PUBLISHED AT WASHINGTON, BY JOHN C. RIVES.-TERMS $3 FOR THIS SESSION.

Sir, I have been surprised to hear the sentiment uttered on this floor by the gentleman from Ohio, and by other gentlemen in private conversation, that it is the duty of this House to proclaim to the world that they are prepared to sustain the bloodstained banner of Louis Kossuth. For one, as an humble representative on this floor-as an American citizen, I reject indignantly that blood-stained banner. My first, my last, my great, my only duty is to my own country. Louis Kossuth seems to be devoted body, soul, and mind to Hungary.ject to it? May I not imitate his example? May I not go for my own country? and should I not be a traitor to that country, and to the blessings by which we are surrounded

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. DEAN asked if it would be in order to withdraw his amendment?

The CHAIRMAN stated that it could only be withdrawn by unanimous consent.

Load cries of "Object!"]

The question was then taken on Mr. DEAN'S amendment, and it was not agreed to.

Mr. BAYLY, of Virginia, moved the following amendment:

Provided, That nothing in this resolution contained shall be construed as expressive of a design to involve ourselves in entangling alliances with European governments.

Mr. FICKLIN. I rise to a point of order, in reference to this amendment. I inquire if this amendment is not in substance the same as one offered some time ago?

The CHAIRMAN. It is not in the same language. Lbelieve there is no rule or practice of the House which says an amendment once offered and voted down shall not be again offered.

Mr. BAYLY, of Virginia. It is not the resolution in substance of my honorable friend from Tennessee, [Mr. HARRIS.] His resolution instructed the committee, which the original resolution proposed to raise, to inform Louis Kossuth that the settled policy of this Government was, friendly relations with all nations and entangling alliances with none. This resolution differs from it in this: it does not say what is our policy, but only declares a purpose upon our part to express by his reception here no design of involving ourselves in alliances. On yesterday, I took the ground that the resolution as it stood did not commit our Government to the principles which he was propagating; but, sir, a change has come over the spirit of the dream of some of us. We have heard it avowed here to-day that intervention in European affairs might be the policy of this Government; all I call upon this committee now to declare is, what I maintained upon yesterday, that this resolution commits us to nothing except the showing of an act of courtesy to Kossuth. I was opposed to that resolution on yesterday for some reasons I stated. I said on yesterday I was not

say that you, sir, Mr. Chairman, whatever may be your opinions now, would not refuse. I say, that the majority of this House, whatever may be their views at the present time, would not refuse, because circumstances may arise which will render intervention necessary. It is not because they have arisen, but because they may arise, that I am unwilling to see this Government commit itself to a declaration that we will not interfere, under any circumstances, for the purpose of securing the liberties of the down-trodden nations of Europe. I say, when we can intervene, it is our duty to do it, and we will do it.

tlemen who see our duty in a mission of des-
tiny prevail, we must keep on foot such an army
as shall enable us to fulfill it; and we may live
to see the representatives of our people forcibly
ejected by our own troops, conveyed to dungeons
by our own Executive, and he perpetually seated
and kept secure in authority by the army, who were
to be the missionaries of universal emancipation.
Sir, neither the dread of being identified with the
defenders of Haynau the Butcher, nor the shame
of being considered an antiquated politician, whose
views are fitted only for the infancy of a great
republic, can deter me from making resistance to
the doctrines advanced in this debate, or protest-
ing against the adoption of the troubles of every
foreigner, who, visiting our shores, can by his
eloquence and his tact excite the passions of the
masses who may listen to his orations. If to
study the interests of my country, and my whole
country-if to adhere to the policy under which
we have grown great and powerful-if to remember
that we have inherited the office of the keepers of
the Temple of Liberty, and to be resolved that no
hand shall apply the torch to it whilst vigilance
and patriotism can prevent it, constitute an anti-
quated politician, I glory in the name. I shall
never blush at the remembrance that I was un-
willing to forget my country's dignity, under any
excitement, or compromise that dignity by a de-
parture from those rules of propriety amongst
nations, so essential to the comfort and prosperity
of individuals. With those who suffer for the
cause of liberty in Europe I feel, as I trust, a
proper sympathy, but I do not perceive the wisdom
of an intervention which can only compromise us
and do them no good.

great struggle for liberty, and the best evidence of it is found in the fact, that when we learned that about four thousand refugees had taken refuge in the Turkish empire, this Government took the initiative step to express the sympathy of this nation for them. We, on the 3d of March, 1851, passed the joint resolution to which I have referred. For what purpose? Merely to liberate these Hungarian exiles? No, sir; but to afford them an asylum in the United States of America; a home, as emigrants to this country. They intimated their desire to live under our glorious stars and stripes, and to become citizens of the United States. Now, what do we see? Do you suppose that, if it had been known on the 3d of March, 1851, that Louis Kossuth would come here to undertake to incorporate a new principle-a great principle in the foreign policy of our Government-which we have abstained from and kept aloof from until this time, under the advice of the great Washington, the Father of our country-do you suppose that if he had announced that as his intention at that time, that we should ever have passed that joint resolution? Never, never! We passed it to aid the Ottoman Sultan in liberating, from extreme danger, the unfortunate exiles who had fled from their own country for life, and to afford them, as I say, a secure asylum in the United States. I think, sir, in passing that vote of welcome a week or two ago, we exhausted all our duty to him as members of this House; and by that vote welcomed him to the country, its protection, and to its hospitalities, if he should choose to become a citizen of the United States. I am opposed to the whole proceedings now before us-the original resolution of my colleague from Ohio, [Mr. ČARTTER,] and all the amendments. I say, this House is not called upon to take any such step. Let us treat this gentleman with the utmost kindness; but to do more, to carry out the objects he now proposes, would be a departure from the national policy which has enabled us to become the admiration of the world. I would cheerfully unite, as a citizen of the United States, in promoting their settlement in this country, and rendering it a safe retreat and secure asylum to Kossuth and his associates in captivity. But, sir, let us adhere to the settled policy of the country-let us avoid “entangling alliances" with foreign nations, and show, by exact justice in our intercourse with foreign nations, and wise legislaThe question was then taken on Mr. STANTON'stion, for the benefit of our own country, that our amendment, and it was not agreed to.

[Here the hammer fell, the five minutes having expired.]

Mr. V. intended to have continued his remarks, by observing, that if we felt very much inclined to look for a quarrel, the questions involved in the policy of England in relation to the Mosquito kingdom, the firing into the Prometheus, and the assumed guardianship by the English Government of the locum tenens negro king, to the injury of our commerce and the insult of our flag, would afford at least temporary employment for the zeal of those who are inclined to seek for wrongs to redress. I propose that we adjust our real quarrels before we engage in amateur disputes.

Mr. TAYLOR moved the following amendment to the amendment, viz:

Mr. VENABLE. Mr. Chairman, if I had been doubtful before as to the propriety of caution on our part in relation to the course to be pursued towards M. Kossuth, all my difficulties would have been removed by the events occurring in this House and during this debate. Although it was manifest that he was for intervention on our part in the troubles of Europe, we had seen no indorsement of that policy by the representatives of the people in Congress. This is no longer the case. We have heard more than one distinguished member of this House announce that intervention in favor of universal liberty was our destiny and mission. We have more than once been reminded that we had nothing to fear, and there has been even some merriment at the apprehensions of those who thought it prudent for our Government to avoid the hazards of entering the whirlpool of European revolutions. We have been admonished, that although the doctrines of General Washington's Farewell Address were suitable to the infancy of our Republic, they were no longer applicable to the grown-up power which now stood forth amongst the first on the platform of nations; that a new destiny and new duties had been revealed; and that to be insensible to them was inexcusable. Those whose ignorance or timidity induced them to advise caution have, by one gentleman from New York, [Mr. DEAN,] been spoken of as the apologists for the Butcher Haynau. I can assure him that the days of Anacharsis Clootsthe orator of the human race-are among the things which have passed by never more to return; that Red Republicanism is at a discount even in France; and that it will neither exalt his reputation for practical wisdom or as the possessor of the qualification of the elements of profound statesmanship, to fix a policy upon our country which shall present a future history like the roll in the prophet's vision, written within and without with "mourning, lamentation, and woe." I fear no just quarrel of our own-I apprehend nothing from the consequences of war in such a quarrel beyond the calamities necessarily belonging to that condition; but I shrink from that causeless and unholy strife which drenches a country in blood and strews the fields with the slain; which is productive only in the nurture of a savage and destructive spirit, the tears of widows, and the sorrows of orphans. We have even seen the platform of Kossuth recommended for our adop- || tion, and one and another has openly avowed our duty to declare to the world our purpose to aid the oppressed in their struggles for liberty. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. STANTON] speaks of the present condition of Europe, where two millions of bayonets hold down and oppress more than one hundred millions of people. If the removal of this evil be our duty, we have indeed a great work before us, one concerning which I think we ought to prudently pause and ponder the consequences of the undertaking. He speaks of the present condition of France, whose liberties have but just been overthrown by Louis Napoleon. He speaks of the imprisonment of Thiers, Cavaignac, and other deputies, and more than intimates that the time is near for us to intervene in such affairs. Sir, I think that the bursting of this French bubble is full of instruction to us. We ought to learn the folly of being premature in even an expression of approbation for the measures in which national identity is destroyed. France has fallen by the institutions which were chosen by the people themselves. The army, which kept their liberties, has taken them for their own use, and a mushroom republic bids fair to find its maturity in a finished despotism. I admit that the Sir, if there is one man upon this floor, who will imprisonment of the representatives of the peo- pretend to sympathize with the Hungarian exiles ple is a great outrage on the part of the Presi- more than another, he does dishonor to himself dent of France, and I do not wish to see it re- and a great injury to his fellow-members. We all enacted here. Should the doctrines of those gen-sympathize with the exiled Hungarians in their

Resolved, That the vote of welcome heretofore given by this House and the Senate of the United States to Louis Kossuth had no political meaning, but was intended to car

constitutional form of republican government is the wisest and best to promote the true interests of the people, and our example will be powerful for good in all the nations of the world.

ry out the kind intention of the United States in their jointing better justice to our own reputations as states

resolution, approved March 3, 1851, in relation to Kossuth
and his associates in captivity, to afford them a secure
asylum in the United States.

Mr. TAYLOR. Now, Mr. Chairman, I have
listened here for several days to a debate which I
think would have been more profitable if we had
had it at the time when the resolution of welcome
was under consideration. I have sat here quietly
for many days, anxious to engage in the public
business, and do justice to our fellow-citizens all
over the United States, by taking up the great
questions of public policy which are pressed upon
our attention by the millions of people we repre-
sent. I have, sir, noticed with disgust the move-
ments of men who seek high places in your coun-
try, since the unfortunate exiles of Hungary landed
upon your shores; yea, sir, from the time he took
his departure from your frigate-of-war Mississippi,
to become a propagandist in England first, to ex-
cite a feeling in that country, and then in this, to
induce us to depart from that wise policy-that
straight-forward policy recommended to us by
Washington, and which we have carried out from
the foundation of our Government. I have looked
at the progress of this business from its inception.
No class of men have been more anxious to do
honor to Louis Kossuth, and to show him the
kindness which did honor him, than the politicians
of the country, and for the purpose of upholding
their own fortunes. Look around this House,
and see what a billing and cooing there is here of
persons from the most extreme sections.

Mr. GIDDINGS. I believe we should be domen, if we were to proceed in the ordinary mode of legislation upon the subject-matter before us, and avoid all reference to matters not legitimately under consideration. I believe, sir, it is due to ourselves, as the representatives of the people of this nation, that we do the business which is presented to us, and do it in the ordinary forms and in the ordinary manner, without factious opposi tion, and without any extraneous matters being brought in for investigation. I make these remarks because, from some experience in this House, I am constrained to say, that, from this factious opposition which we have sometimes seen displayed in this body, we have never seen any good result. It does not serve to raise our reputation with the American people, nor does it increase our own self-respect. I sincerely hope we may proceed to vote upon this resolution; but while I am up, I am constrained to notice the extraordinary inconsistency of certain gentlemen upon this floor. If I mistake not, my colleague who has just taken his seat [Mr. TAYLOR] Voted for a certain resolution, of a direct character, interfering and proclaiming our sympathies with a foreign and European nation in a cause of freedom. I ask the Clerk to read the resolution I have sent him.

The CLERK then read the resolution referred to, from the Congressional Globe, of 1847–28, vol. 18th, page 592, as follows:

Resolved, That in the name and behalf of the American people, the congratulations of Congress are hereby tendered to the people of France, upon the success of their recent efforts to consolidate the principles of liberty in a republican form of Government.

And be it further resolved, That the President of the United States be and he is hereby requested to transmit this resolution to the American Minister at Paris, with instructions to present it to the French Government."

eigners-to a country that in the hour of peril re-
ceived the aid of a Lafayette, De Kalb, and Kos-
ciusko, and whose soil still holds the ashes of
Pulaski and Steuben?

Mr. McMULLIN, (interrupting.) His impu-
dence is in attempting to destroy the teachings of

Washington.

and leaders. From out the stormy waves of the
French convulsions emerged Napoleon Bonaparte,
who seized with an iron hand the helm of Europe,
and wrote his name with the point of his sword in
inetfaceable characters upon the history of the
world. In our own Revolution, also, Providence
raised up the man for the times, and gave as that
Washington whose fame is yet the dearest treasure Mr. GROW. Devoutly as we turn to the
of his countrymen, and whose name is honored teachings of that greatest of mortals-and Heaven
wherever liberty is praised. But in looking over grant the day may never come when it shall be
the late agitations of the Old World, no man, it otherwise with the American-still the institutions,
seems to me, appears who can fairly contest the opinions, and men, both living and dead, of this
country, as of all others, are here proper and open
lution had failed everywhere else, and the old dark-subjects of manly discussion. Freedom of opin-
palm of supremacy with Kossuth. When revo-
ness was settling over the nations, it was he who ion and expression on any and all subjects, is the
kept Hungary alive with freedom, and so anima- right of a freeman under a free Government. The
ted her with his own spirit that she beat Austria
only sure reliance in every case is on the virtue,
from the field, did not tremble before Austria and intelligence, and integrity of the people to correct
Russia combined, and only bowed her head at last all errors. It becomes not the American to bow
before the treachery of one of her own sons. Sir, with blind reverence to opinions or institutions be-
for what this man has done I am willing to give cause of their grey age. For while knowledge is
him my cordial thanks, and I care not how loudly growing more comprehensive, man's relations be-
and how warmly he may be welcomed to our coming better known, he who would cling blindly
shores. I am willing to see the people load him to all the notions of other times, acts a suicidal
with honors, and make him the almoner of great part to the best interests of the present. While
wealth. All this they have a right to do, and truth and society are progressive, he who would
there is no power on earth which can control them. seek the one with an honest heart and fearless
Nor do I fear that they will ultimately go too far. mind, and act with a generous soul for the best
I have great and abiding confidence in their" sober interest of the other, cannot entertain all the no-
second thought." But I warn gentlemen that tions of his predecessors.
any abatement of a proper courtesy on our part
towards the illustrious Magyar may awaken an
indignant feeling among the people, which may re-
act in favor of those very doctrines of his which
some of us do not see fit yet to avow.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. GROW. It was not my purpose thus early in the session to mingle in the debates of this Hall, nor would I at this late hour of the day trouble the House with any remarks but for the charge that has just fallen from the lips of the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. McMULLIN.] I cannot refrain from replying, when I have the words of Kossuth to do it with. Let his own language defend him against the charge of audacity. He comes here advocating the rights of crushed humanity and the cause of his native land, and asks the American people for their aid against the despots of his country. Frankly he lays his claims and wishes before his hearers, and asks their consideration. He asks them as men standing under the shadow of Washington, to consider the cause of humanity; and for this he is charged with being guilty of the greatest impudence! Are his requests unreasonable, that they should not be heard? He brings to their elucidation the light of his master intellect, and the impulses of a warm heart. In what consists his impudence? Does he make a demand upon this Government or people, and attempt by threats or intimidation to coerce it? He presents his cause and reasons, and asks you for a voluntary decision; and if in his favor, then he will leave your shores-the herald of glad tidings to enthralled nations. But if you answer no, in his own language "you will see a mournful tear in the eye of humanity-its breast heaving with a sorrowful sigh-yet 'the answer must be accepted." "If you answer, 'you would rather be on friendly terms with the Czar than rejoice in the liberty and independence of Hungary, Italy, Germany, and France, yet 'dreadful as it is I will wipe the tear of sorrow 'from my eye, and say to my brethren, let us pray, and go to the Lord's last supper, and then to battle and to death. I will say to them, there is no 'help for us but in our trust in God, and in our 'own good swords. I will leave you with a dying farewell, and bless you with the warmest wishes 'of my heart, and pray to God that the Sun of Freedom may never decline from the horizon of 'your happy land." If this be "impudence," in what way would you have an apostle of liberty appeal for the sympathy and aid of a people whose country has drank the life-blood not only of its own martyrs, but of the martyrs of every clime? Is it impudent for a man just escaped from Austrian dungeons and Turkish exile to stand up in the face of nations and advocate the conscious rights of man? Is it "impudent" for the representative of a brave people to present the claims of his fatherland to the sympathies of the descendants of Washington, Franklin, and Jefferson?-to make his appeal in behalf of bleeding humanity to a people whose every battle-field in the first and second war of independence is red with the blood of for

If the doctrine of non-intervention was proper for our country in the days of Washington, and even though bequeathed to us as his dying legacy, has not the time come, or will it never arrive, for this Republic to decide whether in its foreign relations it is an inveterate rule never in any case to be departed from; that we must stand with folded arms and closed lips and see a brave people, goaded by the wrongs of centuries and battling for liberty and the rights which God and nature has given them, and even when they have driven the invader from their soil, struck down by the hireling myrmidons of united despots, and their country drenched with the blood of the noble and the brave, blotted from the map of nations? Is it the legacy of wisdom and humanity bequeathed by Washington and his copatriots, that Americen freemen must forever, in silence, be pierced with the "shrieks of liberty" as her votaries fall?

Whatever may be the policy or decision of our Government in reference to armed intervention, as the generous spirit sits not at the social board with the robber and the assassin, let it, at least, in its intercourse with other nations, be as circumspect in its company as the private citizen. To that nation which tramples on the laws of nations and the common rights of humanity, let it not extend the hand of fellowship. Let us welcome to our shores, and to the hearts of our countrymen, the exile driven by oppression and wrong from the fireside of his fathers.

Third, That the Government of the United States should declare its opinion in respect to the question of the independence of Hungary, and act accordingly.

Mr. S. said: The amendment is simply the platform of Kossuth himself, as presented to the American people, and seems either to have been misunderstood, or forgotten, by those who have undertaken to announce his purposes in the debate which has taken place on this resolution. Kossuth himself can better explain what he means by these propositions, than any one else, and as he has had no chance of speaking to-day for himself, I propose to afford him an opportunity. When Kosthis debate; and I trust that the little speech which suth shall have spoken, it will be a fit time to close I send to the Clerk to read, from the great Hungarian himself, explanatory of his platform, will be the last made upon the subject.

The following extract from Kossuth's address to the Jackson Democratic Association, was then read:

"My nation believes that the United States, presenting
themselves before the world in that imposing attitude, will
restrain tyrants without any war. Let me say, that I came
not to try to engage your arms and the blood of your hearts,
to fight our battles. We will fight our battles ourselves.
[Applause.] I came not to entangle you in a war. We
can fight our own batties. We are a nation capable of
achieving our own freedom if we have fair play. If a na-
tion like Hungary, with fifteen millions of inhabitants, is
not able to fight its own battles, by its own foree, against
its own enemy-if it is not strong enough to settle its own
domestic matters, by its own strength, it deserves not, it
merits not, to be free. All we want is fair play. [Applause.}
We do not wish to fight against the whole world. The only
thing which we desire is fair play."

Mr. BAYLY, of Virginia. I will remark that
the extract which has just been read, does not
contain all that Kossuth has said on this point.
[Prolonged laughter.] I hope that laugh will not
be taken out of my time. [Renewed laughter.]
He has told us, with that candor which has char-
acterized him since he came amongst us, that when
he asks us to declare against intervention, if that
declaration of ours was disregarded upon the part
of Russia, that he expected us to go to war to sus-
tain it. That is what he said, and it cannot be dis-
puted on the floor; and an attempt ought not to be
made to disguise it. Now, I want to put to the
American Congress one or two simple inquiries in
respect to this doctrine in favor of non-interven-
tion. I ask what department can commit us to it
in a form to be authoritative and respected? Sup-
pose the Executive should declare it, does not
every one know that, coming from that Depart-
ment alone, it would be brutum fulmen? Suppose
it should not be respected, as it most probably
would not be, what could the President do? He
could not back it with the Army and Navy of the
United States. The war-power resides in Con-
gress; and no appropriation to that use can be
made for a longer period than two years. All he
could do would be to convene Congress, and rec-
ommend to it to declare war to make good his
declaration. Congress is, as we all know, a fluctu-

Mr. GORMAN. As the gentleman's time is
not yet out, I desire to make a statement to theating body; an opposition Congress is not always
friends of this resolution. I desire to say to them,
that if they expect to arrive at a vote upon the
resolution to-night, they must not discuss it them-
selves. If gentlemen will recollect, during the
last Congress the Committee of the Whole on the
state of the Union were kept from a vote for sixty
days precisely in this way. For one, I intend
to sit here till midnight rather than not to dispose

of this resolution.

The question was then taken on the amendment of the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. APPLETON,] and it was not agreed to.

Mr. STANTON, of Kentucky. I have an amendment which I propose to offer, after which I intend to ask the Clerk to read an extract from a speech of Kossuth's. I move to strike out all after the word "provided," and insert the following:

First, That, feeling interested in the maintenance of the laws of nations, acknowledging the sovereign right of every people to dispose of its own domestic concerns to be one of these laws, and the interference with this sovereign right to be a violation of these laws of nations, the people of the United States-resolved to respect and to make respected these public laws-declare the Russian past intervention in Hungary to be a violation of these laws, which, if reiterated, would be a new violation, and would not be regarded indifferently by the people of the United States.

Second, That the people of the United States are resolved to maintain its right of commercial intercourse with the nations of Europe, whether they be in a state of revolution against their government or not; and that, with a view of approaching scenes on the continent of Europe, the Goverument should take appropriate measures for the protection of the trade of our people in the Mediterranean; and,

disposed to carry out Executive recommendations,
and it cannot be relied upon with certainty that
all future Congresses would go to war to sustain
such a declaration, even if made by a President
to whom it was friendly. It certainly would not
do it in a case which did not strongly enlist its
sympathy. Yet to cause the principle to be re-
spected in any case, it would be necessary to vin-
dicate it in all. I repeat, what Kossuth himself
admits in effect, that, unless it is known by other
nations that we would vindicate our declaratian by
war if it was not respected, that it would be mere
brutum fulmen.

Suppose the declaration made by the Executive
and by Congress also. It could only bind the
Congress that would make it.

Kossuth's doctrines are impracticable under our form of government. Let me illustrate. Sup-pose this Government was to commit itself in all of its branches to them; suppose about August, Hungary should again strike for her independence; suppose Russia should interfere as interfere she would, for the right to do so, as she esteems, is the vital principle of her system, and she would risk a war with us, or anybody else, sooner than surrender it-all the President could do would be to convene Congress. This would take sixty days. We would debate at least six weeks, more likely six months, before a declaration of war would be made. Then we would have to take time to raise and discipline an army, unless we do

what I think is an indispensable adjunct to this policy-keep on hand a large standing army. Then they are to be transported to Hungary, and in the mean time she is again prostrate; and we, I suppose, would either return with our fingers in our mouths, or wage a war to resuscitate her. In other words, we would wage a war to bring into existence a republic rather than to succor one. If we desire to engage in this policy, I think France presents a fair theatre. That is the view I hinted at yesterday; but I did not wish to elaborate it then, and, of course, I do not mean to attempt it now, in the five minutes that are allotted me. I shall do it hereafter. But I undertake to say that this doctrine of intervention is utterly inconsistent with the whole structure of our Government. Under a monarchy it is different. When the King of England or any other of the potentates of Europe make a declaration against intervention, they have all the war power in their own hands, and they can back their declaration without consulting anybody. I undertake to say, with some little knowledge of history upon this subject, that there has been no case where any nation of Europe has taken the decisive stand which we are called upon to take, that did not at least commence making preparation for war coexistent with its declaration. In most cases the preparation has preceded the declaration; and to cause it to be respected this must be done. If we are to adopt this European policy, we must adopt all essential parts of it.

[Here the hammer fell.]

The question was then taken upon Mr. STANTON's amendment to the amendment of Mr. CHURCHWELL, and it was not agreed to.

Mr. RICHARDSON. I desire to offer an amendment to the amendment of the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. CHURCHWELL.] I offer the following:

Resolved, That the Speaker be requested to appoint a committee who shall report to this House whether, in their opinion, the resolution of the last Congress, inviting Father Mathew to a seat in this Hall, committed members of Congress and the Government of the United States to the cause of temperance.

[Great laughter.]

The CHAIRMÁN. The amendment is not in order.

Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia. What is the pending amendment?

The CHAIRMAN. The amendment of the gentleman from Tennessee, [Mr. CHURCHWELL.] Mr. STEPHENS. What has become of the amendment of the gentleman from Illinois? The CHAIRMAN. It is not in order. Mr. YATES. I offer the following amendment to the amendment:

"And that said committee be instructed to inform Louis Kossuth that the Government of the United States will not look with indifference on the intervention of Russia, or any other foreign Power, against Hungary, in any struggle for liberty she may hereafter have against the despotic power of Austria."

gling against power and despotism for true and
genuine liberty.

ment. They readily learn our language, take an interest in our schools and public works, and I believe, sir, are as sober, industrious, moral, and patriotic as our native American citizens. Upon the great subject of liberty I humbly trust that this House cannot hesitate because Kossuth is a foreigner. The true friends of freedom are united in the bonds of brotherhood throughout the world, and no natural barriers, no differences of locality, of clime, or country, no ocean running between, should divide them.

population of the district I have the honor to represent, consists of Germans, and, sir, they are disWho is Louis Kossuth? He stands forth prom- tinguished for their intelligence, enterprise, and inent before the civilized world as the distinguished public spirit; but more than this, they are distinrepresentative of the democratic principle in Eu-guished for their ardent devotion to our Governrope; as one who, in the council chamber of his native land-in the Hungarian Diet-contended for the abolition of feudal prerogatives, for the principle of popular representation, and for unrestricted equality without regard to rank or birthand who is now the great missionary of freedom, and is setting on fire the whole civilized world by the splendor and power and brilliancy of his eloquence in the sacred cause of oppressed humanity. He comes here an exile. Overcome by his enemies, defeated by the treachery of his friends, incarcerated in Austrian dungeons, banished from his native country, from the home of his childhood, yet his lofty spirit, still unbroken, towers with the great idea of redemption to Hungary, and his great heart still beats with the unfaltering purpose to strike for freedom and the rights of man. This, sir, is the man whom we propose to welcome.

Sir, if it be intervention, which I deny, to shake by the hand this republican, then I am for intervention. If it be intervention to proclaim our sympathy for any people struggling for disenthralment from tyranny, for the great principles of democratic liberty, then I am for it. [Several voices: "That's right."] If it be intervention for this Congress to express its indignant condemnation of the tyranny of Austria and the double tyranny of Russia, in the progress of this Hungarian war, then I am for it. [Voices: "That's right."] Sir, the inglorious sentiment that we, the freest nation in the world, enjoying all the blessings of republican government, can be indifferent to the struggles of the oppressed for the same liberty we possess, is a sentiment unworthy of the spirit of the age in which we live, and should find no lodgment in the American heart. It has been the policy of this Government to express its sympathy in such cases, and I hope it will continue to be. We must do right, sir, let the consequences be what they may. If Russia and Austria take offence and bring on war, it will be their war and not ours. We shall fight in the defence; and in a righteous war upon our own soil, we could bid defiance to the despotisms of the world. Bright glories have covered our arms in three wars already; but in this last and final struggle between freedom and despotism, our good old flag would be borne aloft in triumph, the glorious ensign of liberty to the world.

Mr. Chairman, we are told that there is no precedent for this welcome. I am willing to admit that precedent is worth something, and could show that we had precedents in a good measure similar to the case now before us, in the reception of Lafayette and Father Mathew; but what is it for which gentlemen ask a precedent? Why, sir, it is this: we must not take a good republican by the hand, because we have no precedent for it. This, sir, with due deference to gentlemen, I must say is simply ridiculous. No precedent, sir! I will inquire if all advance in legislation, all progress in civil or political reform, and even the friendly exchange of the common courtesies of life, are to be disregarded, because there is no precedent for them? Sir, it is in politics as it is in the physical sciences, in improvements in agriculture, or the mechanic arts; it is an age of progress in which in some things we are leaving the old landmarks behind and striking out a new path. Less than half a century ago, and there was no precedent for steamboats, or railroads, or telegraphs. Now, sir, we have precedents in the palaces that float upon the bosoms of our rivers and plough the ocean; in the iron horse that thunders along our mountains and valleys; and in the long wires which bear our thoughts and messages faster than eagles fly. Sir, if there is no precedent in the annals of Congress for tendering the hospitalities of this nation to so distinguished a champion of human rights as Louis

Mr. YATES said: I have introduced this
amendment only for the purpose of saying that
I am in favor of the original resolution. I am
astonished that gentlemen will not permit the
House to come to a fair vote upon that resolution.
The resolution does not commit the House to the
principle of intervention. No, sir; not even by
implication or construction. There is nothing in
it which, according to a fair and honest interpre-
tation, can be construed a committal to that prin-
ciple. The only question is, whether we will
extend a cordial welcome to this illustrious cham-
pion of human rights. It contains a simple direc-
tion to the committee to wait upon Louis Kossuth,
and to introduce him to this House. When gen-
tlemen array the objection of intervention against
this resolution, they travel out of the record.
There is no such averment in the declaration. It
is a simple act of courtesy, and no more. I would
not, sir, heedlessly involve this nation in the affairs
of foreign nations. I see no reason yet to change
the time-honored policy of the country-entang-Kossuth, then the sooner we have such a precedent
ling alliances with none; and immediate inter-
vention, by means and men, might prove most
disastrous to the best interests of our country, and
might even endanger its existence, to say nothing
of the blood to be shed and the immense amount
of treasure to be expended in such a fanciful cru-
sade for liberty.

But, sir, I would be willing to go further even than this resolution, and to express, in unequivocal terms, our sympathy for every nation strug

the better. The more is the honor to us, if we
shall be the first Congress to set such a glorious
precedent.

But Kossuth is a foreigner. This, sir, is no
objection with me. It is justly our boast, that
ours is an asylum for the oppressed of every clime;
and long, long I hope it will continue to be.
When the lone exile of oppression shall find no
other refuge, here, sir, in all time to come, may
he find a foothold. A considerable portion of the

Mr. Chairman, this is a noble opportunity for the representatives of this great nation to testify to the world their sympathy for a nation strug gling to be free. It should not pass. We should give to Kossuth such a welcome as is worthy of his exalted worth-of his privations in the cause of freedom-of his illustrious services, and of him as one of the greatest living orators of the ageand such a welcome as is worthy of this great nation. Ours is the greatest and freest nation on the earth. We have attained to a fuller and more perfect development of the democratic principle than any other people. Then, sir, let us welcome Kossuth in a manner worthy of this. our great land of free States and spreading millions of free people. Let no idle and inglorious fears of offending the despots of Europe deter us from the plain dictates of patriotic duty. Let Kossuth feel that the simple, unostentations welcome of this House is a full reward for all his services in behalf of oppressed humanity; and that this land, with institutions based emphatically upon the power of the people, is indeed an asylum for the oppressed. Let him feel that if he does not get men and money and armed intervention from our Government, he gets what is not less potent for his cause the moral power of this nation.

Mr. Chairman, let not the representatives of the people be behind the people themselves. I rejoice, sir, that standing in this the Capitol of my country for the first time, it is my prerogative to speak for this resolution. Let us hail Kossuth, not for himself only, but for his cause, as the elder Adams said of the Fourth of July, " with gratulation and joy, with bonfires and illuminations. Welcome should be inscribed upon the doors of the Capitol, upon the flag that floats above us

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. GREY said, that this debate had taken a range and latitude, which to him seemed strange and inappropriate. The simple question presented by the resolution of the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. CARTTER,] was as to the appointment of a committee to introduce Mr. Kossuth to the House of Representatives. Yet a person entering the Hall and ignorant of the true question before the House, would suppose that the proposition under discussion was war with Russia and direct intervention in the contest between Hungary and Austria. The resolution presents no such issue. The question is simply whether we shall now repudiate, or carry out the invitation heretofore tendered to Kossuth; whether we shall extend to him the courtesies to which we stand committed by the action of the Executive and by past legislation. In February last, the Secretary of State, the officer charged with the management of our foreign relations, had taken the initiative, and instructed our Minister in Turkey to open negotiations with the Turkish Government for the liberation of Kossuth. proceeding of the national Executive had been subsequently indorsed and approved by Congress, by the resolution of March last, instructing the President to send a national vessel to bring Kossuth to this country.

This

The President in his message informed Congress that he had complied with their instructions, and that Kossuth was soon expected to arrive, and he referred to their consideration the question of the manner of the reception and treatment of this distinguiseed man, thus brought to this coun try by the order of Congress. Kossuth arrived, and the President of the United States, as Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy, had received him at New York as the nation's guest with a national salute. Congress then adopted the following Joint Resolution: