the United States' Ambassador, with thanks to him and the other American gentlemen who have honored this meeting with their presence :-May we always live on terms of mutual amity and esteem with the people of that enlightened nation."

In reply, Mr. Rush observed, that "the sentiments respecting the United States, which had been coupled with his name, were reciprocated on his part with entire warmth. There were so many common points of interest and of feeling between the two countries, that all wise men and good men in each must desire to see the existing harmony perpetuated." A due cultivation of such sentiments and feelings will insure uninterrupted peace between the two nations. But let the men of each country, who thirst for another war, remember to what class of beings they belong, and with what justice they are excluding from every class of "WISE MEN AND GOOD MEN."

THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE RELATING TO SPAIN.

HAVING stated facts in relation to the Treaty with Spain, the President proceeds to say :

"These facts will, it is presumed, satisfy any impartial mind, that the government of Spain had no justifiable cause for declining to ratify the Treaty. By this proceeding Spain has formed a relation between the two countries which will justify any measures on the part of the United States, which a strong sense of injury and a proper regard for their rights and interest may dictate. In the course to be pursued these objects should be constantly held in view, and have their due weight. Our national honor must be maintained, and a new and distinguished proof be afforded of that regard to justice and moderation which has invariably governed the councils of this free people. It must be obvious to all, that if the United States had been desirous of making conquests, or had even been willing to aggrandize themselves in that way, they could have had no motive to form this Treaty. They would have much cause of gratulation at the course which has been pursued by Spain. An ample field for ambition is open before them. But such a career is not consis. tent with the principles of their government, nor the interests of the nation." Message to Congress, Dec. 1819.

We regard the Message before us as intentionally pacific, -not designed to precipitate the nation into a war with Spain. In this view of it we sincerely rejoice. In present. ing the extract we are far from a disposition to criminate the President; our aim is to examine with care and candor a popular principle contained in the Message-a principle which we admit to be consistent with the laws and usages of nations, but one that is believed to be unjust and inhuman in its operations, and perfectly at variance with the spirit and precepts of the Christian religion. The principle is contained in the following words :

"By this proceeding, Spain has formed a relation between the two countries which will justify any measures on the part of the United States, which a strong sense of injury, and a proper regard to their rights and interests, may dictate."

If we mistake not, this passage was designed to intimate, that the conduct of Spain, in declining to ratify the Treaty, would justify the United States in an immediate declaration of war-if such a measure should be deemed consistent with "a proper regard to their rights and interests!" But while we frankly admit that thousands of wars have been waged on as slender ground as that which is stated in the Message, we are anxious that such light may be thrown on the subject of war, as will abolish such principles, and cause others to be adopted more congenial to the dictates of humanity and benevolence. For though the President does not appear disposed to reduce the principle to practice, in the present instance, yet so long as it shall be admitted as correct, the nation will be exposed to make unjust and needless wars.

Rulers, as well as private citizens, are liable to judge of the moral nature of actions, and measures, under the influence of the laws of custom, rather than the laws of equity and benevolence. Whatever is according to common usage, in a similar case, is too often deemed right, though it may violate the first dictates of justice and humanity.

To render evil for evil, or to retaliate wrongs, has been a general principle and practice of governments; yet nothing can be more at variance with the spirit and precepts of the gospel, and no one principle perhaps has ever produced more injustice, or more calamity to the human race.

But were we even to admit, that rendering evil for evil is right, when the evil retaliated falls only on the offender, it would not follow, that it can, in any case, be just, to inflict evil on subjects for the offences of their rulers, or to punish or destroy the innocent. Yet such are the maxims and usages of war, that its greatest evils fall principally on the unoffending.

Too long have custom and popular opinion sanctioned this poetical remark. One murder makes a villain,Millions a hero." But sometimes light may be thrown on a subject by comparing great things with small. Families are nations in minature; and no valid reason can be given why the same moral principles should not be adopted by nations, which justice and benevolence require of independent families in their treatment of each other.

There are two independent families, each consisting of about 40 persons; Cesar is the head of one of them, and Alfred of the other. By the overbearing conduct of another neighbour, Cesar became indebted to Alfred to the amount of fifty dollars; and being in embarrassed circumstances, and not very well pleased with having to pay the debt, he long delayed to settle the account. He had, however, a tract of land, of little present use to himself, which Alfred was desirous to obtain, as an indemnity for the money due. Two agents were appointed, one by each party, to negotiate for the transfer of the land, and the adjustment of all differences. A treaty was consequently formed according to the instructions given to the agents. On the part of Alfred, the treaty was promptly ratified; but Cesar delayed to give it his sanction till the limited time bad expired. He now offers reasons for his delay, which are unsatisfactory; but still professes a desire for an amicable adjustment, and proposes

to send another agent to ask and to give further explana. tions.

This is believed to be a pretty correct minature of the case between Spain and the United States. The sum of fifty dollars, however, between the two families, is much greater than the five millions between the two nations.

Now what would civilized men say of Alfred, should he, in such circumstances, declare war, arm his children and servants to revenge the wrong of Cesar, and cause the slaughter of fifteen or twenty innocent persons and the devastation of a thousand dollars worth of property? And what ought to be said of his conduct in relation to his own family, should he thus expose their lives, their morals, and their salvation, for the paltry sum of 50 dollars? Would he not be deemed either as insane, or devoid of all proper regard for his own family, as well as destitute of benevolence • toward his neighbours? Could any enlightened man justify such a course of conduct on the part of Alfred? If not, on what principle, except custom, can it be said, that the delay of Ferdinand to ratify the late Treaty will justify any measures on the part of the United States, which a strong sense of injury, and a proper regard to their rights and interests, may dictate?" Is it a less evil for a nation of ten millions to make war, than for a family of forty persons? Or is it a greater evil to sacrifice or destroy 15 or 20 persons in a dispute about 50 dollars, than to sacrifice or or distroy 20,000 persons in a dispute about five millions of dollars?

Let the President of the United States regard himself as in the supposed situation of Alfred, and he would view with horror a proposition to make war on Cesar. May it not then be justly imputed to the unfortunate influence of custom that any of our citizens believe, that the neglect of Ferdinand to ratify the Treaty affords just ground for war on Spain?

It may indeed be said, that " a proper regard to the rights and interests" of all the people of the United States would effectually restrain our rulers from making war for the al

leged breach of faith or decorum on the part of the Spanish monarch. But "a strong sense of injury" has often so misled the minds of rulers, as to make them believe that war "measures" were consistent with a proper regard to the rights and interests" of their subjects, while in fact those very measures were adapted to bring on these subjects far greater evils than they had suffered or were likely to suffer, from the people on whom the war was made. For this reason we have a strong desire that the principle in question should be seen in a just light, and consigned to its proper place, among the now exploded principles of former ages.

One question demands the serious consideration of every enlightened man in this country, and in other countries; namely Whether the lives of soldiers can justly be regarded as the mere property of rulers, and liable to be sacrificed at pleasure in projects of avarice, ambition, or revenge, -or to be bartered away in exchange for other property? For ages they seem to have been viewed in this light; and millions after millions of them have been sacrificed in the games of war, as beings who had no personal rights-no claim to liberty or life, but according to the pleasure of men in power,-nay, as beings who were made for no better purpose, than to butcher or be butchered in the needless quarrels of governments.

The Message of the President opens the way for a discussion of the question before us. Speaking of the course which might be adopted by the United States, were they disposed to "aggrandize" themselves by conquests, he observes,→ "An ample field for ambition is open before them. But such a career is not consistent with the principles of their government, nor the interests of the nation."

"The principles of their government" may intend, either the principles of liberty and justice, on which our government was professedly founded,-or the principles asserted in the constitution,—or the principles of the present administrators. We hope indeed that all these are implied in the President's declaration. For the conquests of pirates and