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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

XXIX.—OHIO AND FRANCE CONTRASTED AS REPUBLICS.

[Reception at Cincinnati.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kossuth replied:—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

XXX.—WAR A PROVIDENTIAL NECESSITY AGAINST OPPRESSION.

[To the Clergy of Cincinnati.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

XXXI.—ON WASHINGTON'S POLICY.

[Speech on the Anniversary of Washington's Birthday, Cincinnati.]

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

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

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

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

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

Kossuth in response said:—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I now ask you to listen to Washington himself.

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

XXXII.—KOSSUTH'S CREDENTIALS.

[Farewell to Ohio, Feb. 25th.]

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

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

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

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

Let me dispense with empty words—let what Ohio did, does, and will do, for the cause of European freedom, be its own monument!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

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

[Speech at Indianapolis.]

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

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

He closed with the words:

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

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

Kossuth replied:—

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

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

[Speech at Louisville, March 6th.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Neutrality when taken as a principle means indifference to the condition of the world.

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

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

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

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

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

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

* * * * *

XXXV.—CATHOLICISM VERSUS JESUITISM.

[At St. Louis, (Missouri.)]

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

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

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