liberty, and anxious to oppose the design of the Viennese Cabinet to Germanize Hungary, and so melt it into the common absolutism of the Austrian dynasty—­I say, anxious to oppose this design by a cheerful public life of the people itself, from the year 1790 began to pass laws in the direction that by-and-by, step by step, the Latin language should be replaced in the public proceedings of the Legislature and of the Government by a living language familiar to the people itself.  And what was more natural, than that, being in the necessity to choose one language, they choose the Magyar? the more so, since those who spoke Hungarian were not only more than those who spoke any one of the other languages, but were if not more than, at least equal to, all those who spoke several other languages together.

Be so kind to mark well, gentlemen; no other language was oppressed—­the Hungarian language was enforced upon nobody.  Wherever another language was in use even in public life; of whatever Church—­whatever popular school—­whatever community—­it was not replaced by the Hungarian language.  It was only the dead Latin, which by-and-by became eliminated from the diplomatic public life, and replaced by the living Hungarian in Hungary.

In Hungary, I say.  Gentlemen, be pleased to mark:  never was this measure extended into the municipal life of Croatia and Sclavonia, which, though belonging for 800 years to Hungary, still were not Hungary, but a race with distinct local institutions.

The Croatians and Sclavonians themselves repeatedly urged us in the common parliament to afford them opportunity to learn the Hungarian language, that, having the right, they might also enjoy the benefit, of being employed in the government offices of our common Hungary.  This opportunity was afforded to them, but nobody was forced to make use of it; while neither with their own municipal and public life, nor with the domestic, social, religious life, of any other people in Hungary itself, did the Hungarian language ever interfere.  It replaced only the Latin language, which no people spoke, and which was contrary to liberty, because it excluded the millions from public life.  Willing to give freedom to the people, we expelled that Latin tongue; which was an obstacle to its future.  We did what every other nation in the old world has done, clearing by it the way to the universal liberty.

Your country is happy even in that respect.  Being a young nation, you did not find the Latin tongue in your way when you established this Republic; so you did not want a law to eject it from your public life.  You have a living language, which is spoken in your Congress, in your State Legislatures, and by which your Government rules.  It is not the native language of your whole people—­and yet no man in the Union takes it for an oppression that legislature and government is not carried on in every language spoken in the United States.