In contemplating these facts, who can doubt that we are now a match for Austria. Then we had no army—now we have 120,000 brave Magyars, who fought for freedom and motherland, enlisted in the ranks of Austria, forming their weakness and our strength. Then hostile nations were opposed to us, now they are friendly, and are with us. Then no combination existed between the oppressed nations—now the combination exists. Then our oppressor took his own time to strike—when he was best and we were worst prepared:—now we will take our time and strike the blow when it is best for us and worst for him. In a word, then every chance was against us, and we almost in a condition that the stoutest hearts faltered; and we only took up the gauntlet because our very soul revolted against the boundless treachery;—now every chance is for us, and it is the native which throws the gauntlet into the tyrant's face. Our very misfortune ensures our success—because then we had some something to lose, now we have nothing. We can only gain—for I defy the sophistry of despotism to invent anything of public or private oppression which is not already inflicted upon us.
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.