hoddek: the duty of the scholar in politics. 73 



And I believe that this remark is characteristic of the feeling of the 

 English people. Prejudice against England was revived by the 

 events of our civil war. There was in truth far greater reason for 

 hatred of France, whose government on the one hand continually 

 urged Great Britain to interference and to a joint recognition of 

 Southern independence and on the other tried to turn our distracted 

 condition to her own advantage b}' establishing an empire in 

 Mexico. The existence of what is called the Irish vote tends to 

 perpetuate this prejudice and enables politicians to make capital 

 by trading upon the passions of the people. Here again we can- 

 not do better tlian turn to the advice of Washington's farewell 

 address: 



"Nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate 

 antipathies against particular nations and passionate attachments 

 for others should be excluded and that in place of them, just and 



amicable feelings toward all should be cultivated Antipathy in 



one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer 

 insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage and to 

 be haughty and intractable when accidental or trilling occasions of 

 dispute occur .... Hence frequent collisions and obstinate, enven- 

 omed and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will 

 and resentment, sometimes impels the government to war contrary 

 to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes 

 participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion 

 what reason would reject. At other tim3s, it makes the animosity 

 of the people subservient to projects of hostility, instigated by 

 pride, ambition and other sinister and pernicious motives. The 

 peace often, sometimes even the libert}^ of nations, has been the 

 victim. " 



A third cause of the war spirit may be found in an extreme 

 sensitiveness and a disposition to resent anything that looks like 

 injury before the actual facts are known. The conduct of foreign 

 relations is undoubtedly a weak point in republican institutions. 

 Formerly they were considered the exclusive affair of government, 

 diplomatic correspondence was secret and time was allowed for 

 explanation or apology before definite action was threatened or 

 taken. Now all public questions are discussed in the forum of the 

 people and upon the first rumor of insult or injustice there arises a 

 demand for instant apology and a threat of war. Governments 

 like individuals dislike the appearance of yielding to pressure and 

 a premature resort to it diminishes the chances of accommodation. 

 The danger is that popular excitement may precipitate an unnec- 



