The Sun.
London, England, 1851-11-04 00:00:00

THE SUN,

piness—for our lives and fortunes; and a The
sword of Saul returned not empty."—(Cheers.) The
Austrians were defeated, humiliated, abandoned, and
on the ruins of our country rose the liberties of Hun-
gary. But the case cannot bear the good; the tyrant
cannot bear freedom and happiness ; the freedom of
nations must be secrified to the desires and cupidities
of a single family, at least that is the rule of European
politics beyond the sea.—(Cheers.) Austria was not
able to subdue Hungary by herself—she called in the
aid of Russia; and by Russia our fathers, mothers,
brothers, sisters, and friends were killed. Still (turn-
ing to the motto behind the chair) " there is no obsta-
cle to him that wills."—(Load cheers.) It is said
that the Russian forces were brought forward in the
name of God to subdue rebellion. Ido not know
what ideas of justice or humanity tyrants entertain;
but I know that the principles of European policy are
wholly abhorrent to religion and humanity. What !
attribute the sanction of God and nature to Russian
and Austrian scalping-knives. I say there is a God
in heaven—and God is just. The Hungarian people
still live—" they are swifter than eagles and stronger
than lions."—(Cheers.) Their day will return—it
cannot be far distant and at that moment I will
call for justice to my countrymen—l will invoke the
humanity of the generous English people.—(Cheers.)
I trust that the sympathies which we meet in the
palaces of the rich, as well as in the cottages of the
poor, will support our people in those days ; and that
in the few words of your immortal Nelson—" England
expects every man to do his duty"—(Loud cheers)—
all Englishmen will unite in maintaining the hap-
piness and freedom not of Hungary only, but of the
whole world.—(Cheers.)
Mr. CONYNGHAM, of Brighton, then proposed,
" Italy, and long life to Joseph Mazzini."— (Cheers.)
With regard to the procession of the day, be had
seen many processions on the continent, and he could
not estimate to-day's gathering at less than 150,000
persons.—(Cheers.) They had expressed their sen-
timents in favour of Hungary, but bow vain was all
this expression of sentiment so long as the people
were not represented in the House of Commons ?
Did they suppose if the people had been represented
that England would ever have allowed a 'single Cos-
sack to set his foot on the soil of Hungary ?
(Cries of " No, no.") But what could they do so
long as they were ruled by the Whigs, than whom
there was not a greater set of impostors under the
sun ?—(Cheers.) The first duty of every Englishman
was to get them out of office, and the only way to do
that was to insist on universal suffrage.—(Loud
cheers and cries of:" Question.") Why did not the
six millions of the disfranchised rise as one man, and
insist upon the suffrage ? Was it asked of them
what right they had to the suffrage ? He asked of
such people what right bad they to the land mono-
poly—(Loud cheers)—what right had they to the
principle of hereditary legislation ?—(Cheers.) All
that the disfranchised population had to boast of was
the privilege of hereditary bondage. He would say
to the people of England, if they were in earnest
when the next struggle came, let them go forward as
one man and insist upon having the suffrage. Let
them return their, own representatives to the
House of Commons, and all subordinate questions
would take care of themselves.—(Cheers.) Political
reform was but a stepping-stone to social reform. It
was not merely a radical reform they wanted, but
a reform in the social organization of the whole
countrv.—(Cries of " Question," and " What has
this in do with hlazzini ?") It had every-
thing to do with Mazzini.—(Great confusion.) He
was: anxious to impress upon the people the im-
portance of a change in the Government. If the
Whig impostors continued to rule England, when
the struggle came again in Hungary not a finger
would be moved to save them. It they were in
earnest in meeting in such solemn festivals as these
they must take steps to put the Government of Great
Britain into such hands that when Russia ventured
to invade Hungary, or Austria to interfere in Italy,
England and the United States would say to them—
stir at your peril.—(Loud cheers.) He concluded by
proposing " Joseph Mazzini and Italy."
Mr. DAVID MAssoN replied.
Mr. FETTLE (the secretary) then proposed France.
(Cheers.) The heart of France even now beat
quick, and the period would soon arrive when she
would unfurl the banner, not of any one man, but of
a glorious principle-1852 was the epoch when France
had named that her struggle for freedom would re-
commence; when she would unite in sentiments of
fraternity with wounded Italy, with broken Hun-
gary, and with Poland, fallen, but yet again to rise.
—(Cheers.) If there was any name dear to France,
it was the name of a man that was present among
them—dear to all who, like himself, were the toilers
and workers, the hewers of wood and the drawers of
water; and yet there were other names dear to
France, and he hoped that those men would yet re-
turn and raise aloft the banner of their country's
glory ;:for in the honour of these men lay the action
of France, and in the action of France lay the hope
of the world.—(Loud cheers.)
M. LOUIS BLANC then rose and spoke as follows:
Citizens—l regret that I cannot express in a satisfac-
tory manner, in your language, the emotion which
the ardent expression of your sympathies has caused
within me. How I regret that I cannot throw my
heart into my words ! I am proud, for my beloved
country, of all which I have just heard, and I trust
that those who hear me may never have the sad ex-
perience of feeling how gratifyingly the praises of
his country fall upon the soul of the exile. It is my
turn to express to you how my admiration was ex-
cited for your country by what it has been my lot to
witness here. Haynau arrived here, and his presence
excited one burst of generous indignation. Such was
the reception which the English people had ready for
despotism. Kossuth arrived, and thousands of Eng-
lishmen rushed to welcome him as a brother—such
was the reception England had in store for liberty.
There is a connexion between these two facts which
I think contains a deep lesson, and no stronger proof
could be given, in the times in which we live, that no
nation can remain indifferent to the fate of another.
It was not without surprise, therefore, that I read
the other day, in a speech of Mr. Cobden's, that the
fundamental principle of the policy of free govern-
ments should be the principle of non-intervention.
This assertion appeared to me the more singular
in the mouth of one of the most ardent apostles
of free trade. For, in sooth, if when considering
simply their commercial and material interests,
peoples should approach each other as near as
possible, entwine and embrace each other, why should
they remain confined to an isolated position when
their moral interests are concerned, their social faith,
the worship which they have to render in common to
universal truth and justice ? The principle of non-
intervention ! Why, that is national egotism sanc-
tified ; it is almost to acknowledge that the weak
should be abandoned ; it is every one for himself,
every one at home, admitted as the rule for intea-
national relations ; it is a giving up of diplomacy to
the sway of that maxim " laissez faire, laissez
passer," which, in political economy, has been too
often translated thus—" laissez gemir, laissez souffrir,
laissez mourir." Well am I aware that when a
people feels itself strong enough to re-assert/its inde-
pendence by its own efforts, all the honour must be
conceded to it, even at the expense of more tears and
more bloodshed. After all, liberty is well worth the
pains men take about it, and he who hesitates to brave
a rugged path to attain it is not worthy of possessing
it. I can thus perfectly understand the shout which
Italy raised in 1848, " L'ltalia ford da se," and it
was from my very soul that I applauded Kossuth
when he said, " Let only Russia be stopped, and the
Hungarians will do the rest." Who has a greater right
than Kossuth to bold such language—he who is the re-
presentative of a people who have recently immor-
talized themselves by fighting the battles of giants ?
But it must not be forgotten that there are nations
who are weighed down by the consequences of a long
oppression ; it must not be forgotten that chains leave
marks—that they enervate the limbs upon which they
press, and that one of the crimes of tyranny is to
deprive its victims even of the firm will to shake it
off. With regard to those peoples, what value, tell
me, can be attached to non-intervention ? You find
a man prostrate on the ground—a brigand has a knee
upon his breast—will you confine yourself to say, "If
another assailant comes I will stop him ; until then I
shall not interfere ?" If the unfortunate man suc-
cumbs, it is because he had not the strength to de-
fend himself ; and will you pass listlessly on ?
Citi-
zens I those are not the principles of Democracy.
Puissance oblige. Weakness is the creditor of
strength—ignorance is the creditor of knowledge—
every
slave is the creditor of every free man—and
a nation. For, citizens, when aeqmuaahll—y
aspapinligclaeblman
o
what is true of an individual i
—is oppressed, heis representst in that moment the
embodimenththF of humanity.
whole earth—he
Tous was it understood the French revolution.
When that much calumniated,3r goroldrruits rdeivdonluo;
tion entered upon the scene of the w
proclaim the principle of non-intervention ; on the con-
trary, it nobly maintained that a strong people is the
natural debtor of weaker nations—it affirmed that
there was not a drop of blood—not one—in the veins of
France which did not belong to the oppressed. It did
not write at the head of its new laws, " Declaration
of the rights of Frenchmen," but it wrote, "Decla-
ration of the rights of man," and that heroic charter
was entrusted to citizen soldiers to proclaim it
throughout Europe, at the riTslehaof tt
phietitr
alhivoeusldanhdavat
the point of their bayone,3ts •
e
resolved to transform the anathemas of Burke against
the French revolution, and that be one day exclaimed
in the British Parliament,
" Will you allow the re-
publicans of France to send to the republicans of
England, as they announced, 50,000 caps of
liberty? let us hasten to declare war against
the principles of the French revolution—principles
which it is capable of teaching to Europe from the
cannon's mouth"—that Pitt, I say, took such a course'
and held such language is not to be wondered at. Evil,
like good) has an inflexible logic of I •
ts own. By in- I