mutual distrust. There seems strong reason to anticipate that should they fail in establishing their equilibrium of power, they will endeavor to cast the blame on each other, and that if successful, they will quarrel about the division of the spoils.

But setting this aside; we do not pretend to indicate the naval force which would be necessary to deter any foreign power from risking its ships of war so far from home, and in the face of an enemy whose naval prowess has been demonstrated by a succession of triumphs over an opponent who had hitherto boasted of invincibility. We shall content ourselves with assuming that the United States, in their present condition, are able to keep up, or at least hold in readiness for service in any exigency, a naval force sufficient to deter any nation, however powerful, from wantonly assailing their rights, their interests, or their honor.

That a crisis is approaching, which will place before the people of the United States the stern necessity of creating and maintaining such a force, appears to us every day becoming more evident. The United States, we apprehend, are placing too much reliance on that great maxim of non-intervention which has become one of the fundamental principles of their foreign policy. Though it did not suffice to prevent the late war with England, they seem to believe that so long as they don't interfere with other nations, other nations will not interfere with them. But this system of abstinence is an unstable foundation for perpetual peace, unless a similar policy is universally adopted. It is in the nature of things impossible for any nation to be mistress of its own destiny, so long as it continues a member of the community of nations. When the storm is raging, the waves will dash on the most distant shores, and, with every desire to preserve peace with all the world, there is no independent nation that will not at some time or other be brought to the alternative of resistance or submission to insult or wrong. Until the nature of man is radically changed, or a new race created, no nation can safely rely for defense on its abstinence from all offensive demonstrations toward others. Nay, if carried too far, experience has everywhere proved that, instead of repelling, it only invites aggression. The nation, like the individual, that adopts the doctrine of passive obedience and non-resistance, and turns one cheek when smote on the other, may congratulate itself if it escapes being kicked on the breech, tweaked by the nose, and robbed into the bargain.

The discovery of America was equivalent to the discovery of

a new world, and, since the independence of this continent, there have been two worlds instead of one; two separate systems, in many respects extremely difficult to harmonize. They differ in the fundamental principles of their government, their political maxims, their social organization, and, above all, in some most important points of international law; and this last, if there were no other bones of contention, will necessarily bring them into collision.

The doctrine of perpetual allegiance maintained by Great Britain, and made the basis of the right of impressment, bears so directly and so heavily on the United States, that it can not be submitted to without a base and cowardly sacrifice of their honor, by abandoning the protection of their citizens, native as well as adopted. The assertion of the freedom of the seas, which is a cardinal principle in their policy, can only be sustained by standing at all times ready to maintain that position at all hazards; by arms, if negotiation, remonstrance, and protests fail. The doctrine of perpetual allegiance has been extended to children born in the United States, whose fathers were or had been British subjects, by a decision of the ViceChancellor of England; and as the decisions of Sir William Scott, in the British Court of Admiralty, were, and still are, recognized in the Supreme Court of the United States, for the condemnation of our own vessels, we presume it is anticipated the United States will pay the like devotion to the dictum of the Vice-Chancellor, which we may one day reasonably expect to see quoted by some of our lawyers in support of the right of impressment. We are inclined to the opinion it is high time to think and act for ourselves, on great national subjects involving principles of international law, in the adoption of which every independent State has an equal voice, and which no power has a right to dictate to another.

The United States may be said to represent the new world in its relations with the old. They are, in fact, the natural guardians of those younger sisters, while still in the cradle struggling to cast off the old ragged remnants of the colonial livery, and involved in domestic dissensions arising either from a mingling of races, or the despicable contests of rival leaders, whose ambition of power is only equalled by their incapacity to govern. So long as this unhappy state of things continues, there will be a boundless sphere for the intrusion of a foreign influence, which, if managed with the usual dexterity of European diplomacy, can not fail to decide the contest between contending factions, and become master of both by siding with

either. Such is the present state, and, for aught we see, the future prospects of Mexico and the republics of Central and South-America, where the combined efforts of two powers which heretofore seemed to counteract each other, are now employed invariably in support of what are called the Serviles, in opposition to the Liberales, in order to bring about a reäction, and reduce these States to something approaching as nearly as possible to the old Spanish colonial system. We firmly be lieve-nay we know for a certainty-that the present unsettled and distracted condition of Nicaragua and other Central States, is not more owing to the personal ambition of rival leaders, than to the influence of British ministers, consuls, nautical bullies, and other privileged incendiaries. Is it not so in some degree with the United States?

While the Republics of Central and South-America remain in this state of civil dissension or civil war, wasting the precious years of their youth in paltry struggles among petty statesmen, who are set up and knocked down, like poor Judy, by the invisible agency of the managers of the puppet-show; while this state of things lasts, it must appear evident that the rights of neutral nations, if not all their other national rights, on this continent at least, depend in a great measure on the United States; and that, instead of cherishing a silly, groundless jealousy of their future encroachments fomented by European agency, principally British, they would do well to come to a better understanding of their true position. They would then comprehend, what must be now evident to every enlightened statesman, that the preservation of the recently recovered freedom and independence of the New World, depends in a great degree, if not altogether, on the United States, which alone can protect and save the lusty infant from the wild savages that surround him on one hand, and the civilized intriguers who are spinning a net to enthral him on the other. This grand responsibility of the Great Republic of the West imposes on it a solemn obligation to prepare for "The third Punic War," which will assuredly come before these questions are finally settled. Those who now wield the trident of Neptune, and have so long lorded it over the seas, will not quietly relinquish what is worth a dozen jeweled sceptres or imperial crowns. They will struggle manfully, and die hard. The United States, though they may possibly not be called on to fight, should be prepared for fighting, as the best possible means for avoiding the necessity.

Among the highest duties of government is that of preparing

for national defense, not only when danger actually presents itself, but in anticipation of danger; for death is not more certain than that sooner or later every nation will be called upon either to surrender or to maintain its rights or its honor. The history of the past clearly demonstrates this truth, and we see no reason to anticipate that the future will present any radical change in the nature of things, or the nature of individuals and nations. When jealousy, ambition, avarice, and revenge shall cease to influence the actions of men, then, and then only, will aggression cease, and self-defense become no longer necessary.

The United States now stand in something like an antagonistical position towards two of the most powerful nations in the world. The late official declarations of Great Britain and France indicating their policy on this continent, followed by demonstrations that amount almost to actual hostility, are sig nificant hints to the United States to be prepared for an approaching crisis. Whether intended as mere intimidation, or as foreshadowings of coming acts, the attempt is in itself, at one and the same time, an insult and a warning. It would seem impossible for any man of political experience and sagacity to shut his eyes to future probabilities, and the consequent impending necessity of either being prepared to assert or abandon some of the most important principles of our foreign policy. Whether the crisis arrives sooner or later, or not at all, in a great measure, we apprehend, depends on the result of events now in progress in a far distant region, where the empire of the world has often been disputed, and seems about being disputed again. It was in the countries bordering on the Black Sea, that the most renowned warriors of antiquity, the great powers of the East and the West, came face to face and crossed their swords. It was there that Alexander, Agesilaus, Scipio, Lucullus, Pompey, Antiochus, and Mithridates contended for the prize of empire, and there was decided the contest of Europe and Asia for the sceptre of the world. It was where the conflict is now being resumed that the first man was created; that the ark rested when the waters had subsided; that the terrestrial paradise was situated; and it was from thence the race of man spread through all parts of the Old into the New World.

The war in the East has brought us back to the Bible, to Herodotus, and the earliest historical era; to those regions, which, once the most enlightened and illustrious of the world, have long been lost sight of by all but the readers of sacred and classical history. Another great contest is now gradually

drawing to a focus in that very sphere, which, from time immemorial, has been the theatre of events in which the whole civilized world has participated. Nay, a world not then existing, or whose existence was unknown, has, by a singular fatality, become though not actually a party, yet deeply interested in the final issue of this great conflict. Russia and the United States are, it seems, equally to be weighed in the great balance of power contemplated by the Anglo-French Alliance, which is at this moment engaged in humbling one and intimidating the other. Their policy aims at both the Old and the New World, and their triumph in one will, if not bought too dear, be the signal for an attempt to circumscribe the other.

Instead, therefore, of discussing points in which we have no concern, such as whether the late Czar was wrong or Great Britain and France right; whether he deceived the British ministers or they him; whether the protection of "the Holy Places" belongs to Russia or France; or whether the Ottoman Empire is regenerated or rotten, it would be better, we think, to consider the question a little more in its bearings on the interests, honor, and repose of our own country. The AngloFrench Alliance is based on principles equally applicable to the two great progressive powers of the Old and New World, and while it is fighting to shut up Russia in the Black Sea, it is intriguing to shut up the United States in the Gulf of Mexico. The Czar is therefore, at this moment, as it were, fighting our battles as well as his own; and, setting at naught all the hypocritical cant of the British and Anglo-American press, about Christianity, civilization, and liberty, in our opinion we have nothing to do but look to ourselves in this great contest, and be prepared for the result whatever that may be.

All patriotic Americans, all those who have not been denationalized by abolition, "solidarity," and British philanthropy, should look at home, or, if abroad, at least give their sympathies to a power that always been our friend, and is at this moment embarked in the same bottom with us, instead of those who are now standing in the position of secret, if not open, enemies.

If Russia is a despotism, so is Turkey, France, and Austria; and, as to Great Britain, though theoretically free, the people are practically enslaved by a vast monopoly of landholders, fundholders, money-mongers, titled aristocracy, and church dignitaries, who, combined together, have, in fact, engrossed all the power and all the privileges of the nation. The success of such a combination can never be the harbinger of liberty; and we