ns, but the government does not mix with their religious affairs,
but leaves these entirely to their own control; whereas under Austria,
although self-government was secured by three victorious revolutions, by
treaties which ensured these revolutions, and by hundreds of laws; still
Austria has blotted out from Hungary the self-government of the
Protestant church, while Turkey accords and protects the self-government
of every religious denomination. Russia (as is well known) taking
religion as a political tool, persecutes the Roman Catholics, and indeed
the Greeks and Jews, in such a manner that the heart of man must revolt
against it. The Sultan, whenever a fanatic dares to encroach on the
religious freedom of any one at all in his wide dominions, is the
inexorable champion of that religious liberty which is permitted
everywhere under his rule.

Again, I must cite from the history of Hungary this fact; that when
one-half of Hungary was under Turkish dominion, and the other half under
Austrian, religious liberty was always encouraged in that part which was
under the Turkish rule; and there was not only a full development of
Protestantism, but Unitarianism also was protected; yet by Austria the
Unitarians were afterwards excluded from every civil right, because they
were Unitarians, although our revolution restored their natural rights.
Such was the condition in respect to religious liberty under the
Austrian and under the Turkish dominion.

Now, in respect to municipal self-government, Hungary and all those
different provinces which are now opposed to the Austrian empire,--if
indeed an empire which only rests upon the goodwill of a foreign master,
can be said to exist, or even to vegetate,--all those different
provinces are absorbed by Austria. There was not one which had not in
former times a constitutional life, not one which Austria did not
deprive of it by centralizing all power in her own court. Such is the
principle of Christian rule!

Take, on the other hand, the Turk. In Turkey I have not only seen the
municipal self-government of cities developed to a very considerable
degree, but I have seen administration of justice very much like the
institution of the jury. I have seen a public trial in a case where one
party was a Turk, and the other party a Christian; where the municipal
authorities of the Christian and of the Turkish population were called
together to be not only the witnesses of the trial, but mutually