lature to restrain its subjects from invading the happiness of other countries, and from violating the fundamental principles of justice."

Mr. Fox observed, '" Never did I hear of charges so black and horrible, as those contained in the evidence on the table. But what is our motive in the case before us, to continue a trade which is a wholesale sacrifice of a whole order and race of our fellow-creatures? O, most monstrous wickedness! O, unparalleled barbarity! And what is more aggravating, this most complicated scene of robbery and murder, which mankind has ever witnessed, has been honoured by the name of trade.*

Mr. Fox rehearsed some of the facts which had been stated by the witnesses, and then said, "I am glad that these tales affect the House. Will they then sanction enormities, the bare recital of which makes them shudder? Let them remember that humanity does not consist in a squeamish ear. It does not consist in shrinking and starting at such tales as these; but in a disposition of heart to remedy the evils they unfold."

At the close of his speech, he said, "I will now conclude, by declaring that the whole country, indeed the whole civilized world must rejoice, that such a bill as the present has been moved for, not merely as a matter of humanity, but as an act of justice; for I will put humanity out of the question. Can it be called humanity, to forbear from committing murder? Exactly upon this ground does the present motion stand; being strictly a question of national justice.”

May I not subjoin, "exactly upon this ground" stands the motion for the abolition of war?

Now who will say that the arguments in favour of war, are better than those which were formerly adopted in favour of the slave-trade? Or who can pretend that the barbarous commerce in slaves involved half so much of crime, of "murder," and of misery, as the custom of war, which is still popular? And who can deny that the arguments for the abolition of the slave trade, will apply with sevenfold energy for the abolition of war?

Let Mr. Wilberforce and his surviving coadjutors, have their eyes as completely opened in respect to the injustice,

Had this gentleman ever read, or heard, or thought of war? And of its being "honoured by the name of "---PROFESSION?

the inhumanity and the horrours of war, as they have been to the evils of the slave trade, and they will repeat their resolution :-"NEVER, NEVER WILL WE DESIST, TILL WE HAVE WIPED AWAY THIS SCANDAL FROM THE CHRISTIAN NAME; TILL WE HAVE RELEASED OURSELVES FROM THE LOAD OF GUILT, UNDER WHICH WE AT PRESENT LABOUR."

In a future number, will probably be given, extracts from other speeches on the same subject.

SIR,

LETTER OF EIRENIKOS TO PHILO PACIFICUS.

I AM one of the many, whom your publications, on the antichristian character of war, have aroused to reflection. Like him, who "saw men as trees walking," when his eyes were suddenly opened to the light, 1, at first, had but an indistinct view of the interesting subject, and was equally astonished and delighted by the confused perception of the truths presented to my mind: astonished that these truths had so long escaped my attention, and delighted by the cheering results, which they seemed to promise. With all the eagerness, and, I trust, with some part of the simplicity, conspicuous in the child, when beginning to notice surrounding objects, I set myself to examine the novel doctrine. The more I examined, the more clear and indubitable it appeared. "My understanding and my heart accorded with it, at first blush:" and when I resorted to the gospel of Christ for information, I found no other doctrine more repeatedly expressed, more powerfully enforced, or more engagingly exemplified. I could hardly realize, that, from a child, I had been accustomed to read the New Testament, from beginning to end, and yet had never noted

a sentiment which now met me in every page. Nor was I less surprised to discover in my subsequent researches, that the same sentiment, if not explicitly stated, was almost invariably implied in the sermons and other theological works, with which I had long been acquainted. I was particularly gratified with a lucid exhibition of the import and style of our Saviour's instruction, relative to the spirit whence wars and fightings come, in Dr. Paley's "Evidences of Christianity;"* which, though I had often seen it before, struck me with all the force of a new discovery. I take the liberty to transcribe it for your perusal.

"There are two opposite descriptions of character, under which mankind may generally be classed. The one possesses vigour, firmness, resolution; is daring and active, quick in its sensibilities, joalous of its fame; eager in its attachments, inflexible in its purpose, violent in its resentments.

"The other, meek, yielding, complying, forgiving; not prompt to act, but willing to suffer, silent and gentle under rudeness and insult, suing for reconciliation where others would demand satisfaction; giving way to the pushes of impudence, conceding and indulgent to the prejudices, the wrong-headedness, the intractability of those with whom it has to deal.

"The former of these characters is, and ever has been, the favourite of the world. It is the character of great men. There is a dignity in it which universally commands respect.

Yet so it hath hap

"The latter is poor-spirited, tame, and abject. pened, that with the founder of Christianity, this latter is the subject of his commendation, his precepts, his example; and that the former is so, in no part of its composition. This, and nothing else, is the character designed in the following remarkable passages:- Resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on the right check, turn to him the other also; and if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also; and whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain; love your enemies ; bless them that curse you; do good to them that hate, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.' This certainly

* Pages 206, 7, 8, 9, Boston edition, 1795.

is not common-place morality. It is very original. It shows, at least' (and it is for this purpose we produce it) that no two things can be more different than the heroick and the Christian character.

"Now the author, to whom I refer,* has not only remarked this difference more strongly than any preceding writer, but has proved, in contradiction to first impressions, to popular opinion, to the encomiums of orators and poets, and even to the suffrages of historians and moralists, that the latter character possesses the most of true worth, both as being most difficult either to be acquired or sustained, and as contributing most to the happiness and tranquillity of social life. The state of his argument is as follows:

"I. If this disposition were universal, the case is clear: the world would be a society of friends. Whereas, if the other disposition were universal, it would produce a scene of universal contention. The world could not hold a generation of such inen.

"II. If, what is the fact, the disposition be partial; if a few be actuated by it, amongst a multitude who are not, in whatever degree it does prevail, in the same proportion it prevents, allays, and terminates quarrels, the great disturbers of human happiness, and the great sources of human misery, so far as man's happiness and misery depend upon man. Without this disposition enmities must not only be frequent, but, once begun, must be eternal; for each retaliation being a fresh injury, and consequently, requiring a fresh satisfaction, no period can be assigned to the reciprocation of affronts, and to the progress of hatred, but that which closes the lives, or, at least, the intercourse of the parties.

"I would only add to these observations, that although the former of the two characters above described, may be occasionally useful; although, perhaps, a great general, or a great statesman, may be formed by it, and these may be instruments of important benefits to mankind, yet is this nothing more than what is true of many qualities which are acknowledged to be vicious. Envy is a quality of this sort. I know not a stronger stimulus to exertion. Many a scholar, many an artist, many a soldier, has been produced by it. Nevertheless, since in its general effects it is noxious, it is properly condemned, certainly is not praised by sober moralists.

"It was a portion of the same character as that we are defending, or rather of his love of the same character, which our Saviour displayed, in his repeated correction of the ambition of his disciples; his

*Soame Jennings.

frequent admonitions, that greatness with them was to consist in humility: his censure of that love of distinction, and greediness of superiority, which the chief persons amongst his countrymen were wont, on all occasions, great and little, to betray. "They (the Scribes and Pharisees) love the uppermost rooms, at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. But be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren; and call no man your father upon the earth, for one is your Father, which is in heaven; neither be ye called masters, for one is your master, even Christ; but he that is greatest among you shall be your servant, and whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted,* I make no further remark upon these passages, (because they are, in truth, only a repetition of the doctrine, different expressions of the principle, which we have already stated) except that some of the passages, especially our Lord's advice to the guests at an entertainment, (Luke xiv. 7.) seem to extend the rule to what we call manners; which was both regular in point of consistency, and not so much beneath the dignity of our Lord's mission as may at first sight be supposed, for bad manners are bad morals.”

I confess, Sir, that the transcript, now before you, commands my unqualified assent, as an argument which goes eventually to prove the repugnance of publick war, no less than of single combat, and private contention, to the genius of our holy religion. On the most deliberate, and, as far as I know my own heart, impartial examination, I find no warrant in the gospels and epistles, nor yet in the nature of the case, to detach its application and influence from any office or character, from any condition or relation, from any transaction or concern, incident to human life. To me it appears equally pertinent to rulers, as to subjects; to the intercourse of nations, as to the treatment of individuals. Its author seems, however, to have thought otherwise, and accordingly subjoined a limitation, on which I propose, by leave of Providence, to remark in my next. Meanwhile, I am yours with affection and esteem. EIRENIKOS.

Matt. xxiii. 6. See also Mark xii. 39. Luke xx. 45. xiv. 7.