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; andwe 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.Yourfreedom 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, thatthe 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. ThePozzo di Borgostell you so: theHulsemannstell 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 ofindustrious and intelligentpeople 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 theex post factoargument 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.
* * * * *
[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 areye, or what like proof haveyegiven 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.
* * * * *
[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 itsilently, 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 merelake, a glassy expanse, only reflecting foreign, light around—but ariver, carrying its rich treasures from the fountain to distant regions of the earth.
A nation should not be a merelight-house, a stationary beacon, erected upon the coast to warn voyagers of their danger—but a movinglife-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, calledme 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.
* * * * *
[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 beableto do good to humanity: let it be your glory that you arewillingto 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.
* * * * *
[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 thathe 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 ofAmerican 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 beAmerican, buthuman; 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. Aprivilegenever 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 offoreign 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 thechiefdifficulty 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 ofabolitionistsandfree 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.]
* * * * *
[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 proverbnil 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 inlegislationjust so far as to control that legislation, but denying the right of the people to control theexecutivepower. The Hungarian people never adopted that theory. They ever claimed a full share in theexecutiveas 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 wordnoblemanin Hungary originally was equivalent tosoldier. 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 peopleinstead ofthe nobilityhad 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 alsowewent 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 doesnotcall 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 alegislativecapacity —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 ourancientprinciples and yourrecentones. 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 ofRepeal, which offended the people of England, but the standard of municipalself-governmentagainst 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."