EXTRACT FROM AN ESSAY BY WILLIAM JAY, "_On the Folly and Evils of War,
and the Means of Preserving Peace._"
"But, after all that can be said against war, and after the
fullest admission of its folly, cruelty, and wickedness, still
the question recurs, how can it be prevented? It would be an
impeachment of the Divine economy to suppose that an evil so
dreadful was inseparably and inevitably connected with human
society. We are informed, by Divine authority, that wars proceed
from our lusts; but our lusts, although natural to us, are not
invincible. He who admits the free agency of man, will not
readily allow that either individuals or nations are compelled
to do evil. The universal prevalence of Christian principles
must, of necessity, exterminate wars; and hence we are informed,
by revelation, that when righteousness shall cover the earth,
'the nations shall learn war no more.'
"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.
"To him who in faith and zeal labors in this great and holy
cause a rich reward is secured. While doing good to others, he
is himself a sharer in the blessing he bestows. The very
exercise of his benevolent affections affords a pure and
exquisite delight, and when he enters the world of peace and
love, he shall experience the full import of those cheering, but
mysterious words--Blessed are the peace makers, for they shall
be called the children of God."'