« السابقةمتابعة »
reasoning could give. The true cause was, however, one of general influence, that which has stagnated commerce, and given a prevalence to misery through every country that has been cursed with its introduction. "They did not think (says the author) of that which has exhausted Italy, Switzerland, Germany, and in short all Europe. A philanthropist however, a citizen of the world, a brother in the great human family, unbiassed by national interest, unblinded by national pride, recognizes the cause in a moment, and weeps at the prospect. He knows that it is War; deadly, insatiate, demoralizing, destructive war,-carrying fire, famine, and crime, from nation to nation, blasting the bosom of creation, disorganizing society, and leaving behind, not merely the wounds of the infatuated warrior, the scattered relics of fathers, husbands, and brothers, the tears of the widow, and the cry of orphan infancy, but a gangrene in society, a palsy in commerce, which henceforth diffuse, for years, wherever their operations extend, nothing but pollution, poverty, and suffering."
The second extract is taken from the 8th letter, addressed from Tunisassah, one of the settlements of the Friends among the Indians.
This injured and interesting people, who have been stigmatized by their ferocious conquerors as perfidious barbarians, who have been represented as possessing no principles of faith or honour, and no desires but those of rapine and plunder, have been found, by their affectionate and peaceable civilizers, to possess excellent dispositions, firm faith, and, but for the caution which the crimes of their enlightened conquerors have taught them, generous hospitality. The barbarism of war has shewn us them through a perverted medium. We make them our enemies, we give birth to the most direful propensities of human nature among them, and then declare them to the world
as the monsters our own crimes have made them! We shudder with horror at the very name of an Indian toma hawk; we pity and execrate that dreadful barbarism that gratifies its revenge with the mangled scalps of its enemies; but we forget that we too are warriors, with no barbarian blindness to palliate our outrage! We are philosophers, philanthropists, and Christians, yet we advocate war, and practise its atrocities! What better are we, then, than an Indian savage? but that, as we possess more ingenuity, more arts and arms than they, we are become the more `expert, the more cunning, the more savage warriors! The Indian however is not blind to conviction, and we may reasonably hope, from the following conversation, that as the work of civilization proceeds, their prone ness to war may vanish with the other features of the savage.
Among the most inveterate attachments of the Indians, is that of war. Jonathan Thomas (a Friend who has spent the last 23 years in civilizing these children of the forest,) is considered their friend, and honoured as their father. They enter his house when they please, and sit down without asking. He is their adviser in difficulties, and the result of their councils is often submitted to him. He can frequently prevail upon them to alter their plans and abandon their prejudices. He has often discussed this subject with Tekianda (an Indian chief from whom the author received several civilities) but he always replied, that war was pleasing to the Great Spirit, for he had commanded their ancestors to fight and destroy their enemies. J. Thomas could never silence him, but on one occasion. His long residence here has enabled him not only to acquire a full knowledge of their language, but likewise of the signification of their hieroglyphics. One alone he found inscribed upon a tree, which he could never decipher. This Tekianda explained to him, shewing
him that it commemorated the return of a celebrated chief from a war, bringing so many scalps, and having acquired uncommon glory. From this explanation they again fell upon the subject, in a gradual and almost insensible manner, as they walked along. At length J. T. said Well, Tekianda, thou thinkest war is pleasing to the Great Spirit?? Yes, he is the father of the Indians, he made them.' He made the white people too, and he gave them all things best for them? Yes, certainly, he finds them all, and makes the ground fruitful for them.'' He watches over them and takes care of them, for he loves them?'Yes.'-' Well, thou hast several children. Thou bringest them up hardily. Thou teachest them to hunt, and to use every sport and exercise that may make them strong, and capable of living honourably, and of destroying their enemies; thou wouldest like to see them like thyself, great warriors?? Yes.'-'Well, when they are grown up, and are strong, and warlike and famous, and all thy hopes are fulfilled, thou wouldest like to see them strike one another, and kill one another, and shew great bravery? What! strike! kill one another! No, I should be ready to kill them! Indians must love one another, they must kill only their enemies.' 6 Well, thou sayest the Great Spirit is the father of all the Indians, and the white people and the black people. That he loves them all, and especially his real children. Dost thou think he likes to see his children fight and kill one another? Is he not very angry at this?' Tekianda was silent."
I am, the success of the cause,
with very sincere wishes for
Your advocate truly, &c.
Uttoxeter, 12th Mo. 12, 1820.
I beg leave to observe a small error of the press in the signature to my last, which should have been M. instead of In.
AFTER having glanced at the constitution of civil society, and the arrangements necessary for their policy, we must cast our eyes on the causes, foreign or domestic, which may disturb their tranquillity.
War is the grand disturber. It is of three kinds; offensive, which is waged against the territories of an enemy; defensive, which is maintained upon our own soil; and civil, when the members of the same society are armed against each other.
The first is the least severe, for it screens the property of the citizens from being ravaged, or burnt, and their families from insult. The second, more tormenting, exposes us to all these evils; and the third is most bitter, for it breaks the bonds of society, even among the nearest kindred, and renders men barbarous.
If a society is happy in proportion as the prince is conformed to the laws of justice, and the state; as the magistrate obeys the laws of the prince; the citizen the commands of the magistrate; the son the father; and the servant the master; while concord binds all the subjects together ;—we must say, that War, which is destructive of all this order, is in its very essence the scourge of man, and the bane of bliss.
That overthrow of all subordination, of which I have spoken, is more particularly the effect of civil war; but we may say that the spirit of war, taken in general, includes the germe
of all disorder.
In fact, what is so perfect a contrast to a philosopher, as a warrior; what is so opposed to economy, as a destroyer; who is so opposite to a labourer, as a soldier; and who are so unlike sages, as madmen? and what madness is equal to that of war? If war is an evil so pernicious,
ought not to undertake it, but in order to avoid an evil as great, or greater. This way of estimating things, governments ought ever to have before their eyes.
Those who love war, resemble those insects which cannot walk on a smooth surface, but seek something rough, in which their forked feet may stick. Ever restless, ever agitated, ever changing, with the idea of seeking a situation more suited to their genius, they set no bounds to their desire of being better off. Such is the heart of man.
The chained slave thinks he only desires to be rid of the weight of his fetters; if he gets rid of them, he wishes for complete liberty; when free, he demands the privileges of a citizen; become a citizen, he aims at being a magistrate; he is not yet content, he aspires after the first dignities; if he arrives at them, he must be then made a sovereign prince, whose will is law. Pompey said to the king of the Parthians, that " The boundary of a wise republic is justice; Agesilaus replied, "It is the point of the spear." The one uttered the sentiment which ought to animate men, the other that which actually does influence them. According to this last, Politics supposes that it must always be upon the lookout, to guard against those who would attack us. It is said, that we must always be in a condition to repel the foreigner, who would seize our frontiers; and sometimes under the name of self-defence, we attack those whom we fear.
This cause of war is placed among the most legitimate; the usefulness of its effects is so striking: thus we take care that the war shall be of the first kind we mentioned: we transport the war into our enemy's territories.
But what a field for abuse and perversion is opened by this political maxim! What a varnish is this to cover all that is vile! For cupidity, ambition, or perhaps the mere ennui of a long peace, are the agitating
causes that make men pretend they are afraid another may attack them. It is a deceitful veil, that may cover truth or lies. Was it necessary to attack our neighbour, who by the very supposition had not yet attacked us? Were we really afraid he would? Who should pluck the veil from these secrets? Yet under such pretexts, Europe is kept in flames.
Speculative philosophers have asked, whether, when the power that threatens only seeks to rule over a part of the territory, which he says belongs to him, if he does not wish to injure the inhabitants, to change their laws, nor deteriorate their condition; whether this were a legitimate reason for making two nations drink all the bitters of the cup of War? or whether, even the one that is in the right, ought not to give way, rather than expose myriads to such horror?
The condition of both nations would be the same. It is very much a matter of indifference to the people, what prince rules, if the ordinary laws remain the same; and if some injury should be done, it would be far less than that created by a bloody war.
These are questions that sovereigns only have to answer; and they think little of the interests of the people in such cases, which in fact could never arise if princes had not thought that the welfare of the people was distinct from and inferior to their own.
A nation is sometimes astonished to learn that it is become the enemy of another people, which has taken away nothing from them, and which claims nothing belonging to them; they do not understand that a match is intended for one of the family of the prince, and that war must be made, in order that this alliance may be one of the articles of the peace. They are not aware that one of the governments has been inspired with jealousy or vengeance towards the other; that a court favourite wishes
to get into some office, or aims at a change of ministry, or that the minister wants to embroil the country, in order to make himself of importance, or to fix himself in his seat, and that every member of the body politic must shed its blood, and exhaust its fortune, for these frivolous causes; as if they were considerations essential to their safety and bliss.
One would think that the limits. of two countries, once settled, would never after create occasions of war between them. This supposition would be true, if the boundaries of countries could limit pride and cupidity. Man, insatiable in his desire of property and rule, will search after pretexts for war, in the sea, or beyond it, if the land will not supply them. Nothing contributes more to give existence and influence to the trifling causes which, in defiance of humanity, cause millions of men to perish and make the rest wretched, than the distinct profession of the military art. Those who follow this trade say, that they are the noblest portion of the state; and who will dare to enter the lists, to dispute with armed men? and the gallantry on which they pique themselves has procured for them the suffrages of the fair sex.
This point decided, they have formed the court of kings; they have filled the imagination of kings with notions of glory and of the point óf honour, such as suit their interest or their idleness. It is not to be wondered at, that the nobility and gentry, at once proud and idle, should turn the mind of the king, whom they surround, from the thought of the frightful evils of war, and of his obligation to study the happiness of his people. It is easy to fascinate the eye, when the charm is conferred of all that flatters the strongest passions. How strange is the power of prejudice and self-love! A great king, who has seen all the infamy of duelling, could not perceive that war
is only a mass of duels in all their madness. A declaration of war is nothing but a challenge. If we consider that man, when left to himself, is a being who submits to nothing but his passions, we shall cease to wonder that wars are so frequent. Good plain people, who see the differences among individuals terminated by jus-tice, think that justice ought to terminate the quarrels of states.
But man only obeys justice when he is forced. Free those who reason thus from all obedience to a superior power, and they will rarely submit to a sentence given against themselves. Sovereign states, and those who preside over them, recognise neither law nor superior, except when force makes them feel; this is the state of barbarous nature, and this is the state of war.
False glory, which has caused many breaches of peace, still prolongs their continuance. I make no difference between false glory and false shame, they are the same feeling. It sets itself in opposition to the steps which reason would induce us to take, in order to propose peace. They seek a third party, they temporise, they wait till their subjects are in a ferment before they will submit.
Pope Julian, reduced to this extremity, was forced to ask peace of Henry II., King of France, but still, deceived by the self-love which forbids us to admit that we are wrong, he wrote to the King, that he cited him before God, to answer for the injustice that he had done him. Henry granted him peace, and answered, "that he should appear before God, but he doubted whether he should find the Pope there."
From the same Foreign Writer.
any good arise from War? Let a people or a prince extend its frontiers, let the capture of a strong place skreen them from the incur sions of their neighbours; let a victory make the nation respected or feared; these are the blessings that war is
said to procure, but they are not the advantages of war considered in itself. This people, or this prince, might be happy in a territory less extended; this fortress, or this victory, only serve to avert war. It is that which crushes the cockatrice in the egg; it would be better not to have the egg laid.
Some will have it, that war, even intestine war, may be a blessing. This is the opinion of those who follow the trade of war, and those who love paradoxes may make such assertions. They have affirmed, that, however good the laws may be, they cannot hinder vicious characters from infecting society; War purges it from this corruption. Intestine commotions manifest turbulent spirits, and for the most part they perish in these troubles. But wars, and above all, civil wars, make no distinction between good and bad citizens; they are fatal to both. A pestilence may do this kind of good;-but who calls the plague a blessing?
Charles V. sent the Constable de Gregolin to the assistance of the Bastard of Castile, more for the sake of clearing France of disturbers than to dethrone Peter the Cruel. But if we seek after the cause of this number of bad subjects, who in these times create intestine broils, we shall find scarcely any other than War. We see that War accustoms men to licentiousness, to rapine, to blood, and that the licentiousness of the troops is the the source of the plundering that infests towns and roads. War is then a terrible evil, if it requires a sword to cure the evils that a former war has left behind.
But it is added, that two hostile powers are kept by emulation in the practice of virtue. Scipio the younger opposed the ruin of Carthage; he foresaw that Rome, having no rival, would destroy herself, and he was not deceived.
The example of Rome has also established the maxim, that a foreign war was often necessary, above all
to popular republics, to save them from internal troubles, and that war without produced tranquillity at home.
But these men forget that it is war which introduces the spirit of sedition, and that it is the origin of all the evil. The Roman people began by being warlike, before they were seditious. Their first sentiment was Ambition. They took arms to make conquests; they accustomed themselves to movement, to tumult; this taste followed them within their walls.
Have we reflected, that they found within their city no occupation, neither arts, nor commerce, nor pleasures? Something was necessary to feed the spirits made lofty by success. The senators, who were warriors as well as the people, found no relief, but in that which was the very cause of the evil.
But war is only necessary, because we have already been at war. Milder means of relief would not suit the taste of a people spoiled by war. The immoderate desire of conquering which the Romans caught from their Sibylline books, rendered all other means unfit to be proposed to them. A very common source of error is, to make a general maxim out of a practice which has succeeded in a particular case. War, it is true, sometimes saved Rome from its own fury; but war is the last means we should employ to save a falling state.
The Republic of Venice has not followed the example of the Romans. When Venice made war with her own troops, seditions did not cease to trouble her, and divisions to rend her in pieces. In these extremities, they resolved to use mercenary troops and a foreign general; but the evils of this conduct are tremendous.
But these wise republicans have found out the way of sheltering themselves from both evils. They reflected that the glory of arms does not render a republic happy; that it may become so rather by renouncing the spirit of