Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The statesman who gives direction to the destiny of his country by internal measures of economy, and who frames treaties with foreign powers for the protection of rights and the just interests of men, admits of no principle which would justify war in preference to an honorable peace, or predicate the welfare of a nation upon the magnitude of its power. All rest upon the illimitable basis of Christian principle, which has its origin in the will of the Almighty, and its development in the deeds of good men, and in the just measures of nations. This is the acknowledged STANDARD of the Christian world.

With this standard before us, it becomes a serious question how far war has been or may be made the instrument of power in advancing the cause of human freedom, and of securing to the citizen of every clime a just and permanent government. The progress of nations is as unequal as that of individuals; and as the freedom and prosperity of the latter always stand in relation to the stability of the former, all temporary, minor considerations of individual interest, or of comfort, should be made to yield to the ultimate good of all. The want of principle in a nation which denies to its citizens that protection to which they are entitled; the weakness of a government which is continually subjecting its citizens to changes destructive of all those privileges which render existence a blessing; the subserviency of a nation professing to be free and independent, and which fails to take care of itself; its submission to degrading terms of stronger powers, are causes sufficient to produce not only revolutions at home, but to undermine and absolutely to destroy all confidence in the stability and integrity of its government abroad. Such a people and such a nation becomes a living reproach to the form of government which it has adopted, and a legitimate prey to all enemies of free institutions. The penalty for all violation of principle, if continued and persisted in, whether done by an individual or a nation, is inevitable; it is uncompromising destruction. The individual loses his liberty, but the nation its

existence. The law secures the former, while the strong power of the sword ends the latter. The former is a measure to protect society, the latter for the protection and advancement of nations. Any nation that submits to insult and wrong, loses the measure of its own influence in advancing her true interests, and is false to posterity. The fact of yielding to another power, where justice forbids it, is a double wrongit favors neither party as a measure of policy, and impairs the power of both to promote the universal cause of humanity. In this view, war to the nation is what justice is to the individ ual. It is a result, in the nature of things, which becomes in its turn a most powerful cause in the correction of evils of the greatest magnitude. Thus it has ever been, and thus it will ever continue, until nations shall be prepared for a different

course.

In the deep and mighty current of all past time, war has been incident to humanity, a part of the destiny of all nations, of all ages; and it is with a feeling of awe and reverence that we are forced to admit that it is yet to be the mysterious and terrible instrument of good, in the ruling of that Providence which governs and controls the world of worlds, and all apparent differences adjust in final harmony. "So soon as Christianity shall gain a full ascendency in the world,” says Dr. Chalmers, "from that moment war is to disappear."

There is no power which is fundamental or permanent but moral power, and that endures forever. All physical power, all forms of existence, whether conventional or national, are temporary, and are incidental to the great ends of life. Nothing can preserve a nation but moral power, and if physical power be employed to sustain any other principle, it destroys its own means. Ultimate success, in a just war, is inevitable. Ultimate success, in an unjust war, is impossible. Injustice cannot be successful in the very nature of things. It may appear to be so, but this appearance is utterly deceptive. To admit. such a proposition would be atheistical.

The great evils of war, such as the loss of life, violence,

expenditure of means, are entirely of a transient nature. They appear very formidable as the events of time, but in relation to eternity, utterly insignificant. Death is the lot of all, but the death of a soldier should be signalized as a sacrifice in the great cause of humanity.

Most of the great expenditures of government in war are made among its own people, and the evils usually attributed to them are doubtless oftentimes much exaggerated. The checks to trade and industry, the absorption of time and talents for a single object to the neglect of others, are evils which all deplore; but they are temporary. Temporary evils, or private sufferings, are of no account whatever in determining the solemn duty of a nation when called upon to prosecute a war that is just.* When justice requires it, war becomes a national duty. Let it be so regarded, let it be so understood, and wars will be lessened. Let the penalties of a nation's wrong be as terrible as its power is mighty. Let its might be on the side of right and freedom; let its decrees protect the good, and be a source of terror to the wicked. Let a nation's glory be a nation's righteousness, and its wars will be few and victorious.

The war that is just closed has been with a sister Republic, a nation professedly of free institutions, and claiming to stand upon the same platform as our own. In her prosperity Mexico had our congratulations, and in her misfortunes she had our sympathy. And while it is to be lamented that her first war of any duration with another nation has been with the United States, it must be regarded as a singular truth, that by no other foreign power could she have been chastised and saved.

Our inquiries with respect to this war will embrace, 1st, Its causes; 2d, A comparative view of the acts of the two governments; 3d, The prosecution of the war; and 4th, Its justice and results.

*See Appendix D.

THE CAUSES OF THE WAR.

In analyzing causes of national acts, it is a common error to confound the fundamental with the casual, and thus to lose that literal order of cause and effect which alone exhibits events in their true relation. The process of cause and effect in the formation of national character, though not always obvious to the student, is subjected to undeviating laws. The success or failure of a nation is no accident. The virtue or vice of a people come not from chance. Chance may have its meaning with man, but it has no place in Providence. National growth or decay, national strength or weakness, national glory or degradation, may be traced by a faithful hand to a series of causes as exact and certain, could they be pictured to the eye, as the development of a flower from the seed, or an oak from the acorn. The moral world without laws would be a nullity. The moral world without certainty would be a mockery. The moral world without growth and progress would be an absurdity.

We would not be understood as making the assertion, that all events may be clearly traced to their legitimate causes, for the mind of man is not yet equal to the task: time and knowledge may lead to this; but we confidently state our belief in that constitution of things which is governed by eternal and unalterable laws, and which would prove to us the greatest source of evidence, if we would but patiently study its parts and solve its beautiful harmony. All philosophy is but a knowledge of cause and effect, and all success, the result of correct application of its principles.

In proceeding, therefore, to investigate the causes of the war between the United States and Mexico, we shall endeavor to avoid the errors which have appeared to characterize the discussions of Congress and the views of journalists. With all deference to abler minds, it has seemed to us that ultimate effects have been placed as primary causes, and that the casual

has been mistaken for the fundamental.* Not that any event should be excluded, in the examination, which is calculated to enlighten; but that we should not deceive ourselves by derangement of evidence. We need not warn the reader against the fallacy of the ancient metaphysicians, in the adoption of syllogisms to prove the truth of a proposition; and yet, if a parallel were wanting, there is much in modern logic that would furnish it without violence or injustice.†

"The Peace Society of Massachusetts near 1825 instituted an inquiry into the actual causes of war, and, besides a multitude of petty ancient wars, and of those waged by Christian nations with tribes of savages, ascertained 286 wars of magnitude to have had the following origin: 22 for plunder or tribute; 44 for the extension of territory; 24 for retaliation or revenge; 6 about disputed boundaries; 8 respecting points of honor or prerogative; 5 for the protection or extension of comnerce; 55 civil wars; 41 about contested titles to crowns; 30 under pretence of assisting allies; 23 from mere jealousy of rival greatness; 28 religious wars, including the crusades; not one for defence alone." Peace Society Tract, No. LVII.

What a commentary on divine Providence! If we are permitted to finish our more extended work on the late war, it is our purpose to enlarge upon this topic.

+ The ancient metaphysicians conceived that most questions could be settled by syllogisms. It was certainly very convenient. They always had logical truth in their own keeping. The following propositions, which we give from memory, ex gr., were clearly proved syllogistically.

"A glass of wine fuddles a man.'
"A kernel of grain makes a bushel."

"A feather breaks a camel's back."

The process is quite irresistible. The question is repeated for each glass of wine given to the man, for each kernel of grain put into the measure, and for each feather put upon the camel's back. Will the first produce the result? No. Will the second? No; and so forth, until the negative is changed to the affirmative. It is the last glass, the last kernel, the last feather, that produces the result. The proof is complete; and what was considered remarkable by the ancients, it is complete by consent of parties. By this process, the march to the Rio Grande may be placed methodically as the cause of the war. Was there war before the march? No. Was there war after the march and so forth.

« AnteriorContinuar »