LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

troops against Italy, by conceding a most energetic "King's Speech" against the Serbs, with which the Archduke Palatine was to open, and did open, the Diet on July 2d. A part of this speech is quoted in Appendix II., and indeed it is a loathsome exhibition of Austrian treachery. The Hungarian ministry were pressed by the arguments, that since Austria was attacked in Italy by the King of Sardinia, the war was not merely against the Lombards; and that the Pragmatic Sanction bound Hungary to defend the empire if assailed from without. This led them to acknowledge the principle, that they were bound to assist, if able; but they replied that Hungary itself must first be secured against marauders, and no troops could be spared until the Serbs were subdued. At the same time orders were sent to Radetzki from Vienna to offer independence to the Lombards, and constitutional nationality under the Austrian crown to the Venetians: hence the Hungarian ministry for a time fancied that they would not be fighting against the Italians, as they expected the terms to be accepted by them. When it was farther represented that the Italians had rejected them—(for Radetzki, acting probably by secret orders, suppressed the despatches, and never offered independence to Lombardy, though the Austrian ministers made diplomatic capital of their liberality,)—then the Hungarian ministry began to think the Italians unreasonable; yet they did not go beyond their abstract principle, that Hungary ought to grant troops for Austrian defence in Italy, provided, 1st, that rebellion in Hungary itself were repressed; 2d, that the troops should not act against the Italians, unless the Italians had rejected the offer of national liberties and a constitution coordinate to those of Hungary, under the Austrian crown.

      The protocol on this subject was drawn on July 5th; the public speech of Kossuth concerning it was not until July 22d; and in this short interval the treachery of the dynasty had been so displayed, that Kossuth could no longer speak in the same tone as a few weeks earlier. For a fuller development of this, I refer the reader to Appendix III. The real object of the Austrian ministry, was, to ruin the popularity of Bathyanyi and Kossuth, if they could induce them to sacrifice Italian freedom; or else, to accuse them to all the European diplomatists as conspirators against the integrity of the Austrian empire, if they refused to oppress the liberties of Italy.

      Finally, the reader has even here proof enough how false is the statement which has been current in English newspapers, that Kossuth's visit to America was "a failure." This was an attempt to practise on our prevalent disgraceful tendency to judge of a cause by its success. However, the end is not yet seen: America has still to act decisively, if she would win the lasting glory which we have despised, of rescuing Law and Right from lawless force, and establishing the future of Europe.

      APPENDICES

      KOSSUTH'S SPEECHES.

      [The speeches of Kossuth in England, though masterly in themselves, are in great measure superseded by those which he delivered in America, where the same subjects were treated at far greater length, and viewed from many different aspects. From the speeches in England I here present only three topics, in a rather fragmentary form.]

      I.—SECRECY OF DIPLOMACY.

      [First Extract: from Kossuth's Speech at the Guildhall, London, Oct. 30th, 1851.]

      The time draws near, when a radical change must take place for the whole world in the management of diplomacy. Its basis has been secrecy: therein is the triumph of absolutism, and the misfortune of a free people. This has won its way not in England only, but throughout the whole world, even where not a penny of the national property can be disposed of without public consent. It surely is dangerous to the interests of the country and to constitutional liberty, to allow such a secrecy, that the people not only should not know how its interests are being dealt with, but that after the crisis is passed, the minister should inform them: "The dinner has been prepared—and eaten; and the people has nothing to do, but digest the consequences." What is the principle of all evil in Europe? The encroaching spirit of Russia.—And by what power has Russia become so mighty? By its arms?—No: the arms of Russia are below those of many Powers. It has become almost omnipotent—at least very dangerous to liberty—by diplomatic intrigues. Now against the secret intrigues of diplomacy there is no surer safeguard, or more powerful counteraction, than public discussion. This must be opposed to intrigues, and intrigues are then of no weight in the destinies of humanity.

      * * * * *

      [Second Extract from a Short Speech in London, May 25th, 1858.]

      I must ask leave to make a remark on the system pursued by your Government in their Foreign relations. You consider yourselves a constitutional nation: I fear that in some respects you are not so. There is a Latin proverb [current in Hungary], Nil de nobis sine nobis—"nothing that concerns us, without us." This in many things you make your maxim. You say that none of your money shall be spent without your knowledge and approval; and in your internal affairs you carry this out; but I think that the secrecy in which the transactions of your diplomacy are involved is hardly constitutional. Of that most important portion of your affairs which concerns your country in its relations with the rest of Europe, what knowledge have you? If any interpellation is made about any affair not yet concluded, my Lord the Secretary of the Foreign Office will reply that he cannot give any answer, for the negotiations are still pending. A little later he will be able to answer, that as all is now concluded, all comment will be superfluous.

      One little fact I will just mention. By the last treaty with Denmark, to which you became a party, the crown of that kingdom was so settled that only three lives stand between it and the Czar of Russia. Three lives! but a fragile barrier, when high political aims are concerned. It is therefore an allowed fact, that the country which commands entrance to the Baltic, and which, in the hands of an unfriendly power, would effectually exclude your commerce from that sea, may pass into the hands of Russia, whose pretensions in the south of Europe you take so much pains to check. This your government have done quietly. How many are there of your people that know and approve it? I hope you will not be offended, if I say, that I cannot understand how yours can be called in this respect a constitutional country.

      * * * * *

      II.—MONARCHY AND REPUBLICANISM.

      [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

Скачать книгу