EDITOR'S TABLE. 



501 



%^iXox's "gMit. 



THE WAE SPIRIT. 



IT must be a matter of deep re- 

 gret to all right-thinking men 

 that there should have been during 

 the latter half of the century now 

 expiring so marked a revival of the 

 war spirit. In the middle of the 

 century it was thought by many 

 that the world had learned wisdom 

 from the terrible experiences of the 

 past, and that with the development 

 of international trade war would 

 become an outworn mode of set- 

 tling international controversies. 

 How different a turn things were 

 destined to take need not here be 

 told. Coming to recent events, 

 however, we may say that it is la- 

 mentable our own country could not 

 have won by peaceful means what- 

 ever advantages it has secured by 

 its recent war with Spain. Equally 

 lamentable is it that Great Britain, 

 the other great representative of 

 Anglo-Saxon civilization, should at 

 this moment be engaged in a still 

 bloodier struggle over questions 

 which it is hard to believe could not 

 have been settled by negotiation. 

 " Whence come wars and fightings 

 among you ? " is a question that was 

 asked very long ago, and we do not 

 know that it is possible to improve 

 on the answer then given : " From 

 your lusts." 



We do not say that a nation 

 should not resist to the death a dis- 

 tinct aggression on its liberties or 

 its independence. We do not say 

 that when horrors are being enacted 

 in any part of the world force may 

 not righteously be employed to ar- 

 rest them; but it is clear to our 

 mind that, in the present age, wars 

 between civilized countries might be 

 almost wholly avoided if more re- 

 liance were placed upon moral force 

 and less rein given to the impulse 



to employ physical force. This is 

 a matter for the people in any state 

 enjoying free institutions to take 

 to heart. Let every man in a time 

 of national difficulty ask himself 

 this question : " Do I personally 

 want to have blood shed over this 

 matter? " Or this one : " Am I per- 

 sonally indifferent whether or not 

 this dispute ends in bloodshed ? " 

 If a nation or the majority of a na- 

 tion wants to have blood shed over 

 a dispute with another nation, or is 

 indifferent as to whether that shall 

 be the outcome, the discussion will 

 be carried on in a very different 

 spirit from what it would be if there 

 were a pronounced aversion to such 

 a result. With nations, as with in- 

 dividuals, everything depends upon 

 the spirit and ulterior purpose with 

 which a question is approached. 

 The cases must be very few in 

 which a great nation, safe itself 

 from attack, might not, in any mat- 

 ter in which minor interests are in- 

 volved, resolve within itself that it 

 will not resort to war — that it will 

 work, and continue to work, on 

 moral lines, trusting that, if it has 

 right on its side, it will in due time 

 carry its point. If blood cries from 

 the ground against the slayer, what 

 must be the responsibility of those 

 who heedlessly and ruthlessly give 

 their voices for war, when patience, 

 moderation, and disinterestedness 

 would have better accomplished 

 every legitimate purpose? Slaugh- 

 ter is slaughter, murder is murder, 

 however we may seek to weaken 

 their import by a conventional 

 treatment. War is mutual murder 

 carried on professionally and sys- 

 tematically. Yet the primal com- 

 mand still makes its solemn appeal 

 to the human heart and conscience: 

 " Thou shalt not kill." 



