Select Speeches of Kossuth

by Lajos Kossuth

So much I know, at least, that this absurd idea cannot, and will not, be advocated by any man here in the United States; which did not open its hospitable shores to humanity, and greet the flocking millions of emigrants with the right of a citizen, in order that the Union may be cut to pieces, and even your single States divided into new-framed, independent countries according to languages.

And do you know, gentlemen, whence this absurd theory sprang up on the European Continent? It was the idea of Panslavismus—that is the idea that the mighty stock of Sclavonic races is called to rule the world, as once the Roman did. It was a Russian plot—it was a dark design to make out of national feelings a tool to Russian preponderance over the world.

Perhaps you are not aware of the historical origin of this plot. It was after that most immortal act of tyranny, the third division of Poland, that the chance of fate brought the Prince Czartorinsky, to the Court of Catherine of Russia. He subsequently became minister of Alexander the Czar. It was in this quality that, with the noble aim to benefit his fallen fatherland, he claimed from the young Czar the restoration of Poland, suggesting for equivalent the idea of Russian preponderance over all nations of the old Sclavonic race. I believe his intention was sincere; I believe he did not mean to overlook those natural borders, which, besides the affinity of language, God himself has drawn between the nations. But he forgot that he might be no longer able to master the spirits which he would raise, and that an undesired fanaticism might force sundry fantastical shapes into his framework, by which the frame itself must burst in pieces. He forgot that Russian preponderance cannot be propitious to liberty; he forgot that it cannot be favourable even to the development of the Sclave nationality, because Sclavonic nations would by this idea be degraded into mere Russians, that is, absorbed by despotism.

Russia got hold of the fanciful idea very readily! May be that young Alexander had in the first moment noble inclinations; the warm heart of youth is susceptible to noble instincts. It is not common in history to find young princes so premature in tyranny as Francis-Joseph of Austria. But a few years of power were sufficient to extinguish every spark of noble sentiment, if there was one, in Alexander's heart. Upon the throne of the Romanoffs the man is soon absorbed by the Autocrat. The traditional policy of St. Petersburg is not an atmosphere in which the plant of regeneration can grow, and the fanciful idea became soon a weapon of oppression and of Russian preponderance—Russia availed herself of the idea of Panslavism to break Turkey down, and to make an obedient satellite out of Austria. Turkey still withstands her, but Austria has fallen into the snare. Russia sent out its agents, its moneys, its venomous secret diplomacy; it whispered to the Sclave nations about hatred against foreign dominion—about independence of religion connected with nationality under its own supremacy; but chiefly it spoke to them of Panslavism under the protectorate of the Czar. The millions of his large empire also, all oppressed—all in servitude—all a tool to his ambition; them too he flattered with the idea of becoming rulers of the world, in order that they might not think of liberty: he knew that man's breast cannot maintain in ascendancy two great passions at once. He gave them ambition and excluded the spirit of liberty. This ambition got hold of all the Sclave nations through Europe; so Panslavism became the source of a movement, not of nationality, but of the dominion of languages. That word "language" replaced every other sentiment, and so it became a curse to the development of liberty.

Only one part of the Sclavonic races saw the matter clear, and withstood the current of this dark Russian plot. These were the Polish Democrats—the only ones who understood that to fight for liberty is to fight for nationality. Therefore they fought in our ranks, and were willing to flock in thousands upon thousands to aid us in our struggle; but we could not arm them, so I would not accept them. We ourselves had a hundredfold more hands ready to fight than arms—and there was nobody in the world to supply us with arms.

Now let me see what was the condition of Hungary under these circumstances.

Eight hundred and fifty years ago, when the first King of Hungary, St. Stephen, becoming Christian himself, converted the Hungarian nation to Christianity, it was the Roman Catholic clergy of Germany whom he invited to assist him in his pious work. They did assist him, but the assistance, as happens with human nature, was accompanied by some worldly designs. Hungary offered a wide field to the ambition of foreigners, and they persuaded the King to adopt a curious principle, which he laid down in his last Will and Testament—that it is not good for the people of a country to be but of one extraction and speak but one tongue. A second rule was, to adopt the language of the Church—Latin—for the language of government, legislature, law and all public proceedings. This is the origin of that fatality, that Democracy did not grow up for centuries in Hungary. The public proceedings being in Latin, the laws given in Latin, public instruction carried on in Latin, the great mass of the people, who were agriculturists, did not partake in any of this; and the few who in the ranks of the people partook in it, became severed and alienated from the people's interests. This dead Latin language, introduced into the public life of a living nation, was the most mischievous barrier against liberty. The first blow to it was stricken by the Reformation. The Protestant Church, introducing the national language into the divine services, became a medium to the development of the spirit of liberty, and so our ancient struggles for religious liberty were always connected with the maintenance of political rights. But still, Latin public life went on down to 1780. At that time, Joseph of Hapsburg, aiming at centralization, replaced the Latin by the German tongue. This roused the national spirit of Hungary; and our forefathers seeing that the dead Latin language, excluding the people from the public concerns, cannot be propitious to liberty, and anxious to oppose the design of the Viennese Cabinet to Germanize Hungary, and so melt it into the common absolutism of the Austrian dynasty—I say, anxious to oppose this design by a cheerful public life of the people itself, from the year 1790 began to pass laws in the direction that by-and-by, step by step, the Latin language should be replaced in the public proceedings of the Legislature and of the Government by a living language familiar to the people itself. And what was more natural, than that, being in the necessity to choose one language, they choose the Magyar? the more so, since those who spoke Hungarian were not only more than those who spoke any one of the other languages, but were if not more than, at least equal to, all those who spoke several other languages together.

Be so kind to mark well, gentlemen; no other language was oppressed—the Hungarian language was enforced upon nobody. Wherever another language was in use even in public life; of whatever Church—whatever popular school—whatever community—it was not replaced by the Hungarian language. It was only the dead Latin, which by-and-by became eliminated from the diplomatic public life, and replaced by the living Hungarian in Hungary.

In Hungary, I say. Gentlemen, be pleased to mark: never was this measure extended into the municipal life of Croatia and Sclavonia, which, though belonging for 800 years to Hungary, still were not Hungary, but a race with distinct local institutions.

The Croatians and Sclavonians themselves repeatedly urged us in the common parliament to afford them opportunity to learn the Hungarian language, that, having the right, they might also enjoy the benefit, of being employed in the government offices of our common Hungary. This opportunity was afforded to them, but nobody was forced to make use of it; while neither with their own municipal and public life, nor with the domestic, social, religious life, of any other people in Hungary itself, did the Hungarian language ever interfere. It replaced only the Latin language, which no people spoke, and which was contrary to liberty, because it excluded the millions from public life. Willing to give freedom to the people, we expelled that Latin tongue; which was an obstacle to its future. We did what every other nation in the old world has done, clearing by it the way to the universal liberty.