MR. WEBSTERWS

 



ON

WHE GREEK RHVO%IuUfl'ION....

 

EXwun.thc VVushingt0n fihiflionu

n nwuunwvnvamrvwuunn-«wow

I%3STTHW:
.”??l’JI6‘~IW.ISI*II£D BY CUMMING-S,‘ EIIIQLIARD 85 CO.
'&’.Tnivr2:'sizy Pmss--HilIia1'cl 2:1: Metcalfl
189%.

MR. WEBSTEIEPS SPEECH

ON THE

(Erect: ilwillfllttfillll.

ON the 8th of December, 1823, l‘vIr.i Webster presented, in
the House of Representatives, the following resolution :

“Resolved, That provision ought to be made, by law, for
defraying the expense incident to the appointment of an

“Agent or Commissioner to Greece, whenever the President

shall deem it expedient to make such a1:>pointment.”

t The House having, on the 19th of January, resolved itself
into a Committee of the Whole, and this resolution being
taken into consideration, Mr. Webster spoke to the following
effect:

I am afraid, Mr. Chairman, that, so far as 111ypa1't in this
discussion is concerned, those expectations which the public
excitement, existing on the subject, and certain associations,
easily connected with it, have conspired to raise, may be dis-
appointed. , An occasion which calls the attention to a spot,
so distinguished, so connected with interesting recollections,
as Greece, may naturally excite something of warmth and
enthusiasm. In a grave, political discussion, however, it is
necessary that that feeling should be chastised. I shall en--
deavour properly to repress it, although it is impossible that it
should be altogether extinguished. We must, indeed, fly
beyond the civilized world, we must pass the dominion of
law, and the boundaries of knowledge ; we must, more espe-
cially, withdraw ourselves from this place, and the scenes

4

which here surround us, if we would separate ourselves, alto-
gether, from the influence of all those memorials of herself
which ancient Greece has transmitted for the admiration, and
the benefit, of mankind. This free form of government, this
popular assembly, the common council, held for the common
good, Where have We contemplated its earliest models? This
practice of free debate, and public discussion, the contest of
mind with mind, and that popular eloquence, which, if it were
now here, on a subject like this, would move the stones of the
Capitol, whose was the language in which all these were first
exhibited? Even the Edifice in which we assemble, these

‘ t proportioned columns, this ornamented architecture, all remind

us that Greece has existed, and that we, like the rest of man-
kind, are greatly her debtors. t But I have not introduced this
motion in the vain hope of discharging any thing of this
accumulated debt of centuries. I have not acted upon the
expectation, that we, who have inherited this obligation from
our ancestors, should now attempt to pay it, to those who
may seem to have inherited, from their ancestors, at right to
receive payment. My object is nearer and more immedi-
ate, I Wish to take occasion of the struggle of an inter-
esting and gallant people, in the cause of liberty and
Christianity, to draw the attention of the House to the cir-
cumstances which have accompanied that struggle, and to the
principles which appear to have governed the conduct of the
great states of Europe, in regard to it; and to the effects and
consequences of these principles, upon the independence of
nations, and especially upon the institutions of free govern-
ments. VVhatIhav'e to say of Greece, therefore, concerns
the modern, not the ancient; the living, and not the dead.

It regards her, not as she exists in history, triumphant over

time, and tyranny, and ignorance; but as she now is, con-
tending, against fearful odds, for being, and for the common
privilege of human nature.

As it is never difficult to recite commonplace remarks, and
trite aphorisms; so it may be easy, I am aware, on this occa-_
sion, to remind me of the wisdom which dictates to men a

5

care of their own affairs, and admonishes them, instead of
searching for adventures abroad, to leave other men’s con»
cerns in their own hands. It may be easy to call this reso-
lutioin Qui:A:‘0t'£c, the emanation of a crusading or propagandist
spirit. All this, and more, may be readily said ; but all this,
and more, will not be allowed to fix a character upon this
proceeding, until that is proved, which it takes for granted.
Let it first be shown, that, in this question, there is nothing
which can affect the interest, the character, or the duty of this
country. Let it be proved, that we are not called upon, by
either of these considerations, to express an opinion on the
subject to which the resolution relates. Let this he proved,
and then it will, indeed, be made out, that neither ought this
resolution to pass, nor ought the subject of it tohavo been
mentioned in the communication of the President to us. But,
in my opinion, this cannot be shown. In my judgment, the
subject is interesting to the people and the government of this
country, and we are called upon, by considerations of great
weight and moment, to express our opinions upon it. Tltcse

-considerations, I think, spring from a sense of our own duty,

our character, and our own interest. I wish to treat the sub»-
ject on such grounds, exclusively, as are truly .flmerz'c(m; but
then, in considering it as an American question, I cannot for-
get the age in which we live, the prevailing spirit of the age,
the interesting questions which agitate it, and our own
peculiar relation, in regard to these interesting questions. Let
this he, then, and as far as I am concerned, I hope it will be,
purely an American discussion ; but let it ernhrace, neverthe-
less, every thing that fairly concerns America 3 let it compre-
hend, not merely her present advantage, but her permanent
interest, her elevated character, as one of the free states of the
world, and her duty towards those great principles, which
have hitherto maintained the relative independence of nations,
and which have, more especially, made her what she is.

At the commencement of the session, the President, in the
discharge of the high duties of his oflice, called our attention
to the subject, to which this resolution refers. “A strong hope,”

6

V; says that communication, “ has been long entertained, found-

ed on the heroic struggle of the Greeks, that they would suc-
ceedin their contest, and resume their equal station among
the ‘nations of the earth. It is believed that the whole civil-
ized world takes a deep interest in their welfare. Although
no power has declared in their favour, yet none, according to
our information, has taken part against them. Their cause
and their name have protected them from dangers, which
might, ere this, have overwhelmed any other people. The
ordinary calculations of interest, and of acquisition with a view
to aggrandizement, which mingle so much in the transactions
of nations, seem to have had not effect in regard to them.
From the facts which have come to our knowledge, there is

a good cause to believe that their enemy has lost, for ever, all

dominion over them : that Greece will become again an inde-
pendent nation.” .

It has appeared to me, that the House should adopt some
resolution, reciprocating these sentiments, so far as it should
approve them. More than twenty years have elapsed, since
Congress first ceased to receive such a communication from
the President, as could properly be made the subject of a
general answer. I do not mean to find fault with this re-
linquishrnent of a former, and an ancient practice. It may have
been attended with inconveniences which justified its abo-
lition. But, certainly, there was one advantage belonging to
it ; and that is, that it furnished a fit opportunity for the ex-
pression of the opinion of the Houses of Congress, upon those
topics in the Executive communication, which were not ex»-
pected to be made the immediate subjects of direct legisla-
tion. te Since, therefore, ‘the President’s message does not

now receive a generalianswer, it has seemed to me to be

proper, that in some mode, agreeable to our . own usual form

ofproceeding, we should express our sentiments upon the

important and interesting topics on which it treats.
r If the sentiments of the message in respect to Greece be

it proper, itis equally properthat this House should reciprocate

those: sentiments. i The present resolution is designed to have

'7

that extent, and no more. If it pass, it will leave -any future
proceeding where it now is, in the discretion of the Executive
Government. It is but an expression, under those forms in

which the House is accustomed to act, of the satisfaction of ‘

the House with the general sentiments expressed in regard
to this subject in the message, and of its readiness to defray
the expense incident to any inquiry for the purpose of further
information, or any other agency which the President, in his
discretion, shall see fit, in whatever manner, and at Whatever
time, to -institute. The whole matter is still left in his judg-
ment, and this resolution can in no way restrain its unlimited
exercise.

I might well, Mr. Chairman, avoid the responsibility of this

measure, if it had, in my judgment, any tendency to change

the policy of the country. With the general course of that
policy, I am quite satisfied. The nation is prosperous, peace-
ful, and happy; and I should very reluctantly put its peace,
prosperity, or happiness, at risk. It appears to me, however,
that this resolution is strictly conformable to our general poli-
cy, and not only consistent with our interests, but even de-
manded by a large and liberal View of those interests.

It is certainly true, that the just policy of this country is
in the first place, a peaceful policy. No nation ever had less
to expect from forcible aggrandizement. The mighty agents
which are Working out our greatness, are time, industry, and
the arts. Our augmentation is by growth, not by acquisition;
by internal development, not by external accession. No
schemes can be suggested to us, so magnificent as the pros-

pects which a sober contemplation of our own condition,

unaided by projects, uninfluencecl by ambition, fairly spreads
before us. A country of such vast extent, with such varieties
of soil and climate; with so much public spirit and private
enterprise; with a population increasing so much beyond
former examples, with capacities of improvement not only
unapplied or unexhaustecl, but even, in a great measure, as
yet, unexplored 3 so free in its institutions, -so mild in its
laws, so secure in the titletit confers on every man to his own



acquisitions; needs nothing but time and peace to carry it
forward to almost any point of advancement.

In the next place, I take it for granted, that the policy of
this country, springing from the nature of our government, and
the spirit of all our institutions, is, so far as it respects the
interesting questions which agitate the present age, on the side
of liberal and enlightened sentiments. The age is extraordi-t
nary ; the spirit that actuates it, is peculiar and marked; and
our own relation to the times we live in, and to the questions
which interest them, is equally marked and peculiar. We
are placed, by our good fortune, and the Wisdom and valour

t of our ancestors, in a condition in which We can act no obscure

part. A Be it for honour, or be it for dishonour, Whatever we
do, is not likely to escape the observation of the World. As
one of the free states among the nations, as a great and rapid-
ly rising Republic, it would be impossible for us, if we were
so disposed, to prevent our principles, our sentiments, and
our example, from producing some effect upon the opinions
and hopes of society throughout the civilized world. It rests
probably with ourselves to determine, Whether the influence
of these shall be salutary or pernicious.

It cannot be denied that the great political question oftliis
age is, that between absolute and regulated governments.
‘The substance of the controversy is, whether society shall
have any part in its own government. VVhether the form
of government shall be that of limited monarchy, with more or
less mixture of hereditary power, or wholly elective, or rep-
resentative, may perhaps be considered as subordinate. The

main controversy is between that absolute rule, which, while

it promises to . govern well, means nevertheless to govern
without control, and thatregulated or constitutional system,
which restrains sovereign discretion, and asserts that society
may claim, as matter of right, some effective power in the
establislttnent of the laws which are to regulate it. The spirit of
the times sets with a most powerful current, in favour of these
last mentioned opinions. T It is opposed, however, whenever
and Wherever it shows itself, by certain of the great potentates

9

of Europe ; and it is opposed on grounds as applicable in one
civilized nation as in another, and which wo=;?:d justify such
opposition in relation to the United States, as well as in rela--
tion to any other state, or nation, if time and circumstance
should render such opposition expedient.

What part it becomes this country to take on a question of
this sort, so far as it is called upon to take any part, cannot be
doubtful. Our side of this question is settled for us, even with-
out our own volition. Our history, our situation, our charac-
ter, necessarily decide our positio:n and our course, before we
have even time to ask whether we have an option. Our
place is on the side of free institutions. From the earliest
settlement of these States, their inhabitants were acou;-:»torned,
in a greater or less degree, to the enjoyment of the powers of
self-government; and For the last half century, they have sus»
tained systems of government entirely representative, yielding;
to themselves the greatest possible prosperity, and not leaving:
them without distinction and respect among the nations of the
earth. This system we are not likely to abandon; arid while
We shall no farther recommend its adoption to other nations,
in whole or in part, than it may recommend itself by its visi~~
ble influence on our growth and prosperity, we are, ncvertl.1e-~
less, interested, to resist the establishment of doctrines which
deny the legality of its foundations. We stand as an equal
among nations, claiming the full benefit of the established in-
ternational law; and it is our duty to oppose, from the earliest
to the latest moment, any innovations upon that code, which
shall bring into doubt or question our own equal and inde-
pendent rights. a S

Iwill now, Mr. Chairman, advert to those pretensions, put
forth by the Allied Sovereigns of continental Europe, which
seem to me calculated, if unresisted, to bring into disrepute
the principles of our government, and indeed to be wholly in-
compatible with any degree of national independence. I do

i not introduce these considerations for the sake of topics. I

am not about to declaim against crowned heads, nor to quar-
rel with any country for pt*efe1r1*in,{=;  form of government dif-
"-7?

,6.

10

ferent from our own. The choice that we exercise for our-;
selves, I am quite willing to leave also toothers. But it ap--

pears to me that the pretensions of which I have spoken, are

wholly inconsistent with the independence of nations gener-—
ally, without regard to the question, whether their governments
be absolute, monarchical and limited, or purely popular and

representative. I have a most deep and thorough conviction,

that a new era has arisen in the world, that new and dangerous
combinations are taking place, promulgating doctrines, and
fraught with consequences,.who1ly subversive, in their tenden-
cy, of the public law of nations, and of the general liberties
of mankind. Whether this be so, or not, is the question
which I now propose to examine, upon such grounds of in-
formation, as the common and public means of knowledge
disclose.

Every body knows that, since thetfinal restoration of the
Bourbons to the throne of France, the continental powers
have entered into sundry alliances, which have been made
public, and have held several meetings or Congresses, at
which the principles of their political conduct have been de-
clared. These things must necessarily have an effect upon
the international law of the states of p the world. If that effect
be good, and according to the prin;_"‘_i_ples of that law, they de-
serve to be applauded. If, on the contrary, their effect and
tendency be most dangerous, their principles wholly inadmis-
sible, their pretensions such as would abolish every degree of
national independence, then they are to be resisted.

I begin, Mr. Chairman, by drawing your attention to the
treaty, concluded at Paris in September, 1815, between Rus-
sia, Prussia, and Austria, commonly called the Holy Alliance.
This singular alliance appears to have originated with the
Emperor of Russia; for we are informed that a draft ofit
was exhibited by him, personally, to a plenipotentiary of one
of the great powers of Europe, before it was presented to the
other sovereigns who ultimately signed itfil‘ This instrument

* Vide Lord Castlereagh’s Speech in the House of Commons, February 3,
1816. Debates in Parliament, vol. 36, page 355; where also the Treaty
may be found at length.

I1

professes nothing, certainly, ' which is not extretnely com-
mendable and praiseworthy. It promises only that the con-
tractingi parties, both in relation to other states, and in regard.

to their own subjects, will observe the rules of justice and:

Christianity. In confirmation of these promises, it makes the
most selemn and devout religious invocations. Now, al-

though such an alliance is a novelty in European history, the a

World seems to have received this treaty, upon its first pro-
mulgation, with general charity. It was commonly under-
stood as little or nothing more than an expression of thanks
for the successful termination of the momentous contest, in
which those sovereigns had been engaged. It still seems
somewhat unaccountable, however, that these good resolutions

should require to be confirmed by treaty. Who doubted

that these august sovereigns would treat each other with jus-
tice, and rule their own subjects in mercy? And what ne-
cessity was there, for a solemn stipulation by treaty, to ensure
the performance of that, which is no more than the ordinary
duty of every government? It would hardly be admitted by

- these sovereigns, that, by this compact, they suppose themselves

bound to introduce an entire change,or any change, in the course
of their own conduct. Nothing substantially new, certainly,
can be supposed to have been intended. What principle, or
what practice,therefore,called for this solemn declaration of the
intention of the parties to observe the rules of religion and
justice E I

It is not a little rpmarkable, that a writer of reputation upon

the Public Law, described, many years ago, not inaccurately, r

the character of this alliance: Iallude to Put*l‘endorfl". “It
seems useless,” says he, “ to frame any pacts or leagues,
barely for the defence and support of universal peace 3 for, by
such a league nothing is superadded to the obligation of natu-
ral law, and no agreement is made for the performance of any
thing, which the parties were not previously bound to per-
form 5 nor is the original obligation rendered firmer or strong»
er by such an addition. Men of any tolerable, culture and
civilization, might well be ashamed of entering into any such

l2

compact, the conditions of which imply only that the parties
concerned shall not ofiend in any clear point of duty Be-—
sides, we should be guilty of great irreverence towards God,
should we suppose that his injunctions had not already laid a
suflicient obligation upon us to actjustly, unless we ourselves
voluntarily consented to the same engagement: as if our obli-
gation to obey his will, depended upon our own pleasure.

“ If one engage to serve another, he does not set it down
expressly and particularly among the terms and conditions of
the bargain, that he will not betray nor murder him, «or pil-
lage nor burn his house. For the same reason, that would
be a dishonourable engagement, in which men should bind
themselves to act properly and decently, and not break the
peace.’’* a

Such were the sentiments of that eminent writer. HOW
nearly he had anticipated the case of the Holy Alliance, will
appear from cotnpnring his observations with the preamble to
that alliance, which is as follows : p

“ In the name of the most Holy and Indivisible Trinity,
their litiajesties the Emperor of Austria, the King of Prussia,
and the Emperor of P.ussia,”-—"‘ solemnly declare, that the
present act has no other object than to publish, in"the face of
the whole world, their fixed resolution, both in the adminis---
tration of their respective states, and in their political relations
with every other government, to take for their sole guide the
precepts of that holy religion, namely, the precepts of justice,
christian charity, and peace, which, far from being applicable
only to private concerns, must have an imniediate influence on
the councils of princes, and guide all their steps, as being the
only means of consolidating human institutions, and remedy--
ing their imperfections.”

This measure, however, appears principally important, as
it was the first of a series, and was followed afterwards by
others of a more direct and practical nature. These meas-
ures, taken together, profess to establish two principles, which
the Allied Powers would enforce as a part of the law of the

T * Book ii, cap. 2.

155

civilized world, and the enforcement of which is rnenaced by
a million and a half of bayonets.

The first of these principles is, that all popular, or consti-
tutional rights, are holden no otherwise than as grants from

the crown. Society, upon this principle, has no rights of its

own; it takes good government, when it gets it, as a boon

and a concession, but can demand nothing. It is to live in
that favour which emanates from royal authority, and if it
have the misfortune to lose that favour, there is nothing to
protect it against any degree of injustice and oppt'ession. It
can rightfully make no endeavour for a change, by itself; its
whole privilege is to receive the favours that may be- dispens-
ed by the sovereign power, and all its duty isdescrihed in the
single word, submt'sst'or2.. This is the plain result  the
principal continental state papers; indeed it is nearly’ the
identical text of some of them.

The Laybach circular of May, 182], alleges, “that useful
and necessary changes in legislation and administration,
ought only to emanate from the free will and intelligent con—-
viction of those whom God h.as rendered responsible for pow»-
er; all that deviates from this line necessarily leads to dis-
order, commotions, and evils, far more insufferable than those
which they pretend to retnedy.”“* Now, Sir, this principle
would carry Europe back again, at once, into the middle of
the dark ages. It is the old doctrine of the divine right of
kings, advanced now, by new advocates, and sustained by a
formidable mass of power. Tliat the people hold their fun»
damental privileges, as matter of conce.ssz'on or indulgence,
from the sovereign power, is a sentiment not easy to diffuse
in this age, any farther than it is enforced by the direct ope-
ration of military means. It is true, certainly, that some six
centuries ago, the early founders of English liberty called the
instrument which secured their rights a Charter; it was,
indeed, a concession; they had obtained it, sword in hand,
from the king; and, in many other cases, whatever was ob-

* Annual Register, for 1821.

\

lzla

tainetl, favourable to thulnan rights, from the tyranny and des-
potism of the feudal sovereigns, was called by the names of
prrlvfleges and liberties, as being mattertof special favour. And,
though We ; retain this language at the'present time, the prin-
ciple itself belongs to ages that havelong passed by us. The
civilized world has done with the enormous faith of many
made for one. Societyiasserts its own rights, and alleges
them to be original, sacred, and unalienable. It is not satis-
fied with having kind masters; it demands a participation in
its own government: and, in states much advanced in civiliza-
tion, it urges this demand with a constancy and an‘ energy,
that cannot well, nor long, be resisted. There are, happily,
enough of regulated governments in the ‘ world, and those
among the most distinguished, to operate as constant exam-
ples, and to keep alive an unceasing panting in the bosorns of
men, for the enjoyment of similar freeinstitutions. ,

When the English revolution of 1688‘tool< place, the Eng-
lish people did not content themselves with the example of
Runnymede ; they did not build their hopes upon royal char-—
ters; they did not, like the Laybach circular, suppose that all
useful changes in constitutionsand laws must proceed from
those only whom God has rendered responsible for power.
They were somewhat better instructed in the principles of civil
liberty, or at least they were better lovers of those principles,
than the sovereigns of Laybach. Instead of petitioning for
charters, they declared their rights, and, while they ofi’ered to
the family of Orange the crown with one hand, they held in
the other an enumeration of those privileges which theyidid
not profess to hold as favours, but which they demcmcled and
insisted upon, as their undoubted rights. T ’

I need not stop to observe, Mr. Chairman, how totally hos-
tile are these doctrines of Laybach, to the fundamental prin-

ciples of our government. They are in direct contradiction :

the principles of good and evil are hardly more opposite. If
these principles of the sovereigns be true, we are but in a
state of rebellion, or of anarchy, and are only tolerated among
civilized nations, because it has not yet been convenient to
conform us to the true standard.

15,

But the second, and, if possible, the still more objectionw
able principle, avowed in these papers, is the right of forcible
interference in the affairs of other states. A right to control
nations in their desire to change theirown government, when-
ever it may be conjectured, or pretended, that such ehange

tnight furnish an example to the ‘subjects of other states, is

plainly and distinctly asserted. The same Congress that
made the declaration at Laybach, had declared, before its
removal from Troppau, “that the powers have an undoubted
right to take a hostile attitude in regard to those states in which
the overthrow of the government may operate as an example.”

There cannot, as I think, be conceived a more flagrant vio-
lation of public law, or national independence, than is contain-
ed in this declaration. W

No matter what he the character of the government resistcd,',
no matter with what weight the foot of the oppressor.beat's; on
the neck of the oppressed; if he struggle, or if heicomplain,
he sets a dangerous example of resistance,---—and from that
moment he becomes an object of hostility to the most power-
ful potentates of the earth. I want words toyyenpress my
abhorrence of this abominable principle. I trust every e1tligi1t~
ened man throughout the world will oppose it, and thattespe-
cially, those who, like ourselves, are fortunately out of the
reach of the bayonets that enforce it, will proclaint their
detestation of it, in a tone both loud and decisive. The
avowed object of such declarations is to preserve the peace of
the world. But by what means is it proposed to preserve
this peace ? Simply, by bringing the power of all governments

to bear against all subjects. Here is to be established a sort‘

of double, or treble, or quadruple, or, for aught I know, a claim»

tuple allegiance. An offence against one king is to be an

ofl"ence against all kings, and the power of all is to be put
forth for the punishment of the ofiiauder. A right to interfere
in extreme cases,’ in the case of contiguous states, and where
imminent dangeris threatened to one by what is transpiring
in another, is not without precedent in modern times,«upon

what has been called the law of vicinage ; and when confin-

 

l6

ed to extreme cases, and limited to a certain extent, it may
perhaps be defended upon principles of necessity and self?-
defence. But to maintain that sovereigns may go to war
upon the subjects of another state to repress an example, is
monstrous indeed. What is to be the limit to such a princi-
ple, or to the practice growing out of it? What, in any case,
but sovereign pleasure is to decide whether the example be
good or bad 3 And what, under the operation of such a rule,
may be thought of con earample? Why are we not as fair
objects for the operation of the new principle, as any of those
who may attempt to reform the condition of their government,
on the other side of the Atlantic?

The ultimate effect of this alliance of sovereigns, for ob»-
jects personal to themselves, or respecting only the perma»
nence of their own power, must be the destruction of all just
feeling, and all natural sympathy, between those who exercise
the power of government and those who areisubject to it.
The old channels of mutual regard and confidence are to be
dried up, or cut ofl". Obedience can now be expected no
longer than it is enforced. Instead of relying on the afiectiotis
of the governed, sovereigns are to rely on the affections and
friendship of other sovereigns. There are, in short, no lon-
gerlto be nations. Princes and people no longer are to unite
for interests common to them both. There is to be an end of
all patriotism, as a distinct national feeling. Society is to be
divided horizontally; all sovereigns above, and all subjects
below; the former coalescing for their own security, and for
the more certain subject.ion of the undistinguished multitude
beneath. This, Sir, is no picture, drawn by imagination. I
have hardly used language stronger than that in which the
authors of this new system have commented on their own
work. Mr. Chateaubriand, in his speech in the French
Chamber of Deputies, in February last, declared, that he had
a conference with the Emperor of Russia at Verona, in which
that august sovereign uttered sentiments which appeared to
him so precious, that he immediately hastened home, and
Wrote them down while yet fresh in his recollection. “ The

17

Emperor declared,” said he, “ that there can no longer be such

, a thing as an English, French, Russian, Prussian, or.dus-

trian policy : there is henceforth but one policy, which, for the
safety of all, should be adopted both by people and hinge. It
was for me first to show myself convinced of the principles
upon which I founded the alliance; an occasion ofiiered itself;
the rising in Greece. Nothing certainly could occur more for
my interests, for the interests of my people ; nothing more ac-
ceptable to my country, than a religious war in Turhey : but
I have thought I perceived in the troubles of the Morea,
the sign of revolution, and I have held back. Providence has
not put under my command 800,000 soldiers to satifi my am"
bition, but to protect greligion, morality, and justice, and
to secure the prevalence of those principles of order on which
human society rests. It may well be permitted that hinge may
have public alliances to defend themselves against secret ene-
mies.” i s 0

These, Sir, are the words which the French minister
thought so important as that they deserved to be recorded;
and I too, Sir, am of tlie same opinion. But, if it be true
that there is hereafter to be neither a Russian policy, nor

‘a Prussian policy, not an Austrian policy, nor a French

policy, nor_ even, which yetI will not believe, an English
policy ; there will be, I trust in God, an flmericanpolicy. If
the authority of all these governments be hereafter to be mix-
ed and blended, and to flow in one augmented current of
prerogative, over the face of Europe, sweeping away all re-
sistance in its course, it will yet remain for us to secure our
own happiness, by the preservation of our own principles;

which I hope We shall have the manliness, to express on all

proper occasions, and the spirit to defend in every extremity.

The end and scope of this amalgarnated policy is neither

more nor, less than this :—-to interfere, by force, for any
government, against any people who may resist it. Be the
state of the people what it may, they shall not rise; be the

government what it will, it shall. not be opposed. The prac-

tical commentary has corresponded with the plain language of

3.

18

the text. Look at Spain, and at Greece. If men may not
resist the Spanish inquisition, and the Turkish scimitar, what
is there to whic-h humanity must not submit E’ Stronger cases
can never arise. Is it not proper for us, at all times----is it not
our duty, at this time, to come forth, and deny, and condemn,
these monstrous principles. Where, but here, and in one
other place, are they likely to be resisted? They are ad»-
vanced with equal coolness and boldness; and they are sup-
ported by immense power. The timid will shrink and give
way---and many of the brave may be compelled to yield to
force. Human liberty may yet, perhaps, be obliged to repose
its principal hopes on the intelligence and vigour of the Saxon
race. As far as depends on us, at least, I trust those hopes
will not be disappointed ; and that, to the extent which may
consist with our own settled, pacific policy, our opinions and
sentiments may be brought to act, on the righ_t side, and to
the right end, on an occasion which is, in truth, nothing less
than a momentous question bettvveen an intelligent age, full of
knowledge, thirsting for improvement, and quickened by a
thousand impulses, and the most arbitrary pretensions, sus-
tained by unprecedented power.

This asserted right of forcible intervention, in the affairs of
other nations, is in open violation of the public law of the
world. Who has authorized these learned doctors of Trop-~
pau, to establish new articles in this code 3 Whenoe are their
diplomas E’ ls the whole world expected to acquiesce in prin-

‘ciples, which entirely subvert the independence of nations?
tOn the basis of this independence has been reared the beau»

tiful fabric of international law. On the principle of this in-
dependence, Europe has seen a family of nations, flourishing
within its limits, the small among the large, protected not al-
ways by power, but by a principle above power, by a sense
of propriety and justice. On this principle the great com-~
monwealth of civilized states has been hitherto upheld. There
have been occasional departures, or violations, and always
disastrous, as in the case of Poland; but, in general, the bar-
mony of the system has been wonderfully preserved. In the

19

production and preservation of this sense of justice, this pre-
dominating principle, the Christian religion has acted a main
part. Christianity and civilization have laboured together; it
seems, indeed, to be a law of our human condition, that they
can live and flourish only together. From their blended in-
fluence has arisen that delightful spectacle of the prevalence
of reason and principle, over power and interest, so well des-
cribed by one who was an honour to the age--

“ And sovereign Law, the world’s collected will,
O’er thrones and globes elate,
Sits Empress---crowning good, repressing ill :
Smit by her sacred frown,
The fiend, Diiscrerion, like a vapour, sinks,
And e’en the all-dazzling crown
Hides his faint rays, and at her bidding shrinks.”
But this vision is past. While the teachers of Laybach give
the rule, there will be no law but the law of the strongest.

It may now be required of me to show what interest we
have, in resisting this new system. »What is it to us, it may
be asked, upon what principles, or what pretenses, the Euro-
pean governments assert a right of interfering in the affairs of
their neighbours? The thunder, it may be said, rolls at a
distance. ' The wide Atlantic is between us and danger; and,
however others may suffer, we shall remain safe.

I think it a sufficient answer to this, to say, that; we are one
of the nations 5 that we have an interest, therefore, in the pre-
servation of that system of national law and national inter»-v
course, which has heretofore subsisted, so beneficially for all.
Our system of government, it should also be remembered, is,
throughout, founded on principles utterly hostile to the new
code; and, if we remain undisturbed by itsoperation, we
shall owe our security, either to our situation or our spirit.
The enterprising character of the age,onr own active com-
mercial spirit, the great increase which has taken place in the
intercourse between civilized and commercial states, have ne-
cessarily connected us with the nations of the earth, and giv-
en us a high concern in the preservation of those salutary

20

principles, upon which that intercourse is founded. Wehave
as clear an interest in international law, as individuals have
in the laws of society.  

But, apart from the soundness of the policy, on the ground
of direct interest, we have, Sir, a. duty, connected with this
subject, which, I trust, we are willing to perform. What do
we not owe to the cause of civil and religious liberty? to the
principle of lawful resistance? to the principle that society
has a right to partake in its own government? As the lead-
ing Republic of the world, living and breathing in these prin-
ciples, and advanced, by their operation, with unequalled ra-
pidity, in our career, shall we give our consent to bring them
into disrepute and disgrace? It is neither ostentation nor
boasting, to say, _that there lie before this country, in immedi-
ate prospect, agreat extent and height of power. We are
borne along towards this, without effort, and not always even
with a full knowledge of the rapidity of our own motion. Cir-
cumstances which never combined before, have combined in

our favour, and a mighty current is setting us forward, which

we could not resist, even if we would, and which, while we
would stop to make an observation, and take the sun, has set
us, at the end of the operation, far in advance of the place
where we commenced it. Does it not become us, then, is it
not a duty imposed on us, to give our weight to the side of
liberty and justice-—-to let mankind know that we are not tir-
ed of our own institutions-—-—and to protest against the assert-
ed power of altering, at pleasure, the law of the civilized

world?
But whatever we do, in this respect, it becomes us to do

upon clear and consistent principles. There is an important
topic in the Message, to which I have yet hardly alluded. I
mean the rumoured combination of the European continental
sovereigns, against the new established free states of South
America. Whatever position this government may take on
that subject, I trust it will be one which can be defended, on
known and acknowledged grounds of right. The near ap-
proach, or the remote distanceof danger, may afliect policy,

21

but cannot change principle. The same reason that would ,

autliorize us to protest against unwarrantable combinations to’
interfere between Spain and her former colonies, would an-A”
thorize us equally to protest, if the same combination were
directed against the smallest state "in Europe, although our du-
ty to ourselves, our policy, and wisdom, might indicate Very
difierent courses, as fit to be pursued byus in the two cases.
We shall not, I trust, act upon the notion of dividing the world
with the Holy Alliance, and complain of nothing done by
them in their hemisphere, if they will not interfere with ours.
At least this would not be such a course of policy as I could
recommend or support. We have not offended, and, I hope,
we do , not intend to offend, in regard to South America,
against any principleof national independence or of public
law. We have done nothing, we shall do nothing, that we
need to hush up or to compromise, by forbearing to express
our sympathy for the cause of the Greeks, or our opinion of
the course which other governments have adopted in regard
to them. t V‘

It may, in the next place, be asked, perhaps, supposing all
this to be true, what can we do? Are we to go to war? Are
we to interfere in the Greek tcause,,or any other European
cause 5’ Are we to endanger our pacific relations ?——No, cer-
tainly not. What, then, the question recurs, remains for 153 ‘.?
If we will not endanger our own peace; if we will neither

M furnish armies, nor navies, to the cause which we think the

just one, What is there within our power ?

Sir, this reasoning mistakes the age. The time has been,
indeed, when fleets, and armies, and subsidies, were the prin-
cipal reliances even in the best cause. But, happily for man-
kind, there has come a great change in this respect. Moral
causes come into consideration, in proportion as the progress
of lmowledge is advanced ; and the public opinion of the
civilized world is rapidly gaining an ascendancy over mere
brutal force. It is already able to oppose the most formidable
obstruction to the progress of injustice and oppression; and,
as it grows more intelligent and more intense, it will be more

22

and more formidable. It may be silenced by military power,
but it cannot be conquered. It is elastic, irrepressible, and
invulnerable to the weapons of ordinary warfare. It is that
irnpassible, unextinguishable enemy of mere violence and ar-
bitrary rule, which, like Milton’s angels,

“ Vital in every part,

“ Cannot, but by annihilating, die.”

Until this be propitiated or satisfied, it is vain for power to

talk either of triumphs or of repose. No matter what fields‘

are desolatecl, what fortresses surrendered, what armies sub-
dued, or what provinces overrun. In the history of the year
that has passed by us, and in the instance of unhappy~Spain,
we have seen the vanity of all triumphs, in a cause which vi-
olates the general sense cf justice of the civilized world. It
is nothing, that the troops of France have passed from the
Pyrenees to Cadiz; it is nothing that an unhappy and pros»-
trate nation has fallen before them ; it is nothing that arrests,
and confiscation, and execution, sweep away the little rem-
nant of national resistance. There is an enemy that still ex-»

ists to check the glory of these triumphs. It follows the con--t

queror back to the very scene of his ovations ; it calls upon
him to take notice that Europe, though silent, is yet indignant;
it shows him that the sceptre of his victory is a barren scep-
tre; that it shall confer neither joy nor honour, i but shall
moulder to dry ashes in his grasp. In the midst of his exalt-
ation, it pierces his ear with the cry of injured justice, it de-
nounces against him the indignation of an enlightened and
civilized age ;~~ it turns to bitterness the cup of his rejoicing,
and wounds him with the sting which belongs to the conscious-
ness of liavingioutraged the opinion of mankind.

In my own opinion, Sir, the Spanish nation is now nearer
not only in point of time, but in point of circumstance, to the
acquisition of a regulated government, than at the moment of
the French invasion. N ations must, no doubt, undergo these
trials in their progress to the establishment of free institutions.
The very trials benefit them, and render them, more capable
both of obtaining and of enjoying the object which they seek.

23

I shall not detain the Committee, Sir, by laying before it
any statistical, geographical, or commercial account of Greece.
I have no knowledge on these subjects, which is not common
to all. It is universally admitted, that within the last thirty or
forty years, the condition of Greeceihas been greatly improv-—
ed. Her marine is atipresent respectable, containing the best
sailors in the Mediterranean, i better even, in that sea, than
our own, as more accustomed to the long quarantines, and
other regulations which prevail in its ports. The number of
her seamen has been estimated as high as 50,000, but I;sup-
pose that estimate must be much too large. They have prob-
bly 150,000 tons of shipping. It is not easy to state an ac-

-curate account of Grecian population. The Turkish gov-

ernment does not trouble itself with any of the calculations of
political economy, and there has never been such a thing as
an accurate census, probably, in any part of the Turkish em-
pire. In the absence of all official information, private opin-
ions widely differ. By the tables which have been commuw
nicated, it would seem that there are 2,400,000 Greeks in
Greece Proper and the Islands; an amount, as I am inclined
to think, somewhat overrated. There are, probably, in the

whole of European Turkey, 5,000,000 Greeks, and 2,000,000

more in the Asiatic dominions of that power. The moral

and intellectual progress of this numerous population, under _

the horrible oppression which crushes it, has been such as may
well excite regard. Slaves, under barbarous masters, the Greeks
have still aspired after the blessings of knowledge and civiliza--
tion. Before the breaking out of the present revolution, they had
established schools, and colleges, and libraries, and the press.
Wherever, as in Scio, owing to particular circumstances, the
weight of oppression was mitigated, the natural vivacity of
the Greeks, and their aptitude for the arts, were discovered.
Though certainly not on an equality with the civilized and
Christian states of Europe, (and how is it possible under such
oppression as they endured that they should be .9) they yet
furnished a striking contrast with their Tartar masters. It has
been well said, that it is not easy to form a just conception

24
of the nature of the despotism exercised over them. Con-
quest and subjugation, as used among'European states, are
inadequate modes of expression by which to denote the do-
minion of the Turks. A A conquest, in the civilized world, is
generally no more than an acquisition of a new part to the
conquering country. It does not imply a never--ending bond-
age imposed upon the conquered, a perpetual mark, and op-
probrious distinction between them and__their masters ; a bit»-
ter and unending persecution of their religion; an habitual
violation of their rights of person and property, and the un-
restrained indulgence towards,‘ them, of every passion,
which belongs to the character of a barbarous soldiery.
Yet, such is the state of Greece. The Ottoman pow--

ier over them, obtained originally by the sword, is constantly

preserved by thesame means. ‘Wherever it exists, it is a
mere military power. The religious and civil code of the
state, being both fixed in the Alcoran, and equally the object
of an ignorant and furtiousfaitli, have been found equally in»-
capahle of change. . “ The Turk,” it has been said, “ has been
encampecl in Europe for four centuries.” He has hardly any
more participation in European manners, knowledge, and arts,
than when he crossed the Bosphorus. But this is not the
worst of it. The power of the empire is fallen into anarchy,
and as the principle which belongs to the head belongs also
to the parts, there are as many despots as there are pachas,
beys, and visiers. Wars are almost perpetual, between the
sultan and some rebellious governor of a province; and in
the conflict of these despotisms, the people are necessarily
ground between the upper and the nether millstone. In short,
the Christian subjects of the sublime lPorte,ifeel daily all the

H miseries which flow from despotism, from anarchy, from slave-

ry, and from religious persecution. If any thing yet remains
to heighten such a picture, let it be added, that every office in
the government is not only actually, but professedly, venal ;-T--
the pachalics, the visierates, the cadiships, and wliatsoever
other denomination may denote the depositary of power. In
the whole world, Sir, there is no such oppression felt, as by

25

the Christian Greeks. In various parts of India, to be sure,
the government is bad enough; but then it is the government
of barbarians over barbarians, and the jéeling of oppression
is, of course, not so keen. There the oppressed are perhaps
not better than their oppressors ; but in the case of Greece,
there are millions of Christian men, not without knowledge,

not without refinement, not without a strong thirst for all the

pleasures of civilized life, trampled into the very earth, cen-«
tury after century, by a pillaging, savage, relentless soldiery.
Sir, the case is unique. There exists, and has eXisted,~noth-~
ing like it. The world has no such misery tolshow; there is
no case in which Christian communities can be called upon,
with such emphasis of appeal. , t

But I have said enough, Mr. Chairman, indeed I need have
said nothing to satisfy the House, that it must be some new
combination of circumstances, or new views of policy in the
cabinets of Europe, which have caused this interesting struggle

not merely to be regarded with indifi'"erence, but to be mark-

ed with opprobrium. The very statement of the case, as a
contest between the Turks and Greeks, sufficiently indicates
what must be the feeling of every individual, and every gov-
ernment, that is not biassed by a particular interest, or a par-
ticular feeling, to disregard the dictates of justice’ and hu-
manity.

And now, Sir, what has been the conduct pursued by the
Allied Powers, in regard to this contest? When the revolu-
tion broke out, the sovereigns were in Congress at Laybach ,1
and the papers of that assembly sufliciently manifest their sen-
tirnents. They proclaimed their abhorrence of those “ crimi-
nal combinations which had been formed in the eastern parts
of Europe ;” and, although it is possible that this denuncia-
tion was aimed, more particularly, at the disturbances in the
provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia, yet no exception is
made, from its general terms, in favour of those events in
Greece, which were properly .the commencement of her re»
volution, and which could not but be well known at Laybach,
before the date of these declarations. A Now it must be re»

d 4

26

memhered, that Russia was a leading party in this denunciau
tion of the efliorrts of the Greeks to achieve their liberation;
and it cannot but be expected by Russia that the world shall
also remember what part she herself has heretofore acted, in
the same concern. It is notorious, that within the last hall‘
century she has again and again excited the Grreeks to rebel-
lion against the Porte, and that she has constantly kept alive
in them the hope that she would, one day, by he-r-own great
power, break the yoke of their oppressor. Indeed, the earn-
est attention with which Russia has regarded Greece, goes
much farther back than to the time I have mentioned. Ivan
the Third, in 1489.2, having espoused a Grecian princess, heir-—
ess of the last Greek emperor, discarded St. George from the
Russian arms, and adopted in its stead the Greek two»-headed
black eagle, which has continued in the Russian arms to the
present day. In virtue of the same marriage, the Russian
princes claimedthe Greek throne as their inheritance.

Under Peter the Great, the policy of Russia developed
itself more fully. In 1696, be rendered himself master of
Azoph, and in 1698, obtained the right to pass the Dardanelles,
and to maintain, by that route, commercial intercourse with
the Mediterranean. He had emissaries throughout Greece,
and particularly applied himself to gain the clergy. He
adopted the Labartttn of Constantine, “ In hoc signo minces ;”
and medals were struck, with the inscription, “ Petras I.
Russo-Grcecoram Im,_perator..” In whatever new direction
the principles of the Holy Alliance may now lead the politics
of Russia, or whatever course she may suppose Christianity
now prescribes to her, in regard to the Greek. cause, the time
has been when she professed to be contending for that cause,
as identified with Christianity. The white banner under
which the soldiers of Peter the First usually fought, bore, as
its inscription, “ In the name of the Prz'nce, andfor oar coun-
try.” Relying on the aid of the Greeks,.in his war with the
Porte, he changed the white flag to red, and displayed on it
the words, “ In the name of God, amlfor Ch-rz'stwIamIty.” The
unfortunate issue of this war is well known. Though Anne

27’

and Elizabeth, the successors of Peter, did not possess his
active character, they kept up a constant communication with
Greece, and held out hopes of restoring the Greek empire.
Catharine the Second, as is well known, excited a general re«-
volt in 1769. A Russian fleet appeared in the Mediterranean,
and a Russian army was landed in the Morea. The Greeks
in the end were disgusted by being required to take an oath
of allegiance to Russia, and the empress was disgusted be«-
cause they refused to take it. In 1774, peace was signed be»-
‘tween Russia and the Porto, and the Greeks of the Morea
were left to their fate. By this treaty the Ports acknowledged
the independence of the khan of the Crimea; a preliminary
step to the acquisition of that country by Russia. It is not
unworthy of remark, as a circumstance which distinguished
this from most other diplomatic transactions, that it conceded
the right to the‘ cabinet of St. Petersburg, of intervention in
the interior affairs of Turkey, in regard to whatever concern-
ed the religion of the Greeks. The cruelties and massacres
that happened to the Greeks after the peace between Russia
and the Ports, notwithstanding the general pardon which had
been stipulated for them, need not now he recited. Instead
of retracing the deplorable picture, it is enough to say, that
in this respect the past is justly reflected in the present. The
empress soon after invaded and conquered the Crimea, and
on one of the gates of Kerson, its capital, caused to be in-
scribed, “ The road to Byzantium.” The present emperor,
on his accession to the throne, manifested an intention
to adopt the policy of Catharine II. as his own, and the
world has not been right, in all its suspicions, if a project for
the partition of Turkey did not form a part of the negotia-
tions of Napoleon and Alexander at Tilsit.

All this course of policy seems suddenly to be changed.

Turkey is no longer regarded, it would appear, as an object

of partition or acquisition, and Greek revolts have, all at once,
become, according to the declaration of Laybach, “ criminal
combinations.” The recent congress atVeronaexceeded its pre-
decessor at Laybach, in its denunciations of theGreek struggle.

28

In the circular of the 14th of December, l8F3£:?., it declared the
Grecian resistance to the Turkish power to be rash and cul-
pable, and lamented that “ the firebrand of rebellion had been
thrown into the Ottoman empire.” This rebuke and crimina-
tion we know to have proceeded on those settled principles of
conduct, which the continental powers had prescribed for
themselves. The sovereigns saw, as well as others, the real
condition of the Greeks ; they knew, as Well as others, that
it was most natural and most justifiable, that they should en-
deavour, at whatever hazard, to change that condition. They
knew, that they, themselves, or at least one of them, had
more than once urged the Greeks to similar efforts ; that they,
themselves, had thrown the same firebrand into the midst of
the Ottoman empire. And yet, so much does it seem to be
their fixedobject to discountenance whatsoever threatens to
disturb the actual government of any country, that, Christians
as they were, and allied as they professed to be, for purposes
most important to human happiness and religion, they have
not hesitated to declare to the world, that they have wholly
forborne to exercise any compassion to the Greeks, simply
because they thought that they saw, in the struggles" of the
Morea, the sign of revolution. This, then, is coming to a
plain, practical result. The Grecian revolution has been
discouraged, discountenanced, and denounced, for no reason
but because it is at revolution. Independent ofpall inquiry
into the reasonableness of its causes, or the enormity of the
oppression which produced it ; regardless of the peculiar
claims which Greece possesses upon the civilized World; and
regardless of what has been their own conduct towards her
for a century ; regardless of the interest of the Christian
religion, the sovereigns at Verona seized upon the case of the
Greek revolution, as one above all others calculated to illus-
trate the fixed principles of their policy. The abominable
rule of the Porte on one side, the valour and the sufferings of
the Christian Greeks on the other, furnished a case likely to con--
vince even an incredulous world of the sincerity of the pro-«

29

fessions of thetAllied Powers. They embraced the occasion
with apparent ardour 3 and theworld, I trust, is satisfied.

We see here, Mr. Chairman, the direct and actual applica-
tion of that system which I have attempted to describe. We
see it in the very case of Greece. We learn, authentically and
indisputably, that the Allied Powers, holding that all changes
in legislation and administration ought to proceed n from kings
alone, were wholly inexorable to the sufferings of the Greeks,
and wholly hostile to their success. Now it is upon this
practical result of the principle” of the continental powers,
that I wish this House to intimate its opinion. The great
question is a question of principle. Greece is only the signal
instance of the application of that principle. If the principle
be right, if we esteem it conformable to the law of nations, if

' We have nothing to say against it, or if we deem ourselves

unfit to express an opinion on the subject, then, of course, no
resolution ought to pass. If, on the other hand, we see in
the declarations of the Allied Powers, principles not only
utterly hostile to our own free institutions, but hostile also to
the independence of all nations, and altogether‘ opposed to

the improvement of the condition of human nature; if, in g 7

the instance before us, we see a most striking exposition and
application of those principles, and if we deem our own opin-
ions to be entitled to any weight in the estimation of mankind;
then,I think, it is our duty to adopt some such measure as
the proposed resolution.

4 It is worthy of observation, Sir, that as early as July, 1821,
Baron Strogono1"l", the Russian minister at Constantinople,
represented to the Porte, that, if the undistinguished massa-
cres of the Greeks, both of such as were in open resistance,
and of those who remained patient in their submission, were
continued, and should become a settled habit, they ‘would
give just cause of War against the Porte to all Christian states.
This was in 18921. It was followed, early in the next year,
by that indescribable enormity, that appalling monument of
barbarian cruelty, the destruction of Solo 3 a scene I shall not
attempt to describe ,5, a scene from which human nature

30

shrinks shuddering away 3 a scene having hardly a parallel in
the history of fallen man. This scene, too, was quickly follow-
ed by the massacres in Cyprus 3 and all these things were per-
fectly known to the Christian powers assembled at Verona.
Yet these powers, instead of acting upon the case supposed
by Baron Strogonoff, and which, one would think, had been
then fully made out; instead of being moved by any compas-
sion for the sufferings of the Greeks; these powers, these
Christian powers, rebuke their gallantry, and insult their suf-T
ferings, by accusing them of “ throwing a firebrand into the
Ottoman empire.”

Such, Sir, appear to me to be the principles on which the
continental powers of Europe have agreed hereafter to act;
and this, an eminent instance of the application of those

‘ principles.

I shall not detain the Committee, Mr. Chairman, by any
attempt to recite the events of the Greek struggle, up to the
present time. Its origin may be found, doubtless, in that
improved state of knowledge, which, for some years, has
been gradually taking place in that country. The emancipa-

_tion of the Greeks has been a subject frequently discussed

in modern times. They themselves are represented as hav-
ing a vivid remembrance of the distinction of their ancestors,
not unmixed with an indignant feeliitg, that civilized and
Christian Europe should not, ere now, have aided them in
breaking their intolerable letters.

In 1816, a society was founded in Vienna, for the en-
couragement of Grecian literature. It was connected with a
similar institution at Athens, and another in Thessaly, called
the “ Gymnasium of Mount Pelion.” The treasury and
general ofiiice of the institution was established at Munich.
No political object was avowed by these institutions, proba--
bly none contemplated. Still, however, they have, no doubt,
had their effect in hastening that condition of things, in which
the Greeks felt competent to the establishment of their inde-
pendence. Many young men have been, for years, annually
sent to the universities in the western states of Europe for

31

their education ; and, after the general pacification of Europe,
many military men, discharged from other employment, were
ready to enter even into so unpromising a service as that of
the revolutionary Greeks. t i

In 1820, war commenced between the Ports and Ali, the
well known pacha of Albania. Differences existed also with
Persia, and with Russia. In this state of things, at the begin-
ning of .1821, an insurrection appears to have broken out in
Moldavia, under the direction of Alexander Ypsilanti, a well
educated soldier, who had been maior—-general in the Russian
service. From his character, and the number of those who
seemed disposed to join him, he was supposed to be counte-—
nanced by the court of St. Petersburg. This, however, was
a great mistake, which the emperor, then at Laybach, took an
early opportunity to rectify. The Forte, it would seem,
however, alarmed at these occurrences in the northern provin-~
ces, caused search to be made of all vessels entering the
Black Sea, lest arms or other military means should be sent
in that manner to the insurgents. This proved inconvenient
to the commerce of Russia, and caused some unsatisfactory cor»
respondence between the two powers. It may be worthy of‘
remark, as an exhibition of national character, that, agitated
by these appearances of intestine commotion, the sultan issued
a proclamation, calling on all true musselmans to renounce
the pleasures of social life, to prepare arms and horses, and to
return to the manner of their ancestors, the life of the plains.
The Turk seems to have thought that he had, at last, caught
something of the dangerous contagion of European civiliza«-
tion, and that it was necessary to reform his habits, by recur-~
ring to the original manners of military, roving barbarians.

It was about this time, that is to say, at the commencement
of 1821, that the Revolution burst out in various parts of
Greece and the Isles. Circumstances, certainly, were not
unfavourable, as one portion of the Turkish army was em-
ployed in the war against Ali Pacha in Albania, and another
part in the provinces north of the Danube. The Greeks soon
possessed themselves of the open country of the Morea, and

32

drove their enemy into the fortresses. Of these, that of’
Tripolitza, with the city, fell into the hands of the Greeks, in
the course of the summer. Having after these first move-
ments obtained time to breathe, it became, of course, an early
object to establish a government. For this purpose delegates
of the people assembled, under that name which describes the
assembly in which we ourselves sit, that name which “freed
the Atlantic,” a Congress. A writer, who undertakes to ren-
der to the civilized world that service which was once per-
formed by Edmund Burke, I mean the compiler of the Eng-
lish Annual Register, asks, by to/"mt auzlzor-ity this assembly
could call itself a Congress. Simply, Sir, by the same author-
ity, by which the people of the United States have given the
same name to their own legislature. We, at least, should be
naturally inclined to think, not only as far as names, but
things also, are concerned, that the Greeks could hardly have
begun their revolution under better auspices; since they have
endeavoured to render applicable to themselves the general
principles of our form of government, as well as its name.
This constitution went into operation at the commencement
of the next year. In the mean time, the war with Ali Pacha
was ended, he having surrendered, and being afterwards
assassinated, by an instance of treachery and perfidy, which,
if it had happened elsewhere than under the government of the
Turks, would have deserved notice. The negotiation with
Russia, too, i.OOl{ a turn unfavourable to the Greelcs. The
great point upon which Russia insisted, beside the abandon»
ment of the measure of searching vessels bound to the Blaclt:
Sea, was, that the Ports should withdraw its armies from the
neighbourhood of the Russian frontiers; and the immediate
consequence of this, when effected, was to add so much more
to the disposable force, ready to be employed against the
Greeks. These events seemed to have left the whole force
of the Empire, at the commencement of 1822, in a condition
to be employed against the Greek rebellion ; and, accordingly,
very many anticipated the immediate destruction of their
cause. The event, however, was ordered otherwise. Where

C)

o3

the greatest effort was made, it was met and defeated. Enter-
ing the Morena" with an army which seemed capable of bear-

ing down all resistance, the Turks were nevertheless defeated '

and driven back, and pursued beyond the isthmus, within
which, as far as it appears, from that time to the present, they
have not been able to set their foot.

It was in April, of this year, that the destruction of Scio
took place. That island, a sort of appanage of the Sultana
mother, enjoyed many privileges peculiar to itself. In a

population of 130,000 or 140,000, it had no more than 2000 V

or 3000 Turks; indeed, by some accounts not near as many.

' i The absence of these rufian masters, had, in some degree,

allowed opportunity for the promotion of knowledge, the
accumulation of wealth, and the general cultivation of society.
Here. was the seat of the modern Greek literature; here were
libraries, printing presses, and other establishments, which
indicate some advancement in refinement and knowledge.
Certain of the inhabitants of Samos, it would seem, envious
of this‘comparativeihappiness of Scio, landed upon the island:
in an irregular multitude, for the purpose of compelling its
inhabitants to make common cause with their countrymen
against their oppressors. These, being joined by the peasan-
try, marched to the city, and drove the Turks into the castle.
The Turkish fleet, lately reinforced from Egypt, happened to
be in the neighbouring seas, and learning these events, landed
a force on the island of 15,000 men. There was nothing to
resist such an army. These troops immediately entered the
city, and began an indiscriminate massacre. The city was
fired; and, in four days, the fire and the sword of the Turk
rendered the beautiful Scio a clotted mass of blood and ashes.
The details are too shocking to be recited. Forty thousand
women and children, unhappily saved from the general
destruction, were afterwards sold in the market of Smyrna,
and sent off’ into distant and hopeless servitude. Even on
the wharves of our own cities, it has been said, have been
sold the utensils of those hearths which now exist no longer.
Of the whole population which I have mentioned, not above
5

34

900 pie;-sons were left livinggupon the island. I will only
repeat, Sir, that these tragical scenes were as fully known at
tl1e Congress of Verona, as they are now known to us; and
it islnot too much‘ to call on the powers that constituted that:
Congress, in the name of conscience, and in the name of
humanity, to tell us, if there be nothing even in these un-
paralleled excesses of T Turkish barbarity, to excite a senti-
ment of compassion; nothing which they regard as so objec-
tionable asieven‘ the very idea. of ‘ popular resistance to

power.

The events of the year which has just passed by, as far as

they have becorneiknown to us, have been even more fa-‘
vourable to the Greeks, than those of the year preceding. I
omitall detailsgiasl being as well known to others as to my-
self. Suflice it to say, that with no other enemy to contend
with,.and no diversion of hisforce to other ob_jects,rthe Porte
has not been able to carry the war into the Morea; and that,’
by the last accounts, its armies were acting defensively in

Thessaly. I pass over also the naval engagementsof the

Greeks, although that is a mode of warfare in which they are
calculated to excel, and in which they have already perform-J
ed actions of such distinguished skill and bravery, as would-
draw applause upon the best mariners in the world. The
present state of the war would seem to be, that the Greeks‘
possess the whole of the Morea, with the exception of the
three. fortresses of Patras, Coron, and Modon; all Candie.
but one fortress; and most of the other islands. They pos-
sess the citadel of Athens, Missolunghi, and several other

places in Livadia. They have been able to act on the offen--*

sive and to carryithe war beyond the isthmus. There is no"
reason to believe their marine is weakened ; probably on the}
other hand, it is strengthened. But, what is most of all im-t
portant, they have obtained time and experience. They
have awakened a sympathy throughout Europe and through-

out America; and they have formed a government which

seems suited to the emergencyof their condition.
Sir, they have done much. It would be great injustice to

35"

compare their achievements with our own. We began our
revolution, already possessed of government, and, compara-
tively, of civil liberty. Our ancestors had, yforcenturies, been
accustomed in a great ,measure to govern themselves. They
were well acquainted with popular elections andlegislative
assemblies, and the general principles and practice of free
governments. They had little else to dothan to throw ofl?
the paramount authority of the parent state. Enough was
still left, both of law and of organization, to conduct society

in its accustomed course, and to unite men together for 3- ~

common object. a The Greeks, of course, could act with little
concert at the beginning; they were unaccustomed to the
exercise of power, without experience,with limited knowl-
edge, without aid, and surrounded by nations, which, whatev-
er claims the Greeks might seem to have had upon them,
have afforded them nothing but discouragement and reproach.
They have held out, however, for three campaigns ; and that,
at least, is something. Constantinople and the northern prov-
inces have sent forth thousands of troops ;------they have been
defeated. Tripoli, and Algiers, and Egypt,have contributed
their marine contingents ;-----they have not kept the ocean.
Hordes of Tartars have crossed the Bosphorus ;---——they have
died where the Persians died. The powerful monarchies in the
neighbourhood have denounced their cause, and admonished.
them to abandon it, and submit to theirifate. They have an»-

swered them, that, although two hundred thousand of their.

countrymen have offered up their lives, there yet remain lives
to offer; and that it is the determination of all, “yes, of
ALL,” to persevereuntil they shall have established their lib-
erty, or until the power of their oppressors shall have relieved
them from the burthen of existence. i

It may now be asked, perhaps, whether the expression of
our own sympathy, and that of the country, may do them
‘good? I hope it may. It may give them courage and spirit,
it may assure them of public regard, teach them that they
are not wholly forgotten by the civilized world, and inspire
them with constancy in the pursuit of their great end. At

36

any rate, Sir, it appars to me, that the measure which I have
proposed is due to our own character, and called for by our
own duty. "When we shall have discharged that duty, we
may leave the rest to the disposition ofWProvidence.

I do not see how it can be doubted, that this measure is
entirely pact;/ic. I profess my inability to perceive that it has
any possible tendency to involve our neutral relations. If the
resolution pass, it is not, necessarily, to be immediately acted
on. It will not be acted on at all, unless, in the opinion of the
President, a proper and safe occasion for acting upon it shall
arise. If we adopt the resolution to-day, our relations with
every foreign state will be to-morrow precisely what they
now are. The resolution will be sufficient to express our
sentiments on the subjects to which I have adverted. Useful
to that purpose, it can be mischievous to no purpose. If the
topic were properly introduced into the Message, it cannot
be improperly introduced into discussion in this House. If it
were proper, which no one doubts, for the President to ex-—
press his opinions upon it,‘it cannot, I think, he improper for
us to express ours. The only certain effect of this resolution
is to express, in a form usual in bodies constituted like this,
our approbation of the general sentiment of the Message. Do
we wish to withhold that approbation ? The Resolution con-
jers on the President no new power, nor does it enjoin on him
the exercise of any new duty; nor does it hasten him in the
discharge of any existirtg duty.

I cannot imagine that this resolution can add any thing to
those excitements which it has been supposed, I think very
causelessly, might possibly provoke the Turkish government
to acts of hostility. There is already the Message, express-
ing the hope of success to the Greeks, and disaster to the
Turks, in a much stronger manner than is to be implied from
the terms of this resolution. There is the correspondence
between the Secretary of State and the Greek Agent in Lon--
don, already made public, in which similar wishes are ex-
pressed, and aoontinuance of the correspondence apparently
invited. I might add to this, the unexampled burst of feeling

37’

which this cause has called forth: from all classes of society,
and the notorious fact of pecuniary contributions made
throughout the country for its aid and advancement. After
all this, whoever can_ see cause of danger to our pacific rela-
tions from the adoption of this resolution, has a keener vision
than I can pretend to. r Sir, there is no augmented danger;
there is no danger. The question comes at last to this,
whether, on a subject of this sort, this House holds an opin-
ion which is worthy to be expressed?

Even suppose, Sir, an Agent or Commissioner were to he
immediately S3I1ta'---a measure which I myself believe to be
the proper one,--~—there is no breach of neutrality, nor any
just cause of offence.‘ Such an agent, of course, would not
be accredited; he would not be a public minister. The ob-
ject would be inquiry and information; inquiry, which we
have a right to make; information, which we are interested
to possess. If a dismemberment of the Turkish empire be
taking place, or has already taken place; if a new state be
rising, or be already risen, in the Mediterranean, whocan
doubt, that, without any breach of neutrality, we may inform
ourselves of these events, for the government of our own con—-
cerns P

The Greeks have declared the Turkish coasts in a state of
blockade 5% may we not inform ourselves whether this block»
ade be nominal or real {Z and, of course, whether it shall be
regarded or disregarded P The greater our trade may happen
to be with Smyrna, a consideration which seems to have
alarmed some gentlemen, the greater is the reason, in my
opinion, why we should seek to be accurately informed of
those events which may-affect its safety.  ~

It seems to me impossible, therefore, for any reasonable
man to imagine, that this resolution can expose us to the re-
sentment of the Sublime Porte.

As little reason is there for fearing its consequences upon
the conduct of the Allied Powers. They may, very natural-
ly, dislike our sentiments upon the subject of the Greek Revo-
lution 5 but What those sentiments are, they will much more

38.

‘explicitly learn in the President’s Message than in this reso-

pp lution. They might, indeed, prefer that we should express
no dissent upon the doctrines which they have avowed, and

the application which they have made of those doctrines to
the case of Greece. But I trust we are not disposed to

, leave them in any doubt as to our sentiments upon these im-

portant subjects. They have expressed their opinions, and
do not call that expression of opinion, an interference; in
which respect they are right, as the expression of opinion, in
such cases, is not such an inte7;fierence as would justify the
Greeks in considering the powers as at war with them. For
the same reason, any expression which we may make, of dif-
ferent principles and different sympathies, is no interfiarence.
No one would call the President’s Message an interference ;
and yet it is much stronger, in that respect, than this resolu-—
tion. If either of them could be construed to be aniinter-~
ference, no doubt it would be improper, at least it would be so,
according to my view of the subject: for the very thing
which I have attempted to resist in the course of these obser-
vations, is the right of foreign interference. But neither the
Message nor the resolution has that character. There is not
a power in Europe that can suppose, that, in expressing our
opinions on this occasion, we are governed by any desire of
aggrandizing ourselves or of injuring others. We do no more
than to maintain those established principles, in whichwe
have an interest in common with other nations, and to resist
the introduction of new principles and new rules, calculated
to destroy the relative independence of states, and particular-
ly hostile to the whole fabric of our own government.

Iclose, then, Sir, with repeating, that the object of this
resolution is, to avail ourselves of the interesting occasion of
the Greek revolution, to make our protest against the doctrines
of the Allied Powers; both as they are laid down in principle,
and as they are applied in practice. a p 

I think it right too, Sir, not to be unsegsonable in the ex-
pression of our regard, and, as far as that goes, in a ministra-
tion of our consolation, to a long oppressed and now struggling

39

people. I am not of those who would, in the hour of utmost

peril, withhold such encouragement as might be properly and
lawfully given, and when the crisis should be past, overwhelm A
the rescued sufferer with kindness and caresses. The Greeks T

address the civilized world with a pathos, not easy to be resisted.
They invoke our favour by more moving’ considerations than
can well belong to the condition of any other people. They
stretch out their arms to the Christian communities of the
earth, beseeching them, by a generous recollection of their
ancestors, by the consideration of their own desolated and
ruined cities and villages, by their wives and children, sold
into an accursed slavery, by their own blood, which they
seem willing to pour out like water, by the common faith, and
in the Name, which unites all Christians, that they would em-
tend to them, at least some token of compassionate regard.

'!l"fIE END»

Digitization information for the
Daniel Webster Pamphlet Project

University Libraries

University of Missouri——Columbia

Local identifier

web000

Digitization work performed by the
University of Missouri Library Systems Office

Capture information

Date captured
Scanner manufacturer
Scanner model
Optical resolution
Color settings

File types

Source information

Format
Content type
Derivatives — Access copy
Compression
Editing software
Editing characteristics

Resolution
Color

File types
Notes

2004-2005
Minolta
PS7000
600 dpi
Unknown
tiff

Pamphlets
Text with some images

Uncompressed
Adobe Photoshop

600 dpi

Bitonal; images
grayscale

tiff

Pages cropped and
brightened

Blank pages removed

Property marks
removed