In reply to Governor Boutwell, when the tumultuous applause had
subsided, Kossuth spoke, in substance as follows:--
He apologized for profaning Shakespeare's language in Faneuil Hall, the
cradle of American liberty. Yet he ventured to criticize that very
phrase; for liberty ought not to be _American_, but _human_;
else it is no longer a right, but a privilege; and privilege can nowhere
be permanent. The nature of a privilege (said he) is exclusiveness, that
of a principle is communicative. Liberty is a principle: its community
is its security; exclusiveness is its doom.
What is aristocracy? It is exclusive liberty; it is privilege; and
aristocracy is doomed, because it is contrary to the destiny of men. As
aristocracy should vanish within each nation, so should no nation be an
aristocrat among nations. Until that ceases, liberty will nowhere be
lasting on earth. It is equally fatal to individuals as to nations, to
believe themselves beyond the reach of vicissitudes. By this proud
reliance, and the isolation resulting therefrom, more victims have
fallen than by immediate adversities. You have grown prodigiously by
your freedom of seventy-five years; but what is seventy-five years as a
charter of immortality? No, no, my humble tongue tells the records of
eternal truth. A _privilege_ never can be lasting. Liberty
restricted to one nation never can be sure. You may say, "We are the
prophets of God;" but you shall not say, "God is only our God." The Jews
said so, and their pride, old Jerusalem, lies in the dust. Our Saviour
taught all humanity to say, "Our Father in heaven," and his Jerusalem is
lasting to the end of days.
"There is a community in mankind's destiny"--that was the greeting which
I read on the arch of welcome on the Capitol Hill of Massachusetts. I
pray to God, the Republic of America would weigh the eternal truth of
those words, and act accordingly; liberty in America would then be sure
to the end of time; but if you say, "American Liberty," and take that
grammar for your policy, I dare to say the time will yet come when
humanity will have to mourn a new proof of the ancient truth, that
without community national freedom is never sure.
However, the cradle of American Liberty is not only famous from the
reputation of having been always on the lists of the most powerful
eloquence; it is still more conspicuous for having seen that eloquence
attended by practical success. To understand the mystery of this rare
circumstance one must see the people of New England, and especially the
people of Massachusetts.
In what I have seen of New England there are two things, the evidence of
which strikes the observer at every step--prosperity and intelligence. I
have seen thousands assembled, following the noble impulses of a
generous heart: almost the entire population of every town, of every
village where I passed, gathered around me, throwing flowers of
consolation on my path. I have seen not a single man bearing that mark
of poverty upon himself which in old Europe strikes the eye sadly at
every step. I have seen no ragged poor--have seen not a single house
bearing the appearance of desolated poverty. The cheerfulness of a
comfortable condition, the result of industry, spreads over the land.
One sees at a glance that the people work assiduously, not with the
depressing thought just to get through the cares of a miserable life
from day to day by hard toil, but they work with the cheerful
consciousness of substantial happiness. And the second thing which I
could not fail to remark, is the stamp of intelligence impressed upon
the very eyes and outward appearance of the people at large. I and my
companions have seen them in the factories, in the workshops, in their
houses, and in the streets, and could not fail a thousand times to think
"how intelligent this people looks." It is to such a people that the
orators of Faneuil Hall had to speak, and therein is the mystery of
success. They were not wiser than the public spirit of their audience,
but they were the eloquent interpreters of the people's enlightened
instinct.
No man can force the harp of his own individuality into the people's
heart, but every man may play upon the chords of his people's heart, who
draws his inspiration from the people's instinct. Well, I thank God for
having seen the public spirit of the people of Massachusetts, bestowing
its attention on the cause I plead, and pronouncing its verdict. In
respect to the question of national intervention, his Excellency the
high-minded Governor of Massachusetts wrote a memorable address to the
Legislature; the Joint Committee of the Legislative Assembly, after a
careful and candid consideration of the subject, not only concurred in
the views of the Executive government, but elucidated them in a report,
the irrefutable logic and elevated statesmanship of which will for ever
endear the name of Hazewell to oppressed nations; and the Senate of
Massachusetts adopted the resolutions proposed by the Legislative
Committee. After such remarkable and unsolicited manifestations of
conviction, there cannot be the slightest doubt that all these Executive
and Legislative proceedings not only met the full approbation of the
people of Massachusetts, but were the solemn interpretation of public
opinion. A spontaneous outburst of popular sentiment tells often more
in a single word than all the skill of elaborate eloquence could; as
when, amidst the thundering cheers of a countless multitude, a man in
Worcester greeted me with the shout: "_We worship not the man, but we
worship the principle_." It was a word, like those words of flame
spoken in Faneuil Hall, out of which liberty in America was born. That
word reveals the spirit, which, applying eternal truth to present
exigencies, moves through the people's heart--that word is teeming with
the destinies of America.
Give me leave to mention, that having had an opportunity to converse
with leading men of the great parties, which are on the eve of an
animated contest for the Presidency--I availed myself of that
opportunity, to be informed of the principal issues, in case the one or
the other party carries the prize; and having got the information
thereof, I could not forbear to exclaim--"All these questions together
cannot outweigh the all-overruling importance of _foreign policy_."
It is there, in the question of foreign policy, that the heart of the
immediate future throbs. Security and danger, prosperity and stagnation,
peace and war, tranquillity and embarrassment--yes, life and death, will
be weighed in the scale of Foreign Policy. It is evident things are come
to the point where they were in ancient Rome, when old Cato never spoke
privately or publicly about whatever topic, without closing his speech
with these words: "_However, my opinion is that Carthage must be
destroyed_"--thus advertising his countrymen, that there was one
question outweighing in importance all other questions, from which
public attention should never for a moment be withdrawn.
Such, in my opinion, is the condition of the world now. Carthage and
Rome had no place on earth together. Republican America and
all-overwhelming Russian absolutism cannot much longer subsist together
on earth. Russia active--America passive--there is an immense danger in
that fact; it is like the avalanche in the Alps, which the noise of a
bird's wing may move and thrust down with irresistible force, growing
every moment. I cannot but believe it were highly time to do as old Cato
did, and finish every speech with these words--"_However, the law of
nations should be maintained, and absolutism not permitted to become
omnipotent._"
It is however a consolation to me to know, that the _chief_
difficulty with which I have to contend,--viz. the overpowering
influence of domestic questions with you,--is neither lasting, nor in
any way an argument against the justice of our cause.
Another difficulty which I encounter is rather curious. Many a man has
told me that if I had only not fallen into the hands of
_abolitionists_ and _free soilers_, they would have supported
me; and had I landed somewhere in the South, instead of at New York, I
should have met quite different things from that quarter; but being
supported by the free-soilers, of course I must be opposed by the South.
On the other side, I received a letter, from which I beg leave to quote
a few lines:--
"You are silent on the subject of slavery. Surrounded as you have been
by slaveholders ever since you put your foot on English soil, if not
during your whole voyage from Constantinople, and ever since you have
been in this country surrounded by them, whose threats, promises, and
flattery made the stoutest hearts succumb, your position has put me in
mind of a scene described by the apostle of Jesus Christ, when the devil
took him up into a high mountain," &c.
Now, gentlemen, thus being charged from one side with being in the hands
of abolitionists, and from the other side with being in the hands of
slaveholders, I indeed am at a loss what course to take, if these very
contradictory charges were not giving me the satisfaction to feel that I
stand just where it is my duty to stand--on a truly American ground.
And oh, have I not enough upon these poor shoulders, that I am desired
yet to take up additional cares? If the cause I plead be just, if it is
worthy of your sympathy, and at the same time consistent with the
impartial consideration of your own moral and material interests, (which
a patriot never should disregard, not even out of philanthropy,) then
why not weigh that cause in the scale of its own value, and not in a
foreign one? Have I not difficulties enough before me here, that I am
desired to increase them with my own hands?--Father Mathew goes on
preaching temperance, and he may be opposed or supported on his own
ground; but who ever thought of opposing him because he takes not into
his hands to preach fortitude or charity? And indeed, to oppose or to
abandon the cause I plead, only because I mix not with the agitation of
an interior question, is a greater injustice yet, because to discuss the
question of foreign policy I have a right,--my nation is an object of
that policy; we are interested in it;--but to mix with interior party
movements I have no right, not being a citizen of the United States.
[After this Kossuth proceeded to urge, as in former speeches, that the
interests of American commerce were not opposed to, but were identified
with, the cause of Hungary and of European Liberty. He also adduced new
considerations, which are afterwards treated more fully in his speech at
Buffalo.]
* * * * *