The Express.
London, England, 1851-11-12 00:00:00

market, more employment, better wages, surer and more
cadent labour for the industrialist or the manufecturer ;
and by this they would, and in the best manner, promote
the juiciest of agriculture. Because, where is better trade,
where so more money, where is money hard to buy back
that is bought by a country's produce? That would be the
way to carry on, to protect the interests of agriculture—
which of course are very important in every country—but
that carrying on of the free trade principle to
free exportation to other countries, is strongly
connected with the • great principle of freedom.
Without that it is entirely impossible. Let me especially
honour the people of Manchester, fur having so far carried
out the principle. My poor nation, Hungary, even now,
when groaning under the weight of despotism, consumes
cotton manufactures of the value of two millions and a half
pounds sterling yearly. In that consumption, which is a
very great one, not a single yard of Manchester industry
appears. Why ? Because the governments of every people
are the greatest locomotives of principles. (Cheers.) An
alliance between the absolutist principle and free govern-
ments and free opinions is impossible and unheard
of. (Hear, hear.) And what would be the con-
sequence in the future, if Iluegary had a free
government on the basis of liberty. Of course the Hun-
garians would undertake—will undertake—new develop-
ment& of industry themselves. But the cotton manufacture
they could never think of, because it would nut be natural
tothem. British exports during the last three years—that
is to say, from the beginning of 1817 up to the end of 1849,
that is the last year for which the returns have been made
up by your Board of Trade—give an average of a fraction
under 61d. for each individual of the Russian population.
To Austria British exports are still lower, averaging for
every individual a fraction over 40. per bead during
the same period. Yet during these three years
British exports to the United States have amounted on
the average to more than 104. for each individual. Great
as is this difference, the difference is daily increasing. The
despotically governed countries are taking gradually lens,
and the United Steno gradually more of your progress. In
the three preceding years, 1814, 1445, and 1816, your ex-
ports to Russia averaged 714. They have fallen off, as I
have had the honour to state, to 61d. During the same
three years your caroms to the United States averaged
7s. 6d. They have increased by one quarter—that is to
sae, up to 10s ; so that not only is your market increased
with the increase of the United States' population, but
every individual of the United States' population con-
sumes inure of your products, while in Austria and Russia
the reverse has taken place. Yon will remark that though you
ought proportionately to their reepectivepopulations to have
five times more commerce with Russia and Austria than the
United States, you have in fact wisely the times more
commerce with the United States than with Russia and
Austria; whence it may be inferred that under a free go-
vernment, your commerce with those countries would be at
least five and twenty times its amount at present. If 12.5
or 130 millions of Russia, Austria, and Italy were in the
name condition as the highly mani:tacturing United Staten,
those millions would consume as much at least as 50 or 64
millions more than the amount of the whole taxation of
England and Ireland, who wish naturally to reduce taxa-
tion by cutting down those articles whose very existence
tends to the disturbance of peace. But how can you
reduce your armaments whilst France has got
her armaments on foot ready to the hand of Changaruier ;
and how can you expect France disarmed whilst the armed
despotisms are existing ? Therefore, I venture to say, that
in entreating your aid for the slowy of tho principle of
liberty of Europe's continent it is more than a dispensable
compliment to your free trade school, of which I see the
most able leaders and most energetic promoters around me.
I look to the protection of the Reform Society, to the Free
Trade Society, to the Association of the Friends of Italy, as,
of course' the cause of Hungary and Italy must be identical.
I openly declare that to none of these associations I look
with more hope for a generous support than pre.asely to
the Peace Association. (Cheers.) And should I not
have entertained this expectation, the generous speech
of one of your most eloquent and kind-hearted
men, one of your most decided artisans, upholders and
champions of freedom, would have convinced me I did not
plead in vain for the support of that association of peace.
(Cheers.) Too truly other associations can perhaps oppose
the cause of Hungary. The Peace Society is morally
obliged,to support it. If it is logical, certainly it is. If it as
willing to fulfil the necessary conditions of its success, cer-
tainly it is. Everything depends on a good definition, and
' none of the Continent of Europe represents the true
meaning of the word "peace.' Let us take first,
in a private aspect, the word " peace." A man,
for instance, is kicked out of his house. What.
shall he do ? Shall he act according to the principles of the
' Peace Association—try to convince by reasoning ? Shall
Iho require the protection of the law ? But what shall he
do where there is no law ?—where he is out of the law ? I
believe that to surrender so much, then, wculd be to sur-
render the principle of the security of property, on which a
certain one pillar or two, of social order repose. It would be
contrary to the instinct of self-preservation, which God him-
self has given us. Though I must consider the principle of
peace whi,:h is taken up to be agit tied, carried out by the
Peace Association, • principle for legislative adoption, the
principle of non-resistance is a different principle to that
of peace. That is precisely the case in Europe now. The
nations are oppressed by the armed force of military go-
vernments. Despots will not give way—at least they will
not without a struggle. Now what should do the aggressed
nation ? Should they rely upon the principle of capitula-
tion to the Cur, or the other military Owen? Capitula-
tion is no ground that they should rely upon—that they
will themselves abandon their power, never. If we look to
history, where is there a single free country which was not
forced to win its institutions ? In the first progression and
development of opinion where is a single nation which was
not forced to win these institutions by a legitimate defence
of arms mainst arms? There is not a single case in his-
tory. Of course, when a nation is in the happy condition',
of the people of England, it is an example of freedom to
the world, which has its parliament, its free institutions, its
responsibility of ministers, its public spiritand its position
in the world. Such a country, of course, will never need
to have recourse to arms as material forces. But how in
England are these materials acquired ? If you had not
had the revolution of 1665, what then would become of
your parliaments? Therefore I confidently know that
R is not possible for the glorious association of peace
to have the intention to condemn the nations of
Europe to • weak and artificial feeling of despotism.
I ammo that every member of whatever society
—Peace Society, or whatever else—temembers the
great rule, "Thou shalt do to thy neighbour as thou wilt
that thy neighbour shall do unto thee." I find in the
Christian religion there is given to the emperor what be-
longs to him, but it is not taught by the Christian rele
gion to give him what does not belong to him. The free-
dom of opinion is not the property of emperors. (Cheers.)
The second principle of this glorious society is the princi-
ple of non-intervention in foreign matters. That is
r arleisely what I ask for : I am not come to Eng-
to sit your armed interference—to entreat
England to take part in an armed restoration
of Hungary. I only entreat England to respect, and
make respected, the principle of the sacred right of every
nation to dispose of its own affairs. (Loud cheers.) That
glorious association I consider not an English society alone,
but an association of the world. I am entitled to say I feel
with confidence the identity of my principles with the
principles of the association, and the identity of their prin-
ciples with my wishes and my wants; and it is, therefore,
that I was confident that Manchester, being one of
the most glorious workshops of the Peace Asso-
ciation, would prove to be a supporter of the cause
of liberty ; and this my presentiment and expectation
is closely fulfilled here. So, gentlemen, let me now, in •
few words, say what is the practical results which Lin the
name of my good country and in the interest of humanity,
would entreat the practical and glorious people of Man-
chester to give a generous sympathy towards my cause. It
may be that in these principles substantial aid may enter.
I feel, gentlemen, that never in my life, from no one, would
I accept anything. My life is a proof of it. I would rather
starve. it may be my fault; I feel it is my nature ; but
fur the triumph of liberty—for my dearest country, I would
not be ashamed to go begging from door to door like a
poor mendicant. (Cheers.) But there are yet other things
to which I look for a practical result. Firstly, public opi-
nion has declared itself freely; but, to have force, this
public opinion must go on pronouncing itself. Only I hope
that the words of loistiar, "I would it were bedtime, and
all were well," may never be taken for a motto by the
people of England; but that public opinion may go on to
pronounce itself. Therefore these are my wishes—
meetings, petitions—a press to throw out the secrecy of
diplomacy, and pronounce the will of the people of Eng-
land, that all may be considered a right when the great day
of decision comes, I humbly ask this pronunciation of the
public opinion of the people of England for a full acknow-
ledgment of the several rights of every nation to dispose of
its domestic affairs. And by the principle of non-interfer-
ence I understand not to permit the interference of
one nation with another. Here I take the opportunity
to declare that it is true I for my own country and for
myself have convictions, I consider that after what has
happened in Hungary, if it were the most monarchical
country in Europe, still the mare establishment of it is
impossible, because the treachery of the House of Hamburg
has blotted out every hope of it. But it never came to my
mind to have the pretension to go round through the world
to preach government principles. Wherever I go, I ac-
knowledge the right of every nation to govern itself as it
pleases, and I will say that I believe freedom can
dwell under different forms of government. This
I say, because gentlemen whom I have had the
honour to answer upon an address presented to me
—of course, not having quite well understood my words—
have given such a report as that I should have said, I could-
dered in Europe there was no other form of government
possible—no other really constitutional form of government
than a republic. That was • misunderstanding. I never
said so. (Loud cheers.) I consider that a form of govern-
meet may be different, according to the peculiar circum-
stances of • nation. Freedom exists in England
under monarchical government as under republican
government. There social order is established. Combine
my republican convictions with the principle of respect for
the security of persons and property. (Applause.) Here,
gentlemen, I will cud. The generous attention I meet with
in England makes me believe you expected to fiad in me
something worthy of your attention; now the spell is
broken which distance had imparted to my name. (Loud
cheers and " No, no.") The halo of expectation has died
away, and here I sit, as a plain common man, as
thousands and thousands are in your own country ; but
ladies and gentlemen, however deep I may have fallen in
your estimation as to myself, let me most certainly believe
that the present day will not vanish without soma benefit to this
cause of my unhappy land, and without some benefit to the
cause of humanity. And, therefore, I cod with these words:
People of Manchester, let nut the world, let not history
say that on the eve of the last struggle between despotism