A toast was then proposed:

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

Kossuth replied as follows:--

Sir, I feel very thankful for having the opportunity to express in this place my everlasting grat.i.tude to the Sultan of Turkey and to his n.o.ble people. I am not a man to flatter any one. Before G.o.d, nations, and principles I bow--before none else. But I bow with warm and proud grat.i.tude, before the memory of the generous conduct I met in Turkey.

And I entreat your kind permission to state some facts, which perhaps may contribute something to a better knowledge of that country, because I am confident that, when it is once better known, more attention will be bestowed on its future.

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

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

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

Such was the condition in respect to religious liberty under the Austrian and under the Turkish dominion.

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

Take, on the other hand, the Turk. In Turkey I have not only seen the munic.i.p.al self-government of cities developed to a very considerable degree, but I have seen administration of justice very much like the inst.i.tution of the jury. I have seen a public trial in a case where one party was a Turk, and the other party a Christian; where the munic.i.p.al authorities of the Christian and of the Turkish population were called together to be not only the witnesses of the trial, but mutually to control and direct it with perfect publicity. But more yet: there exist Wallachia and Moldavia, under Turkish dominion; and the Turkish nation, which has conquered that province and is dominant, yet, out of respect for national self-government, has prescribed to its own self not to have the right of a house to dwell in, or a single foot of soil in that land.

In all the domestic concerns of the province--which for centuries has had a charter, by which the self-government of Wallachia and Moldavia was ensured--it is worthy to mention that the Turk has never broken his oath. Whereas in the European continent there is scarcely a single dynasty, whether king, prince, duke, or emperor, which has not broken faith before G.o.d and man. Now, the existence of this Turkey, great as the present power of Europe is, is indispensable to the security of Europe. You know that in the Crimea, in the time of Catherine, Potemkin wrote the words, "Here pa.s.ses the way to Constantinople." The policy indicated by him at that time is always the policy of St. Petersburg; and it is of Constantinople that Napoleon rightly said, that the power which has it in command, if it is willing, is able, to rule three-quarters of the world. Now, it is the intention, it is the consistent policy of the Russian cabinet, to lay hold of Constantinople; and therefore to protect the independent existence of Turkey is necessary to Europe: for if Turkey be crushed, Russia becomes not only entirely predominant, as she already is, but becomes the single mistress of Asia and of Europe. And to uphold this independence of Turkey, gentlemen, nothing is wanted but some encouragement from such a place as the United States. Since Turkey has lost the possession of Buda in Hungary, its power is declining. But why? Because from that time European diplomatists began to succeed in persuading Turkey that she had no strength to stand by herself; and by and bye it became the rule in Constantinople that every petty interior question needed European diplomacy. Now I say, Turkey has vitality such as not many nations have.

It has a power that not many have. Turkey wants nothing but a consciousness of its own powers and encouragement to stand upon its own feet; and this encouragement, if it comes as counsel, as kind advice, out of such a place as the United States, I am confident will not only be thankfully heard, but also very joyfully followed. That is the only thing which is wanted there.

And besides this political consideration that the existence of Turkey, as it is, is necessary to the future of Europe, there are also high commercial considerations proper to interest and attract the United States. The freedom of commerce on the Danube is a law of nations guaranteed by treaties; and yet there exists _no_ freedom. It is in the hands of Russia. Turkey, to be sure, is very anxious to re-establish freedom; but there is n.o.body to back her in her demands. Turkey can also present to the manufacturing industry of such a country as the United States a far larger and more important market than all China, with her two hundred and fifty millions of inhabitants.

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

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

XVIII.--ASPECTS OF AMERICA TOWARD ENGLAND.

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

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

What have we to expect from neutrality? We may antic.i.p.ate the treatment which we received from both belligerents when Napoleon pressed on to empire over all the nation as Russia does now.... Can we hope, that when the war is intended to exterminate the principle of which our government is the great exemplar, our people will be allowed the immunity of free trade with the belligerents to grow rich and strong by their calamities?... The impending danger can only be averted from us by the ability of the people of Europe, now kept down by military mercenaries, to rise and a.s.sert their own rights. To encourage such efforts is the duty of every free people, and of all that would be free....

Shall our government hesitate to denounce, as a violation of the law of nations, the intervention of the Czar? Shall it hesitate to declare it a justification of a counter-intervention?...

Our countrymen will not a.s.sent to the one-sided doctrine. They will intervene to lift up those stricken down by intervention,--

The exiles from Europe--_Liberty_ and _Louis Kossuth_.

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

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

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

As a man has to pa.s.s through several periods of age, each of them marked with its own peculiarities, before he comes to a settled position in life, even so a nation. A nation has first to be born, then to grow; then it has to prove its pa.s.sive vitality by undergoing a trial of life.

Afterwards it has to prove its active force to rise within its own immediate horizon. At last, it must take its proper seat amongst the nations of the world as a power on earth. Every one of these periods of national life must be gone through. There is no help for it. It is a necessary process of life. And every one of these life-periods has its own natural condition, which must be accepted as a necessity, even if we should not be pleased with it.

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

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

The instinct of the people is in the life of a nation precisely that which conscience is in the life of man. Before we, in our private life, arrive at a clear conviction what course we have to adopt in this or that occurrence, the conscience--that inexplicable spirit in our breast--tells us in a pulsation of our heart what is right or what is wrong. And this first pulsation of conscience is very trustworthy. Then comes the reflective operation of the mind: it now and then lulls conscience to sleep, now and then modifies particulars, and now and then raises it to the degree of conviction. But conscience was in advance of the mind. So is the instinct of the people--the conscience of nations.

Nor needs the highest intellectual power of individuality to feel offended at the idea that the instinct of the people is always the first to feel the right and wrong. It is the pulsation of the heart of the nation; it is the advertis.e.m.e.nt of conscience, which never heaves without reason, without necessity.

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

Had this interest and sympathy not existed long ago, I were not now here. My very freedom is the result of it.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hatred is no good counsellor, gentlemen. The wisdom of love is a better one. What people has suffered more than my poor Hungary has from Russia?

Shall I hate the people of Russia for it? Oh never! I have but pity and Christian brotherly love for it. It is the government, it is the principle of the government, which makes every drop of my blood boil and which must fall, if humanity is to live. We were for centuries in war against the Turks, and G.o.d knows what we have suffered by it! But past is past. Now we have a common enemy, and thus we have a common interest, a mutual esteem, and love rules where our fathers have fought.

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

XIX.--MEANING OF RECOGNIZING.

[_Last Speech at Washington_.]

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

Nevertheless, I have received _private_ expression of sentiment and of generous kind sympathy from various parts of this district, and chiefly from the city of Washington.

[Footnote *: Chancellor Walworth of New York.]

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

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

In regard to my third desire, to see the _legitimacy_ of our declaration of Independence acknowledged by Congress that did not mean that I (a poor exile!) am _de facto_ Governor of Hungary! You little conceive how valuable to us it would have been, if your Envoy, who came to inquire and report, during our struggle, had been authorized to recognize the legitimacy of our cause and of our proceeding. And even now, the moral effect would be great; for such an act cannot stand alone, it points to your future policy towards every other nation.

Moreover, it would enlarge the lawful field of action for private sympathy, and would enable me to accept many things which I cannot now; I do not mean t.i.tles,--which I value not. I care only for my country's dignity; but it appertains to its dignity that its solemnly expressed Will be recognized by your government.

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