Lapas attēli



EDITORIAL CORRESPONDENCE.-THE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE AT BRUSSELS. The International Conference for the Reform and Codification of the Law of Nations with reference to preventing differences between nations and preparing a substantial basis for the pacific settlement of them when they arise, commenced its sessions in Brussels, October 10th, and closed on the 13th. It was successful even beyond the most sanguine expectations that had been entertained respecting it.

Before entering upon a report of the meeting, a word in regard to its origin may be proper. In the month of February, 1872, Elihu Burritt and the writer of this article in consultation together, drew up the plan, which has resulted in the Brussels Conference as the first step in its accomplishment. That plan was published in the Advocate soon after it was reduced to a definite form, as, also, has been an account of the progress of the whole movement.

The plan from the moment of its inception up to the time of the assembling of the Conference has encountered opposition in several quarters, and quite a large measure of scepticism. This was to be expected. Many times our own faith has well-nigh failed. But manifestly the God of peace and the God of the nations has smiled upon the movement, and it has triumphed.

The various steps in the preparation and working up, so to speak, of the Conference are briefly indicated in the address, which the writer of this report gave by request of the Conference, at the opening of the first business session, which appears in its place in the report.

Two invitations were sent out, one from America, early in the summer, and another from Brussels in September. They have both appeared in the Advocate.

I can now give a report of only the first sessions of the Conference and indicate one or two of the prominent characteristics of this most unique and interesting convocation. A stenographic report of the proceedings, discussions, resolutions and addresses has been taken and will soon be published in French and English.

Our original design was to convene, in the first meeting, from thirty to fifty eminent publicists of different nations. The number actually in attendance was thirty-five, and as many more, it may be, sent letters expressing in strong terms their regret at not being able to attend, and their sympathy with the object of the meeting. Among those from whom letters were received were Count Sclopis, Drouyn de Lhuys, Profs. "Holtzendorff and Heffter, Vernon Harcourt, Prof. Levy, President Woolsey, Gen. R. C. Schenck, etc., etc. These letters will be published in the appendix of the report. The names of those present are

as follows:

Ameline M., Paris, Mem. Assem.
Arntz M., Belgium, Prof. of Law.
Amos Sheldon, Prof. of Law, London,
Alviella Goblet, Belgium, Advocate.

Bachine Ph., Belgium, Prof. of Law.
Bourson M., Belgium, Directeur Moniteur Belge.
Bernard Rt. Hon. Mountague, Prof. of Law, Oxford.
Barron Sir Henry, Chargé des Affairs, Great Britain.
Bluntschli Dr., Prof. of Law, Heidelberg, Germany.
Calvo Ch., South America, late Minister, Author, etc.
Calvo Ch., fils, South America, Advocate.
Comrear Aug., Belgium, Member Parl't.
Conchy M., France, Advocate, Author, etc..
Carmichael Ch., Oxford.

Faider Ch., Belgium, Attor. General.
Field David Dudley, Advocate, Author, etc.
Jencken H. D., Advocate, Temple, London.
Lavaleye E. de, Belgium, Prof. of Law.
Mancini Com., late Minister, Deputy Parliament, Prof of
Law, etc., Italy.

Masse G., France, Advocate, etc.

Marcoarfu A., Spain, Member Cortes, etc., etc.
Miles James B. Dr., Boston, U. S. A.
Passy Frederic, France, Economist, etc.
Pierantoni Aug., Naples, Prof. of Law.
Praebius J. P., Holland, Deputy in Assembly.
Richard Henry, M. P., England.

Rogier Ch., Belgium, late Minister of State.
Rolin Jacquemyns, Ghent, Editor Law Review.
Sandford H. D., late Minister U. S. A.
Sounaz de, Chargé des Affairs, Italy.
Temples P., Military Director, Belgium.
Thompson Dr. J. P., U. S. A.

Twiss Sir Travers, Queen's Counsel, Gt. Br.
Visschers Hon. Auguste, Brussels.
Webster Th., Queen's Counsel, Gt. Br.

Thus it will be seen the Conference comprised men of great distinction and was eminently International in its character. Perhaps never before convened from countries so widely separated, an equal number of men having so many titles to respect and honored with so many distinctions. The very constitution of the body was a distinct recognition and an impressive consecration of the grand idea of the Family of Nations. Patriotism, love of one's own country, is a very noble sentiment, but it really seemed to us that a sentiment even nobler than this animated this body, a sentiment born of the inspired declaration, "God hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth." Doubtless, patriotism of the most genuine and noble type accepts and acts upon this declaration. For it cannot be denied of nations any more than of individuals

that the best good, the greatest prosperity of each is consistent with, indeed, is dependent upon the best good of all. The Conference sprung from faith in this idea, and many times in the discussions of the Conference this great fact was strikingly prominent. For example: when the proposition for preparing an International Code was under discussion, a distinguished member from one country objected, saying, he did not think a Code precisely defining the rights and duties of nations would be acceptable in his country. A distinguished member from another country replied that such an objection could be only temporary, arguing that a set of rules, which should secure the true interests of our nation would really secure the true interests of all.

This opinion prevailed. Indeed, this magnanimous sentiment prevailed in all the discussions and it was the predominance of

Brussels, Assistant Secretaries.

this sentiment, that resulted in a remarkable and delightful har- Secretary. For Belgium, M. de Laveleye was chosen Secremony in the proceedings and unanimity in the resolutions adopt-tary, and Carlos Calvo, Jr., of Paris, and Adolphe Prims of ed. We must confess we did not expect the great truth that the nations, although in a very important sense independent, are in a sense equally important, one community with a common interest, would receive such distinct and emphatic recognition, especially from a body of men representing great nations, whose interests are so often spoken of as conflicting and diverse.

The time at first fixed for the assembling of the meeting was October 28th, but afterwards it was found that this time would be inconvenient for many of the eminent professors whose presence was considered indispensable, as their duties in their respective universities would commence about the middle of October. Accordingly the date of the meeting was changed

to October 10th.

By the kindness of the Honorable Burgomaster of Brussels, M. Anspach, and the authorities of the city, the Salon de Marriage at the beautiful Hotel de Ville, was placed at the disposal of the meeting. At twelve o'clock, October 10th, the members of the municipality were present in goodly numbers to welcome their guests, to whom they gave not merely the halls for their meetings, but also a most tangible mark of hospitality, an elegant banquet. The inaugural address was given by the Hon. Auguste Visschers, President of the committee of reception,

and was as follows:

[The addresses referred to came too late for publication this month, but will appear in the next Advocate.]

After the several addresses the Burgomaster then invited the guests to partake of a banquet prepared for them in the adjoining hall. There the guests soon assembled, and to quote the language of a correspondent of the London Times, "certainly the spectacle was of no ordinary order of interest. The spacious hall appeared all but to smile on its new tenants. Down the long row of tables a truly remarkable vista of faces might have been noticed. There was the veteran, M. Rogier, former Minister of State; opposite to him, Praebius, Representative from Holland; then Carlos Calvo, the Right Hon. Mountague Bernard, D. D. Field, the Attorney General of Belgium, the Minister of the Interior, and a host of eminent men all grouped together to enjoy the princely liberality of Brussels. At the extreme end a separate table had been laid for the dignitaries of the city. In the midst of speeches and toasts, Henry Richard, M. P., entered the hall amidst cheers, and a hearty welcome was extended to him. No sooner had he entered than he was called upon to give an account of himself, and truly well did he acquit himself of his task.

The Right Hon. M. Bernard, D. D. Field, H. D. Jencken addressed the meeting in French, the other members of the Anglo-Saxon family, among them Dr. J. B. Miles, Dr. J. P. Thompson, preferring their own language. It is impossible to give all that was said, suffice it to say the greatest good will prevailed. No sooner had the guests withdrawn than the men who had come from different parts of America and Europe to attend the Congress were ushered into a separate room admirably adapted to the purpose."

M. Visschers and Mr. David D. Field were voted President and Honorary President. The Vice-Presidents elected were, for Germany, Dr. Bluntschli, (the eminent publicist); for Italy Com. Sr. Mancini, Ex-Minister, Professor of Law, etc.; for France, Prof. Ch. Giraud; for England, Right Hon. Mountague Bernard. Dr. James B. Miles was chosen Honorary

President Visschers read letters from distinguished gentlemen invited who were unavoidably detained, after which Dr. J. B. Miles was requested to address the Conference, and state the purpose, origin and progress of the movement which had culminated in the present meeting.

[blocks in formation]

Our readers will find on the first page of the Advocate, a form of Petition proposed to their fellow-citizens by the Executive Committee of the American Peace Society. It refers to an

This result was

address to the Queen by the British House of Commons, voted July 8th upon motion by Mr. Richard, Secretary of the London Peace Society. This motion though opposed by Mr. Gladstone, the Premier, was carried, not by a simple majority as at first stated, but by a vote of 100 to 90. justly regarded as a remarkable triumph for the cause of Peace, especially when it was remembered that a motion of Mr. Cobden to a similar effect had been negatived by the House of Commons, receiving only 79 ayes to 176 noes. writes the Parliamentary Correspondent of the London Freeman, anticipated the result of the division; it took the whole "Not a House, and most of all Mr. Richard, by surprise." better night's work," he adds, "has been done by the House of Commons in the session which is now drawing near to its close."


"No one,"

The Queen's" most gracious reply" was conveyed to the House, July 17th, by Lord O. Fitzgerald, and was in these words of encouragement and assurance:

"I have received your address praying that I would graciously instruct the principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs to enter into communication with Foreign Powers, with a view to further improvement in the International Law and the establishment of a general and permanent system of International Arbitration. I am sensible of the force of the philanthropic motives which dictated your address. I have at all times sought to extend by advice and example, as occasion might offer, the practice of closing controversies between nations by submission to the impartial judgment of friends, and to encourage the adoption of international rules intended for the benefit of all. I shall continue to pursue a similar course, with due regard to time and opportunity, when it shall seem likely to be attended with effect."

The address and reply have placed the British Parliament and Government most distinctly and avowedly on the side of pacific arbitration and of the improvement of international law. The glorious result, which came so unexpectedly-for the defeat of the motion was generally anticipated even by its warmest friends, and some had even charged Mr. Richard with rashness and obstinacy in pressing it was welcomed by an outburst of enthusiasm from the Friends of Peace in the different countries of Europe and on this side of the Atlantic.

England having thus taken the initiative, the next great movement in the onward work is to secure a favorable response from other great nations. This response, sooner or later, will assuredly come. What nation shall be the first to give it? In view of our general relations to our mother-country, and especially of our recent arbitrations with her, which have been such triumphs to us, and which, however disappointed and

chagrined, she has so promptly, honorably and faithfully ac-
cepted and brought to a complete fulfilment, does not our na-
tional honor require of us that we should be the first to clasp
the friendly hand thus stretched forth to the nations? We
might have felt a delicacy in being the foremost nation to com-
mend arbitration after our success, but if she is willing to be the
foremost after her defeat, how can we help springing forward
to welcome her noble advances? Other nations expect this of
us. We are already reproached on the Continent of Europe
for our unexpected delay and apparent lukewarmness. That
eminent friend of peace and other reforms, Charles Lucas,
thus writes: "It is for the United States and England to take
the first step to which Providence seems to have called them,
and thence this great reform shall spread throughout the civil-
ized world." But he says in the tone of disappointment, "I
do not see public opinion besieging the American Congress in
favor of the codification of International Law and of Internation-
al Arbitration. The Congress at Washington remains silent,
while in the English Parliament this great reform receives the
light of discussion and the authority of votes." And again,
"In examining the respective situations of the United States
and England in relation to the direction of the movement in fa-
vor of International Arbitration in these two countries, we see


Washington, July 10th, 1873.
MY DEAR SIR,-Few events have given me more pleasure
than the vote on your Motion. I thank you for making the
motion, and I thank you also for not yielding to Mr. Gladstone's
ton on his Motion against Slavery. He, too, insisted upon a
request to withdraw it. You were in the very position of Bux-
Division, and that vote led to Emancipation. May you have
equal success!

the Continent, which the facts and figures of your speech will I anticipate much from this vote. It will draw attention on


I find in your speech grand compensation for the long postponement to which you have been constrained. It marks an I know you will not rest. But this epoch in a great cause. speech alone, with the signal result, will make your Parliamentary life historic Surely Mr. Gladstone acted under some inaagined exigency of politics. He cannot, in his soul, differ from you. Honoring him much, I regret that he has allowed himself to appear on the wrong side. What fame so great as his if he would devote the just influence of his lofty position to securing for nations the inappreciable benefits of a Tribunal for the settlement of their differences!

How absurd to call your motion Utopian, if by this word is meant that it is not practical. There is no question so supremethat the United States are most actively engaged under they practical; for it concerns not merely one nation but every nation, and even its discussion promises to diminish the terbanner of Codification, but they have been surpassed by Eng-rible chances of war. Its triumph would be the greatest reform land under that of Practicability. We do not find here the peti- of history. And I doubt not that this day is near. tioning which preceded, prepared for, and supported the motion Accept my thanks and congratulations, and believe me, my of Mr. Richard in the English Parliament, and the parliament- dear Sir, Sincerely yours, ary influence is inactive and silent in regard to Arbitration." Let us deserve this reproach no longer. Let us emulate the efforts of our English brethren. They accord to us "the hon- M. MARCOARTU'S PRIZE ESSAY UPON INTERor" in the words of Archdeacon Jefferies, "of inventing one of the most valuable institutions that ever blessed mankind,—the Peace Society." Shall we show ourselves unworthy of the honor?

It would be interesting, instructive and stimulating, if our space allowed, to describe the various forms of activity through which our English friends obtained their signal success, their Peace Societies, Arbitration Leagues, Public Meetings (great and small), Lectures, Discussions, Publications, Petitions, etc. How thoroughly in earnest they were, and how liberally they contributed for the work! How much history of efficient labor is condensed into the simple statement, made in our last number, that 1,165 petitions, with 207,391 signatures, were presented to the House of Commons during the late session, in behalf of Mr. Richard's motion. Nay more! many of these signatures were by one or two persons for whole associations or public meetings, so that it was ascertained that the number simply of working-men who petitioned for the motion, either personally or through others, was upwards of one million and thirty-eight thousand. Shall we then think it a task, in so glorious a cause, to comply with the request on our first page? to attach our own names to the petition there presented, and to obtain the names of others? Shall we not do what we can to secure the action, during the coming session of Congress, which principle, honor and interest alike require, in support of the great onward step which has been so magnanimously taken by

another nation?

A. C.

MOTTO FOR THE WARFARE.-No pain, no palm; no thorn, no throne; no gall, no glory; no cross, no crown.— - William Penn.

-London Herald of Peace.



The Association for the Promotion of Social Science, (1, Adam Street, Adelphi, London,) has issued a further statement as to the conditions of this prize. It is as follows :—

"Senor Don Arturo de Marcoartu, ex-deputy to the Cortes in Spain, has, through this Association, munificently offered the what way ought an International Assembly to be constituted for sum of £300 for the best essay on the following subject :—“ In the Formation of a Code of Public International Law; and what ought to be the leading Principles on which such a Code should be framed?" The following are the conditions of the prize :

1st of June, 1874, under cover, with motto on the cover, and a "1. Competitors to send in their essays on or before the sealed cover with the same motto, containing the name and address of the author.

"2. The essays may be either in English, French, or German, and should have with it an index.

"3. The Adjudicators will be appointed by the Executive Committee of this Association, and they will be selected so as to form a body having an international character. The decision will be by the written vote of a majority of the judges.

"4. If in the opinion of the Adjudicators none of the essays are of sufficient value, the sum named will not be awarded, but the Donor will offer the same prize of £300 for further competition.

"5. The Adjudicators shall have power to give one prize of £300; or two prizes, one of £200, and one of £100. "6. The Donor to be entitled to the copyright.

[blocks in formation]


Paris, Oct. 11, 1873.

DEAR FRIEND,-Permit me so to address you, for, although I had not the pleasure of making your personal acquaintance during your visit to Europe, our hearts are united by the same sentiments of humanity. It is our common wish to see applied to practice those Divine words, "Love one another!"

May I have the privilege to-day of sketching in brief outline, for the readers of the Advocate of Peace, the present position of Europe in relation to our noble aim, universal and perpetual


We are at this moment passing, in France, through a terrible crisis, and one whose consequences for peace or war will have of necessity a determining influence upon the tranquillity of Europe. It is this which obliges me (a Frenchman) to speak first of my own country, notwithstanding the impartiality with which I endeavor to look over the whole field. In France, above all, two questions are indissolubly bound together, those of the Republic and of the Maintenance of Peace. If the Republic is overpowered, not only shall we have international war, but as a further and speedy result, that horror of horrors, civil war ! Do not, then, wonder that I cannot separate politics (in the higher sense of the term) from our favorite theme, our passion

ate desire.

war, but the Republic peace through justice. Setting aside, as we wish to do, questions of local policy, and convinced that the "UNITED STATES OF EUROPE" would bring the solution of the problem of peace for Europe, we do not, however, for the present moment look so far. but take the different nations as they are now constituted. So taking them, what have we to fear with the return of monarchy to France? War! and still War! This consequence is so evident and so appalling that we cannot regard this return as possible; and, without entering into the details of political questions as they present themselves from day to day, we believe that we may affirm that the French nation is to-day essentially Republican, and that the monarchical intriguers will not attain their end.

to indicate.

It is then with a heart full of hope that I have written you, dear friend, my personal impressions, believing that I can assure you, with entire safety, that republican and pacific ideas are far less smothered in Europe than recent events might seem I clasp your hand with all my heart. JACQUES COURRIER. [There is one term in the letter of our earnest French correspondent which we have chosen to transfer into our own language, rather than to attempt its translation. It is immobilism, by which he appears to mean a stagnant, motionless, lifeless condition of society, one which is to national progress as death is to life. Our correspondent's confidence that Monarchy cannot be restored in France must have received much additional strength from events which have occurred since the date of his

What will be the solution of the frightful problem which Europe must now solve without delay under penalty of death, -that death of nations which may be expressed by the term immobilism? No one can know. But is it not the duty of every man to withstand the progress of the invading evil,-to letter.] utter his thought, however feebly it may be heard? It is this imperative obligation which impels me to write.

Napoleon said, in the age preceding ours, that Europe would inevitably become Republican or Cossack (the domain of peace or of war). We are at the deciding point of this alternative; and if we reject the principles of justice and liberty,-Republican principles,- -we have nothing to look for but war and devastation, the inevitable results of that monarchical principle with which France is threatened. For myself, however, I cling to the belief that the return of the ancient regime to France is impossible. God grant that I do not deceive myself!

Pardon any incoherence in my letter from the strong emotions produced by our fears of the return of monarchy, of the reign of war. Will those who read this, excuse me for turning back so far into the past? Ages before Christ, a profound philosopher, a man who wrote from the heart, uttered these words, almost divine: "Vengeance can no more remain in a great heart, than water upon a high mountain peak." What might not have been hoped from a country which produced such a man, from a nation which gave birth to a Confucius? And yet, alas! this China so favored of Heaven has become immobilized, in despite of this sublime inspiration. May we not then fear that Europe, in the slough into which she has fallen in her admiring gaze upon what are called "the great," the murderers of men, such as Alexander, Cæsar and Napoleon,-may become immobilized in turn? It is against this stupefaction that, we ought to struggle, against this deadness that we ought to implore the whole world, and young America above all, to aid us by counsel, or at least by placing our warnings upon record. It is now some thirty years since the public mind entertained the question of European peace. Some men, with Cobden at their head, saw no solution except in non-intervention. Lately, an immense step has been taken upon the question (thanks to Henry Richard); and the idea of an international tribunal has obtained a firm hold upon the English mind, while it is gaining in recognition through the rest of Europe. But, alas' since the time of the Cobdens and Brights, since the visits of Elihu Burritt to Frankport, Paris, Brussels and London, there have come frightful massacres in Schleswig-Holstein, at Sadowa and in France, to replunge the nations into the mutual antipathies and common errors of the past,-evil engendering evil, We are to-day less advanced than in 1849 and 1850, when the Congresses of Peace were held in Paris and Frankport.

war, war!

What can we do? or, in default of possible action, what foresee? This most clearly, that Monarchy will produce only


Hon. Secretary Liverpool Peace Society.

No. 7.-PRACTICAL ASPECT. (Continued.)

INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION-WHAT IT IS. Negatively only, in our previous article, we dealt with the subject of International Arbitration, our object being to show -what it is NOT. And briefly, we essayed to show, that it is not a bribe to turn aside the attack of a hostile foe-that it is not a humiliation to any country, under any circumstances-that it is not a mere nostrum of this or any former time—and that it is not inconsistent with the highest moral courage, the purest and loftiest patriotism, the finest tone of national honor, nor with the most rapid, and safe development of national progression. Our business in this is to show what International Arbitration is.

This question receives its briefest answer in these four words -THE SUBSTITUTE FOR WAR. But brief and correct though the answer is, the undertaking is at once gigantic and perplexing-gigantic, because it boldly guarantees to compose difficulties, which heretofore have roused the nations to arms- -perplexing, because of the many powerful opposing influences brought to bear from various sources against its legitimate action. On its trial now, before the world, this principle has been severely weighed, but it has discovered no deflection, and even in its incipient condition, and under very imperfect application is putting forth a power, which augurs well for the future, and promises a force which shall rise equal to any emergency. The study of International Law is beginning to occupy the thoughts of many of the best thinkers of this and of other countries, and as nations move towards this point, the barbarism of WAR will recede before the civilization of LAW, for surely there is no reason why law should more successfully supersede . . . . . . phy sical force for the settlement of grievances, when those grievan ces arise between individuals, than when they arise between na tions; and as certainly as the force of public opinion annihilated dueling, so certainly will the strong uprise of international opinion annihilate war, and relegate the latter, [as already the former] to jurisprudence as the final appeal.

Without doubt, the codification of International Law is a ver itable Herculean task; but that is simply a reason for bringing to the undertaking men who from their varied acquirements, position and influence, can focus and harmonize the entire

theme, and attune and vivify it into a condition for ready and successful action; and England, and America, and the continent of Europe can supply the noble constellation, from whose decisions no country in the civilized world would desire to dis


wasted no treasure, and invaded no right, and yet accomplished in the settlement of International difficulties, far more than war has ever done.

We have shown before what International Arbitration is NOT. Also in this article, what it is. Our next will speak of its nobility.



But difficult though it undoubtedly is to frame just laws, to govern the multifarious complications of divergent nations, and to enact salutary laws which more or less imply the action of moral sense on both sides; that it is not impossible may be shown by the following crude, and very brief outline. Assume then, a Delivered at the Evangelical Alliance at New York. representative body of jurists from the various nations. Primarily, they have no interest in forms of government, domestic Co-operation and arbitration were recommended by the Confactions, or the internal affairs of any people whatsoever. Their gress, both peaceful and worthy of trial. But in large indusobject is simply to gather from every source, knowledge and tries the co-operation of workingmen alone will be likely to fail precedents to guide to a just desision on the cases submitted. through deficiency of capital, or through want of financial skill Then to elect a court of nations which would be willingly rec- should be co-operation of both labor and capital; and it would and business habits in the managers. To be successful, there ognized by the great majority of the nations; some sincerely be strange if the wit of man cannot devise some plan for an believing in the potency of such arrangement to secure peace; others doubting, yet hoping; and some, just to let the scheme equitable division of the profits of such co-operation. Capital have a fair trial. The first proposal of such court would be, of would necessarily assume all risks. Compensation for these necessity, a strong recommendation for a justly proportional dis- and living wages for the workmen must first be paid. The armament. This accomplished, or not accomplished, belliger-profits, if any, over and above risk and labor, should be divided ent and neutral rights-in the dire event of war, would engross be agreed upon by both parties at the commencement of the between the capitalist and operatives by some rule or ratio, to their best energies; while appeals in re-International Arbitration, successful or not successful, would fully employ their facul- partnership. ties. We say successful or not successful, because we do not Co-operation and arbitration may prevent strikes and settle think it safe to suppose that all at once, the nations can be many disputes between employers and workmen, but they do weaned from the practice, [hideous though it be] of a hundred not go to the root of the difficulty. The real causes of the degenerations; but the very fact of having such a court constitut-pression of labor are of long duration, and are so wrought into ed would go far to show a tacit desire for a more excellent way without convulsion and ruin. They can and must be removed the framework of society that they cannot be suddenly removed of composing international disputes. We have of course throughout assumed only moral force, and though we make al- gradually and safely by wise and conservative legislation. lowance for failure, we believe it would in any result, be an as- Among these are an inflated currency, extravagant rates of intonishing march towards a better state of things, and a powerful terest, standing armies, wars and national debts. All interest, discouragement to brute force. The "Trent" case in 1861 af- and by nothing but labor. Workingmen feed and clothe milall taxes, all armies, wars and national debts are paid by labor, fords an instance of the force of collective opinion, peacefully lions of soldiers, supply them with all the modern engines of offered, to which great weight was attached by the United States Government, even amid excited passions; when the chief destruction to prepare for war, fill up the decimated ranks when courts of Europe calmly expressed their opinion that the re- If the International Association be, as it claims to be, a war is flagrant, and pay the war debts after war ends in peace. moval of the Confederate Ambassadors, from our steamers, was brotherhood of the workingmen of all nations, let it employ its contrary to International Equity; and may we not expect, rea- influence and power, if it have any, to promote peace on earth sonably, that the collective opinion of the Comity of Nations heard under special and recognized organization, and speaking jealousies and rivalries. Let it try to allay the fears of the and good will among men. with the authority of International Law, would, in like manner, be listened to with respectful attention. But it is not our in-weak, and check the ambition of the strong. Let it teach tention to conclude this article without adding to the theoretic suggestion, practical illustration also, of what International Arbitration is. Happily, even amid the thunders of war, the still small voice of Arbitration has been heard, and acted upon, and it has been practically instrumental in calming the fury of the nations again and again.

Let it aim to eradicate international

rulers that reason is a better arbiter than force, and that inter-
national duels are as impotent to decide questions of right and
justice, as duels between individuals. Then it will accomplish
Then standing armies
a work worthy of its imposing name.
might be disbanded; soldiers, who consume everything and
produce nothing, be enrolled in the grand industrial army; the
enormous cost and waste of war be saved to feed the hungry
and clothe the naked; a heavy burden be rolled off from the
shoulders of the toiling millions, and nations professing the re-
ligion of Christ be endued with something of the spirit of Christ.

Illuminating shells and smoke balls are constantly arriving at the Woolwich Arsenal for use in the Ashantee war. The smoke balls are mere shells full of a composition, the burning of which creates a thick smoke and powerful odor-agencies which have before now been found to operate with great effect in dislodging troops from ambush and throwing them into con


In the year 1794 the American boundary claims, which other wise might have resulted seriously, were peacefully adjusted by three Commissioners. This is International Arbitration! Then in 1822 the Compensation Claims, bearing on the restitu-. tion of all private property taken in the war of 1812, was settled by the award of the Emperor of Russia. This is International Arbitration! Following these, the Maine Boundary, Florida Bonds, United States and Chili and Peru, Puget Sound, and the Portendic Claims are all illustrations-practical illustrations, [but too lengthy to enlarge upon in this article] of what International Arbitration is. Then the reference of our dispute with Brazil, arbitrated by the King of the Belgians, did honor at once to him and to us, and though the King awarded against us, we gained honor and prestige that day, more, far more than battle fields can ever give! This is International Arbitration! We will also mention Lord Stanley's [now Earl Derby] arbitration of the threatening Luxembourg difficulty between France A certain Scotchman being solicited to enter the army asked and Prussia, and finally the Geneva Arbitration on the "Ala-the officers these two questions: "Can you tell me if I kill a bama Claims," that "CROWNING MERCY" in favor of this noble man, that he will go to heaven? or, can you say whether, if I principle, and with thankfulness we say, These are the tri-am killed, I will likewise go there? for I dare not send a fellow umphs of International Arbitration! Victories these, which creature unprepared into eternity, neither dare I rush there unmangled no human beings, heaped up no hecatombs of slaugh- bidden." tered bodies, made no widows and orphans, trampled down no waving corn fields, bombarded no cities, destroyed no national monuments, suspended no industries, put back no progression,

Civilization has condemned such practices in war, and it is certainly a reproach to any country, and to the age, that in fighting savages a resort should be had to means that civilized nations have by common consent repudiated.—Exchange.

Pleasant and kind words, if they be sensible and well meant, are cords all men may be led by.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »