Select Speeches of Kossuth
Date: 2004-01-02T00:00:00+00:00
Keywords: Hungary -- History

The Project Gutenberg eBook of Select Speeches of Kossuth

This ebook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this ebook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

Title: Select Speeches of Kossuth

Author: Lajos Kossuth

Editor: Francis William Newman

Release date: January 1, 2004 [eBook #10691]
Most recently updated: October 28, 2024

Language: English

Credits: Produced by Keren Vergon, Rich Magahiz and PG Distributed Proofreaders

*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK SELECT SPEECHES OF KOSSUTH ***

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: Szemerè 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 Szemerè, 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 Görgy'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 Görgey, 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 Windischgrätz. 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 Olmütz. 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 solidarité 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 république" 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'état 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 retard 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-coloured 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 Windischgrätz 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 "khôsh 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'état of Louis Napoleon had found me in prison still—that coup d'état 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 cripple 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, £10,000 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, cripple, 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'état, 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 Rüttli, 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 Rüttli-covenant! God increase the number of them, as he increased the number of those on the Rüttli, 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 Fürst, 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 patés 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 Cannaê 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 Thulé, 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 déchéance 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 Olmütz 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 Görgei, 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 Görgei with full power (and despatched to him immediately) the abdication of the government. On the same day—it was the 11th of August, 1849—Görgei declared in the presence of some of the ministers who had assembled at Csányi'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 Görgei, 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, Csányi, Horvath, and I. Two of the ministers, Szemere and [Casimir] Bathyanyi, were absent when the formal declaration of the abdication was discussed at Csányi'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 Görgei 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 Világos, 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, Földvar, 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 Görgei, whom our generals never accused of treacherous designs, was a mystery: nay, the patriotic General Perczel, who proclaimed loudly Görgei'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 SELECT SPEECHES OF KOSSUTH ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE

PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™ electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg™ License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works provided that:

- • You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.”

- • You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™ License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™ works.

- • You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

- • You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™

Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation’s website and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.

Table of Contents

- PREFACE TO KOSSUTH'S SPEECHES.

- IV.—LEGITIMACY OF HUNGARIAN INDEPENDENCE.

- KOSSUTH'S REPLY.

- APPENDICES TO KOSSUTH'S SPEECHES.

- THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE