There may be some also that will fall victims to the craft of skilful aristocratic diplomatists, who would fain keep or get the reputation of liberal men, but without the necessity of becoming really liberal. That class of influential persons may give some hope—even some half indefinite promise of support to the cause of Hungary (which they never intend to fulfil), under the condition of a peaceful compromise with the House of Austria upon a monarchical-aristocratical basis, and not in that way which I have proclaimed openly in England, knowing that every root of the monarchical principle is torn out from the breasts of the people of Hungary, so that we can never be knit again. Therefore the future of Hungary can only be republican, and there is no door to that future, but to continue the struggle. There may perhaps be some few honest but weak men, who, weary of a homeless life, would fain return home, even under the condition of monarchical-aristocratical compromise which some skilful diplomatists make glitter into their eyes.

But as to those two who do good service to the tyrant of their and my country, the very circumstance that they were silent when I (because a prisoner) was not able to work much, but are trying to check my endeavours, now that I am about to achieve something which can only prove to be a benefit to Hungarians,—smaller or greater, but only a benefit and in no case a harm; this very circumstance shows the nature of their attacks. But as to the pretence, by which they try to lull to sleep their own consciences, that was revealed to me by a copy of a confidential communication of one of their silent associates to a private circle of friends, where it is stated, that, as I have declared exclusively for a republic, a party must be got up under the nominal leadership of Bathyanyi, on a monarchical basis, because my views leave no hope to get home in an honourable manner, otherwise than by a revolution.

That is the key of the dispute. As to myself, I am a republican, and will never be a subject to a king, any more than be a king myself. But I love my country too sincerely to favour the course I would pursue, on my own private sentiments alone. I know the Hapsburg, and I know my country. I have weighed my people's revolution, wishes and will, and weighed the condition of the only possible success. Upon this basis I act, and am happy to say that the considerate prudence of a statesman, and the duties of a patriot, not only act in full harmony with my own personal republican convictions, but indeed cannot allow me in any other course. Either freedom and our popular rights have no future, not only in Hungary, but indeed in Europe, or that future will be, can be, and shall be only republican for the Hungarians. It is more than foolish to think that either an insurrectionary war can be prevented in Europe, or that that war can terminate otherwise than either by a consolidated despotism or republicanism. No other issue is possible. Therefore, however mean be the private motives of the hostility of those, my very few Hungarian enemies, I pity them. Out of too great a desire to get home, they have made their return in every case impossible. Not all the power of earth could afford them security at home against the indignation of the people. Not, if I succeed to liberate my country, for the people will consider them as traitors, who have done all they could to prevent that liberation; not, if I should fail, because then the people will believe that their counter-machinations are what caused me to fail.

So much for them. But the confidence with which I look to the republican freedom of Hungary has been confirmed, by considering how weak must the case be of those who urge you to indifference, when they are forced to resort to the argument that we have no chance of success.

I have often answered that objection, which in itself is a distrust in God, in justice, in right, and in the blessings of humanity. Allow me to-day in addition, only one remark. Two days ago the rumour was spread that Louis Napoleon was killed. It was remarkable to see how those who countenance despotism, grew livid by despair, and how those who doubt about our success rose in spirits and in confidence. Some time ago a similar false rumour caused almost a commercial crisis in the cotton market of New Orleans. Now how can the security of that cause be trusted, where the mere possible death of a single individual, and of such an individual, can so crush every calculation upon the solidity of the peace of oppression?

Allow me to draw your attention to a circumstance which one of your countrymen, William Henry Trescott, of South Carolina, has recommended to public attention, already in the year 1849, in his pamphlet, entitled 'A few Thoughts on the Foreign Policy of the United States.' The position of the United States underwent an immense change, as soon as your boundaries extended to the Pacific; extensive commercial relations with Asia became a necessity. You feel it—the very movements now commenced in respect to Japan bear witness to it. Let those movements be completed, and whom will you meet? Russia. That is the old story. Everybody who is willing to have some influence in the East must meet Russia, whose sterling thought is to exclude all other powers from the East.

England is to you the competitor in the commerce of the East; and competitors may well have a fair field for them both; but Russia is not a competitor there, she is an enemy. Look to the Mediterranean Sea, and remember the everlasting thought of Russia to crush Turkey, and to get hold of Constantinople. What is the key of this eternal fond desire, inherited from Peter the Great? It is not the mere desire of territorial aggrandizement; the real key is, that it is only by the possession of Constantinople that Russia, a great territorial power already, can become also a great maritime power. The Mediterranean is what Russia wants, to be the mistress of Europe, Asia, of Africa, and of the world. But the Sultan, sitting on the Bosphorus, confines the navy of the Czar to the Black Sea, an interior lake, without any outlet but by the beautiful Bosphorus. Constantinople taken, it is Russia which controls the Mediterranean:—a circumstance of such immense importance, that Mr. Trescott says, it would be a sufficient reason for direct and positive interference—that is, for war.

There—there—in Turkey, will be decided the fate of the world. Perhaps there will be not only the end, but also the beginning of the end; and some American politicians say, the United States can do nothing for Europe's liberty, but Turkey can,—holding only the Bosphorus against an inroad from Sebastopol!—Turkey, with its brave four hundred thousand men—the natural ally of all those European nations who will, who must, struggle against Russian preponderance. How wonderful! The Bosphorus in the hands of the Sultan, saves the world from Russian dominion; and yet I am asked, what can America do for Europe? How many men-of-war have you in the Mediterranean? I would you had more. Would you had some other anchorage in the Mediterranean for your glorious flag! Turkey has many a fine harbour, and a great deal of good will. The Turkish Aghas now would not be afraid to see cheered, for instance, by the inhabitants of Mytilene, the American flag, should it ever happen that that flag were cast in protection around my humble self; nay, I am sure they would smilingly join in the harsh but cordial "khôsh guelden, sepa gueldin," which is more than a thrice welcome in your language. But the word welcome reminds me that I have to say to you farewell—and that is a sad word in the place where I have met so warm a welcome, but it must be done. Can I hope to have the consolation of knowing that in bidding farewell to my namesake city, I leave high-minded men, who, remembering that they have seen the Hungarian exile on the Ides of March, will have faith in the future of freedom's just cause, and make the central city of the great United Republic the centre of numerous associations of the friends of Hungary in the Great West, whence I confidently hope the sun of freedom will move towards the East.

Ladies and gentlemen, I bid you farewell, a heartfelt, affectionate farewell.

[From St. Louis, Kossuth proceeded farther south; but we do not find any novelty in his speech at New Orleans, March 30th. The most notable thing in that meeting, is the cordial pronouncement of the Hon. E. W. Moise, in the name of the City Authorities and People of New Orleans, in favour of Hungary and Governor Kossuth: thus distinctly showing that the commercial metropolis of the South sympathizes with European liberty equally as the North. But it is sufficient here to have indicated the fact.]