Chapter 24

"And are we to wait, it will be inquired, till this distant and uncertain period for the extinction of war? We answer, that revelation affords us no ground to expect that all mankind will previously be governed by the precepts of justice and humanity; but that experience, reason, and revelation, all unite in leading us to believe that the regeneration of the world will be a gradual and progressive work. Civilization and Christianity are diffusing their influence throughout the globe, mitigating the sufferings and multiplying the enjoyments of the human family. Free institutions are taking the place of feudal oppressions--education is pouring its light on minds hitherto enveloped in all the darkness of ignorance--the whole system of slavery, both personal and political, is undermined by public opinion, and must soon be prostrated; and the signs of the times assure us that the enormous mass of crime and wretchedness, which is the fruit of drunkenness, will, at no very remote period, disappear from the earth.

"And can it be possible, that, of all the evils under which humanity groans, war is the only one which religion and civilization, and the active philanthropy of the present day, can neither remove nor mitigate? Such an opinion, if general, would be most disastrous to the world, and it will now be our endeavor to prove that it is utterly groundless. * * * *

"We have often seen extensive national alliances for the prosecution of war, and no sufficient reason can be assigned why such alliances might not be formed for the preservation of peace. It is obvious that war might instantly be banished from Europe, would its nations regard themselves as members of one great Society, and erect a court for the trial and decision of their respective differences.

"But we are told that such an agreement among the nations is impossible. It is unquestionably so at present, for the obvious reason, that time is necessary to enlighten and direct public opinion, and produce a general acquiescence in the plan, as well as to arrange the various stipulations and guaranties that would be requisite. It is certainly not surprising, that those who suppose a congress of nations for the maintenance of peace, can only be brought about by a simultaneous movement of the various states and kingdoms of the earth, who are to continue to battle with each other till the signal is given for universal peace and harmony, should be startled at the boldness and absurdity of the project. But this boldness and absurdity belong not to the project we advocate. We have no expectation whatever of any general, much less simultaneous effort of mankind in behalf of peace. A congress for the decision of national differences, instead of arising in the midst of the present military policy of Europe, must be preceded by an extensive, although partial abandonment of war, and will be the _effect_ and not the cause of the general diffusion of pacific sentiments.

"Hence it is in vain to look for a sudden and universal cessation of war, even among civilized and Christian nations. But reason and experience warrant the hope that some one State may be led to adopt a pacific policy, and thus set an example which through the blessing of Providence, and the prevalence of Christian principles, may usher in the reign of universal peace.

"But by whom, and in what way it will be asked, is this example to be set? It may be a feeling of national vanity, and it may be a reference to the peculiarities of our local, social, and political condition, that inspires the hope, that to the United States is to be reserved the glory of teaching to mankind the blessings of peace, and the means of preserving them. * *

"But in _what way_ are we to make the experiment? Certainly in the way least likely to excite alarm and opposition. In every effort to promote the temporal or spiritual welfare of others, we should consider things as they really are, and not merely as they ought to be, and we should consult expediency as far as we can do so, without compromising principle. * * *

"Of all the nations with whom we have relations, none probably enjoy in an equal degree our good will, as France. No spirit of rivalry in commerce or manufactures exists between us, no adjacent territory furnishes occasion for border aggressions and mutual criminations, while our past relations afford subjects of pleasing and grateful recollection, and at present we see no prospect of the interruption of that harmony which has so long subsisted between the two nations.

"Let us suppose that under these propitious circumstances, a convention should now be concluded between the two governments, by which it should be agreed, that if unhappily any difference should hereafter arise between us, that could not be adjusted by negociation, neither party should resort to arms, but that they should agree on some friendly power, to whom the matter in difference should be referred, and whose decision should be final; or that if it should so happen that the parties could not concur in selecting an umpire, that then each party should select a friendly power, and that the sovereigns or states thus selected, should, if necessary, call to their aid the assistance of a third.

"To what well founded objections would such a treaty be subject? It is true that treaties of this kind have been of rare occurrence, but all experience is in their favor. Vattel remarks (Law of Nations, book II., chap. 18,) 'Arbitration is a method very reasonable, very conformable to the law of nature, in determining differences that do not directly interest the safety of the nation. Though the strict right may be mistaken by the arbitrator, _it is still more to be feared that it will be overwhelmed by the fate of arms_. The Swiss have had the precaution in all their alliances among themselves, and even in those they have contracted with the neighboring powers, to agree beforehand on the manner in which their disputes were to be submitted to arbitrators, in case they could not adjust them in an amicable manner. _This wise precaution has not a little contributed to maintain the Helvetic Republic in that flourishing state which secures its liberty, and renders it respectable throughout Europe_.'

"But it may be said, a nation ought not to permit others to decide on her rights and claims. Why not? Will the decision be less consistent with justice, from being impartial and disinterested? It is a maxim confirmed by universal experience, that no man should be judge in his own cause; and are nations less under the influence of interest and of passion than individuals? Are they not, in fact, still less under the control of moral obligation? Treaties have often been violated by statesmen and senators, who would have shrunk from being equally faithless in their private contracts. Is it to be supposed that the government of a friendly power, in a controversy between us and France, in which it had no interest, and with the observation of the civilized world directed to its decision, would be less likely to pronounce a fair and impartial judgment than either France or ourselves?

"But we can decide our own controversies for ourselves, it is said; that is, we can go to war and take our chance for the result. Alas, 'it is an error,' says Vattel, 'no less absurd than pernicious, to say that war is to _decide_ controversies between those who, as in the case of nations, acknowledge no judge. It is _power_ or _prudence_ rather than right that victory usually declares for.'--Book III. Chap. 3.

"The United States chose to decide for themselves the controversy about impressment, by appealing to the sword. In this appeal they of course placed no reliance on the propriety and justice of their claims, since such considerations could have no influence on the fate of battle; but they depended solely on their capacity to inflict more injury than they would receive themselves, and this difference in the amount of injury was to turn the scale in our favor. Our expectations, however, were disappointed. Our commerce was annihilated, our frontier towns were laid in ashes, our capital taken, our attempts upon Canada were repulsed, with loss and disgrace; our people became burthened with taxes, and we were at last glad to accept a treaty of peace which, instead of containing, as we had fondly hoped, a formal surrender on the part of Great Britain of the right of impressment, made not the slightest allusion to the subject.

"Let us now suppose that a treaty similar to the one we have proposed with France had, in 1812, existed between Great Britain and the United States; the question of impressment would then have been submitted to one or more friendly powers.

"It is scarcely possible that the umpires could have given any decision of this question that would have been as injurious to either party as was the prosecution of the war. Had the claims of Great Britain been sanctioned, some American seamen would, no doubt, have been occasionally compelled to serve in the British navy; but how very small would have been their number compared with the thousands who perished in the war; and how utterly insignificant would have been their sufferings resulting from serving on board a British instead of an American vessel, when weighed against the burdens, the slaughters, the conflagrations, inflicted on their country in the contest? If, on the other hand, the decision had been in our favor, Great Britain would have lost a few seamen from her navy, but she would have saved the lives of a far greater number, and she would have been spared an amount of treasure which would have commanded the services of ten times as many sailors as she could ever hope to recover by impressment.

"It is not, however, probable, that the umpires, anxious to do right, and having no motive to do wrong, would have sanctioned, without qualification, the claims of either party.

"We can scarcely anticipate any future national difference which it would not be more prudent and expedient to submit to arbitration than to the chance of war. However just may be our cause, however united our people, we cannot foresee the issue of the contest, nor tell what new enemies we may be called to encounter, what sacrifices to bear, what concessions to make.

"We have already partially commenced the experiment of arbitrament, by referring no less than three of our disputes to the determination of as many friendly powers. A difference as to the meaning of an article, in our last treaty of peace with Great Britain, was referred to the Emperor of Russia, who decided it in our favor. The question of our northern boundary was referred to the King of the Netherlands; and although the line he assigned was not the one claimed by either party, it was vastly less injurious to each, than would have been one month's hostility on account of it. Our disputes with Mexico were verging rapidly to open war, when they were happily submitted to the King of Prussia, and are now in the course of satisfactory adjustment.

"A treaty with France of the character proposed, would greatly increase our importance in the estimation of all Europe--as it would permanently secure us from her hostility. It would be seen and felt, that whatever other nation might enter into collision with us, it could not expect the aid of France, but that under all circumstances we should enjoy the friendship and commerce of our ancient ally. These considerations would not be without their influence on England. She has colonies near us which we may capture, or essentially injure, and which cannot be defended by her, but at very inconvenient expense. A war with us must ever be undesired by her, for the obvious reason that in such a contest she has little to gain and much to lose. Our treaty also with France would deprive England of the aid of the only nation that could afford her effectual assistance in a war against us. She would therefore, find it her interest to avail herself of a similar treaty, and thus to secure herself from hostilities which on many accounts she must wish to avoid. Once assured by such treaties of permanent peace with France and England, we should find our alliance courted by the other powers of Europe, who would not readily consent that those two nations should have exclusively the uninterrupted enjoyment of our great and growing commerce. They would think it a matter of prudence also, to avoid the risk of collision with a powerful republic, that had already secured the permanent friendship of France and England; and they would hasten to contract similar treaties. Under such circumstances, every consideration of policy would prompt our South American neighbors to desire that their amicable relations with us might remain uninterrupted; and to them we might offer the same stipulations with full confidence of their cordial acceptance.

"And will it be said that all this is visionary and impossible? The plan we propose rests on no supposed reformation in the passions and propensities of mankind; but upon obvious principles of national interest, deduced from reason and experience, and susceptible of the plainest demonstration. It is a plan adapted to the existing state of civilized society, and accommodated to the passions and prejudices by which that society is influenced. It is indeed perfectly consistent with the precepts of Christianity, but it is also in accordance with the selfish dictates of worldly policy.

"To this plan we can imagine only one plausible objection, which is, that the treaties would not be observed. It is readily admitted that if the only guaranty for the faithful observance of these treaties consisted in the virtue and integrity of those who signed them, the confidence to be reposed in them would be faint indeed. Happily, however, we have a far stronger guaranty in national interest and in public opinion. * * *

"Dismissing then all idle fears that these treaties, honestly contracted and obviously conducive to the highest interests of the parties, would not be observed, let us contemplate the rich and splendid blessings they would confer on our country. Protected from hostile violence and invasion by a moral defence, more powerful than armies and navies, we might indeed beat our swords into ploughshares and our spears into pruning hooks. The millions now expended in our military establishments could be applied to objects directly ministering to human convenience and happiness. Our whole militia system, with its long train of vices and its vexatious interruptions of labor, would be swept away. The arts of peace would alone be cultivated, and would yield comforts and enjoyments in a profusion and perfection of which mankind have witnessed no example. In the expressive language of Scripture, our citizens would each 'sit under his own vine and under his own fig tree, with none to make him afraid,' and our peaceful and happy republic would be the praise and glory of all lands. * * * * *

"It is impossible that a scene so bright and lovely should not attract the admiration and attention of the world. The extension of education in Europe, and the growing freedom of her institutions, are leading her population to think, and to express their thoughts. The governments of the eastern continent, whatever may be their form, are daily becoming more and more sensitive to public opinion. The people already restive under their burdens, would soon discover that those burdens would be greatly diminished by the adoption of the American policy. Before long, some state would commence the experiment on a small scale, and its example would be followed by others. In time these conventions would give way to more extended pacific alliances, and a greater number of umpires would be selected; nor is it the vain hope of idle credulity, that at last a union might be formed, embracing every Christian nation, for guarantying the peace of Christendom, by establishing a tribunal for the adjustment of national differences, and by preventing all forcible resistance to its decrees.

"It is unnecessary to discuss, at this time, the character and powers with which such a tribunal should be invested. Whenever it shall be desired, little difficulty will be experienced in devising for it a satisfactory organization; that it is possible to form such a court, and that next to Christianity it would be the richest gift ever bestowed by Heaven upon our suffering world, will be doubted by few who have patiently and candidly investigated the subject.

"But many who admit the advantages and practicability of the plan we have proposed, will be tempted to despair of success, by the apparent difficulty of inducing an effort for its accomplishment. Similar difficulties, however, have been experienced and overcome. The abolition of the slave trade, and the suppression of intemperance were once as apparently hopeless as the cessation of war. Let us again recur for instruction and encouragement to the course pursued by the friends of freedom and temperance. Had the British abolitionists employed themselves in addressing memorials to the various courts of Europe, soliciting them to unite in a general agreement to abandon the traffic, they would unquestionably have labored in vain, and spent their strength for nought. They adopted another and a wiser course. They labored to awaken the consciences of their own countrymen, and to persuade them to do justice and to love mercy; and thus to set an example to the rest of Europe, infinitely more efficacious than all the arguments and remonstrances which reason and eloquence could dictate.

"In vain might moralists and philanthropists have declaimed for ages on the evils of drunkenness, had no temperance society been formed till all mankind were ready to adopt a pledge of total abstinence. The authors of the temperance reformation did not lavish their strength and resources in attempting to convince the world of the blessings of temperance, but forming themselves into a temperance society, gave a visible and tangible proof that the principle they recommended was not merely expedient but practicable. And surely if we desire to persuade mankind that war is an unnecessary evil, it is indispensable that we should be able to point them to some instance in which it has been safely dispensed with; nor can we hope to effect a change in the opinion of Europe, while our own people remain unaffected by our assertions and arguments.

"Here then must be the field of our labors; and let those labors be quickened by the reflection, that while they are aimed at the happiness of the human race, they are calculated to confer on our beloved country a moral sublimity which no worldly glory can approach.

"But what are the means we shall use? The same by which the commerce in human beings was destroyed, and which are now driving intemperance from the earth--_voluntary associations and the press_.

"Let the friends of peace concentrate their exertions in Peace Societies; and let the press proclaim throughout our land, in all its length and breadth, the folly, the wickedness, and the horrors of war; and call on our rulers to provide for the amicable adjustment of national differences. In the first treaty that shall be formed for this purpose we shall behold the dawn of that glorious day, the theme of prophets and the aspirations of saints, when nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.

"The present age is propitious to the enterprise. It is an age of energy and of freedom. All the powers of mind are in full activity, and every eye and every ear is open to the reception of new truths. Science and philanthropy are daily achieving triumphs which the past century dared not imagine. The world is no longer governed by princes and senates, but by public opinion, and at the fiat of this mighty potentate, ancient institutions are levelled in the dust. Let this despot wield only a delegated authority, and each individual, however humble, can enhance or diminish his power. Who, then, will refuse to lend his assistance to enable public opinion to say to the troubled nations, 'peace--be still;' and to compel the rulers of the earth to refer their disputes to another tribunal than the sword.

"In this cause every man can labor, and it is a cause in which every man is called to labor, by interest and by duty. But it is a cause that peculiarly claims the zeal and devotion of Christians. They are the servants of Him who is not only the mighty God and the everlasting Father, but the Prince of Peace. They know that war is opposed to all his attributes, and contradicts the precepts of his word. Conscience gives her sanction to the means we have proposed, and prophecy assures us of the accomplishment of the object to which they are directed. Why, then, will not Christians use the talents and influence given them from above to effect this consummation? Let them not plead, in excuse for listlessness and indifference, that it is God alone who 'maketh wars to cease to the end of the earth.' In the moral government of the world, the purposes of its Almighty Ruler are accomplished by his blessing upon human means. He has promised that righteousness shall cover the whole earth; and in reliance on this promise, his servants are now bearing the everlasting Gospel to every nation and kindred, and tongue and people. He has also promised that nations shall learn war no more, and in his faithfulness we have all the incentive which certainty of ultimate success can give to human exertion. And in what cause can the energies of Christian benevolence be more appropriately exercised? To prevent war is to avoid the effusion of human blood, and the commission of innumerable crimes and atrocities;--it is to diffuse peace, and comfort, and happiness, through the great family of man,--it is to foster the arts and sciences which minister to the wants of society,--it is to check the progress of vice,--to speed the advance of the gospel,--to rescue immortal souls from endless misery,--and to secure to them a felicity as durable as it is inconceivable.