OCR Text |
Show 104 Other and better customs and laws had gradually developed, and without repealing practically obliterated this ancient curiosity in legal procedure. Should two or more persons now agree to thus test the title to land or the guilt or innocence of one of them charged with crime, on the first attempt to execute this agreement the law would appear, personified in a peace officer, who would forcibly end hostilities and point to the methods of reason and common sense for the determination of such affairs. There is no objection presented to the forcible and bloody settlement between citizens in their private disputes which does not apply equally to the adoption of such methods by nations in determining their differences with each other. If we condemn Smith for striking Jones on the head with a club because he did not promptly pay him a doubtful debt, what shall we say of the display of armed cruisers of the big nation threatening destruction at the port of the little nationifor the same reason? \mmll ‘ljuw lwwu If we impose upon A the death penalty because in his anger he suddenly took the life of 13, why shall the nation which delib- eratcly planned and coolly accomplished her neighbor's destruction go unpunished? Or if one nation may, by reason of her superior force, take from another a choice stretch of territory without the disapproval of the world, why shall we comment unfavorably upon the land frauds of the West, where unoccupied territory passes into the hands of those who are not entitled to it? It is indeed difficult to see why the individual and the nation. in matters of principle, in matters of right and wrong, should not rest their conduct on the same general basis. Yet every one knows that throughout modern history the rules of conduct for the individual have not only been widely different but often in direct conflict with those governing the state or the nation. The ethics which apply to the citizen are supposed to be unsuited to the state, which, after all, is only a combination of citizens. The code of morals which the state or nation enacts for its subjects. and to which willingly or unwillingly they are compelled to submit. has no binding force upon the nation itself in its relation with equals. inferiors or superiors. l\ow what logic leads any nation, which so carefully guards 105 the life and property of the individual citizens, which fixes about him and fastens upon him all this network of laws, to be so lavishly reckless with his rights, his property and his life when the contest comes with another nation? Why is life then not as sweet and as valuable-aye, as priceless-as at any other period? \Vhy should not those peaceful means and methods of settlement which we are accustomed to apply to individuals be here invoked? Wager of battle involved only two lives, but the battles of contending nations involve the lives of millions The first we abol- ished because it was senseless and abhorrent; the other we still uphold, and foster with our richest treasures. The mountainous debts of the civilized nations trace their foundations to past wars which those nations have carried on between each other. The shameful burden of current expenses has for excuse the danger of future wars with these same friendly and peaceful neighboring nations. Between the burden for the follies of the past, and that which is imposed for the purpose of conducting: future indiscretions, the humble citizen, in some coun- tries at least, finds the protecting hand of government a mere travesty upon his rights. It is impossible to secure any accurate estimate of the cost of all the wars in which the world has engaged. The figures representing the cost for the past century are so great that we cannot fully grasp their meaning. Dr. Benjamin Trueblood says, "Forty thousand millions of dollars is a sum so vast that the mention of it leaves only a confused impression on the mind; but that is about what the nations have paid in solid cash in a single century for the folly and wickedness of their quarrels and fighting, their mutual injustices and slaughters." it is said that Russia spends more than one-third of all her public revenue for military purposes. Germany, with a debt of more than two billion marks, spends annually more than five hundred million marks on her army and navy. France has a debt of about thirtwtwo billion francs. largely the cost of past wars. Great liritain has a debt of six hundred and twenty~one million pounds and spends annually more than forty million pounds on her army and navy. At the close of the \Var of the Rebellion the indebtedness of |