2. The tendencies of society have been, and are, to limit war, and consequently to abolish it ultimately. It cannot take place now in numerous situations where it used to rage. The formation of society stops individual hostilities. Private war, once so general and destructive, is abolished. In England once Baron warred upon Baron, and castle against castle hoisted the flag of defiance. Those combats have ceased, and for ever. What rivers of blood have Scotch and English shed in desperate struggles! From all appearance, they have waged their last war with each other. Had the United States of America been, by different formation and circumstances, disunited kingdoms, or republics, what incessant and bloody conflicts would have deluged that continent! In this respect, the tendency of small states to coalesce into larger, and of larger ones to a sort of federal union, is auspicious to mankind. At present, all the great powers of Europe are in alliance: this may be only the coalition of governors. Supposing all those governors to become the faithful guardians of free nations, that union might remain-the arbiter of national disputes, the congress of peace and justice.

The wide diffusion of knowledge and Christianity, which we have already seen good reason to anticipate, and the hope of which will be further confirmed by considerations to which we shall hereafter advert, encourages us to argue from the

manifest guilt and folly of wars to their disuse and abolition. Let but the great majority become enlightened, and although certain classes of society may still be interested in exciting appeals to the sword, there can be no want of means to prevent the sacrifice of the general good to their vanity, avarice, or madness. Wars may be divided, according to their causes, into four principal classes:

1. Wars for disputed sovereignty. The crown of England was long contested by the two houses of York and Lancaster. An historian, speaking of the battle of Tewkesbury, which seated Edward IV. on the throne, says, "This was the twelfth battle that had been fought in this fatal quarrel; and in these battles, and on the scaffold, above sixty princes of the royal family, above one half of the nobles and principal gentlemen, and above one hundred thousand of the common people, lost their lives." And what followed? The licentiousness of Edward, the usurpation of Richard, the grinding avarice of Henry VII., and the wanton tyranny of Henry VIII. Had the common people had common sense, would they not have left the houses, or the nobles, if they pleased, to fight it out themselves? What to them was York or Lancaster? The crown has since been bestowed more rationally; not by divine right, ascertained in battle, but by Act of Parliament, in defiance of succession: on Wil

liam III., Anne, George I. and the house of Hanover, it was thus conferred. These scenes will never be reacted in this country. Their folly must be seen in all countries; and when seen, however individuals or families might be wicked enough to aim at their revival, they would find that, losing the opinions and prejudices of the multitude, they had also lost the direction of their physical force. What a fine contrast to Yorkists, Lancastrians, Stuarts, Bourbons, and all the rest who "wade through slaughter to a throne," was Richard Cromwell! He was advised to take off a seditious leader, and secure his father's elevation for himself. "No," said he, "I will not purchase authority at the price of one man's blood." (P)

Such as

2. Wars of conquest and usurpation. those of Edward III. and Henry V., in France, by which the people got nothing for their blood and treasure, but the pleasure of seeing the lilies in the royal arms. What conquest was ever worth its purchase; even to any one? The only gain from them is to the pride of the monarch, and the avarice of the favourites, who may then acquire plunder. Will nations always sacrifice themselves for these; or for what is baser still, the gratification of commercial rapacity? For trade now prompts to wars of encroachment and usurpation, as well as ambition.

3. Wars of passion, revenge, and glory. To

these, democracies are as liable as monarchies. They flow from that military spirit which leaders foster for their own purposes, till it sometimes becomes too strong for their direction. Defeat tarnishes the glory of a warlike people, and must be wiped off by victory. This was once the principle of private life. If one of a family or clan was murdered, it was necessary to retaliate, and obliterate, the stain by another murder: but now the murderer only is disgraced, and imitation but involves in similar disgrace. Is this case too strong for information and Christianity?

4. Wars of religion. The most absurd and impious of all. Men have been in arms for idolatry and theism, the Turkish faith, and the (nominally) Christian faith, the Catholic religion and the Protestant religion, and in the last war, for all sorts of religion against all sorts of infidelity. Now to put down all this imposture, hypocrisy, and blasphemy, it is only necessary that men should go from priests and statesmen to the New Testament to learn Christianity: they will soon find that it may be suffered for, but cannot be fought for. They will read of only one sword drawn in its defence,—and then Christ healed the wounded person, and rebuked Peter with, “they that use the sword shall perish by 'the sword."

The opinion of the public in all countries must become more enlightened, and with that en

lightenment wars will become more rare and less bloody, till they gradually cease. Armies cannot be raised, or paid, in defiance of opinion. Would it be possible, in this country, to raise a corps of fifty thousand assassins? With all the ignorance and vice that exist, hired assassination has no existence here. It has yet in Italy, and did flourish there. Opinion makes the impossibility. Were the gospel generally understood, opinion would present as insuperable a barrier to raising fifty thousand, or one thousand hired soldiers. Peace then follows in the train of improvement.

"War is a game, which, were their subjects wise, Kings could not play at :"

And wisdom is their destined portion.

The Slave-Trade was abolished by the voice of humanity alone. Numbers were interested in its continuance, but nobody had any thing to gain by its cessation. If the evils of war were generally known and contemplated, surely they would not produce feebler horror at its enormities, conviction of its guilt, or wishes and efforts for its abolition, than prevailed on that subject. It is an immense advantage that, when once the subject is properly understood, the pleadings of interest will join with those of humanity, prudence co-operate with conscience, and true policy second the views of benevolence and religion.