[_From Kossuth's Speech at Copenhagen House, Nov. 3d, 1851_.]
In my opinion, the form of Government may be different in different
countries, according to their circumstances, their wishes, their wants.
England loves her Queen, and has full motive to do so. England feels
great, glorious and free, and has full reason to feel so. But the fact
of England being a monarchy cannot be sufficient reason for her to hate
and discredit republican forms of government in other countries
differing in circumstances, in wishes, and in wants. On the other side,
to the United States of America, which under republican government are
likewise great, glorious, and free, their republicanism gives no
sufficient reason to hate and discredit monarchical government in
England. It entirely belongs to the right of every nation to dispose of
its domestic concerns. Therefore I claim for my own country also, that
England, seeing from our past that our cause is just, should profess the
sovereign right of every nation to dispose of itself, and should allow
no power whatever to interfere with our domestic matters. Since I thus
regard the internal affairs of every nation to be its own separate
concern, I did not think it became me here in England to speak about the
future organization of our country.
But my behavior has not been everywhere appreciated as I hoped. I have
met in certain quarters the remark that I "am slippery, and evade the
question." Now on the point of sincerity I am particularly susceptible.
I have the sentiment of being a straightforward man, and I would not be
charged with having stolen into the sympathies of England without
displaying my true colours. Therefore I must clearly state, that in our
past struggle it was NOT _we_ who made a revolution. We began
peacefully and legislatively to transform the monarchico-aristocratical
constitution of Hungary into a monarchico-democratical constitution. We
preserved our municipal institutions, as our most valuable treasure; but
to them, as well as to the legislative power, we gave, as basis, the
common liberty of the people, instead of the class-privileges of old.
Moreover, in place of the old Board of Council,--which, being a
corporate body, was of course a mockery in regard to that responsibility
of the Executive, which was our chartered right on paper,--we
established the real and personal responsibility of ministers. In this,
we merely[*] upheld what was due to us by constitution, by treaties, by
the coronation-oath of every king,--the right to be "governed as a
self-consistent, independent country, by our native institutions,
according to our own laws." This and all our other reforms we effected
peacefully by careful legislation, which the King sanctioned and swore
to maintain.
[Footnote *: Many Englishmen have unjustly accused the Hungarians as
having by the laws of March, 1848, effected a SEPARATION of Hungary from
Austria. _Even if this were true_, it could not justify the cause
of the Hapsburgs. The dynasty yielded, under the pressure of
circumstances (as alone will dynasties ever yield), while Hungary did
but petition legally, and was in fact unarmed. The dynasty swore to the
new laws; and then conspired with Croatians, Serbians, and Russians to
overthrow the laws by marauding and force of arms. In fact, if in
January, 1849, Austria would have negotiated, instead of arresting all
Hungarian ambassadors, Hungary would have consented to modify the laws
of March: but the Austrians had already in October ordered the overthrow
of the whole Hungarian constitution, and had no wish to do anything by
legal methods.
At the same time, the original objection is fundamentally _false_.
No separation of the two countries was effected by the laws of March,
1848; for no legal union ever existed. Only the crowns were united, not
the countries. Kossuth rightly compares the union to that which was
between England and Hanover. At any time in the past, Hungary might have
made _peace_ with a power with which Austria was at _war_, if
the Kings had not falsified their oath by not assembling the Diet: for
the Diet always had the lawful right of War and Peace. Any mode
whatsoever of enforcing the Coronation oath, might, according to this
logic, be condemned as a "separating" of Austria and Hungary.]
Nevertheless, this very dynasty, in the most perjurious manner, attacked
these laws, this freedom, this constitution, by arms. We defended
ourselves by arms victoriously. When upon this the perjurious dynasty
called in the Russian armies to beat us down, we of course declared the
Hapsburgs to be no longer our sovereigns. We avowed ourselves to be a
free and independent nation, but fixed as yet no definite form of
government,--neither monarchical nor republican. These are plain facts.
Hungary is not now under lawful government, but is being trampled down
by a foreign intruder who is _not_ King of Hungary, being
_neither acknowledged by the nation, nor sanctioned by law_.
Hungary is, in a word, in a state of WAR against the Hapsburg dynasty, a
war of legitimate defence, by which alone it can ever regain
independence and freedom. By such war alone has any nation ever won its
freedom from oppressors; as you see in Switzerland, Belgium, Spain,
Portugal, France, Sweden, Norway, Greece, the United States, and England
itself.
I can state it, as known to me, with the certainty of matter of fact,
that Hungary will never accept the Hapsburgs as legitimate sovereigns in
the future, nor ever enter into any new moral relations with that
perjurious family. Nor only so; but their perjury has so entirely
plucked out of my nation's heart all faith in monarchy and all
attachment to it, that there is no power on earth to knit the broken tie
again: and therefore Hungary wishes and wills to be a free and
independent republic,--a republic founded on the rule of law, securing
social order, guaranteeing person, property, the moral development as
well as material welfare of the people,--in a word, a republic like that
of the United States, founded on institutions inherited from England
itself. This is the conviction of my people, which I share in the very
heart of my heart.
* * * * *