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 thatyoucallStaterights 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 futurewith 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 Englandnotyield 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 youcouldremain 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,thenit 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 takenas a principlemeans 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 aneternal, mighty Republic!
Gentlemen, I humbly thank you for your kindness, and bid you an affectionate farewell.
* * * * *
[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 beherewarmly 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 thaneightReverend 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 ofseventeenconspirators recently arrested for conspiring in favour of the Republic against Austria,sixteenwerepriestsbelonging 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.
* * * * *
[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 anenemy. 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.]
* * * * *
[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 buta mere show(for Sir Stratford Canning "had no orders" touseit), 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 thecoup d'étatof Louis Napoleon had found me in prison still—thatcoup d'étatwhich 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 beuseful 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 anemigrant; but would only be considered anexile, 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 * * *
* * * * *
[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 thatI 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 thatit 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,almsand 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 forprivatematerial 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 thepoliticalpart 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 substitutingindividualfor 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.