A defence of the American policy, as opposed to the encroachments of foreign influence, and especially to the interference of the papacy in the political interests and affairs of the United States

Front matter

CORNELL

UNIVERSITY

LIBRARY

Contents

CHAPTER L

POPnLAB OOVEKNMENT — EDUCATION IN THE SOHOOI. OF SELF- RELIANCE — ^FRENCH NOTIONS OF LIBERTT — CHARLES X., LAFAY- ETTE AND LOUIS PHILIPPE 13

CHAPTER n.

Appendix

speech op henkt olit in keplt to governor louis kossttth, on the subject of american intervention in the aefaibs

of europe 333

opinion op thos. h. benton on the subject op intervention 337

kossuth's appeal to the germans in america 338

Kossuth's secret circular to the Germans 340

THE revolutionary " LEAGUE " 343

constitution OP THE AMERICAN REVOLUTIONART LEAGUE OP

EUROPE 347

GOVERNOR RAYMOND AND THE IRISH LEAGUE 349

FOREIGN PAUPERS AND CRIMINALS SENT TO THE UNITED STATES

BY THEIR GOVERNMENTS 354

DESECRATION OP THE SABBATH 358

THE KENSINGTON MASSACRE, PHILADELPHIA 362

STATISTICS OP PAUPERISM AND CRIME 365

DEFENCE OF THE AMERICAN POLICY.

Chapter I

Popular Government — Education in the School of Self-reliancb— French Notions of Libehtt — Charles X. — Louis Philippe and Lafayette.

'' If humanity shows to the God of this world

A sight for his fatherly eye ; 'Tis that of a people with banner unfurled,

Resolved for their freedom to die, *Tis a spark of the Deity bursting to light,

Through the darkness of human control.

That fires the bold war-arm in liberty's fight, And flames from the patriot, burning and bright,

Through the eye of an heavenly soul."

Phillips.

Mankind ard entitled to just such privileges, social and political, as they are capable of employing and enjoying rationally. American Republicanism comprises ibis theory, no more.

By American Republicanism, I mean the system of gOTemment in use in the United States of North America, as distinguished from all other systems, forms and theories of Republicanism heretofore, or now in use elsewhere. A republic may be an oligarchy, like that of Venice ; or,

14 A BEFENCE OF THE AMERICAN POLICY.

it may be a demooraoy, like that of Athens. American Eepublicanism is neither the one nor the other. The Venetian and the Athenian exhibit the extremes of what is termed popular government; the American presents the just and rational medium. Eepubhcanism in the form of an oligarchy, imparts to the people little more of political or social freedom than an absolute monarchy. It is, in fact, but one step removed from that form of government. In a monarchy, the prerogative of government is monopolized by a class, whose only claim is that of birth. An aristocratic republic presents a similar phase, and the greatest , liberty enjoyed by the people is the privilege of choosing their rulers from that monopolizing class. And even this degree of liberty, when granted, is confined to a limited portion of the whole people, because the right of suffrage is so hedged in and restrained under " property qualifications " and other hindrances, that, comparatively speaking, but few of the people ever reach the standard of eligibility. It is apparent, that under such a system, a majority of the people might as well live under monarchical restraint — for in an aristocratic republic the poorer classes are regarded with no more favor or consideration than they are under a liberal monarchy ; possibly they are regarded with even less consideration.

It does not follow, however, from this fact, that the people of the Venetian Republic W(_'re entitled to a greater deo-ree of liberty than they possessed. "We must not lose sight of the maxim that " mankind are entitled to just such privilesjes, political and social, as they are capable of employing and enjoying rationally," and we have no evidence that the Vene-

EEPUBLIOS. 16

tian republicans had attained to the intellectual qualifications necessary to fit them for the rational enjoyment of a larger liberty than they possessed. Communities and nations far more enlightened than were the republicans of Venice, have tried the system of popular liberty, and failed. They have overturned thrones, beheaded kings, and exiled or executed whole aristocracies, without avail. Rational liberty has, in every instance, fled like a phantom, or an ignis fatuus before them, constantly eluding their grasp, and eventually leading them with headlong and fanatic speed, through avenues of horror and torrents of human blood, to disappointment, ruin, and disgrace. The Robespierrian republic, and the Cromwellian commonwealth, are terrible proofs in support of our theory.

But we have a later and fortunately a less fanatical, and less bloody witness, in the efforts of the French people to throw ofi' the monarchical shackle. The first fruit of this popular revulsion was the overthrow of the Bourbon dynasty, and the expulsion of Charles X., and the entire royal family. The headstrong leaders of that revolution were eager to declare a republican form of government, but they were confronted by the Marquis de Lafayette, who silenced their clamors with the bold declaration that the people of France were not in a condition to enjoy and employ in a rational manner the delicate responsibility of self-government. Lafayette had been a pupil of George Washington, the Father and founder of the American Republic. He had devoted the energies of his youth and the fortune of his inheritance to the completion of American independence, during its struggle against the oppressive exactions of the British crown. He had shared the inmost confidence of the great champion of liberty ; he had listened to his counsels, and imbibed his spirit. He had studied the history of the colonists, he had analyzed their spirit, and he had witnessed the establishment of their republic. He liad seen Washington in the presidential chair, directing the tottering steps of the new-born nation, and his comprehensive intellect realized the great secret of its success.

Lafayette saw and realized the fact that the American republicans, so far from emerging by a sudden and violent step from the serf-like condition of monarchical subjects, had been prepared for the transition by the training of a century and a half in the school of self-reliance, and that, although nominally the subjects of Great Britain, they were, in the principal essentials of their character, free men, long before the blow was struck for national independence.

Their sovereigns rather encouraged than restrained the spirit of self-reliance, in the early settlement of the colonies, with the view to encourage emigration, and thus people the new territories. Even the first successful colony of Europeans, which, in the year 1607, settled in Virginia, under a grant from James I., of England, was vested with a local legislature, chosen by the people, and it also enjoyed the ri^ht of trial by jury. I say the first successful colony, because the colony established by French Huguenots at St. Augustine, Florida, in 1562, was broken up, and the colonists — nine hundred in number, murdered in cold blood by the Roman Catholic expedition under the monster Melendez.

THE SCHOOL OS SELF-RELIANCE. 11

For generations the whole lives of our ancestors had been the initiative of republicanism. Their remoteness from the parent government, whose authority was exercised more by tacit consent than by absolute dictation, so far at least as its efl'ects were felt by the hardy populace ; their exemption from the constraint of aristocratic intercourse ; the local dangers by which they were surrounded and exposed, forcing upon them a community and equality of interest for mutual protection ; their wild and romantic habits of life, tempered with an uniform reliance on Divine Providence ; together with an innate spirit of resistance to despotic authority, inherited from their Puritan ancestors ; all contributed to qualify the people of the United Colonies for a system of self-government, at the very moment which saw their national independence consummated. In their local afi'airs, each community of Anglo-Saxon pioneers, constituted within itself a limited miniature republic, and not a man among them had been taught to rely for protection upon any government, other than that primitive police which he had himself assisted in creating ; and for personal protection his reliance was in the quick eye, the sure weapon, and the strong arm. These were among the important elements which qualified the early patriots of America, for the grand experiment of a popular gpvernment.

With these truths impressed upon his mind, Lafayette could not be blind to the disparaging contrast presented by his own countrymen at the close of the French Eevolution in 1830. In a contest of only three days, the Parisians, inhabitants of a single city, had overturned one of the ancient

18 A DEFENCE OP THE AMERICAN POLICT.

dynasties of their own powerful nation. They had driven their monarch into precipitate exile ; burned the throne of state in the public street, before the doors of the Royal Palace ; dissolved the legislative department, annulled the judiciary, and left themselves without a government. The whole affair was " French,'' from first to last. It was an act of impulse performed by an impulsive people, without any immediate necessity, or any definite object.

The greatest and most immediate act of despotism of which Charles X. had been guilty, was the suppression of public sentiment by muzzling the public press ; an ofl'ence of sufficient magnitude to arouse the popular indignation it is true, but one which in all human probability might have been corrected without bloodshed or revolution. The parties most aggrieved, however, were the editors and the higher classes, whereas the brunt of the fight fell on the workingmen. France is not like America, and the people of France are not like the people of the United States. In France, the papers are read, comparatively, by very few of what we call " the people," the masses, the men who give bone, muscle, and nerve to any nation. In the United States it is diiferent. Here everybody reads the newspapers ; the news of the day forms a very large part in the economy of the life of the American workingman, and the freer and bolder the press, the better he likes it. It would be safer to stop his bread and butter, than to stop his newspaper, or what is quite as important, deprive it of that interesting spice which the fi-ee discussion of political topics and public men imparts to the dinrnal publication. To silence or muzzle the public press

THE FRENCH REVOLUTION OF 1830. 19

of the United States, would consequently come home with telling effect to the very hearts and bosoms of the working classes of the country. Abolitionism, the Fugitive Slave Law, and even the Maine Liquor Law would sink into insignificance in comparison with this, and it is questionable whether the known respect of our citizens for the laws and authorities of the land, would be sufficient to restrain the just and overwhelming indignation that would grow out of so arbitrary an act.

But, as I have said, it is not so in France, and it was not so at the time of the revolution in 1830. Editors and politicians were the parties most directly aggrieved by the act of their sovereign, and as the editors and politicians were not alone sufficient to cope with the government, they found it necessary to enlist the sympathies of the populace. This was easily done by careful conversations in the cafes of Paris ; and by reiterating and recalling other instances of real or imaginary wrong, it was quite as easy to make the lower classes believe that their bread and wine, the two staves of a Frenchman's life, depended upon the overthrow of the Bourbons. Matters having been arranged on this basis, the populace took it into their heads to get up a revolution, and they had it ; but when the work was consummated, and the excitement over, they were at a loss to know what to do with themselves. They had built barricades, sung the Marseillaise, and massacred the government troops to their hearts' content, and when the thing was done, and the lassitude of satiety had taken the place of enthusiasm, they were quite willing to settle down again under a monarchy. But the inspiring words " Vive la Bepublique /" uttered by a sans culotte, was the suggestion of a new idea. It sent a thrill like an electric shock through the whole Parisian heart, and the cry was echoed and re-echoed through the thronged streets of the insane city. It was at this turn in the tide of Parisian impulse, that Lafayette stejjped forth upon the balcony of the Hotel de Ville, above the heads of the excited multitude, leading by the hand a scion of the House of Orleans. A motion of his honored hand was the signal for universal silence, but again arose the cry " Vim la Repuhlique /" — " Vive Lafayette, le President Premier .'"' Silence v>as again restored, and the aged patriot — the Father of his people, wa\'ing aside the preferred honor, in paternal tones addressed the impulsive populace. He told them it was too soon for the Republic ; that the transition by a single step from a known policy to one unknown and untried, would be fatal alike to public peace and private happiness, and, in a word, that France was unprepared to enter upon the experiment of popular sovereignty. Under such circumstances, Lafayette, wisely temporizing with the inflammable element by which he was surrounded, ventured to recommend a medium course. He advised that a sovereign should be chosen by the popular will, and with a firm voice nominated on the spot, the man who stood at his side, Louis Philippe, Duke of Orleans !

This nomination was received with a shout of approval which shook the old palace to its foundation, and Louis Philippe was there chosen by acclamation, to be the '• citizen king of the French!" Thus ended the revolution of 1830, begun and finished within three days in the city of Paris,

LOUIS PHILIPPE. 21

and with this dinouement the people went back to their workshops and sour wine, fully satisfied that they had accomplished a glorious triumph over despotism ! *

But time wore on. The good Lafayette had been gathered to his fathers, and the " citizen king " proved in the end to be anything but a republican. In admitting Louis Philippe to the sovereignty of France, the people, if they had any definite object in view at all, aimed at the establishment of a new principle in their government. They sought to do away with the old idea of "legitimacy," and to introduce in its stead the elective system. They were willing to be governed by a king, but that king must be one of their own choosing ; they were willing to live under a monarchy, but the monarch must be one of their own creation. This did not meet the approbation of Louis Philippe. He had a large family of the blood royal to provide for, and although he made the most of his time in amassing a stupendous fortune during his reign, he had no idea of allowing the Orleans dynasty to expire at his death, if he could find it in his power to prevent such a catastrophe.

It was quite natural under the circumstances, therefore, that he should shape his course with a view to a legitimate succession, and in doing so, as a matter of course, he ran bolt against the most sensitive chord of popular sentiment. The press, in the most delicate manner, reminded his majesty of the events of July, 1830, and his majesty retorted by

* In derision of " legitimacy" Louis Philippe was denomlnatca, with more of terseness than piety, "Roi de France, par la voix dupeuple et nonpar la grids de JHeu P

22 A DEFENCE OF THE AMERICAN POMOY.

restricting the privilege of the printer. Like the exiled king who, but a few years before, had fled from French territory leaving his crown behind him — but too happy in the reflection that his head was not in it — Louis Philippe committed the fatal error. He placed the press under censorship, and put a muzzle on the types. The corps editorial and the republican aristocracy again had recourse to the cafes, the suburbs, and the vin haunts of the metropolis ; another revolution was gotten up, and in a brief space of time the " citizen king " found it convenient to follow in the footsteps of his illustrious predecessor and take up his abode in England. On the 26th day of February, 1848, Louis Philippe was dethroned, and Monsieur Lamartine, amidst the shouts of the whole people, declared France to be a Bepublic !

NATIONAL BEVERAGES. 23

Chapter II

" They were red-hot with drinking ; So full of valor that they smote the air For breathing in their faces."

Shaespsare,

The cheap wines of France have much to answer for. They have a marvellous effect upon the political temper of the people, and hence, upon the government- itself. They have done more to foment revolution than all other causes combined. They exhilarate without intoxicating. They send a genial glow through the veins, and make men at once valiant, voluble and saucy ; they produce a momentary ehivalric enthusiasm, bold, daring, and uncompromising ; and as the French populace drink these wines as freely as the Americans drink water, we should not be surprised when we witness the effects in imeutes, insubordination, and revolution. How different the national beverage of old England. Ale — strong, dreamy, and stupefying. Ale — " pale," or " nutbrown," " double X," ''old," "new," or " half-and-half ;" it is all the same in its results. As the Frenchman partakes of the character of his light wines, gay, buoyant, and sprightly, so the Englishman personifies his beverage in his rotund, sluggish, and contented habits. Give your Englishman, after a day's labor, his mug of ale with a bit of cheese, a pipe of tobacco, and a companion or two at the ale-house table, and he will care little who is prime minister or sovereign. Of all the beverages in the world to keep people quiet, I would recommend the ale of old England. In fact, the study of the subject of national beverages might form a profitable theme in the political economy of all nations, and especially of despotic dynasties. Cheap wines should never be allowed. Louis Napoleon may profit by this hint, and perhaps, all things else being propitious, secure a succession.

Every nation has its beverage and its drinking customs, as distinctly marked as its language, or its general habits. The French, English, and German, will sit the night out in social carouse, at a single table. The Irishman takes his " poteen " at random, or wherever he can get it. The Portuguese sips his port, with an elegant and courteous grace. The true Castilian demands the best of the vintage, and will utter his " Oracia Dios " over every bumper. He seldom usurps the prerogative of the low priesthood, by getting intoxicated. In sjjite of the prohibitary law of the Koran, the Turk drinks his sherbet. The Chinese are tea-drinkers, and for intoxication they resort to opium. In the Argentine mate is the national beverage. And in the United States water is the staple thirst-quencher, though we do partake of the good things of every clime, from the finest cogniac down to rye whisky of home manufacture.

Your German, now, will dispose of his wishy-washy lager-

THE FKENCH REPUBLIC OF 1848. 25

bier, by the gallon, with Kttle more than a physical effect for which he finds a ready antidote. Men of certain temperaments will get intoxicated on lager-bier; but most men, accustomed to it, will absorb a keg of the article in twentyfour hours, with no other effect than the inconvenience of repletion. The petty kings and princes of the Germanic confederation would have little to fear from popular ebullition if they would confine their subjects to the distinct national beverage — lager-Uer. But the people, although they like it, are not satisfied with it alone. It is neither one thing nor the other. A man must drink an uncomfortable quantity to become either exhilarated or stupefied, and so they qualify it with an alternation of French wine. This may aft'ord a key to the whole secret of the late Germanic revolutions. Had Louis Philippe contrived to change the beverage of France, from buoyant and exhilarating wines to plain English ale, and let the printers alone, he might have reigned to the day of his death, and left his son, the Duke of Orleans, a king instead of a refugee. But Louis Philippe was more of a man than a philosopher, and as a consequence he lost his crown, and his heirs their succession.

In February, 1848, France was again without a government.

There was now but one sentiment animating the French heart, and that sentiment demanded the establishment of a republic. Lamartine, the purest and soundest Frenchman of the day, took the lead in the formation of a provisional council, and immediately became associated with a few of the leading spirits of the revolution, including some of the

26 A DEFENOE OF THE AMERICAN POLICY.

best, and some of the worst men of tlie time. They declared the republic, and having constituted themselves a government -pro tempore, proceeded to make arrangements for the election of a jjresident.

Mr. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte was at that time a refugee, in England. In the year 1841, he had attempted, at an obscure town, to get up a revolution, under the prestige of his uncle's memory, on his own account, and failed. He was laughed at'for his silly faux ^ms, and in order to restrain his youthful impetuosity, Louis Philippe shut him up in the Chateau of Ham, under a sentence oi perpetual imjprisonment. From this confinement he managed to escape in the garb of a laborer, made good his retreat across the frontiers, and took refuge in Belgium. Thence he made his way to England, where he remained until the overthrow of Louis Philippe. This personage now presented himself to the provisional government, and in polite terms, tendered his congratulations and his services. The congratulations were received, but the services were declioed ; and he was very plainly given to understand, that his presence in French ground was unnecessary, and perhaps, injurious, at a period so critical.

With all his follies and vagaries, Louis Napoleon had in his composition a spice of the old stock, and not relishing the cavalier reception he had met with at the hands of the " provisional government," he resolved to tiirn his sails to the popular breeze, and try his fortune under the new rcijime.

He had been a prince, an exile, a refugee, a revolutionist, a prisoner for life, and a roystering b'hoy in the purlieus of'

LOUIS NAPOLEON BONAPARTE. 27

Church street, in the city of New York^ and he doubtless deemed it strange if out of all these vicissitudes and transitions he had not picked up enough of experience to make a statesman.

Proud of his imperial name, he was an aristocrat in every vein; but he talked republicanism as volubly as the most ultra "Eed," and had sufficient tact to secure first a seat in the National ' --:■ nbly, and finally, his election to the presidential chau ^r the republic. His term of office was to extend during four years, deducting the interregnum between the declaring of the republic, and the time of his inauo-uration. The election for president took place on the 10 th and 11th days of December, 1848, and he was inaugurated president in the early part of 1849. The following was the vote rendered on this occasion.

For Louis Napoleon, 5,524,520. For General Cavaignac, 1,448,302. For Ledru Eollin, 371,431. For all others, 71,990.

France had now attained the topmost round in the ladder of her ambition. She was a republic, in the enjoyment of universal suffrage! She had a president and legislature chosen by the ballots of the entire people.

This state of things was not the result of an impulsive tumult. It was the calm deliberate act of reflection (if Frenchmen do reflect), and every man, when he voted for president, knew, or ought to have known, what he was about. There was Lamartine, and other good men, it is true, who would have been, either of them, as a father to the people, but the people chose Louis Napoleon. This was their first act in the republican drama — their debut in the character of freemen, and if they erred the world looked on with indulgence.

The whole event was one of deep interest to the people of the United States of America. For the Americans, although determined to stand on their own ground, and to enter upon no "entangling alliances" with other powers, feel a direct sympathy in the efforts of any and every people who make the struggle for freedom, and popular sovereignty. When France threw away her crown, and burned her throne, in 1830, America rejoiced. She gave vent to her gratification, by public demonstrations, illuminations, processions, and addresses. The fleur-de-lis had been cast aside, and the tri-color mingled its folds with the stripes and stars of our own blessed Union. When, in 1848, France abolished the monarchy, and declared for the republic, the people of the United States renewed their congratulations, but when they elected Louis Napoleon as president, they saw plainly the forecast shadow of coming events, and were silent.

But France was content with her own act — she was gay, frivolous, and happj- — she thought she had secured the boon o^ civil liberty. Alas ! what a mistake. With a republican government, and the right to choose their rulers, the people imagined that nothing was left them to do but to enjoy themselves! Well, France is France, and it would be difficult, with all her enlightenment, to make her rational.

With all the glories of science which illlustrate her name; with all the magnificence of her works of art, and the genius of her artists; with all her triumphs

LOUIS NAPOLEON, PRESIDENT. 29

in literature and in arms, France is still frivolous, fantastic, and unreflecting. She has within her all the elements of grandeur and power, but not of rational freedom. England may sustain a republic — France never ! Subjects cannot become good citizens in a moment. Men must be educated to freedom. The early republicans of the United States of America had more than a century of practical training in the theory of self-government, before they ventured on the bold experiment, and when they set about it, they did so with a will — a calm, fixed resolution, and they maintained that resolution through a tedious, unequal, and bloody war of seven years, against one of the most powerful nations of the earth ! France fought three days in the city of Paris, in 1830, against her oppressor! Would she have maintained that fight seven days, had it been necessary to accomplish the object? Doubtful. When the people of France have the nerve to sustain a seven years' war with despotism, they will deserve a popular government, and be prepared to sustain and enjoy it. Till then their Smeuies and revolutions are nothing but fillagree — the mere effervescence of the wine-cellar !

Under the circumstances in which France was placed in 1848, the election of Mr. Louis Napoleon Bonaparte, for president, was an appropriate choice, because the people having had their periodical amusement, gave little thought to the future. The new president knew the calibre and temper of Frenchmen better than they knew themselves, and as the title of president was but secondary in his ambitious fancy, he was not long in preparing to reach the primary obj-3ct. The imperial diadem of his uncle, Napoleon the Great, glittered in his view, and lie determined to seize it. He flattered the vanity of the populace, ftted the army, and restrained the legislature and the press, and just before the completion of his presidential term, he accomplished his notorious coup d'etat of December 2nd, 1851, and in a single night reduced the Repuhlk to an Empire! During that eventful night, those statesmen and general olBcers -who were known to be attached to the republic from principle, were each aroused from their slumbers by a corporal's guard, arrested in their beds, and thrown forthwith into prison, from which they were soon after banished, by the imperial order, and sent to terminate their existence imder tropical rigor at Cayenne. The public press was instantly silenced, or compelled, on pain of banishment or death, to sustain the despotic act. A few executions took place, and then the work was accomplished. No revolt occurred, but little resistance was made, no expression of popular indignation was beard. To those who have studied the jseouliarities of that nation, this circumstance created no surprise. France had attained the acme of despotism, yet her people tamely and disgracefully acquiesced. The men who had so recently built barricades and poured the blood of their innocent countrymen through the streets of Paris, for no other purpose than to depose a king of their own choosing, and build up a republic, calmly looked on, saw that republic wrested from them to gratify the ainbitious will of a single man, and had not, seemingly, the courage, or the disposition to prevent it.

Still, with all his audacity, Mr. President Bonaparte ass jmed an extraordinarv virtue. He graciously announced

LOUIS NAPOLEON, EMPEROR. 31

that he would submit his right to the title of emperor to the sovereign will of the people, and that, ad interim, or until an election could be held to determine whether he should be permitted to wear the imperial diadem or not, he would exercise the prerogative of emperor pro formd, only. This course was rendered the more necessary, perhaps, from the fact that one or more of the leading powers of Europe refused to recog. nize the empire until the people of France had sanctioned it with their votes.