of the people, instead of the class-privileges of old.  Moreover, in place of the old Board of Council,—­which, being a corporate body, was of course a mockery in regard to that responsibility of the Executive, which was our chartered right on paper,—­we established the real and personal responsibility of ministers.  In this, we merely[*] upheld what was due to us by constitution, by treaties, by the coronation-oath of every king,—­the right to be “governed as a self-consistent, independent country, by our native institutions, according to our own laws.”  This and all our other reforms we effected peacefully by careful legislation, which the King sanctioned and swore to maintain.

[Footnote *:  Many Englishmen have unjustly accused the Hungarians as having by the laws of March, 1848, effected a SEPARATION of Hungary from Austria. Even if this were true, it could not justify the cause of the Hapsburgs.  The dynasty yielded, under the pressure of circumstances (as alone will dynasties ever yield), while Hungary did but petition legally, and was in fact unarmed.  The dynasty swore to the new laws; and then conspired with Croatians, Serbians, and Russians to overthrow the laws by marauding and force of arms.  In fact, if in January, 1849, Austria would have negotiated, instead of arresting all Hungarian ambassadors, Hungary would have consented to modify the laws of March:  but the Austrians had already in October ordered the overthrow of the whole Hungarian constitution, and had no wish to do anything by legal methods.

At the same time, the original objection is fundamentally false.  No separation of the two countries was effected by the laws of March, 1848; for no legal union ever existed.  Only the crowns were united, not the countries.  Kossuth rightly compares the union to that which was between England and Hanover.  At any time in the past, Hungary might have made peace with a power with which Austria was at war, if the Kings had not falsified their oath by not assembling the Diet:  for the Diet always had the lawful right of War and Peace.  Any mode whatsoever of enforcing the Coronation oath, might, according to this logic, be condemned as a “separating” of Austria and Hungary.]

Nevertheless, this very dynasty, in the most perjurious manner, attacked these laws, this freedom, this constitution, by arms.  We defended ourselves by arms victoriously.  When upon this the perjurious dynasty called in the Russian armies to beat us down, we of course declared the Hapsburgs to be no longer our sovereigns.  We avowed ourselves to be a free and independent nation, but fixed as yet no definite form of government,—­neither monarchical nor republican.  These are plain facts.  Hungary is not now under lawful government, but is being trampled down by a foreign intruder who is not King of Hungary, being neither acknowledged by the nation, nor sanctioned by law.  Hungary is, in a word, in a state of WAR against the Hapsburg dynasty, a war of legitimate defence, by which alone it can ever regain independence and freedom.  By such war alone has any nation ever won its freedom from oppressors; as you see in Switzerland, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, France, Sweden, Norway, Greece, the United States, and England itself.