ative of the cause of voluntary government in Europe, a cordial welcome on his escape from the perils of his position, and his arrival in this land where that system of government is, established and in full operation. ples or the character of Washington, as it is to But it is asked, why should the American peo- There is a simplicity in this ceremony which is worthy the dignity of the American Government and of the greatness of the American people; there is a simplicity in it worthy the character of the illustrious citizen whom it is proposed to honor. I have no tenacity in regard to this measure in preference to any other which would make me insist on this at the hazard of its defeat. It seems to me to be preferable to that of the honorable Senator from Illinois, and gentlemen say that they do prefer it upon the ground that this would be the joint act of both Houses of Congress. I am quite sure that if adopted here it would be concurred in by the House of Representatives, and would thus become a national act of welcome. I confess that I am desirous that, as the Congress of the United States caused Kossuth to be brought here under their authority, his reception should be a national act; and that Congress should not be divided in its expression or its action on this the crowning occasion. This form also seems to me to com- I shall notice a single other objection, and then mend itself to the adoption of the Senate, because I shall leave this resolution to its fate. It is an it stops short of committing Congress or the Gov-apprehension that, by the adoption of this, or a ernment to any action beyond that of simply giving welcome. What I desire is not the utterance of words. What I want to see-what I want to have Congress do, is to extend the welcome which the world expects us to give to the illustrious exile. similar motion, the Congress of the United States Objections have been made, to which I will advert very briefly. It has been said or intimated that we are not well aware of what we are doing that we are not well acquainted with the character of Kossuth-that we do not know certainly that he is entitled to these attentions from the American people. Sir, in the course of human events we see the nations of Europe struggling to throw off the despotic systems of government, and to estab-ing it. But I see no advance towards any such lish governments upon the principle of republicanism or of constitutional monarchy. Whenever such efforts are made we see it invariably happen that the existing despotisms of Europe combine to repress those struggles-combine to subdue the people. The consequence is, that despotism is a common cause, and it results also that the cause of constitutional liberty has also become one common cause-the cause of mankind against despotism. Now whatever people leads the way at any time in any crisis in this contest for civil liberty, becomes the representative of the nations of the earth. We once occupied that proud and interesting position, and we engaged the sympathies of civilized men throughout the world. No one can deny, that recently Hungary assumed that same position, and the records of our own Legislature show that we, in common with the friends of civil liberty in Europe, hold Hungary to be the representative of the nations of the earth in this great cause. We had a messenger on the verge of the battle-field ready to acknowledge her independence. Mr. President, it happens, in the Providence of God, that whenever a nation thus assumes to open this controversy for liberty, in behalf of the nations of the earth, some one man more than another becomes identified with the struggle by his virtues, by his valor, by his wisdom, or by his sufferings, until he eclipses others who may be associated with him, and comes to be regarded by the country itself, in whose behalf he labors and struggles, and by mankind, as the representative of that nation, and of that cause. The deliverance of Switzerland brings up at once the name of William Tell. The struggle of Scotland calls up the name of Wallace; and all over the world no man ever hears the American Revolution spoken of, but it calls up the majestic form of Washington. So it happens that the name of Hungary calls up at once the great, the towering fame of the author, the hero, and the sufferer of the Hungarian Revolution. Now, then, shall we say that we do not know that Kossuth is worthy to be regarded - as the friend and advocate of liberty in his own country? Shall we say that he does not merit the homage paid to him, as the leader of the Hungarian Revolution. Hungary herself has set the seal upon his merits, and concluded that question, and it would be as unreasonable and absurd to listen to those who should depreciate the princi danger in doing a simple act of national justice and Mr. SHIELDS. I understand that the resolu- "That they have met the committee of the Senate on that subject, and that the committees have agreed to recommend to their respective Houses that each House should re." ceive General Lafayette in such manner as it shall deem most suitable to the occasion." They stated at the same time, that there was no mode of receiving him jointly by the two Houses. Here are the proceedings when he was received: "At one o'clock, General Lafayette entered the Chamber of the Senate, accompanied by the committee of that body, On entering the bar, Mr. Barbour, chairman of the committee, announced the presence of General Lafayette, in the following words: We introduce General Lafayette to the Senate of the United States."" That was the whole ceremony, and I regard it, as an excellent precedent. I do not wish to delay action on the matter by any discussion. In fact, I regret that I said as much as I did say yesterday, because I think an act of courtesy should always be clothed in as few words as possible. The PRESIDENT. The Chair is under the" impression that the Senator from Illinois is not at liberty to offer the amendment which he propo ses. This is a joint resolution. It has been read twice and is now in Committee of the Whole. The resolution which the Senator from Illinois proposes to substitute for it is a simple resolution, which does not require the joint action of the two Houses of Congress. The Chair is therefore under the necessity of declining to receive the amendment proposed by the Senator from Illinois. Mr. SHIELDS. Unfortunately I know very little of the rules; but I have understood that it was perfectly competent to move to strike out all after the word "resolved," in a resolution, and insert something else. If, however, the Senator from New York would accept this as a substitute for his resolution, I have no doubt that all difficulty would be obviated. Mr. BERRIEN. It does appear to me that this would be an inconsistent mode of proceeding. The resolution of the Senator from New York proposes the joint action of the two Houses of Congress. The amendment of the Senator from Illinois proposes the separate action of the Senate. The two cannot go together. The PRESIDENT. Such is the decision of the Chair. Mr. BERRIEN. It would be well, I apprehend, for the Senator from Illinois to allow the resolution of the Senator from New York to be disposed of, and then let him bring forward his proposition as a separate measure. The PRESIDENT. The Chair has already said that he cannot entertain the motion to amend, as proposed by the Senator from Illinois. Mr. FOOTE, of Mississippi. I rise to make a suggestion. We all have the same feelings on this subject. I imagine that the Senate will unanimously manifest a disposition to accord respect to this distinguished stranger. The main difficulty heretofore has been as to the manner in which we should act. The honorable Senator from Illinois has looked into precedents, and I think he has very satisfactorily shown that the precedent which he has brought forward is entitled to respect. It is most obvious, in the present state of things, that if those gentlemen who prefer the form sanctioned by precedent should vote against the reso lution of the Senator from New York, they would be subject to be misunderstood. I therefore hope that, in the spirit of proper compromise, the Senator from New York will withdraw his resolution, and allow the other to be proposed and acted upon. Mr. BERRIEN. I understand the Chair to have decided that the amendment proposed by the Senator from Illinois is not in order. The PRESIDENT. Such was the decision of the Chair. Mr. BERRIEN. Unless that is appealed from, the question comes before the Senate upon the resolution of the Senator from New York, and upon that resolution I desire to submit some brief observations to the consideration of the Senate. Mr. SHIELDS. Will the honorable Senator from Georgia permit us to have this question of order determined before he proceeds any further? Mr. BERRIEN. The question of order can only be determined by an appeal from the decision of the Chair; and I beg leave to say now, in relation to the precedent which has been referred to, that that was the result of a conference of a joint committee on the part of the two Houses of Congress. They conferred, and separately reported to their respective Houses. There is no prece dent, then, for the course which is now proposed by the Senator from Illinois. Mr. HALE. I would like to take an appeal from the decision of the Chair. Mr. BERRIEN. I believe I have the floor? The PRESIDENT. The Chair suggests to the Senator from Georgia that he allow the appeal to be taken. Mr. BERRIEN. That can be done presently, when I have finished. The PRESIDENT. The Senator from Georgia has the floor. Mr. BERRIEN. Mr. President, I consider this entirely too grave a question to be involved forms of proceedings. 1 concur with my colleague [Mr. DawsoN] in the position which he took the other day, in opposition to the resolution introduced by the Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. FoorE,] and I am opposed myself to the resetion of the Senator from New York [Mr. SEWAD] in the form in which it is presented. But I desire to say at the outset, in order that I may not be misunderstood on this subject, that this opposition arises from no doubt as to the merits or the services of the individual whom it is proposed to honor. His services as a patriot, who has distinguished himself in the cause of civil liberty, I am willing to admit in the largest extent in which they have been asserted by his most ardent admirers. Sir, I have not been an inattentive observer of events which have occured in Hungary, within the last three or four years. I have seen that people struggling for the achievement of their Tational independence, have rejoiced in their prosperity, and have sympathized in their misfortunes. I am perfectly well aware, as everybody must be who has given his attention to this subject, that that struggle was for the preservation of an ancient Constitution, which operated with great inequality pon the various classes of the people; but I did ot doubt that after that independence was obained, when peace was restored, when the existEnce of Hungary, as an independent nation, was quiesced in, the progress of liberal principles ncident to such a struggle would have resulted in ameliorating the organic law and in giving equal right to all classes of people. With this view of theject, I have looked to the progress of events in Haugary with no ordinary interest. I have rejoted in the prospect of the successful issue of that struggle, and have regretted its defeat. I have been at all times willing to accord to this pose. Mr. President, if this resolution be, as has been suggested, the simple expression of the feelings of the American Congress, complimentary to Governor Kossuth, why, under the circumstances in which we are now placed engaged, as we are, in the performance of our constitutional duties, with mass of business which will command our earnest, constant, undivided attention for months to come-why has it not occurred to Senators to consider whether, neglecting our appropriate duties, we ought to employ our time in regulating the terms of a mere idle, valueless compliment? idle in itself, and valueless in the view of him to whom it is addressed, as we know from his repeated declarations. So considering it, that quesLion is submitted to the individual opinion and to the individual taste of every member of the Sen ate. for the purpose of securing their safe transit across the ocean. We have brought them here, and in my judgment, if they were disposed to remain, we have imposed upon ourselves the obligation to afford them an asylum in our land, and the means of enjoying that asylum in comfort. The moment they touched our shores they were under the protection of our laws. Beyond that, we have perhaps imposed upon ourselves the obligation to provide them the means of comfortable subsistence, and ultimately of achieving an independence for themselves. But looking to the public declarations of Mr. Kossuth, we know that this is not his object; that he does not come to seek an asylum here. No, sir; he comes here for the purpose of propagating a political principle; to assert the right of the people of every nation to regulate their own affairs, uncontrolled by the action of any foreign power; and to ask from this Government a pledge that it will aid him, not merely by moral, but by physical force, if it becomes necessary, in any future struggle in Hungary, to enforce and estab lish that principle. Marquis de Lafayette as a precedent to justify occasion. But if this were really and truly the mere un- Mr. President, this resolution is to be consid- It seems, sir, we have got to a point of time, in this system of progress, when precedents are scoffed We are not to look at precedents-we are to decide de noro upon existing circumstances as they arise, and to make precedents which our successors will in like manner follow, or discard at their pleasare. Sir, this is not my view. I am not willing to depart from the usages of our predecessors, unless did we invite him here? Is it doubted by those to that is satisfactory to my judgment. Such also e reason can be asigned for such departure whom I address myself that the object and purpose of that invitation was to afford to these Hungarian to have been the view of the advocates of patriots, who were then imprisoned, an asylum in resolution, for they refer to the case of the our country? We dispatched a national vessel of their country. Again, sir: for what purpose Now, what is the position in which he places this matter? He says to you, The expression of your sympathies-of that feeling which is natural to every freeman-is grateful to the Hungarian; but the expression of your sympathy is valueless: it can do us no good. Our necessities require that the expression of sympathy should be followed by some efficient act on your part. I am a plain man, he says; I am now here where I am free to speak, and I tell you that I come to ask the aid of your Government to secure to my countrymen the enforcement of the principle, that no foreign power shall be permitted to interfere in the contest which we shall wage with Austria for the establishment of our independence. Sir, if gentlemen have read the speech of the distinguished American citizen in Europe, to whom I have referred, they have seen distinctly avowed this proposition. There is about to be convulsion in Europe. A league of despots have combined for the purpose of destroying all republican governments; and the question proposed is, Shall we wait until, isolated and alone, we are compelled to arrest their aggressions? or shall we unite ourselves with the only really free Government on the other side of the Atlantic, and announce, in advance, our determination to maintain the principles for which Mr. Kossuth contends? In express language, it is said in the speech to which I have referred, that England and the United States, looking to their mercantile and naval marine, command the ocean; that they have it in their power to blockade the ports of these despotic powers, if it be necessary, or if not necessary, to place their vessels at the mouths of the harbors of their different ports; and to repeat the operation which was practised by our own Government upon Mexico during our war with that Power; to levy duties on vessels entering those ports, and in that way to destroy their com merce. I refer to these details not for the purpose of commenting upon them; not of expressing an opinion as to their efficiency, still less to intimate any opinion of the correctness of their avowal; but simply to show that it is not your sympathy which Mr. Kossuth asks. It is not public honors to himself which he seeks. No, sir, he comes here to obtain from you a pledge to enforce the principle, that no foreign Power shall be permitted to interfere between the Hungarian people and the Austrian Government in the event of a renewal of the con test. Are we prepared to give that pledge? Whence do we derive our authority? We have in these two Chambers the right to exercise all legislative power which is conferred by the Constitution: and among these powers is that of declaring war. Have we the power, under circumstances like the present, to pledge this Government irredeemably, to a course of action which may lead to war, and which must, in all human probability, have that result? I do not know what estimate is formed of the character of the Emperor of Russia: it has not been a subject of my study. But I can imagine that if anything could arouse the feelings of an individual to resistance against such interference as is proposed, it would be the annunciation of the principles that we, to them a trans-Atlantic Power -a free people who have hitherto declared that, while maintaining the principles of freedom within our own limits, we abstain absolutely and entirely from all interference with any other Government -nay more, that we will allow (as some are disposed to assert) no interference of any European Power in the affairs of this Continent,-if any circumstance, I say, could arouse the feelings of the individual who is at the head of the Russian Empire to a degree which must inevitably result in war, would be the course which it is now proposed to pursue. That this course is contrary to the setled policy of the Government from its foundation, I think no one will be disposed to deny. Our Presidents and our Congresses have not hesitated to express, in times past, their devotion to the principle of civil liberty. They will not hesitate now. But from the time of General Washington's Farewell Address to the American people, down to the present moment, the principle of avoiding entangling alliances with other nations-such as that which I think must be the inevitable result of the progress of these proceedings, if they should be adopted-the principle of avoiding all interference with the disturbances or convulsions of Europe, has been uniformly and emphatically avowed." I desire to ascertain from the American Senateaccording to the individual whom it is intended to honor, on this occasion, all the merit which his most enthusiastic admirers may be disposed to claim for him—whether they are disposed to depart from that principle of policy by adopting a measure which, in my judgment, necessarily involves that departure? We are told of the interpretation which the civilized world has given to the mere act of invitation which has been extended to this individual and his associates, by sending for them a national vessel; and if, after the avowals he has made in England; if, after the declarations of the distinguished American citizen to whom I have referred, and which Mr. Kossuth says expresses all his feelings and all his desires; if he after the declarations which Kossuth has made after landing on our shores; the distinction which he has drawn between the Government and the people; his avowal of a determination to appeal to the people for the active sympathy which he invokes in behalf of his country; if after all this, which is perfectly known to us, the Congress of the United States, representing the thirty-one sovereign States of this Union, and the twenty-five millions of people which compose it, shall welcome him to the shores of the United States in this formal manner, do they not thereby impliedy acquiesce in the object which he thus publicly and in advance announces that he came here to accomplish? Is not that the very interpretation which the civilized world will give it? He says to the American people-and the declaration is before us while we are agitating the question: "I do not come here to ask your sympathy. That is gratifying, but valueless. I come here to invoke the aid of the great American Republic to protect my people, peaceably, if they may, by the moral influence of their declara tions, but forcibly if they must, by the physcial power of their arm-to prevent any foreign interference in the struggle about to be renewed for the liberties of my country I am a plain man. I am in a land of freedom. I am permitted to speak freely my sentiments. This is what I ask. If this is accorded to me, I go home, and the liberties not merely of Hungary but of Europe, are secured. If not, I go with my countrymen alone to renew that struggle for the achievement of our liberties." This language is too distinct to be mistaken. If (departing from your invitation, for that included this resolution passes, extending to him alonehis associates) the welcome which it proposes, after these declarations of the object for which he comes here, the civilized world will be much more authorized than they were by the invitation which has been referred to by the Senator from New York [Mr. SEWARD] to conclude that the welcome to Governor Kossuth implies a pledge that we will interpose, if necessary, and in the manner he desires, for the protection of the Hungarian nation. In my judgment this inference is irresistible; and if it be not, yet if it occasion doubt; if it result in producing opposition to this resolution in its present form; if gentlemen do believe (and I doubt not that they are sincere in the declaration) that this is a mere testimonial of the respect and good will of the people of the United States toward a distinguished advocate of the cause of civil liberty, they will not hesitate to accept the amendment which I shall submit, and which is simply calculated to exclude this conclusion. I desire, in the first place, by the amendment which I shall propose, to ated by the invitation, by extending this resolution fulfill the expectations which were reasonably cre to the associates of Governor Kossuth. The inter position of the American Government in behalf of these captives was not confined to that individual alone: it extended to all his associates in captivity. them all. If, therefore, we are acting in fulfillThe invitation to our shores equally embraced ment of the obligations created by that invitation, we must not confine the resolution to Governor him and to them, to the full extent of my constiKossuth, but must extend it to his associates. To tutional powers, I am willing to afford an asylum within the limits of the United States, and to provide all the means of making that asylum comfortable. But I should be unfaithful to my duty as an American Senator, according to the convictions of my judgment, if I suffered any zeal for the advancement of the principle of civil liberty on the other side of the Atlantic to induce me to jeopard the safety and the vital interests of the country which is my own; to which I owe my ling, therefore, to leave it to implication, that by first, entire, and absolute allegiance. I am unwilthis reception, under these circumstances, we have entered into a pledge that by the exertion of moral, and, if necessary, of physical force, we will protect the people of Hungary from all foreign interference upon the renewal of their struggle. Such a pledge once given would be irrevoca ble. It could not be violated without dishonor. It could not be redeemed without putting in jeopardy the best and most vital interests of our coun try. These are the views which I entertain on this subject, and, in accordance with them, I propose to amend the resolution by adding to it the following: "And be it further resolved, That the welcome thus afforded to Louis Kossuth be extended to his associates who have landed on our shores; but while welcoming these Hungarian patriots to an asylum in our country, and to the protection which our laws do, and always will afford to them, it is due to candor to declare that it is not the purpose of Congress to depart from the settled policy of this Government which forbids all interference with the domestic concerns of other nations." Mr. HALE. I am desirous that the resolution shall pass, but I am not so desirous that this reso. lution shall pass that I am willing, in order to ob tain that, to resign what I believe to be any of the privileges of a Senator. With great deference to the Chair, I look upon its decision as being in contravention of that right; and before I sit down I intend to take an appeal, and quote authority from the Manual, which I think sustains me. I refer to the decision that the amendment offered by the Senator from Illinois [Mr. SHIELDS] to the resolution of the Senator from New York [Mr. SEWARD] is out of order. But before I proceed to do this, I wish to say a word or two upon that question in the aspect in which it is now presented; and I beg leave to assure the honorable Senator from Mississippi [Mr. Foorɛ] that I use words with no sectional, no hidden, no sinister meaning. I will endeavor to use as pure English as I can collect, and use English in the acceptation which it has as far South as civilization extends, and without any qualifications at all. I am desirous that the resolution shall pass, and I am so desirous that it shall pass that I shall interpose no amendment, because the honorable Senator from Michigan [Mr. CASS] thinks that, on a former occasion, an amendment which I had the honor to propose operated very fatally upon the resolution which he introduced. My own opinion is, that the amendment lost strength by being tacked on to his resolution; and if 1 had introduced it as an original measure it would have passed. But to come to this resolution. I want to speak to what seems to me to be a great objec tion to it, and that is, that it wants precedent. The PRESIDENT. The Senator gave notice that he was about to appeal from the decision of the Chair. If the debate goes on, he will be too late to take an appeal. The decision of the Chair' is considered as acquiesced in, unless an appeal is immediately taken. When the Senator from Geor gia rose, the Chair requested him to give way in order that an appeal might be taken. But the Chair will still receive the appeal; though, if the discussion goes on, it will be too late to take an appeal. Mr. HALE. Yielding to the wishes of the friends of the resolution around me, I will not take an appeal, but I hope this decision will not be taken as a precedent. I deem it wrong; but I shall submit to the wrong for the present, for the purpose of getting to a greater good, and that is, the consideration of this resolution. I want to address myself to the objection that this resolution wants precedent. It is said that the only precedent which can be found was the case of the reception given to the Marquis de Lafayette. A very eloquent eulogy was passed on the sacrifices and services which that distinguished individual made in the attainment of the liberties of this country, which entitled him to the reception which he received when he visited our shores, something more than a quarter of a century since. Now, I want to take this very case of Lafayette, and see if it is not a case in point. I ask you, sir, if, when the idea was first suggested to the mind of Lafayette that here was to him a trans-Atlantic people-an ocean wider, for all practical purposes, by thousands of miles, then than now, was between him and this trans-Atlantic people, who had risen up with the energy of freemen and were asserting their rights, and struggling to maintain the declaration which they had made-if Lafayette, instead of acting with that noble and disinterested chivalry with which he threw himself into the contest without waiting to see whether fortunate or adverse circumstances attended those who were struggling here if, instead of obeying the generous impulses of his own nature, he had begun to study the musty records of the monarchy of France to find a precedent, how long would it have been before he would have thrown his fortunes and his life into the scale in which he ventured his all? Sir, many, many centuries would have elapsed before he would have found a precedent for the course which he then took. He found that precedent by the occasion, and the occasion made the precedent. Another word as to precedents, as applicable to What has been the history of the United States? Why, instead of following precedents, they have been making precedents. us. Mr. FOOTE, of Mississippi. Presidents. Mr. HALE. The honorable Senator from Mississippi says we have been making Presidents. I suppose the word precedents sounds so much like presidents, that the Senator from Mississippi cannot hear it without its calling up some other associations than those, as the only ones which belong to the occasion. Mr. FOOTE. I would simply say, that knowing that the gentleman himself had at one time aspirations for the Presidency, I thought it possible that that was in his mind when he made use of the word; particularly as I understood him distinctly to pronounce the word presidents. Mr. HALE. In dictionaries, and precedents, and pronunciation, I yield to the honorable Senator from Mississippi, [Mr. FooTE,] but in nothing else. I think it is a little ungenerous in the Senator from Mississippi, who comes here from fields in which he has so successfully combatted those 1 1 who opposed his claims-who comes here with plumed cap full of triumph, not to enjoy the blushhonors with which his State has crowned him, without a fling at my poor claims, which were so ong ago rejected. I ask him if, while those honare heaped upon him, he cannot remember Mordecai the Jew, sitting at the King's gate? I and hoped that prosperity would have brought beter lessons with it, but it seems it has not. I leave the subject. I say, that it has been the province and destiny of the United States not only to make Presidents bat precedents. I believe that, when the members of the Continental Congress assembled on the 4th of July, 1776, and put forth the declara-, on which they have put forth to the world, they were acting entirely without a precedent; that a precedent is not to be found in which the represectatives of a vast number of States had come gether in peaceful conclave, and in solemn and mature deliberation come to the conclusion that it was a dictate of duty to separate the connections which had heretofore bound them to their mother Country. Then they were acting without precedent. And after the justice of that declaration was vindicated by a seven years' war, the experience of a few succeeding years of peace had told them that peace itself might become valueless without omething to render those blessings permanent nd valuable, they assembled together in a conention which framed our Cunstitution, and they ere then acting entirely without precedent. I believe you may search the world, and you canot find an instance in which the representatives of a nation came together in that manner, and formed a written constitution. It was the second written constitution, I think, which the history of e world, up to that period, presented, and the St was that formed on board the Mayflower, hen the Pilgrims were on their way from DelftHaven to this country. That was a matter withut precedent, and so the history of our country As been without precedent. Instead of following in the vestiges which have been left us of nations one before us, we have been following the destiny which seems to be ours-been making, instead of following precedents. And such, I trust, we shall continue to do. In regard to this resolution of sympathy, respect, or condolence, or whatever it may be, with Kossuth, what is to be the effect of it? Some genlemen may think that it looks to something ulterior, but it does not of itself include anything of that sort. It does not bind the people of this country to anything. It is simply the expression of what I believe the whole people feel-sympathy with Kossuth. They look upon him as the living representative of a great principle which has been the idol of their affections. They look upon him as the vindicator, in the struggles which he has sustained in his own country, of those great sentiments which are dear to the whole American people, and impressed upon the whole American heart. It is because the people of this country look upon him as the representative of these principles, and see in him the living imbodiment of that which is dearest to their own affections. They desire in the most solen n form in which the action of the people or the Government of the United States can do it, an expression of those feelings to be given to the distinguished individual who has Chus come to our shores. pause and reckon and calculate how the expression and utterance of their sentiments may be made palatable and void of offence to those who entertain directly contrary sentiments, we might|| as well at once close our mouths in eternal silence. It is because the utterance of these sentiments will give offence to those who are always offended whenever the sentiments of liberty are uttered, that they have value. It is because they will testify to the victims of oppression everywhere that there is a feeling of sympathy, of commisseration, of condolence, and of respect in the whole American people with them in their misfortunes-it is because of this that this resolution has any value. If you stop to fortify it with provisos and qualifications, and reservations and exclusions of conclusions, it may be a very good special plea, but it will be a very poor channel through which the sympathies are to find vent-to find utterance and expression. No, sir; let the expression of these sentiments be broad and manly, open, unqualified, and direct. Let them speak in the plainest manner in which the English language can present ideas, the sentiment which to-day is beating and vibrating through the hearts of the whole American people. Let the bearings and uprisings of the great American heart, which has been moved by the advent of this man, as it has not been moved for more than a quarter of a century, find a corresponding movement and expression here from the representatives of the nation in this Congress assembled. tends. We receive him not with a crest upon his helmet, and sword and spear, not as Cæsar clothed in armor, but as Cato in his gown, as the great Apostle of Liberty, coming here after having been driven from his native land, seeking that liberty upon our shores which, with all his exertions, he could not obtain at home. It is a common fashion to glorify the successful and conquering hero. But it is no common fashion for a great nation to seek the deserted and the weak and the down-trodden, and to award to them their sympathies and cordial greetings. I confess that I consider it one of the proudest chapters in the history of American diplomacy, where it interferes not by armed force, but by the great influence which is gathered around this country of liberty and law, to take from the dungeons of Turkey a man who had been trodden down by the despots of Europe, and without interfering with the rights of any, placed him at liberty and brought him here to this Western world, where he can enjoy the rights and privileges of a freeman. The resolution of the Senator from New York does nothing more than to bid him welcome to this country in the name of the people. I should have preferred that resolution, had it not been for certain matters which have transpired since the landing of this distinguished individual upon our shores. In the first speech which he made on landing in New York, at Castle Garden, a speech prepared with great care, he declares, with the manly straight forwardness of an honest man, what he wants. He says that it is not merely our sympathies that he looks for, but that he wants pecuniary means and political aid, and nothing less. He asks for all the sinews of warmoney, men, and political power. It is said that he has not asked this of the Government, but he has asked it of the people. What is this Government but the mouth-piece of a free people; and when this Government speaks to strangers and speaks to the world, it is the people of the country that speak in the language uttered by the Govern ment. That is the great glory of our Republican institutions. This distinguished man asks us-the people of this country-to go to war on the Continent of Europe, by money, men, and political influence, for the cause of human liberty there. Now, no man desires more than I do, that the great cause Let us not be afraid that there is any danger of compromising or committing ourselves to any step which we may need hereafter to retrace or retract. It was said by a distinguished American statesman, on another occasion, that he took no step backwards. Such, I trust, will be the language of the American Senate and American peoplethat they will take no backward step. They have planted their banners. They are unfurled. They have written their sentiments where the world may read them, and where, I trust in God, all time will not efface them. Let it never be said to the victims of despotism in the Old World, that are straining their aching eyes and looking with throbbing hearts to hear what the only free people on the face of the whole earth will do, that we have hesitated, halted, furled our banners, lest our views, if repeated and reuttered by us, might give offence to those to whom the principles of liberty are always an offence. I trust that, instead of going back-of civil and religious liberty should succeed upon instead of retrograding-instead of pausing-we will make this resolution more full and more explicit. If it wants more meaning, put it into it. We do not, by such a course as this, commit ourselves to anything and everything which somebody may have said: but we do commit ourselves to principles of fidelity to the great cause which lies at the bottom of our Revolution and is imbodied in the principles of our Constitution. I trust that we are prepared to go as far as that. As I am desirous that the resolution shall pass, I will not trespass longer on the Senate, but will give way, hoping that we may arrive at early action. Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, I desire, at this point of the debate, while the amendment of the Senator from Georgia is before the Senate, to say a few words. Three months ago, the object of this resolution was a prisoner in Turkey. Driven from his own country, forsaken by every Christian nation in Europe, the diplomacy of this country, actuated by a high and Christian spirit, sought him out, and tendered to him a national ship, in which he was brought to this country, under the flag of the Union. When he landed on the shores of this continent, he received, as he is now receiving, the sympathies of millions of freemen. Who was it that attracted the attention and the sympathies of this country? It was Louis Kossuth, the exile, not Louis Kossuth, the Governor of Hungary. It was not Kossuth, the successful hero and statesman, but the deserted and the unfortunate Kossuth, to whom we extended And, sir, shall the American people hesitate, shall they pause, shall they be afraid to give utterance in the most formal, the most solemn, and the most effective manner in which they can do it, to the sentiments which the great body of the people entertain?. If we are to pause before we give utterance to sentiments like these, until we think that they will fail to give offence to any of the other Governments of the world, we might as well abandon at once the idea of carrying out the principles which are imbodied in the Constitution under which we are organized to-day. I have no doubt our liberality and our courtesy. In the spirit of he Declaration of Independence, gave offence at which the Constitution is founded, embraced in asking our Executive to interfere in a peaceful and in, the very imbodiment of the sentiments upon the resolution which we passed at the last session, a quiet way, by diplomacy, he was rescued from his imprisonment and placed upon our shores as an exile. In that spirit I am willing to receive he DOW moment of their promulgation, and give offence and will continue to give offence to the latest of the New. They will never be pleasing; theying to receive him. It is not to Louis Kossuth, period of time, to the despots of the Old World and him, and in that spirit the American heart is will and never be palatable to them. If the people Governor of Hungary, that this resolution and the Government of the United States are to the amendment of the Senator from Georgia ex the Continent of Europe; and I believe, judging from the signs of the times, the day is not far distant when, by reason of the influences which have been cast back upon that Continent from this country, by means of the continual and intimate social intercourse between that country and this, by means of emigration and reemigration, by the peaceful and quiet influence of this country, Europe is to be regenerated. But if we listen to this cry of armed interference, and if the people of this country are to go with men and money to fight the battles of liberty on the Continent of Europe, then we at once put an end to that wise policy which we have practised from the days of Washington to this hour; and instead of the influence of this country being exercised as it has been heretofore exercised, armed force, and war, and blood is to determine whether Europe is to be free or not. In my humble opinion, the first American gun discharged upon the Continent of Europe, in defence of a revolution in Europe, will be more disastrous to the cause of human liberty than all the batteries of all the despots in the world. Sir, it is said that we have a great mission to perform that it is our duty to interfere, not only by the expression of sympathy, but in some other way which gentlemen do not exactly define, in the cause of distressed humanity in Europe. We have a great trust to execute, and a great duty to perform; but, like every other trust and every other duty, domestic, social, and political, it is limited; it has its errand. If we go beyond thatif we turn crusaders for the purpose of executing that trust and performing that duty in other lands, like all crusaders we may get great honor, we may be renowned in chivalry and in song, but we shall neglect the great duties which we have to perform at home, where we can perform them to the advantage of mankind. The altar of our liberty has its own temple. It is here. Here let the oppressed of every land come to worship. Here let them come if they desire to get rid of oppression at home or to warm their patriotism to return to renewed efforts abroad. Let them come; but let us not take away that altar from our own temple and carry it off into the wilderness of European Revolution, there to be taken by the Philistines, or its fires to be quenched forever beneath an ocean of blood. No, sir; it is here that our duty is to be performed. I have felt it my duty to make these remarks, because I intend to carry out the resolution of Congress which was passed at the last session, and to give to Louis Kossuth and his companions in exile, a hearty, a noble, and a generous welcome to this country. I care not as to the form of this welcome. While I am willing to do that, I wish it at the same time to be understood that I acknowledge none of these new doctrines which have been started, that we are to implicate ourselves in the affairs of Europe. I wish it also to be distinctly understood, that I do not agree with the doctrine of cutting off this nation from all social and international intercourse with Europe. I am not, in the language of the Senator from Michigan, for cutting the string. We have a duty to perform in this respect. I am for keeping up legal and international intercourse through diploinacy with all the nations of the earth, and maintaining friendly and social relations with them. I would not forsake Austria because of Austrian despotism. I would not forsake Russia because she is denounced to be a despotic power. Among the proudest nations of Europe, alongside of the highest and oldest flag, should our flag be sustained; not by war, but this great nation should be represented there by some of her patriotic and intelligent citizens. In the darkest days of the struggle for human liberty there I would maintain the influence of this Government; not for the purpose of interfering by armed force, but to hold out to the unfortunate and oppressed of those nations, if they cannot after all their exertions maintain liberty there, our flag and our influence will afford them a home here. A word more, and I have done. The amendment of the Senator from Georgia does not at all, as I see, change the resolution offered by the Senator from New York. It merely avoids a conclusion which might be drawn from the passage by the Congress of the United States of a resolution in such general terms. The resolution with the amendment shall have my hearty concurrence. I, too, have not been an inattentive observer of the history and conduct of this distinguished individual. I admire his talents and patriotism. I believe him to be a man who has devoted himself not to any wild scheme of liberty in Hungary, but to the establishment of constitutional government and liberty for the benefit of his people. As such I shall personally greet Louis Kossuth cordially, and also as a representative of one of the States of this Union. Mr. FOOTE, of Mississippi. I do not rise for the purpose of continuing this debate, and if any gentleman wishes to discuss the resolution, I shall give way to him. I intend simply to put myself right before the country in regard to this matter. I introduced the original resolution, as I have already stated, at the instance of the Secretary of State, and, as declared to me by him, and doubtless truly, with the sanction of the Administration itself, it being the opinion of the President and his Cabinet, as clearly intimated in the last annual message, that it was the duty of Congress, under all the circumstances existing, to provide a suitable reception for the distinguished personage whose character and actings have been the subject of such extended remarks on this occasion. I acted, I say again, at the instance of gentlemen of high official standing in Washington, with whom after full consultation, I had the good fortune to agree. I am willing to acknowledge, that in none of the conversations which I held on this subject, preliminary to introducing the original resolution, did any person undertake to intimate the propriety of so demeaning ourselves in the discussion of the question designed to be presented to the Senate, as to avoid enkindling the resentment of the Emperor of Russia. Had any such consideration been suggested to me, I should have felt not a little dissatisfaction with the personage in whose brain an idea so ignoble had arisen. I understood the resolution before us to be simply a proposition to afford to Governor Kossuth, on account of the high respect which we entertain for his public were men, I believe. Both were illustrious men. Both were champions of freedom. Both had suffered in maintaining this cause. It is true, Lafay ette was not Kossuth, and Kossuth is not Lafay ette; but no one can deny that the character of each is such as naturally to command the respect of a nation of freemen. character, and the ardent sympathy which the freemen of this country must naturally feel for him, and the noble cause with which he stands identified, a reception cordial and respectful on the part of the two Houses of Congress in the first instance, to be followed, as has been generally anticipated, by an additional reception on the part of the Executive of the Republic. I now regret exceedingly We have said already, by a resolution adopted having withdrawn the original resolution, because nearly a year ago, that Kossuth was entitled to it might, perhaps, have been acted upon before the our special sympathy. I undertake to assert, present time. I withdrew it for reasons satisfac- therefore, that the precedent established in the tory to me, and which I stated in the hearing of case of Lafayette is applicable in all its material the Senate. I supposed that it would be impossi-bearings to this case. I do not care very much, ble for us, in consequence of the unexpected op- though, about precedent in such a case. This is position presented in various quarters of this Hall,|| in some degree a question of common sense, and to act on the resolution brought forward by me in still more a question of manly feeling-a question time to accord to Governor Kossuth that reception to some extent also involving our character as supwhich I had hoped all the members of this body porters of Republican institutions. I was not prewould have supposed to be due to him. Since pared to hear it said, or even insinuated here, that that period, some delay having occurred in New we should shudder with alarm in the performance York with regard to his public reception there, of what we may consider a high moral duty to the other gentlemen here, friendly to the original ob- cause of freedom, on account of the danger which ject which I had in view, have thought proper to is supposed to exist of our offending his High introduce propositions to provide for him a re- Mightiness, the Czar of Russia. I am resolved to spectful and affectionate reception in the capital perform what I deem my duty as an American Senof the nation. ator, and to risk all consequences; and I shall respect the government of this Republic far less than I now do when it shall fail to perform its clear public duty from dread of the censure or condemnation of any of the despotic powers of Christendom. I fear that there has been too much of this feeling in our national councils in times past; and I am sure that we have arrived at a period when it becomes us to express our opinions of public men and of Governments with more freedom and boldness than has heretofore been usually practised by men in power. Was there anything in the original resolutionis there anything in either of the resolutions which have been presented to the Senate since the withdrawal of the original one, which indicates an intention, on the part of those who have agreed that this illustrious personage is entitled to some respectful notice at our hands, of a nature to commit the Government to all the uncertainties and perils of a European war? No calmly-thinking and dispassionate man can examine any of the propositions presented, and come to such a conclusion. I do not understand the language of Governor We owe, as I believe, to the illustrious GoverKossuth in New York as the Senator from New nor of Hungary, a cordial national reception. Can Jersey, [Mr. MILLER,] and some others, seem to any one pretend that such reception would violate understand it. I do not understand him at all as the laws of nations? No one has pretended that intimating an expectation that this Government, it would. What right, then, would the Emperor as such, should enter into a war at once without of Russia have to complain of it? Is it disrespectdelay, for the maintenance of the independence of ful to him to treat a man, who is, in the judgment Hungary. I understand him-and the gentleman of the civilized world, possessed of higher moral from Georgia, in one part of his speech seemed attributes than any reigning monarch, with special so to understand him-as clearly asserting a dis-respect and even with reverential homage? If this tinction between the people of the United States potentate could feel insulted at an act on our part and their Government. That distinction was in- so becoming, so natural, and should be silly enough timated by him, not in any spirit of hostility to complain of it, he would expose himself to the toward our institutions-not for the purpose of laughter and contempt of the civilized world, and exhibiting any disrespect on his part towards the I should rejoice that his proud and callous heart Government, or intimating any doubt in his mind had been made to feel the softening influence of as to the sincere sympathy which the Government chagrin and mortification for once in his life. of the United States entertains for him and his I must confess that I greatly prefer the propofortunes. The contrary idea is most emphatically sition of my friend from Illinois, [Mr. SHIELDS,] stated by him. I understand him to appeal, as and but for the extraordinary desire felt by the he has a right to do, to this nation of sovereigns, honorable Senator from Georgia to gratify the every man of whom is equally and completely in- American public with his views in extenso on this dependent, for the calm and dispassionate consid-subject, the resolution of the Senator from Illinois eration of that claim to respect and sympathy which he has come here to present to them. Has he not a right to address public meetings of our citizens in behalf of the cause of Hungarian freedom and independence? Have not our people a right to listen to him respectfully-to avow their respect and affectionate sympathy for him, and to supply him with such pecuniary aid as he may be willing to receive? Have they not a right to do anything for the furtherance of the cause which he has at heart, which is not of a nature calculated to compromit our international relations, or involve us in foreign wars? I maintain that he has said nothing at all in any of his speeches that I have seen which goes beyond this. I know that certain slanderous prints have asserted that he has employed language of a very different character. I know that in advance of his coming the most unmanly and illiberal efforts were made to poison the public mind in regard to him and his claims to our admiration and kindness. I have looked into this matter pretty closely, and I feel justified in asserting that great and cruel injustice has been done to this distinguished individual in regard to what he said in the city of New York. What is it that is now proposed? One gentleman simply urges substantially that we shall give to Governor Kossuth a hearty national welcome. Is there any harm in that? But it is said there is no precedent for this; and again it is answered that a precedent has been discovered. Then it is said that the precedent found does not apply, because Lafayette was a greater man than Kossuth, or had greater claims upon our regard. Both of them might have been accepted by the Senator from New York as a substitute for his, and there would have been an end of the matter. The performance of such an act as that indicated by the resolution of the Senator from Illinois, would not have affected our peaceful_relations with the Govern ments of Europe. How is it possible that any mischief can possibly arise from our being introduced to Governor Kossuth in our own Hall, and the other members and the Government performing the rites of hospitality in such manner as they deem appropriate and becoming? Sir, I deeply deplore this whole debate. I must say that I think it is calculated to detract somewhat from the dignity of the Government itself. Comparisons have been indulged, and parallels attempted to be run which, whilst they testified some ingenuity of a rather trivial and worthless character, are not at all in unison, as I must think, either with the rules of good breeding or the laws of sound taste. Mr. SUMNER next obtained the floor, but gave way to Mr. RUSK, on whose motion the Senate adjourned. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. TUESDAY, December 9, 1851. The House met at twelve o'clock. The Journal of yesterday was read and approved. The following gentlemen appeared to-day, were qualified, and took their seats, viz: Mr. McQUEEN and Mr. WALLACE of South Carolina, and Mr. MOORE of Louisiana. |
