Abraham Lincoln: 'Let us bind up the nation's wounds', Second Inaugural address - 1865

4 March, 1865, Library of Congress, Washington DC, USA

Fellow Countrymen

At this second appearing to take the oath of the presidential office, there is less occasion for an extended address than there was at the first. Then a statement, somewhat in detail, of a course to be pursued, seemed fitting and proper. Now, at the expiration of four years, during which public declarations have been constantly called forth on every point and phase of the great contest which still absorbs the attention, and engrosses the enerergies of the nation, little that is new could be presented. The progress of our arms, upon which all else chiefly depends, is as well known to the public as to myself; and it is, I trust, reasonably satisfactory and encouraging to all. With high hope for the future, no prediction in regard to it is ventured.

On the occasion corresponding to this four years ago, all thoughts were anxiously directed to an impending civil-war. All dreaded it -- all sought to avert it. While the inaugeral address was being delivered from this place, devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war -- seeking to dissole the Union, and divide effects, by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.

One eighth of the whole population were colored slaves, not distributed generally over the Union, but localized in the Southern half part of it. These slaves constituted a peculiar and powerful interest. All knew that this interest was, somehow, the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union, even by war; while the government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it. Neither party expected for the war, the magnitude, or the duration, which it has already attained. Neither anticipated that the cause of the conflict might cease with, or even before, the conflict itself should cease. Each looked for an easier triumph, and a result less fundamental and astounding. Both read the same Bible, and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces; but let us judge not that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered; that of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!" If we shall suppose that American Slavery is one of those offences which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South, this terrible war, as the woe due to those by whom the offence came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a Living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope -- fervently do we pray -- that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue, until all the wealth piled by the bond-man's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash, shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said f[our] three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord, are true and righteous altogether"

With malice toward none, with charity for all, with firmness in the right as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in, to bind up the nation's wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow and his orphan, to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and lasting peace among ourselves and with all nations.

Benjamin Disraeli: 'Though I sit down now, the time will come when you will hear me,' maiden speech - 1837

7 December, 1837, House of Commons, Westminster, United Kingdom

Future prime minister Disraeli was jeered in his maiden speech for attacking the previous speaker, Daniel O'Connell, a renowned Irish patriot. O'Connell's supporters shouted him down.

Otto von Bismarck: 'We are perhaps too educated to put up with a constitution', Blood and Iron speech - 1862

30 September, 1862, Landtag (legislature), Prussia

He would like to go into the budget for 1862, though without making a prejudicial statement. An abuse of constitutional rights could be undertaken by any side; this would then lead to a reaction from the other side.

The Crown for example could dissolve parliament twelve times in a row, that would certainly be permitted according to the letter of the constitution, but it would be an abuse.

It could just as easily reject cuts in the budget, immoderately. It would be hard to tell where to draw the line there. Would it be at 6 million? At 16? Or at 60?

There are members of the National Association [Nationalverein] of this association that has achieved a reputation owing to the justness of its demands, highly esteemed members who have stated that all standing armies are superfluous. Well, what if a public assembly had this view! Would not a government have to reject this?

There was talk about the sobriety of the Prussian people. Yes, the great independence of the individual makes it difficult in Prussia to govern with the constitution or to consolidate the constitution.

In France things are different, there this individual independence is lacking. A constitutional crisis would not be disgraceful, but honorable instead.

Furthermore, we are perhaps too well-educated to support a constitution. We are too critical. The ability to assess government measures and records of the public assembly is too common. In the country there are a lot of catiline [conspiratorial] characters who have a great interest in upheavals. This may sound paradoxical, but everything proves how hard constitutional life is in Prussia.

Furthermore, one is too sensitive about the government's mistakes, as if it were enough to say this and that cabinet minister made mistakes, as if one wasn't adversely affected oneself. Public opinion changes, the press is not the same as public opinion. One knows how the press is written.

Members of parliament have a higher duty, to lead opinion, to stand above it. We are too hot-blooded. We have a preference for putting on armor that is too big for our small body. And now we're actually supposed to utilize it.

Germany is not looking to Prussia's liberalism, but to its power. Bavaria, Württemberg, Baden may indulge liberalism, and yet no one will assign them Prussia's role.

Prussia has to coalesce and concentrate its power for the opportune moment, which has already been missed several times. Prussia's borders according to the Vienna Treaties of 1814-15 are not favorable for a healthy, vital state.

It is not by speeches and majority resolutions that the great questions of the time are decided – that was the big mistake of 1848 and 1849 – but by iron and blood.

Last year's appropriation has been carried out, for whatever reasons, it is a matter of indifference, he [Bismarck himself] is sincerely seeking the path of agreement whether he finds it does not depend on him alone.

It would have been better if one had not made a fait accompli on the part of the Chamber of Deputies. If no budget comes about, then there is a tabula rasa. The constitution offers no way out, for then it is one interpretation against another interpretation. Summum ius, summa iniuria [Cicero: The highest law can be the greatest injustice]; the letter killeth.

He is pleased that the speaker's remark about the possibility of another resolution of the House on account of a possible bill allows for the prospect of agreement. He, too, is looking for this bridge. When it might be found is uncertain.

Bringing about a budget this year is hardly possible given the time. We are in exceptional circumstances. The principle of promptly presenting the budget is also recognized by the government, but it is said that this was already promised and not kept. And now it's "You can certainly trust us as honest people."

He does not agree with the interpellation that it is unconstitutional to make expenditures whose authorization had been refused. For every interpretation, it is necessary to agree on the three factors.

In German

Er wolle gern auf den Etat für 1862 eingehen, ohne jedoch eine präjudizierliche Erklärung abzugeben. Ein Mißbrauch von Verfassungsrechten könne von allen Seiten getrieben werden.
Das führe dann zur Gegenwirkung von der anderen Seite. Die Krone z. B. könne zwölfmal hintereinander auflösen, das sei gewiß nach dem Buchstaben der Verfassung erlaubt, würde aber doch Mißbrauch sein.
Ebenso könne sie Streichungen des Budgets zurückweisen, ohne Maß; da sei die Grenze schwer zu ziehen; sei sie schon bei 6 Millionen? bei 16? oder bei 60?
Es gebe Mitglieder des Nationalvereins, eines wegen der Gerechtigkeit seiner Forderungen zu Ansehen gelangten Vereins – hochachtbare Mitglieder, die alle stehenden Heere für überflüssig erklärten. Ja, wenn nun eine Volksvertretung diese Ansicht hätte! Müsse nicht eine Regierung das zurückweisen?
Von der "Nüchternheit" des preußischen Volkes sei die Rede gewesen. Ja, die große Selbständigkeit des einzelnen mache es schwierig in Preußen, mit der Verfassung zu regieren (oder die Verfassung zu konsolidieren?).
In Frankreich sei das anders, da fehle diese individuelle Selbständigkeit. Eine Verfassungskrisis sei keine Schande, sondern eine Ehre.
Wir sind ferner vielleicht zu "gebildet" um eine Verfassung zu tragen; wir sind zu kritisch; die Befähigung, Regierungsmaßregeln, Akte der Volksvertretung zu beurteilen, ist zu allgemein; im Lande gibt es eine Menge katilinarischer Existenzen, die ein großes Interesse an Umwälzungen haben. Das mag paradox klingen, beweist aber doch alles, wie schwer in Preußen verfassungsmäßiges Leben ist.
Man ist ferner zu empfindlich gegen Fehler der Regierung; als wenn es genug wäre, zu sagen, der und der Minister hat Fehler gemacht, als wenn man nicht selbst mitlitte? – Die öffentliche Meinung wechsle, die Presse sei nicht die öffentliche Meinung; man wisse, wie die Presse entstände.
Die Abgeordneten hätten die höhere Aufgabe, die Stimmung zu leiten, über ihr zu stehen. Wir haben zu heißes Blut, wir haben die Vorliebe, eine zu große Rüstung für unsern schmalen Leib zu tragen; nur sollen wir sie auch utilisieren.
Nicht auf Preußens Liberalismus sieht Deutschland, sondern auf seine Macht; Bayern, Württemberg, Baden mögen dem Liberalismus indulgieren, darum wird ihnen doch keiner Preußens Rolle anweisen.
Preußen muß seine Kraft zusammenfassen und zusammenhalten auf den günstigen Augenblick, der schon einige Male verpaßt ist; Preußens Grenzen nach den Wiener Verträgen sind zu einem gesunden Staatsleben nicht günstig; nicht durch Reden und Majoritätsbeschlüsse werden die großen Fragen der Zeit entschieden – das ist der große Fehler von 1848 und 1849 gewesen – sondern durch Eisen und Blut.
Die vorjährige Bewilligung sei erfolgt; aus welchen Gründen, sei gleichgültig; er suche aufrichtig den Weg der Verständigung: ob er ihn finde, hänge nicht allein von ihm ab.
Man hätte lieber kein fait accompli machen sollen seitens des Abgeordnetenhauses. Wenn kein Budget zustande komme, dann sei tabula rasa; die Verfassung biete keinen Ausweg, denn da stehe Interpretation gegen Interpretation; summum ius, summa iniuria; der Buchstabe tötet.
Er freue sich, daß die Außerung des Referenten, wegen Möglichkeit eines anderen Beschlusses des Hauses infolge einer etwaigen Gesetzesvorlage, die Aussicht auf Verständigung lasse; er suche diese Brücke auch; wann sie gefunden werde, stehe dahin.
Das Zustandekommen eines Budgets in diesem Jahre sei der Zeit nach kaum möglich; wir seien ja in exzeptionellen Zuständen; das Prinzip der schleunigen Vorlegung des Budgets sei ja auch von der Regierung anerkannt; aber man sage, das sei schon oft versprochen und nicht gehalten; nun "Sie können doch uns als ehrlichen Leuten trauen."
Die Interpellation, es sei verfassungswidrig, verweigerte Ausgaben zu machen, teile er nicht; zu jeder Interpretation sei Übereinstimmung der drei Faktoren nötig.

Robert Emmet: 'Let no man write my epitaph', From the dock - 1803

19 September, 1803, Dublin, Ireland

Robert Emmet was an Irish nationalist and Republican, orator and rebel leader. He led an abortive rebellion against British rule in 1803.

My Lords:

What have I to say why sentence of death should not be pronounced on me according to law?  I have nothing to say that can alter your predetermination, nor that it will become me to say with any view to the mitigation of that sentence which you are here to pronounce, and I must abide by.  But I have that to say which interests me more than life, and which you have labored (as was necessarily your office in the present circumstances of this oppressed country) to destroy.  I have much to say why my reputation should be rescued from the load of false accusation and calumny which has been heaped upon it.  I do not imagine that, seated where you are, your minds can be so free from impurity as to receive the least impression from what I am going to utter--I have no hopes that I can anchor my character in the breast of a court constituted and trammeled as this is--I only wish, and it is the utmost I expect, that your lordships may suffer it to float down your memories untainted by the foul breath of prejudice, until it finds some more hospitable harbor to shelter it from the storm by which it is at present buffeted.

Was I only to suffer death after being adjudged guilty by your tribunal, I should bow in silence and meet the fate that awaits me without a murmur; but the sentence of law which delivers my body to the executioner will, through the ministry of that law, labor in its own vindication to consign my character to obloquy--for there must be guilt somewhere: whether in the sentence of the court in the catastrophe, posterity must determine. A man in my situation, my lords, has not only to encounter the difficulties of fortune. and the force of power over minds which it has corrupted or subjugated. but the difficulties of established prejudice: the man dies, but his memory lives. That mine may not perish, that it may live in the respect of my countrymen, I seize upon this opportunity to vindicate myself from some of the charges alleged against me. When my spirit shall be wafted to a more friendly port; when my shade shall have joined the bands of those martyred heroes who have shed their blood on the scaffold and in the field, in defense of their country and of virtue. this is my hope: I wish that my memory and name may animate those who survive me, while I look down with complacency on the destruction of that perfidious government which upholds its domination by blasphemy of the Most High-which displays its power over man as over the beasts of the forest-which sets man upon his brother, and lifts his hand in the name of God against the throat of his fellow who believes or doubts a little more or a little less than the government standard--a government which is steeled to barbarity by the cries of the orphans and the tears of the widows which it has made.

[Interruption by the court.]

I appeal to the immaculate God--I swear by the throne of heaven, before which I must shortly appear--by the blood of the murdered patriots who have gone before me that my conduct has been through all this peril and all my purposes governed only by the convictions which I have uttered, and by no other view than that of their cure, and the emancipation of my country from the superinhuman oppression under which she has so long and too patiently travailed; and that I confidently and assuredly hope that, wild and chimerical as it may appear, there is still union and strength in Ireland to accomplish this noble enterprise. of this I speak with the confidence of intimate knowledge, and with the consolation that appertains to that confidence. Think not, my lords, I say this for the petty gratification of giving you a transitory uneasiness; a man who never yet raised his voice to assert a lie will not hazard his character with posterity by asserting a falsehood on a subject so important to his country, and on an occasion like this. Yes. my lords. a man who does not wish to have his epitaph written until his country is liberated will not leave a weapon in the power of envy, nor a pretense to impeach the probity which he means to preserve even in the grave to which tyranny consigns him.

[Interruption by the court.]

Again I say, that what I have spoken was not intended for your lordship, whose situation I commiserate rather than envy-my expressions were for my countrymen; if there is a true Irishman present. let my last words cheer him in the hour of his affliction.

[Interruption by the court.]

I have always understood it to be the duty of a judge. when a prisoner has been convicted, to pronounce the sentence of the law; I have also understood that judges sometimes think it their duty to hear with patience and to speak with humanity. to exhort the victim of the laws. and to offer with tender benignity his opinions of the motives by which he was actuated in the crime, of which he had been adjudged guilty: that a judge has thought it his duty so to have done. I have no doubt--but where is the boasted freedom of your institutions. where is the vaunted impartiality, clemency. and mildness of your courts of justice, if an unfortunate prisoner, whom your policy, and not pure justice. is about to deliver into the hands of the executioner. is not suffered to explain his motives sincerely and truly. and to vindicate the principles by which he was actuated?

My lords, it may be a part of the system of angry justice, to bow a man's mind by humiliation to the purposed ignominy of the scaffold; but worse to me than the purposed shame, or the scaffold's terrors, would be the shame of such unfounded imputations as have been laid against me in this court: you, my lord [Lord Norbury], are a judge. I am the supposed culprit; I am a man, you are a man also; by a revolution of power, we might change places, though we never could change characters; if I stand at the bar of this court and dare not vindicate my character, what a farce is your justice? If I stand at this bar and dare not vindicate my character. flow dare you calumniate it? Does the sentence of death which your unhallowed policy inflicts on my body also condemn my tongue to silence and my reputation to reproach? Your executioner may abridge the period of my existence. but while I exist I shall not forbear to vindicate my character and motives from your aspersions: and as a man to whom fame is dearer than life, I will make the last use of that life in doing justice to that reputation which is to live after me, and which is the only legacy I can leave to those I honor and love, and for whom I am proud to perish. As men, my lord, we must appear at the great day at one common tribunal. and it will then remain for the searcher of all hearts to show a collective universe who was engaged in the most virtuous actions. or actuated by the purest motives-my country's oppressors or--

[Interruption by the court.]

My lord, will a dying man be denied the legal privilege of exculpating himself, in the eyes of the community, of an undeserved reproach thrown upon him during his trial, by charging him with ambition and attempting to cast away, for a paltry consideration. the liberties of his country? Why did your lordship insult me? or rather why insult justice. in demanding of me why sentence of death should not be pronounced? I know, my lord, that form prescribes that you should ask the question; the form also presumes a right of answering. This no doubt may be dispensed with--and so might the whole ceremony of trial, since sentence was already pronounced at the castle, before your jury was impaneled; your lordships are but the priests of the oracle, and I submit; but I insist on the whole of the forms.

I am charged with being an emissary of France An emissary of France? And for what end? It is alleged that I wished to sell the independence of my country? And for what end? Was this the object of my ambition? And is this the mode by which a tribunal of justice reconciles contradictions? No, I am no emissary; and my ambition was to hold a place among the deliverers of my country--not in power, nor in profit, but in the glory of the achievement!...

Connection with Prance was indeed intended, but only as far as mutual interest would sanction or require. Were they to assume any authority inconsistent with the purest independence. it would be the signal for their destruction: we sought aid, and we sought it, as we had assurances we should obtain it--as auxiliaries in war and allies in peace...

I wished to procure for my country the guarantee which Washington procured for America. To procure an aid, which, by its example, would be as important as its valor, disciplined. gallant, pregnant with science and experience; which would perceive the good and polish the rough points of our character. They would come to us as strangers and leave us as friends, after sharing in our perils and elevating our destiny. These were my objects--not to receive new taskmasters hilt to expel old tyrants: these were my views. and these only became Irishmen. It was for these ends I sought aid from France; because France, even as an enemy. could not he more implacable than the enemy already in the bosom of my country.

[Interruption by the court.]

I have been charged with that importance in the efforts to emancipate my country. as to be considered the keystone of the combination of Irishmen; or, as Your Lordship expressed it, "the life and blood of conspiracy." You do me honor overmuch. You have given to the subaltern all the credit of a superior. There are men engaged in this conspiracy, who are not only superior to me but even to your own conceptions of yourself, my lord; men, before the splendor of whose genius and virtues, I should bow with respectful deference, and who would think themselves dishonored to be called your friend--who would not disgrace themselves by shaking your bloodstained hand--

[Interruption by the court]

What, my lord, shall you tell me, on the passage to that scaffold. Which that tyranny. of which you are only the intermediary executioner. Has erected for my murder. that I am accountable for all the blood that has and will be shed in this struggle of the oppressed against the oppressor?--shall you tell me this--and must I be so very a slave as not to repel it?

I do not fear to approach the omnipotent Judge, to answer for the conduct of my whole life; and am I to be appalled and falsified by a mere remnant of mortality here? By you. too. who, if it were possible to collect all the innocent blood that you have shed in your unhallowed ministry, in one great reservoir. Your Lordship might swim in it.

[Interruption by the court.]

Let no man dare, when I am dead. to charge me with dishonor; let no man attaint my memory by believing that I could have engaged in any cause but that of my country's liberty and independence, or that I could have become the pliant minion of power in the oppression or the miseries of my countrymen. The proclamation of the provisional government speaks for our views; no inference can he tortured from it to countenance barbarity or debasement at home, or subjection. humiliation. or treachery from abroad; I would not have submitted to a foreign oppressor for the same reason that I would resist the foreign and domestic oppressor: in the dignity of freedom I would have fought upon the threshold of my country, and its enemy should enter only by passing over my lifeless corpse. Am I, who lived but for my country, and who have subjected myself to the dangers of the jealous and watchful oppressor, and the bondage of the grave, only to give my countrymen their rights, and my country her independence, and am I to be loaded with calumny and not suffered to resent or repel it--no, God forbid!

If the spirits of the illustrious dead participate in the concerns and cares of those who are dear to them in this transitory life--oh, ever dear and venerated shade of my departed father. look down with scrutiny upon the conduct of your suffering son; and see if I have even for a moment deviated from those principles of morality and patriotism which it was your care to instill into my youthful mind, and for which I am now to offer up my life!

My lords, you are impatient for the sacrifice-the blood which you seek is not congealed by the artificial terrors which surround your victim; it circulates warmly and unruffled, through the channels which God created for noble purposes. but which you are bent to destroy. for purposes so grievous. that they cry to heaven. Be yet patient! I have but a few words more to say. I am going to my cold and silent grave: my lamp of life is nearly e4inguished: my race is run: the grave opens to receive me, and I sink into its bosom! I have but one request to ask at my departure from this world--it is the charity of its silence! Let no man write my epitaph: for as no man who knows my motives dare now vindicate them. let not prejudice or ignorance asperse them. Let them and me repose in obscurity and peace, and my tomb remain uninscribed, until other times, and other men, can do justice to my character; when my country takes her place among the nations of the earth, then, and not till then, let my epitaph be written. I have done.