on the wild
coast of Plymouth, flying from causeless oppression, seeking but for a
place of refuge and of rest, and for a free spot in the wilderness to
adore the Almighty in their own way; still, in such a brief time,
shorter than the recorded genealogy of the noble horse of the wandering
Arab; yes, almost within the turn of the hand, out of the unknown
wilderness a mighty empire arose, broad as an ocean, solid as a
mountain-rock, and upon the scarcely rotted roots of the primitive
forest, proud cities stand, teeming with boundless life, growing like
the prairie's grass in spring, advancing like the steam-engine, baffling
time and distance like the telegraph, and spreading the pulsation of
their life-tide to the remotest parts of the world; and in those cities
and on that broad land a nation, free as the mountain air, independent
as the soaring eagle, active as nature, and powerful as the giant
strength of millions of freemen.

How wonderful! What a present--and what a future yet!

Future?--then let me stop at this mysterious word--the veil of
unrevealed eternity!

The shadow of that dark word passed across my mind, and amid the bustle
of this gigantic bee-hive, there I stood with meditation alone.

And the spirit of the immovable Past rose before my eyes, unfolding the
misty picture-rolls of vanished greatness, and of the fragility of human
things.

And among their dissolving views, there I saw the scorched soil of
Africa, and upon that soil Thebes with its hundred gates, more splendid
than the most splendid of all the existing cities of the world; Thebes,
the pride of old Egypt, the first metropolis of arts and sciences, and
the mysterious cradle of so many doctrines which still rule mankind in
different shapes, though it has long forgotten their source. There I saw
Syria with its hundred cities, every city a nation, and every nation
with an empire's might. Baalbec, with its gigantic temples, the very
ruins of which baffle the imagination of man, as they stand like
mountains of carved rocks in the desert where for hundreds of miles not
a stone is to be found, and no river flows, offering its tolerant back
to carry a mountain's weight upon, and yet there they stand, those
gigantic ruins; and as we glance at them with astonishment, though we
have mastered the mysterious elements of nature, and know the
combination of levers, and how to catch the lightning, and to command
the power of steam and of compressed air, and how to write with the
burning fluid out of which the thunderbolt is forged, and how to drive
the current of streams up the mountain's top, and how to make the air
shine in the night like the light of the sun, and how to dive to the
bottom of the deep ocean, and how to rise up to the sky--though we know
all this, and many things else, still, looking at the temples of
Baalbec, we cannot forbear to ask what people of giants was that, which
could do what neither the efforts of our skill nor the ravaging hand of
unrelenting time can undo, through thousands of years. And then I saw
the dissolving picture of Nineveh, with its ramparts now covered with
mountains of sand, where Layard is digging up colossal winged bulls,
huge as a mountain, and yet carved with the nicety of a cameo; and then
Babylon, with its wonderful walls; and Jerusalem, with its unequalled
temple; Tyrus, with its countless fleets; Arad, with its wharves; and
Sidon, with its labyrinth of work-shops and factories; and Ascalon, and
Gaza, and Beyrout, and farther off Persepolis, with its world of
palaces.

All these passed before my eyes as they have been, and again they passed
as they now are, with no trace of their ancient greatness, but here and
there a ruin, and everywhere the desolation of tombs. With all their
splendour, power, and might, they vanished like a bubble, or like the
dream of a child, leaving but for a moment a drop of cold sweat upon the
sleeper's brow, or a quivering smile upon his lips; then, this wiped
away, dream, sweat, smile--all is nothingness.

So the powerful cities of the ancient greatness of a giant age; their
very memory but a sad monument of the fragility of human things.

And yet, proud of the passing hour's bliss, men speak of the future, and
believe themselves insured against its vicissitudes!

And the spirit of history rolled on the misty shapes of the past before
the eyes of my soul. After those cities of old came the nations of old.
The Assyrians, the Chaldeans, the war-like Philistines, the commercial
republics of Phoenicia and the Persians, ruling from the Indus to the
Mediterranean, and Egypt becoming the centre of the universe, after
having been thousands of years ago the cradle of its civilization.

Where is the power, the splendour, and the glory of all those mighty
nations? All has vanished without other trace than such as the foot of
the wanderer leaves upon the dust.

And still men speak of the future with proud security!

And yet they know that Carthage is no more, though it ruled Spain, and
ruled Africa beyond the pillars of Hercules down to Cerne, an immense
territory, blessed with all the blessings of nature, which Hannon filled
with flourishing cities, of which now no trace remains.

And men speak of the future, though they know that such things as heroic
Greece once did exist, glorious in its very ruins, and a source of
everlasting inspiration in its immortal memory.

Men speak of the future, and still they can rehearse the powerful
colonies issued from Greece, and the empires their heroic sons have
founded. And they can mark out with a finger on the map, the
unparalleled conquests of Alexander; how he crossed victoriously that
desert whence Semiramis, out of a countless host, brought home but
twenty men; and Cyrus, out of a still larger number, only seven men. But
he (Alexander) went on in triumph, and conquered India up to the
Hydaspes as he conquered before Tyrus and Egypt, and secured with
prudence what he had conquered with indomitable energy.

And men speak of the future, though they know that such a thing did
exist as Rome, the Mistress of the World--Rome rising from atomic
smallness to immortal greatness, and to a grandeur absorbing the
world--Rome, now having all her citizens without, and now again having
all the world within her walls; and passing through all the vicissitudes
of gigantic rise, wavering decline, and mournful fall. And men speak of
the future still with these awful monuments of fragility before their
eyes!

But it is the sad fate of Humanity that, encompassing its hopes, fears,
contentment, and wishes, within the narrow scope of momentary
satisfaction, the great lesson of history is taught almost in vain.
Whatever be its warnings, we rely on our good fortune; and we are
ingenious in finding out some soothing pretext to lull down the dreadful
admonitions of history. Man, in his private capacity, consoles the
instinctive apprehension of his heart with the idea that his condition
is different from what warningly strikes his mind. The patriot feels
well, that not only the present, but also the future of his beloved
country, has a claim to his cares; but he lulls himself into
carelessness by the ingenious consolation that the condition of his
country is different--that it is not obnoxious to those faults which
made other countries decline and fall; that the time is different; the
character and spirit of the nation are different, its power not so
precarious, and its prosperity more solid; and that, therefore, it will
not share the same fate of those which vanished like a dream. And the
philanthropist, also, whose heart throbs for the lasting welfare of all
humanity, cheers his mind with the idea that, after all, mankind at
large is happier than it was of yore, and that this happiness ensures
the future against the reverses of olden times.

That fallacy, natural as it may be, is a curse which weighs heavily on
us. Let us see in what respect our age is different from those olden
times. Is mankind more virtuous than it has been of yore? Why, in this
enlightened age, are we not looking for virtuous inspirations to the
god-like characters of these olden times? If we take virtue to be love
of the laws, and of the Fatherland, dare we say that our age is more
virtuous?  If that man is to be called virtuous, who, in all his acts,
is but animated by a regard to the common good, and who, in every case,
feels ready to subordinate his own selfish interest to public
exigencies--if that be virtue (as indeed it is), I may well appeal to
the conscience of mankind to give an impartial verdict upon the
question, if our age be more virtuous than the age of Codrus or of
Regulus, of Decius and of Scaevola. Look to the school of Zeno, the
stoics of immortal memory; and when you see them contemning alike the
vanity of riches and the ambition of personal glory, impenetrable to the
considerations of pleasure and of pain, occupied only to promote public
welfare and to fulfil their duties toward the community; when you see
them inspired in all their acts by the doctrine that, born in a society,
it is their duty to live for the benefit of society; and when you see
them placing their own happiness only upon the happiness of their
fellow-men--then say if our too selfish, too material age can stand a
comparison with that olden period. When you remember the politicians of
ancient Greece, acknowledging no other basis for the security of the
commonwealth than virtue, and see the political system of our days
turning only upon manufactures, commerce, and finances, will you say
that our age is more virtuous? When, looking to your own country--the
best and happiest, because the freest of all--you will not dissimulate
in your own mind what considerations influence the platforms of your
political parties; and then in contra-position will reflect upon those
times when Timon of Athens, chosen to take part in his country's
government, assembled his friends and renounced their friendship, in
order that he might not be tempted by party considerations or by
affections of amity, in his important duties toward the commonwealth.
Then, having thus reflected, say, "Take you our own age to be more
virtuous, and therefore more ensured against the reverses of fortune,
than those older times?"

But perhaps there is a greater amount of private happiness, and by the
broad diffusion of private welfare, the security of the commonwealth is
more lasting and more sure?

Caraccioli, having been ambassador in England, when returned to Italy,
said, "that England is the most detestable country in the world, because
there are to be found twenty different sorts of religion, but only two
kinds of sauces with which to season meat."

There is a point in that questionable jest. Materialism!  curse of our
age! Who can seriously speak about the broad diffusion of happiness in a
country where contentment is measured according to how many kinds of
sauces we can taste?  My people is by far not the most material. We are
not much given to the cupidity of becoming rich. We know the word
"enough." The simplicity of our manners makes us easily contented in our
material relations; we like rather to be free than to be rich; we look
for an honourable profit, that we may have upon what to live; but we
don't like to live for the sake of profit; augmentation of property and
of wealth with us is not the aim of our life--we prefer tranquil,
independent mediocrity to the incessant excitement and incessant toil of
cupidity and gain. Such is the character of my nation; and yet I have
known a countryman of mine who blew out his brains because he had no
means more to eat daily _pates de foi gras_ and drink champagne.
Well, that was no Hungarian character, but, though somewhat
eccentrically, he characterized the leading feature of our century.

Indeed, are your richest money-kings happier than Fabricius was, when he
preferred his seven acres of land, worked by his own hands, to the
treasures of an empire? Are the ladies of to-day, adorned with all the
gorgeous splendour of wealth, of jewels, and of art, happier than those
ladies of ancient Rome have been, to whom it was forbidden to wear silk
and jewelry, or drive in a carriage through the streets of Rome? Are the
ladies of to-day happier in their splendid parlours, than the Portias
and the Cornelias have been in the homely retirement of their modest
nurseries? Nay; all that boundless thirst of wealth, which is the ruling
spirit of our age, and the moving power of enterprising energy, all this
hunting after treasures, and all its happiest results, have they made
men nobler, better, and happier? Have they improved their soul, or even
their body and their health, at least so much that the richest of men
could eat and digest two dinners instead of one? Or has the insatiable
thirst of material gain originated a purer patriotism? has it made
mankind more devoted to their country, more ready to sacrifice for
public interest? If that were the case, then I would gladly confess the
error of my doubts, and take the pretended larger amount of happiness
for a guarantee of the future of the commonwealth. But, ladies and
gentlemen! a single word--the manner in which we use it, distorting its
original meaning, often characterizes a whole century. You all know the
word "_idiot_;" almost every living language has adopted it, and
all languages attach to it the idea that an "idiot" is a poor, ignorant,
useless wretch, nearly insane. Well, "idiot" is a word of Greek
extraction, and meant with the Greek a man who cared nothing for the
public interest, but was all devoted to the selfish pursuit of private
profit, whatever might have been its results to the community. Oh! what
an immense, what a deplorable change must have occurred in the character
of Humanity, till unconsciously we came to the point, that by what name
the ancient Greeks would have styled those European money-kings, who,
for a miserable profit, administer to the unrelenting despots their
eternal loans, to oppress nations with, we now apply that very name to
the wretched creatures incapable to do any thing for themselves. We bear
compassion for the idiots of to-day, but the modern editions of Greek
idiotism, though loaded with the bloody scars of a hundred thousand
orphans, and with the curse of millions, stand high in honour, and go
on, proudly glorying in their criminal idiotism, heaping up the gold of
the world.

But I may be answered, after all, though our age be not so virtuous, and
though the large accumulation in wealth has in reality not made mankind
happier; still, it cannot be denied, you are in a prosperous condition,
and prosperity is a solid basis of your country's future. Industry,
navigation, commerce, have so much developed, they have formed so many
ties by which every citizen is linked to his country's fate, that your
own material interest is a security to your country's future.

In loving your own selves you love your country, and in loving your
country you love your own selves. This community of public and private
interest will make you avoid the stumbling-block over which others fell.
Prosperity is, of course, a great benefit; it is one of the aims of
human society; but when prosperity becomes too material, it does not
always guarantee the future. Paradoxical as it may appear, too much
prosperity is often dangerous, and some national misfortune is now and
then a good preservative of prosperity. For great prosperity makes
nations careless of their future; seeing no immediate danger, they
believe no danger possible; and then when a danger comes, either by
sudden chance or by the slow accumulation of noxious elements, then,
frightened by the idea that in meeting the danger their private property
might be injured or lost, selfishness often prevails over patriotism,
and men become ready to submit to arrogant pretensions, and compromise
with exigencies at the price of principles, and republics flatter
despots, and freemen covet the friendship and indulgence of tyrants,
only that things may go on just as they go, though millions weep and
nations groan; but still, things should go on just as they go, because
every change may claim a sacrifice, or affect our thriving private
interest. Such is often the effect of too great, of too secure
prosperity. Therefore, prosperity alone affords yet no security.

You remember the tale of Polycrates. He was the happiest of men; good
luck attended every one of his steps; success crowned all he undertook,
and a friend thus spoke to him: "Thou art too happy for thy happiness to
last. Appease the anger of the Eumenides by a voluntary sacrifice, or
deprive thyself of what thou most valuest among all that thou
possessest." Polycrates obeyed, and drew from his finger a precious
jewel, of immense value, dear to his heart, and threw it into the sea.
Soon after a fish was brought to his house, and his cook found the
precious ring in the belly of the fish; but the friend who advised him
hastened to flee from the house, and shook the dust of its threshold
from his shoes, because he feared a great mischief must fall upon that
too prosperous house. There is a deep meaning in that tale of
Polycrates.

Machiavel says, that it is now and then necessary to recall the
constituting essential principles to the memory of nations. And who is
charged by Providence with this task? Misfortune!  It was the battles of
Cannae and of Thrasymene which recalled the Romans to the love of their
fatherland; nations had till now, about such things, no other teacher
than misfortune. They should choose to have a less afflicting one. They
can have it. To point this out will be the final object of my remarks,
but so much is certain, that prosperity alone is yet no security for the
future, even of the happiest commonwealth. Those ancient nations have
been also prosperous. They were industrious, as your nation is; their
land has been covered with cities and villages, well-cultivated fields,
blessed with the richest crops, and crowded with countless herds spread
over immense territories, furrowed with artificial roads; their
flourishing cities swarmed with artists, and merchants, and workmen, and
pilots, and sailors, like as New York does. Their busy labourers built
gigantic water-works, digged endless canals, and carried distant waters
through the sands of the desert; their mighty, energetic spirit built
large and secure harbours, dried the marshy lakes, covered the sea with
vessels, the land with living beings, and spread a creation of life and
movement along the earth. Their commerce was broad as the known world.
Tyre exchanged its purple for the silk of Serica; Cashmere's soft
shawls, to-day yet a luxury of the wealthiest, the diamonds of Golconda,
the gorgeous carpets of Lydia, the gold of Ophir and Saba, the aromatic
spices and jewels of Ceylon, and the pearls and perfumes of Arabia, the
myrrh, silver, gold dust, and ivory of Africa, as well as the amber of
the Baltic and the tin of Thule, appeared alike in their commerce,
raising them in turn to the dominion of the world, and undoing them by
too careless prosperity. The manner and the shape of one or the other
art, of one or other industry, has changed; the steam-engine has
replaced the rowing-bench, and cannon replaced the catapult; but, as a
whole, even your country, which you are proud to hear styled "the living
wonder of the world"--yes, even your country in the New World, and
England in the Old--England, that gigantic workshop of industry,
surrounded with a beautiful evergreen garden; yes, all the dominions of
the Anglo-Saxon race, can claim no higher praise of its prosperity, than
when we say, that you have reproduced the grandeur of those ancient
nations, and nearly equal their prosperity. And what has become of them?
A sad skeleton. What remains of their riches, of their splendour, and
of their vast dominions? An obscure recollection; a vain memory. Thus
fall empires; thus vanish nations, which have no better guardians than
their prosperity. But "we have," will you say, "we have a better
guardian--our freedom, our republican institutions; our confederation
uniting so many glorious stars into one mighty galaxy--these are the
ramparts of our present, these our future security."

Well, it would ill become me to investigate if there be nothing "rotten
in the state of Denmark," and certainly I am not the man who could feel
inclined to undervalue the divine power of liberty; to underrate the
value of your democratic institutions, and the vitality of your glorious
Union. It is to them I look in the solitary hours of meditation, and
when, overwhelmed with the cares of the patriot, my soul is groaning
under nameless woes, it is your freedom's sunny light which dispels the
gloomy darkness of despondency; here is the source whence the
inspiration of hope is flowing to the mourning world, that down-trodden
millions at the bottom of their desolation still retain a melancholy
smile upon their lips, and still retain a voice in their bleeding chest,
to thank the Almighty God that the golden thread of freedom is not yet
lost on earth. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, all this I feel, and all this
I know, reflecting upon your freedom, your institutions, and your Union;
but casting back my look into the mirror of the past, there I see upon
mouldering ground, written with warning letters, the dreadful truth,
that all this has nothing new; all this has been; and all this has never
yet been proved sufficient security. Freedom is the fairest gift of
Heaven; but it is not the security of itself. Democracy is the
embodiment of freedom, which in itself is but a principle. But what is
the security of democracy? And if you answer, "The Union is;" then I
ask, "And where is the security of the Union?" Yes, ladies and
gentlemen, Freedom is no new word. It is as old as the world. Despotism
is new, but Freedom not. And yet it has never yet proved a charter to
the security of nations. Republic is no new word. It is as old as the
word "Society." Before Rome itself, republics absorbed the world. There
were in all Europe, Africa and Asia Minor, but republics to be found,
and many among them democratic. Men had to wander to far Persia if they
would have desired to know what sort of thing a monarch is. And all they
have perished; the small ones by foreign power, the large ones by
domestic vice. And union, and confederacy, the association of
societies--a confederate republic of republics, is also no new
invention. Greece has known it and flourished by it, for a while. Rome
has known it; by such associations she attacked the world. The world has
known them; with them it defended itself against Rome. The so-called
Barbarians of Europe, beyond the Danube and the Rhine, have known it; it
was by a confederacy of union that they resisted the ambitious mistress
of the world. Your own country, America, has known it; the traditionary
history of the Romans of the West, of those six Indian Nations, bears
the records of it, out of an older time than your ancestors settled in
this land; the wise man of the Onondaga Nation has exercised it long
before your country's legislators built upon that basis your independent
home. And still it proved in itself alone no security to all those
nations who have known it before you. Your own fathers have seen the
last of the Mohawks burying his bloody tomahawk in the namesake flood,
and have listened to the majestic words of Logan, spoken with the
dignity of an Aemilius, that there exists no living being on earth in
the veins of whom one drop of the blood of his race did flow. Well, had
history nothing else to teach us, than that all what the wisdom of man
did conceive, and all that his energy has executed through the
innumerable days of the past, and all that we take to be glorious in
nations and happy to men, cannot so much do as to ensure a future even
to such a flourishing commonwealth as yours; then weaker hearts may well
ask, What good is it to warn us of a fatality which we cannot escape;
what good is it to hold up the mournful monuments of a national
mortality to sadden our heart, if all that is human must share that
common doom? Let us do as we can, and so far as we can, and let the
future bring what it may. But that would be the speech of one having no
faith in the all-watching Eye, and regarding the eternal laws of the
universe not as an emanation of a bountiful Providence, but of a blind
fatality, which plays at hazard with the destinies of men. I never will
share such blasphemy. Misfortune came over me, and came over my house,
and came over my guiltless nation; still I never have lost my trust in
the Father of all. I have lived the days when the people of my oppressed
country went along weeping over the immense misfortune that they cannot
pray, seeing the downfall of the most just cause and the outrageous
triumph of the most criminal of all crimes on earth; and they went along
not able to pray, and weeping that they are not able to pray. I
shuddered at the terrible tidings in the desolation of my exile; but I
could pray, and sent the consolation home, that I do not despair; that I
believe in God, and trust to His bountiful providence, and ask them who
of them dares despair when I do not? I was in exile, as I am now, but
arrogant despots were debating about my blood, my infant children in
prison, my wife, the faithful companion of my sorrows and my cares,
hunted like a noble deer, and my sisters in the tyrant's fangs, red with
the blood of my nation, and the heart of my aged mother breaking, about
the shattered fortunes of her house, and all of them at last homeless
wanderers, cast to the winds, like the yellow leaves of a fallen tree;
and my fatherland, my dear, beloved fatherland, half murdered, half in
chains, and humanity nearly all oppressed, and those who are not yet
oppressed looking with compassion at our sad fate, but taking it for
wise policy not to help, and the sky of freedom dark on our horizon, and
darkening fast over all, and nowhere a ray of hope; a lustre of
consolation nowhere; and still I did not despair; and my faith to God,
my trust to Providence has spread over my down-trodden land.

I therefore, who do not despair of my own country's future, though it be
overwhelmed with misfortunes, I certainly have an unwavering faith in
the destinies of Humanity; and though the mournful example of so many
fallen nations instructs us, that neither the diffusion of knowledge,
nor the progress of industry, neither prosperity, nor power, nay, not
even freedom itself, can secure a future to nations, still I say there
is one thing which can secure it; there is one law, the obedience to
which would prove a rock upon which the freedom and happiness of nations
may rest sure to the end of their days. And that law, ladies and
gentlemen, is the law proclaimed by our Saviour; that rock is the
unperverted religion of Christ. But while the consolation of this
sublime truth falls meekly upon my soul like as the moonlight falls upon
the smooth sea, I humbly claim your forbearance, ladies and gentlemen; I
claim it in the name of the Almighty Lord, to hear from my lips a
mournful truth. It may displease you; it may offend; but still truth is
truth. Offended vanity may blame me; power may frown at me, and pride
may call my boldness arrogant, but still truth is truth, and I, bold in
my unpretending humility, will proclaim that truth; I will proclaim it
from land to land and from sea to sea; I will proclaim it with the faith
of the martyrs of old, till the seed of my word falls upon the
consciences of men. Let come what come may, I say with Luther: God help
me, I cannot otherwise. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the law of our
Saviour, the religion of Christ, can secure a happy future to nations.
But, alas! there is yet no Christian people on earth--not a single one
among all. I have spoken the word. It is harsh, but true. Nearly two
thousand years have passed since Christ has proclaimed the eternal
decree of God, to which the happiness of mankind is bound, and has
sanctified it with His own blood, and still there is not one single
nation on earth which would have enacted into its law-book that eternal
decree. Men believe in the mysteries of religion, according to the creed
of their church; they go to church, and they pray and give alms to the
poor, and drop the balm of consolation into the wounds of the afflicted,
and believe they do all that the Lord commanded to do, and believe they
are Christians. No! Some few may be, but their nation is not--their
country is not; the era of Christianity has yet to come, and when it
comes, then, only then, will be the future of nations sure. Far be it
from me to misapprehend the immense benefit which Christian religion,
such as it already is, has operated in mankind's history. It has
influenced the private character of men, and the social condition of
millions; it was the nurse of a new civilization, and softening the
manners and morals of men, its influence has been felt even in the worst
quarter of history--in war. The continual massacres of the Greek and
Roman kings and chiefs, and the extermination of nations by them--the
all-devastating warfare of the Timurs and Gengis Khans--are in general
not more to be met with; only my own dear fatherland was doomed to
experience once more the cruelties of the Timurs and Gengis Khans out of
the sacrilegious hands of the dynasty of Austria, which calumniates
Christianity by calling itself Christian. But though that beneficial
influence of Christianity we have cheerfully to acknowledge, yet it is
still not to be disputed that the law of Christ does yet nowhere rule
the Christian world.

Montesquieu himself, whom nobody could charge to be partial for
republics, avows that despotism is incompatible with the Christian
religion, because the Christian religion commands meekness, and
despotism claims arbitrary power to the whims and passions of a frail
mortal; and still it is more than 1,500 years since the Christian
religion became dominant, and through that long period despotism has
been pre-eminently dominant; you can scarcely show one single truly
democratic republic of any power which had subsisted but for a hundred
years, exercising any influence upon the condition of the world.
Constantine, raising the Christian religion to Rome's imperial throne,
did not restore the Romans to their primitive virtues. Constantinople
became the sewer of vice; Christian worship did not change the despotic
habits of Kings. The Tituses, the Trajans, the Antonines, appeared
seldom on Christian thrones; on the contrary, mankind has seen, in the
name of religion, lighted the piles of persecution, and the blazing
torches of intolerance; the earth overspread with corpses of the million
victims of fanaticism; the fields watered with blood; the cities wrapped
in flames, and empires ravaged with unrelenting rage. Why? Is it
Christian religion which caused these deplorable facts, branding the
brow of partly degraded, partly outraged Humanity? No. It was precisely
the contrary; the fact that the religion of Christ never yet was
practically taken for an all-overruling law, the obedience to which,
outweighing every other consideration, would have directed the policy of
nations--that fact is the source of evil, whence the oppression of
millions has overflowed the earth, and which makes the future of the
proudest, of the freest nation, to be like a house built upon sand.

Every religion has two parts. One is the dogmatical, the part of
worship; the other is the moral part.

The first, the dogmatic part, belonging to those mysterious regions
which the arm of human understanding cannot reach, because they belong
to the dominion of belief, and that begins where the dominion of
knowledge ends--that part of religion, therefore, the dogmatic one,
should be left to every man to settle between God and his own
conscience. It is a sacred field, whereon worldly power never should
dare to trespass, because there it has no power to enforce its will.
Force can murder; it can make liars and hypocrites, but no violence on
earth can force a man to believe what he does not believe. Yet the
other part of religion, the moral part, is quite different. That
teaches duties toward ourselves and toward our fellow-men. It can be,
therefore, not indifferent to the human family: it can be not
indifferent to whatever community, if those duties be fulfilled or not,
and no nation can, with full right, claim the title of a Christian
nation, no government the title of a Christian government, which is not
founded upon the basis of Christian morality, and which takes it not for
an all-overruling law to fulfil the moral duties ordered by the religion
of Christ toward men and nations, who are but the community of men, and
toward mankind, which is the community of nations. Now, look to those
dread pages of history, stained with the blood of millions, spilt under
the blasphemous pretext of religion; was it the intent to vindicate the
rights, and enforce the duties of Christian morality, which raised the
hand of nation against nation, of government against government? No: it
was the fanaticism of creed, and the fury of dogmatism. Nations and
governments rose to propagate their manner to worship God, and their own
mode to believe the inscrutable mysteries of eternity; but nobody has
yet raised a finger to punish the sacrilegious violation of the moral
laws of Christ, nobody ever stirred to claim the fulfilment of the
duties of Christian morality toward nations. There is much speaking
about the separation of Church and State, and yet, on close examination,
we shall see that there was, and there is, scarcely one single
government entirely free from the direct or indirect influence of one or
other religious denominations; scarcely one which would not at least
bear a predilection, if not countenance with favour, one or another
creed--but creed, and always creed. The mysteries of dogmatism, and the
manner of worship, enter into these considerations; they enter even into
the politics, and turn the scales of hatred and affection; but certainly
there is not one single nation, not one single government, the policy of
which would ever have been regulated by that law of morality which our
Saviour has promulgated as the eternal law of God, which shall be obeyed
in all the relations of men to men. But you say, of the direct or
indirect amalgamation of Church and State, proved to be dangerous to
nations in Christian and for Christian times, because it affected the
individual rights of men, and among them, the dearest of all, the
liberty of conscience and the freedom of thought. Well, of this danger,
at least, the future of your country is free; because here, at least, in
this, your happy land, religious liberty exists. Your institutions left
no power to your government to interfere with the religion of your
citizens. Here every man is free to worship God as he chooses to do.

And that is true, and it is a great glory of your country that it is
true. It is a fact which entitles to the hope that your nation will
revive the law of Christ, even on earth. However, the guarantee which
your Constitution affords to religious liberty is but a negative part of
a Christian government. There are, besides that, positive duties to be
fulfilled. He who does no violence to the conscience of man, has but the
negative merit of a man doing no wrong; but as he who does not murder,
does not steal, and does not covet what his neighbour's is, but by not
stealing, not murdering, not coveting what our neighbour's is, we did
yet no positive good; a man who does not murder has not yet occasion to
the title of virtuous man. And here is precisely the infinite merit of
the Christian religion. While Moses, in the name of the Almighty God,
ordered but negative degrees toward fellow-men, the Christian religion
commands positive virtue. Its divine injunctions are not performed by
not doing wrong; it desires us to do good. The doctrine of Jesus Christ
is sublime in its majestic simplicity. "Thou shalt love God above all,
and love thy neighbour as thou lovest thyself."

This sublime doctrine is the religion of love. It is the religion of
charity. "Though I speak with the tongues of angels, and have not
charity, I am become as sounding brass and tinkling cymbals. Though I
have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all
knowledge, and have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and
have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to
feed the poor, and give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it
profiteth me nothing." Thus speaks the Lord, and thus speaking He gives
the law, "Do unto others as thou desirest others to do unto thee." Now,
in the name of Him who gave this law to humanity, to build up the
eternal bliss and temporal happiness of mankind, in the name of that
Eternal Legislator, I ask, is in that _charity_, in that
fundamental law of Christianity, any limit of distinction drawn in man
in his personal, and man in his national capacity? Is it but a law for a
man where he is alone, and can do but little good? Is it no law more
where two are together, and can do more good? No law more when millions
are together? Am I in my personal adversities; is my aged mother in her
helpless desolation; are my homeless sisters whom you feed to-day, that
they may work to-morrow; are we your neighbours, unto whom you do as you
would others in a similar position do unto yourself? And is every one of
my down-trodden people a neighbour to every one of you? but all my
people collectively, is it _not_ a neighbour to you? And is my
nation not a neighbour to your nation? Is my down-trodden land not a
neighbour to your down-trodden land? Oh! my God, men speak of the
Christian religion and style themselves Christians, and yet make a
distinction between virtue in private life and virtue in public life; as
if the divine law of Charity would have been given only for certain
small relations, and not for all the relations between men and men.

"There he is again, with his eternal complaints about his country's
wrongs;" may perhaps somebody remark: "This is an assembly of charity,
assembled to ease his private woes of family; and there he is again
speaking of his country's wrongs, and alluding to our foreign policy,
about which he knows our views to be divided." Thus I may be charged.

My "private family woes!" But all my woes and all the woes of my family,
are concentrated in the unwarrantable oppression of my fatherland. You
are an assembly of charity, it is true, and the Almighty may requite you
for it; but being a charitable assembly, can you blame me that the
filial and fraternal devotion of my heart, in taking with gratitude the
balm of consolation which your charity pours into the bleeding wounds of
my family, looks around to heal those wounds, the torturing pains of
which you ease, but which cannot be cured but by justice and charity
done to my fatherland. Shall this sad heart of mine be contented by
leaving to my homeless mother and sisters the means to have their bread
by honest labour, their daily bread salted with the bitter tears of
exile; and shall I not care to leave them the hope that their misfortune
will have an end; that they will see again their beloved home; that they
will see it independent and free, and live where their fathers lived,
and sleep the tranquil sleep of death in that soil with which the ashes
of their fathers mingle? Shall I not care to give the consolation to my
aged mother, that when her soon departing soul, crowned with the garland
of martyrdom, looks down from the home of the blessed, the united joy of
the heavens will thrill through her immortal spirit, seeing her dear,
dear Hungary free?  Your views are divided on the subject, it may be;
but can your views be divided upon the subject that it is the command of
God to love your neighbours as you love yourselves? That it is the duty
of Christians, that it is the fundamental principle of the Christian
religion, to do unto others as you desire others to do unto you? And if
there is, if there can be no difference of opinion in regard to the
principle; if no one in this vast assembly--whatever be the platform of
his party--ever would disclaim this principle, will any one blame me
that in the name of Christ I am bold to claim the application of that
principle? I should not speak of politics! Well, I have spoken of
Christianity. Your politics either agree with the Law of Christ, or they
do not agree with it. If they don't agree, then your politics are not
Christian; and if they agree, then I cause no division among you.

And I shall not speak of my people's wrongs! Oh! my people--thou heart
of my heart, thou life of my life--to thee are bent the thoughts of my
mind, and they will remain bent to thee, though all the world may frown.
To thee are pledged all the affections of my heart, and they will be
pledged to thee as long as one drop of blood throbs within this heart.
Thine are the cares of my waking hours; thine are the dreams of my
restless sleep. Shall I forget thee, but for a moment!  Never! Never!
Cursed be the moment, and cursed be I in that moment, in which thou
wouldst be forgotten by me!

Thou art oppressed, O my fatherland! because the principles of
Christianity have not been executed in practice; because the duties of
Christianity have not been fulfilled; because the precepts of
Christianity have not been obeyed; because the law of Christianity did
not control the policy of nations; because there are many impious
governments to offend the law of Christ, but there was none to do the
duties commanded by Christ.

Thou art fallen, O my country, because Christianity has yet to come; but
it is not yet come--nowhere! Nowhere on earth! And with the sharp eye of
misfortune piercing the dark veil of the future, and with the tongue of
Cassandria relating what I see, I cry it out to high Heaven, and shout
it out to the Earth--"Nations, proud of your momentary power; proud of
your freedom; proud of your prosperity--your power is vain, your freedom
is vain, your industry, your wealth, your prosperity are vain; all these
will not save you from sharing the mournful fate of those old nations,
not less powerful than you, not less free, not less prosperous than
you--and still fallen, as you yourself will fall--all vanished as you
will vanish, like a bubble thrown up from the deep!  There is only the
law of Christ, there are only the duties of Christianity, which can
secure your future, by securing at the same time humanity."

Duties must be fulfilled, else they are an idle word. And who would
dispute that there is a positive duty in that law, "Love thy neighbour
as thou lovest thyself. Do unto others as thou wouldst that others do
unto thee." Now, if there are duties in that law comprised, who shall
execute them, if free and powerful nations do not execute them? No
government can meddle with the private relations of its millions of
citizens so much as to enforce the positive virtue of Christian charity,
in the thousand-fold complications of private life. That will be
impossible; and our Saviour did not teach impossibilities. By
commanding charity toward fellow-men in human relations, He commanded it
also to governments. It is in their laws toward their own citizens; it
is in their policy toward other nations, that governments and nations
can fulfil those duties of Christianity; and what they can, that they
should. How could governments hope to see their own citizens and other
nations observing toward them the positive duties of Christian morality,
when they themselves do not observe them against others; when oppressed
nations, the victims, not of their own faults, but of the grossest
violation of the law of Christ, look in vain around to find out a nation
among Christian nations, and a government among Christian governments,
doing unto them, in the hour of their supreme need, as the Saviour said
that it is duty to do unto others in every case?

Yes, gentlemen, as long as the principles of Christian morality are not
carried up into the international relations--as long as the fragile
wisdom of political exigencies overrules the doctrines of Christ, there
is no freedom on earth firm, and the future of no nation sure. But let a
powerful nation like yours raise Christian morality into its public
conduct, that nation will have a future against which the very gates of
hell itself will never prevail. The morality of its policy will react
upon the morality of its individuals, and preserve it from domestic
vice, which, without that prop, ever yet has attended too much
prosperity, and ever yet was followed by a dreadful fall. The morality
of its policy will support justice and freedom on earth, and thus
augmenting the number of free nations, all acting upon the same
principle, its very future will be placed under the guarantee of them
all, and preserve it from foreign danger--which is better to prevent
than to repel. And its future will be placed under the guarantee of the
Almighty himself, who, true to His eternal decrees, proved through the
downfall of so many mighty nations, that He always punished the fathers
in the coming generations; but alike bountiful as just, will not and
cannot forsake those to whom He gave power to carry out His laws on
earth, and who willingly answered His divine call. Power in itself never
yet was sure. It is right which makes power firm; and it is community
which makes right secure. The task of PETER'S apostolate is
accomplished--the Churches are founded in the Christian world. The task
of PAUL'S apostolate is accomplished--the abuses of fanaticism and
intolerance are redressed. But the task of him whom the Saviour most
loved, is not yet accomplished. The gospel of charity rules not yet the
Christian world; and without charity, Christianity, you know, is "but
sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal."

Oh! Charity, thou fairest gift of Heaven! thou family link between
nations; thou rock of their security; thou deliverer of the oppressed;
when comes thy realm? Where is the man whom the Lord has chosen to
establish thy realm?  Who is the man whom the Lord has chosen to realize
the religion, the tenets of which the most beloved disciple of the
Saviour has recorded from his divine lips? who is the man to reform, not
Christian creeds, but Christian morality? Man!  No; that is no task for
a man, but for a nation. Man may teach a doctrine; but that doctrine of
Charity is taught, and taught with such sublime simplicity, that no
sectarist yet has disputed its truth. Historians have been quarrelling
about mysteries, and lost empires through their disputes. The Greeks
were controversially disputing whether the Holy Ghost proceeds from the
Father alone, or from the Father and Son; and Mahomet battered the walls
of Byzantium, they heard it not; he wrested the cross from Santa Sophia;
they saw it not, till the cimeter of the Turk stopped the rage of
quarrel with the blow of death. In other quarters they went on disputing
and deciding with mutual anathemas the question of transfiguration and
many other mysteries, which, being mysteries, constitute the private
dominion of belief; but the doctrine of charity none of them disputes;
there they all agree; nay, in the idle times of scholastical subtility,
they have been quarrelling about the most extravagant fancies of a
scorched imagination. Mighty folios have been written about the problem,
how many angels could dance upon the top of a needle without touching
each other? The folly of subtility went so far as to profane the sacred
name of God, by disputing if He, being omnipotent, has the power to sin?
If, in the holy wafer, He be present dressed or undressed?  If the
Saviour would have chosen the incarnation in the shape of a gourd,
instead of a man, how would he have preached, how acted miracles, and
how had been crucified? And when they went to the theme of investigating
if it was a whip or a lash with which the angels have whipped St. Jerome
for trying to imitate in his writings the pagan Cicero, it was but after
centuries that Abbot Cartaut dared to write that if St. Jerome was
whipped at all, he was whipped for having _badly_ imitated Cicero.
Still, the doctrine of Christian charity is so sublime in its
simplicity, that not even the subtility of scholasticism dared ever to
profane it by any controversy, and still that sublime doctrine is not
executed, and the religion of charity not realized yet. The task of this
glorious progress is only to be done by a free and powerful nation,
because it is a task of action, and not of teaching. Individual man can
but execute it in the narrow compass of the small relations of private
life; it is only the power of a nation which can raise it to become a
ruling law on earth; and before this is done, the triumph of
Christianity is not arrived--and without that triumph, the freedom and
prosperity even of the mightiest nation is not for a moment safe from
internal decay, or from foreign violence.

Which is the nation to achieve that triumph of Christianity by
protecting justice out of charity? Which shall do it, if not yours? Whom
the Lord has blessed above all, from whom He much expects, because He
has given her much.

Ye Ministers of the Gospel, who devote your lives to expound the eternal
truths of the book of life, remember my humble words, and remind those
who, with pious hearts, listen to your sacred words, that half virtue is
no virtue at all, and that there is no difference in the duties of
charity between public and private life.

Ye Missionaries, who devote your lives to the propagation of
Christianity, before you embark for the dangers of far, inhospitable
shores, remind those whom you leave, that the example of a nation
exercising right and justice on earth by charity, would be the mightiest
propagandism of Christian religion.

Ye Patriots, loving your country's future, and anxious about her
security, remember the admonitions of history--remember that the
freedom, the power, and the prosperity in which your country glories, is
no new apparition on earth; others also had it, and yet they are gone.
The prudence with which your forefathers have founded this commonwealth,
the courage with which you develop it, other nations also have shown,
and still they are gone.

And ye ladies; ye fairest incarnation of the spirit of love, which
vivifies the universe, remember my words. The heart of man is given into
your tender hands. You mould it in its infancy. You imprint the lasting
mark of character upon man's brow, You ennoble his youth; you soften the
harshness of his manhood; you are the guardian angels of his hoary age.
All your vocation is love, and your life is charity. The religion of
charity wants your apostolate, and requires your aid. It is to you I
appeal, and leave the sublime topic of my humble reflections to the
meditations of your Christian hearts.

And thus, my task of to-day is done. Man shall earn the means of life by
the sweat of his brow. Thus shall my family. Your charity of to-day has
opened the way to it. The school which my mother, if God spares her
life, will superintend, and in which two of my sisters will teach, and
the humble farm which my third sister and her family shall work, will be
the gift of your charity to-day.

A stony weight of cares is removed from my breast. Oh!  be blessed for
it, be thanked for it, in the name of them all who have lost every
thing, but not their trust to God, and not the benefit of being able to
work. My country will forgive me that I have taken from her the time of
one day's work--to give bread to my aged mother and to my homeless
sisters, the poor victims of unrelenting tyranny. Returning to Europe, I
may find my own little children in a condition that again the father
will have to take the spade or the pen into his hand to give them bread.

And my fatherland will again forgive me, that that time is taken from
her. That is all what I take from her; nothing else of what is given, or
what belongs to her. And the day's work which I take from my country, I
will restore it by a night's labour. To-day, the son and the brother has
done his task; you have requited his labour by a generous charity; the
son and brother thanks you for it, and the patriot, to resume his task,
bids you a hearty, warm farewell.



APPENDICES TO KOSSUTH'S SPEECHES.


Appendix I.--_Extracts from a Letter to the 'Daily News,' dated
January 17th, 1852_, by Sabbas Vucovics, _late Minister of Justice
in Hungary, in answer to_ Count Casimir Bathyanyi.

So early as the commencement of the Serbian insurrection, the popular
suspicion gained ground that the insurrection had been stirred up by the
secret intrigues of the court, and confidence in the truth and good
faith of the King disappeared accordingly. The nation, however, still
indulged the hope that a weak King, though betrayed into ambiguous
proceeding, would not permit himself to be carried away into a flagrant
breach of the constitution. This was the time when the King, in the
opinion of the people, was kept distinct from the Camarilla. But when
the Austrian ministry openly attempted to deprive Hungary of its
ministries of war and finance, when the base game of the degradation and
restoration of Jellachich was played, and when the Hungarian army,
fighting in the name of the King against the insurrections of the
Serbians and Croats, became aware that the balls of that same King
thinned their ranks from the hostile camp, the nation arrived at the
universal conviction that the Hapsburg dynasty were only pursuing their
old absolute tendencies, and that they wanted to force Hungary into
self-defence, in order, under the pretext of rebellion, to deprive it of
all its constitutional rights and guarantees. It needs no proof that a
loud indignation, and even hatred of the dynasty, spread far and wide in
the country, in consequence of these intrigues and proceedings. In spite
of this natural excitement, and of the war itself, carried on by the
nation with an increasing enthusiasm of hatred of the House of Austria,
no party in the country urged a declaration of _decheance_ or
forfeiture against the dynasty. Even all the faithless acts recorded in
the letter of Count Casimir Bathyanyi, and the cruelties committed in
the name of that court in Lower Hungary and Transylvania, did not turn
the scales in this direction. The Pragmatic Sanction was still
considered as good in law; and the many precedents of our history, when
the nation and its kings went to war with each other, and ultimately
settled their disputes by solemn pacts confirming the constitution of
the land, conveyed the notion that a reconciliation was even then not
impossible.

Without these precedents and reminiscences of history, and only guided
by the universal feeling of the country against the dynasty, the
Hungarian parliament would have pronounced the forfeiture of the House
of Austria so far back as October, 1848, when Jellachich was appointed
absolute plenipotentiary of the King in Hungary, with discretionary
power of life and death; or in December, 1848, when in Olmuetz the
succession of the Hungarian throne was changed and determined, without
the concurrence of the nation through the Diet. To force the nation and
its parliament to the last step in this momentous crisis, the court
itself broke the dynastic tie.

This was done by the imposition of the constitution of the 4th of March,
1849, by which the House of Austria itself annihilated the Pragmatic
Sanction, treating free and independent Hungary with the arrogance of a
conqueror. The nation, more irritated by this act than by any preceding
event, saw that the hour was come, beyond which further to defer the
dethronement of the dynasty would be alike incompatible with the laws
and the honour of Hungary. _All the channels of public opinion, the
public press, the popular meetings, and even the head quarters of the
army, resounded with emphatic declarations of the impossibility of
reconciliation with the dynasty. The garrison of Komorn_--the most
important fortress of the country--_petitioned the government for the
declaration of forfeiture_. Most assuredly no party manoeuvres were
wanted in this universal excitement, caused by the constitution of the
4th of March, to carry a parliamentary resolution of forfeiture.

When the proposition of forfeiture was made on the 14th of April, 1849,
in the House of Representatives, only eight members voted against it, in
a house never attended by less than from 220 to 240 members. The House
of Magnates adopted this resolution without opposition. The press of all
shades of opinion, though enjoying the most unlimited freedom, also
declared for the resolution of the Diet. It was moreover received
throughout the whole country with patriotic assent and determination. If
there was a party opposed to the forfeiture, how came it that it did not
hold it to be a duty to declare its opposition in the Diet or through
the press?

When the intelligence of the unfortunate battle of Temeswar reached the
Governor Kossuth, who was then in the fortress of Arad, he immediately
summoned a council of the ministry to deliberate on measures of public
safety still possible. At this council, in which all the ministers took
part, it was resolved to invest Goergei, who stood alone at the head of
an unconquered army, with full powers for negotiating a peace. It was,
moreover, resolved to dissolve the government, which could not be
carried on in any fixed place of safety under the existing
circumstances. We did not, however, insert in the instrument investing
Goergei with full power (and despatched to him immediately) the
abdication of the government. On the same day--it was the 11th of
August, 1849--Goergei declared in the presence of some of the ministers
who had assembled at Csanyi's (who was one of them), that he could not
accept the commission because the resignation of the government was not
contained in it, while he was sure that the enemy would enter into no
negotiations with him, so long as Kossuth and his ministry were thought
to be behind him. The ministers who were present, after a short
deliberation, considering it to be their duty not to stand in the way of
the negotiation which had been resolved on as necessary, accordingly
sent their resignation to the governor, _whom they requested to resign
as well_. The governor soon after sent his abdication for
countersignature by these members of the ministry, and accordingly the
government formally dissolved itself, after having done so _de
facto_ in the previous council of ministers. I must mention the
circumstance that _in the governor's instrument of abdication
conditions were proscribed to Goergei, which were not inserted in the
original instrument of authorization, issued by the full council_.
These conditions were, the preservation of the nationality and the
autonomy of Hungary. Four ministers took part in this resignation of the
governor, as above stated, Aulich, Csanyi, Horvath, and I. Two of the
ministers, Szemere and [Casimir] Bathyanyi, were absent when the formal
declaration of the abdication was discussed at Csanyi's residence. I
have not mentioned among the ministers our late colleague, the finance
minister Dushek, because his treachery, which was afterwards brought to
light, excludes him from our ranks. From all these circumstances, it
will be manifest how unjust the reproaches of Count Casimir Bathyanyi
are, that no new cabinet council was held.

It is notorious that Goergei abused the full powers with which he was
entrusted, instead of procuring the preservation of Hungary by a
negotiation for peace, by an ignominious treachery to his native
country. From that very moment the power conferred on him by the
above-mentioned instrument, and the conditional abdication of the
government, consequently and legally reverted to him who had invested
him with it. To deny this, would be to recognize in the foreign rule
which crushed Hungary, in consequence of that treachery, legitimate
right and lawful power.

I, however, perfectly agree with the noble count, that the nation, once
more restored to its constitutional existence, and free from foreign
yoke, will have the unlimited right to dispose of all the affairs of the
country, and consequently of the executive power. To assert a contrary
opinion would be a crime against the nation. Not over a liberated nation
(which, of course, would have the right to choose whom it will), but
over a nation crushed by an usurping power, the claims of Kossuth, as
elected Governor of Hungary, are, I submit, lawful.

Republican principles have not been proclaimed at Kossuth's dictation as
the aim of our national exertions. They were, during our struggle, the
well-ascertained and deep-rooted sentiment of the country, and Kossuth
could only faithfully represent the proclaimed will and feeling of the
nation, by inscribing them on his banner. Immediately after the
declaration of independence, all the manifestations of the national will
were unanimous in the desire for a republic. The ministry, which was
nominated by the Governor as a consequence of that legislative act,
declared in both houses of the Diet, that its efforts would be directed
to the establishment of a republic. Both houses joined in this
declaration, and in the government no opposition whatever was manifested
against it. One of the first acts of the new government was to remove
the crown from all national scutcheons, and from the great seal of
Hungary. The press in all its shades developed republican principles.
The new semi-official paper bore the name of _The Republic_. It is
true that the government was only provisional, for the war continued,
and the definite decision of this question depended on unforeseen
circumstances. We should have preferred almost any settlement to the
necessity of a subjection to the Austrian dynasty; and at the price of
emancipation from that detested power, the nation would even have been
prepared, for the sake of aid, to choose a king from another race; but
certainly if it had been the unaided victor in the struggle, never.
Monarchical government would have been for us the resort of expediency.
The government of our wishes and principles was "The Republic."

I do not feel at all convinced, as the noble count asserts, that the
institutions and habits of Hungary are incompatible with a democratic
republic. I find, on the contrary, traits in them which lead me to an
opposite conclusion. The aggregate character of the numerous nobility
which resigned its privileges in the Diet of 1847-48 of its own accord,
and which was in its nature more a democratic than an aristocratic body,
because neither territorial wealth nor rank interfered with or disturbed
the equality of its rights,--the national antipathy to the system of an
upper house, which was considered as a foreign institution, because it
had been introduced under the Austrian dynasty,--the immemorial custom
of periodically electing all officials, and even the judges,--the
detestation in which bureaucracy and all the instruments of
centralization were held in all ages, while the attachment to the
municipal self-government was ineradicable,--the fact that, in
consequence of the laws which had been sanctioned in April, 1848, the
county authorities, formerly only elected from the "nobility," were
democratically reconstituted, and exercised their functions in this form
till the catastrophe of Vilagos, without the slightest collision between
the different classes of society,--the peaceful election of the
representatives of the last Diet conducted almost on the principle of
universal suffrage,--all these facts unmistakeably prove that the germ
of democracy lay in our institutions, and that these could receive a
democratic development without any concussion. Those characteristic
_traits_ of our nation, which have been so often misrepresented as
signs of an aversion to a republic, and which may be more properly
called civic virtues; as, for example, our respect for law, our
antipathy to untried political theories, our attachment to traditional
customs, and our pride in the history of our country, are no obstacles
to, but rather guarantees, and even conditions of a republic, which is
to be national and enduring. It would indeed be an unprecedented event
in history, if staunch royalism could be the characteristic of a country
which, like Hungary, has found in its kings for three hundred years the
inexorable foes of its liberties, and which in that time, for its
defence, had to wage six bloody wars against the dynasty.

As to the criticisms by the noble count of the personal character of
Kossuth, I take leave to assert that a great majority of the Hungarian
nation do not share his opinion. It is not my task to appear as a
personal advocate, and I wish, therefore, to advert only to one point of
his attack, which may seem to be based on facts. The noble count
asserts that Kossuth has attained to power _by doubtful means_. I
am amazed at this assertion, knowing, as I do, that Kossuth was proposed
by Count Louis Bathyanyi, and nominated by the King, with the universal
applause of the nation, to the Ministry of Finance. After the
resignation of the first Hungarian ministry, he was freely and
unanimously elected by the Diet to the Presidency of the Committee of
Defence, and after the declared forfeiture of the dynasty to the
Governorship of the country. I know no more honourable means by which a
man can be raised to power.

S. VUKOVICS,

Late Minister of Justice of Hungary.

_London, January 17, 1852_.

       *       *        *       *        *

Appendix II.--_Extracts from a Letter to the 'Times,' dated December
9th, 1851, by_ Bartholomew Szemere, _late Minister of the Interior
in Hungary; in answer to_ Prince Esterhazy.

I shall now proceed to give a succinct account of what took place from
April 14, when the new acts received the Royal sanction, to December,
1848. You may be assured that I shall conceal nothing that tended to
change the relations between Hungary and Austria.

The Prime Minister was already nominated when Jellachich was raised to
the dignity of Ban of Croatia by a Royal decree which the Premier was
not even asked to countersign. The Hungarian ministers, nevertheless,
for the sake of peace, overlooked this irregular proceeding.

By a decree, dated June 10, 1848, the King made known to all whom it
might concern, that all the troops stationed within the kingdom of
Hungary, whether Hungarians or Austrians, were placed under the orders
of the Hungarian Minister of War, and that all the Hungarian fortresses
were under the jurisdiction of the said Minister. Yet at this very time
officers of the Imperial and Royal army were taking an active part in
the rebellion of the Serbs and Valachs, while General Mayerhofer was
enlisting recruits in the principality of Servia, and sending them to
assist the rebels. The people thus beheld with astonishment civil war
break out, and saw with still greater astonishment that Imperial
officers were fighting on both sides.

Jellachich, as a functionary of the Hungarian Crown, refused to obey the
Hungarian ministry, and illegally summoned a Croatian Diet to meet at
Agram on June 5. In consequence of these proceedings, Ferdinand V., by a
decree dated June 10, 1848, deprived him, as a rebel, of all his civil
and military offices and dignities, but at the same time sent him,
through his Minister of War, Latour, field officers, artillery and
ammunition.

The troubles increased daily. The Hungarian ministry requested the
Archduke John to act us mediator. He accepted the office, but did
nothing.

The Diet met on July 2. The Palatine, as the representative of the
Sovereign in the speech from the Throne, said that, as several districts
were in a state of open rebellion, the principal objects to which, in
the name of His Majesty, he should direct the attention of the Diet were
the finances and the defences of the country, and that bills relating to
these objects would be brought in by the Ministers. He then proceeded as
follows:--"His Majesty has learned with painful feelings, that although
he only followed the dictates of his own gracious inclination, when, at
the request of the faithful Hungarian people, he gave his sovereign
sanction to the laws enacted by the last Diet--laws which the common
weal, according to the exigencies of the present age, rendered
imperatively necessary--there are, nevertheless, a number of seditious
agitators, especially in the annexed territories and the Hungarian
districts of the Lower Danube, who, by false reports and terrorism, have
excited the different religious sects and races speaking different
languages against each other, and, by mendaciously affirming that the
above-mentioned laws are not the free expressions of His Majesty's Royal
will, have stirred up the people to offer an armed opposition to the
execution of the law, and to the legally constituted authorities. And,
moreover, that some of these agitators have even proceeded so far in
their iniquitous course as to spread the report that this armed
opposition has been made in the interests of the dynasty, and with the
knowledge, and connivance of His Majesty or of the members of His
Majesty's Royal house. I therefore, in order that all the inhabitants of
the kingdom, without distinction as to creed or language, may have their
minds set at rest, hereby declare, in conformity with the sovereign
behest of His Majesty our most gracious King, and in his sovereign name
and person, that it is His Majesty's firm and steadfast determination to
defend with all his Royal power and authority the unity and integrity of
His Royal Hungarian crown against every attack from without, and every
attempt at disruption and separation that may be made within the
kingdom, and at the same time inviolably to maintain the laws which have
received the Royal sanction. And while His Majesty will not suffer any
one to curtail the liberties assured to all classes by the law, His
Majesty, as well as all the members of His Royal dynasty, strongly
condemns the audacity of those who venture to affirm that any illegal
act whatsoever or any disrespect of the constituted authorities can be
reconcileable with His Majesty's sovereign will, or at all compatible
with the interests of the Royal dynasty."

It thus clearly appears that the King acknowledged the validity and the
inviolability of the acts passed by the Diet of 1847-8 three months
after they had been sanctioned.

Relying on the sincerity of the Royal asseverations, the Diet humbly
requested that His Majesty would be graciously pleased to render the
country happy by his presence. It was, in fact, the general wish that
the King should come to Hungary; even the most radical journals loudly
declared that if he came he would be received with enthusiasm bordering
on madness.

Meanwhile the rebellion of the Croats, Serbs, and Valachs, was spreading
daily, and that, too, _in the name of the Sovereign_. Generals,
colonels, and other field officers of the Imperial army were at the head
of it, without any one of them being summoned by the King to answer for
his conduct. The eyes of the too credulous natives were now opened, and
still more when the King refused to sanction the acts for the levying of
troops and raising of funds for the suppression of the rebellion,
although the Diet had been convened chiefly for this purpose.

I must here observe that at this period nothing whatever had occurred
that could serve as a pretext for the dynasty to support the rebellion.
The Diet, it is true, would not consent that the troops that were to be
levied should be draughted into the old regiments; but it was obviously
impossible for the Diet to consent to any such measures at a period when
the rebels were everywhere led by Imperial officers, when the Austrian
troops stationed in Hungary, although they had been placed under the
orders of the Hungarian Ministry, refused to fight against those rebels,
and the commanders of fortresses to receive orders from the Hungarian
War-office.

On the 8th of September a deputation from the Hungarian Diet earnestly
entreated His Majesty to sanction two acts relating to the levying of
troops and taxes. The King refused; but in his answer to the address of
the deputation said, "I trust that no one will hereby suppose that I
have the intention to set aside or infringe the existing laws. This, I
repeat, is far from my intention. On the contrary, it is my firm and
determined will to maintain, in conformity with my coronation oath, the
laws, the integrity, and the rights of the kingdom, under my Hungarian
crown."

The King made this solemn declaration on the 8th of September, and on
the 9th of September Jellachich crossed the Drave with 48,000 men to
wage war in the King's name on the Hungarian Diet and Ministry. The King
had, moreover, on _the 4th of September_, affixed his sign manual
to a letter or Royal mandate addressed to Jellachich, and revoking the
decree by which he had been deprived of his civil and military offices
and dignities. His Majesty, in this letter, also expressed his high
approbation of the Ban's conduct. By a Royal decree, dated October 3,
the constitution was suspended, martial law proclaimed, and Jellachich,
the rebel, appointed His Majesty's Plenipotentiary Commissary for the
kingdom of Hungary, and invested with unlimited authority to act, in the
name of His Majesty, within the said kingdom.

Hungary, so far from commencing the revolution, was not even prepared to
meet the invasion of the Croatian Ban. He was defeated near
Stuhlweissenburg by the Landsturm. The Hungarian Government only began
to organize regular troops in October.

That the Diet did not recognize a decree that suspended the constitution
and invested Jellachich with the dictatorship, will be found quite
natural, if not by you, at least by every Englishman who cherishes
constitutional freedom, the more so as its proceedings on this occasion
were founded on legal right, viz., on act 4, sect. 6, of 1847-8, which
expressly ordains that "the annual session of the Diet shall not be
closed, nor the Diet itself dissolved, before the budget for the ensuing
year has been voted."

From this short but faithful account of what actually occurred, it
clearly appears that the Hungarian nation had not recourse to arms until
the Ban of Croatia entered the Hungarian territory with an
Austrian-Croatian army. It is also an undeniable fact that until the
promulgation of the Austrian Charter in March, 1849--by which, with a
stroke of the pen, the independence of Hungary was destroyed, its
constitution abolished, and its territories dismembered--the Hungarian
nation never demanded anything else than the maintenance of the laws and
institutions which its Sovereign had sanctioned and sworn to maintain
inviolate. It was however precisely for the purpose of destroying these
laws and institutions that the dynasty began the war. This, of course,
they did not venture to avow. It was necessary to conceal the real
motives of their perfidious conduct from the civilized world. Hence in
their public proclamations they always alleged some pretext or
other--all of them equally groundless. At the commencement they said
that it was only an insignificant faction they had to deal with; but
when they saw that the whole nation was arrayed in arms against them,
they declared it was for the suppression of demagogueism, propagated by
foreigners, chiefly Poles, that their armies had entered Hungary; and to
give a colour to this pretext they industriously spread the report that
there were 20,000 Poles in the ranks of the Hungarians. When however it
became notorious that no more than 1,000 Poles were fighting under our
national standard, the Austrian dynasty appeared as the
_soi-disant_ champion and judge of the various nationalities or
races. This answered well enough until the system of centralization
showed too clearly that an attempt would be made to Germanize these
nationalities; when the dynasty again veered about, and, leaving
"nationalities" in the lurch, took up the peasantry. We consequently
find the Austrian Government assuring the Washington Cabinet (in the
note of July 4, 1851) that they had waged war on Hungary in order to
crush a turbulent aristocracy that "preach democracy with their tongues,
while their whole lives consist in the daily exercise over their
fellow-men of arbitrary power in the most repugnant form." This last
pretext, so ostentatiously put forth, loses, however, even its
plausibility when contrasted with the policy of the dynasty in 1848, for
it is an undoubted fact that, although the reforms effected in our
_political_ institutions at that period were consented to by the
dynasty without much hesitation, it required the most energetic
remonstrances on the part of the Diet to obtain the Royal sanction to
the act for the liberation of the peasants from feudal bondage.

It is precisely to the fact of all classes, without distinction, being
equally aware of the cabals of the dynasty, that may be ascribed the
success of the Hungarian insurrection. It was not _one_ man, nor a
party, nor a conspiracy, nor terrorism, that awakened that spontaneous
enthusiasm with which the people rushed to arms. Kossuth may have been
the rallying cry; but he was not the cause of the war. For several
months the people had witnessed the equivocal conduct of the dynasty;
had seen that its words were belied by its deeds; had seen that the
rebels were everywhere led by Imperial officers; and finally beheld
Jellachich, a high functionary of the Hungarian Crown, invade the
country at the head of an Austro-Croatian army. It was then, and not
till then, that the nation cried, as with one voice--_the King is a
traitor_. From that day began the Hungarian revolution. On that day
the monarchical feeling was extinguished. What no one had thought it
possible to accomplish was accomplished by the dynasty itself.

       *       *       *       *       *

APPENDIX III.--_Extracts from a Letter to the 'Daily News,' in
February, 1852, by a_, "HUNGARIAN EXILE," _in reply to a Letter
from_ SZEMERE, _to the 'London Examiner_.'

[I am personally acquainted with the accomplished and intelligent
"Exile;" but as he is absent from England, I cannot obtain permission to
publish his name.]

It was more than two months after the civil war had been raging in the
Banat and Transylvania that the question of giving fresh troops for the
suppression of the Italian war was brought before the Assembly at Pesth,
July 22, 1846. Now, what are the accusations M. Szemere brings forth
against Kossuth in reference to the Italian question? The pith of M.
Szemere's reasoning is, that the ministry agreed, in the protocol of
July 5, upon construing the Pragmatic Sanction as binding Hungary to
protect the integrity of Austria; "yet that Kossuth, as the organ of the
ministry, spoke in a way as if he did not approve of the policy, and
sought to make the public believe that the protocol was merely a moral
demonstration:" further, that when the opposition denied the obligation
of Hungary to defend Austria, the ministry refused to enter into any
discussion on an acknowledged principle of constitutional law.

In order to show the utter hollowness of this attack, it may be
sufficient to look at the date and circumstances M. Szemere talks of.
The protocol in question was agreed upon on July 5th, the day when the
parliament met to provide for the defence of the country. The members,
inexperienced in foreign politics and ignorant of the cabals of courts,
although presuming that the civil war was kindled in Vienna, were at
first blinded by the royal convocation of the Diet to provide for the
safety of the country; putting, moreover, implicit confidence in the
sagacity and goodwill of the ministry. When however Kossuth opened the
debate on the Italian question, July 22, affairs looked quite different
from what they appeared to be when the protocol was drawn up. The
treachery of the dynasty broke upon the mind of the most careless, and
its connexions with the leaders of the rebellious tribes had become
undeniable facts. It was during that short time, from July 5 to July 22,
that our national forces met in the Serbian entrenchments of St. Thomas,
Foeldvar, and Turia, regular Austrian soldiers: Meyerhofe, the Austrian
consul at Belgrade, was openly recruiting bands of Servians to reinforce
the insurgents; nay, it became even evident that General Bechtold,
appointed by His Majesty to lead the faithful Hungarians against the
rebellious Serbs, led them on in order to get them the sooner decimated
and broken. Some members of the opposition, headed by General Perczel,
declaimed loudly against the cowardly and fallacious policy of the
ministry, resolving to compel ministers to resign or to induce them to
take some more efficacious measures. In short, during this space of
time, the government and people found themselves in quite a new
position. Kossuth, in concert with the ministry, moved a levy of 200,000
men (July 11), which motion the Assembly hailed with unparalleled
enthusiasm, and which the people witnessed with approval, as affording a
guarantee of their liberties. It was in the midst of these moments of
excitement and temporary distress that Kossuth, as the most popular
member of the cabinet, was pointed out as the person most fitted to
undertake the very difficult task of speaking on the Italian question
alluded to by M. Szemere. Public opinion, aided by the opposition of the
house, was convinced that Austria, after having subjugated the
Lombard-Venetians with Hungarian troops, would then turn to Hungary, the
enslavement of which might more easily be executed by the country's
being bereft of a number of stout arms indispensable to her own defence.
Kossuth therefore, as a man of true liberal principles, while
acknowledging the ground to be right upon which the opposition moved,
professed in the speech alluded to that he had agreed then with his
colleagues in respect to the Italian question, on the ground that the
moral power of the protocol would suffice, although as a private
individual he could not help rejoicing at the victories of the Italian
people. Now, I submit it to every enlightened Englishman to decide
whether Kossuth evinced a want of civic virtue in declaring that, as a
man who wished freedom for himself, he could not rejoice in the sending
of troops to subjugate another people struggling against the same
tyrant?

Referring to the policy of the ministry, M. Szemere says "that Count
Louis Bathyanyi declared, on the 31st March, that the obligation
enjoined by the Pragmatic Sanction was such that Hungary was bound
thereby to defend the territorial integrity of the Austrian monarchy,
but that they (the ministers) would carefully avoid interfering in the
internal affairs of the states that constituted this monarchy."
Irrespective of this--that Count Bathyanyi explained the policy in
March, when Hungary enjoyed perfect peace, whereas the debate on the
Italian question happened in the midst of most threatening civil wars
carried on directly by Austria--it must be remembered that if by the 1st
article of the Pragmatic Sanction Hungary was bound to afford aid to
Austria _etiam contra vim externam_, that same article provided
that the States composing the realm of Hungary were to be preserved by
the monarch _aeque indivisibiliter_ as his hereditary estates; and
that by the 3d article of that celebrated law the Sovereign promised,
for himself and his successors, to compel his subjects of every state
and degree to observe the laws and rights of Hungary. It is therefore
evident that the infraction of this law, by the countenance and aid
furnished to the Serbs (as also to Jellachich), fully exonerated the
Hungarians from sending troops to Italy before they had provided for the
safety of their country, and fully justified them and their responsible
minister for drawing the attention of their Sovereign to it in the
address to the Crown. M. Szemere talks of protecting the integrity of
the Austrian empire, and carefully avoiding to interfere with the
internal affairs of other states. The Czar may indeed exclaim, with M.
Szemere, that in sending his Cossacks into Hungary he never intended to
interfere in our internal affairs.

The second charge, as to Kossuth's striving to concentrate in his person
all power and authority, is, I fear, indicative of the animus which
prompted M. Szemere to write these letters, namely, jealousy of his
great countryman. The charge, however, is entirely without foundation:
and the only question is, as to how Kossuth acquired such unbounded
influence over his countrymen of every rank and station. The means by
which Kossuth gained such an ascendancy over his colleagues, M. Szemere
himself must own, were, the implicit confidence the country placed in
his patriotism, and the conviction it had acquired of his genius and
indefatigable activity. In moments of extreme danger no name was heard
but that of Kossuth. I am far from asserting that all Kossuth has done
is exempt from censure; but it must, on the other hand, be admitted that
all that was grand in our revolution happened by his instrumentality.
His mere appearance, as, for instance, in Debreczin, January, 1849, when
the second danger seemed to overwhelm the country, roused the frightened
people of the Thesis, who crowded under the national standard and
shattered to pieces the Austrian forces.

The fall of Hungary can only be traced to the following three
circumstances:--1st. That it was not believed that European diplomacy
would allow Russian intervention. 2d. That our plan of warfare, directed
by the council of war, and not by Kossuth, wanted that concentration
which could alone have ensured success. 3d. That the character of
Goergei, whom our generals never accused of treacherous designs, was a
mystery: nay, the patriotic General Perczel, who proclaimed loudly
Goergei's treachery from the very beginning, had the satisfaction to be
laughed at and hooted down. To impute these disastrous circumstances to
Kossuth alone, is to render one's self guilty of the greatest perversion
of generally acknowledged and incontrovertible facts.

A HUNGARIAN EXILE.





End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Select Speeches of Kossuth, by Kossuth

*** 