The advocates of slavery, like the advocates of war, resorted to the old testament for support; but it appeared that slavery, as it appears that war, was permitted and approved of, for reasons, and on principles peculiar to the ancient economy. This is apparent, as well from the difference between the general design of the old and new dispensations, as from the whole genius and spirit of the gospel. Hence those who opposed the slave trade argued from the general nature and spirit of christianity, as the strongest ground which could be taken. If slavery was inconsistent with this, it ought not to be tolerated; but slavery is inhuman, and is therefore inconsistent with christianity. Exactly the same is true of war, nor can any thing short of an express revelation from God, commanding war, or slavery, render either of them justifiable.

It deserves to be distinctly considered, that the gospel contains little or nothing directly by way of precept, against slavery; but slavery is inconsistent with its general requirements and inculcations, and is therefore wrong. But war besides being inconsistent with the genius and spirit of the gospel, is prohibited by those precepts which forbid retaliation and revenge, and those which require forgiveness and good will.

It is plain then, that he who does not advocate and defend the slave trade, to be consistent, must grant that war is incompatible with christianity, and that it is a violation of the gospel to countenance it.

D

WAR IS UNWISE.

That the principles and practice of war are unwise, I observe,

1. Because, that instead of preventing, they provoke insult and mischief.

The maxim, that in order to preserve peace, mankind must be prepared for war, has become so common, and sanctioned by such high authority, that few question its wisdom or policy. But if stripped of its specious garb, it may appear to proceed not from that wisdom which came down from above, which is "first pure, then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy ;" and if it is not the wisdom from above, then it must be the wisdom from beneath.

Are not pride, avarice and revenge, the seeds of all kinds of carnal warfare? From these grow all the quarrelling among children, the discord among families, the bickerings, law suits and broils among neighbors, the boxing among bullies, the duelling among modern gentlemen, and wars among nations. They all originate from one and the same spirit.

Now, is the mild, meek and peaceable man unarmed more liable to inspire jealousy in others, that he is about to insult and abuse them, than the high-toned duellist, who constantly carries with him deathly weapons? Does he in fact so often get into difficul

ty, quarrelling and fighting? The respectable society of Friends stand a living monument to answer the question.

On the principles of self-defence as they are styled, if one man suspects an injury from another, unless he is naturally a more powerful man, he must take a cane; as the principles of self-defence require a superior power in your own hand, either by art or muscular strength. When the other learns the suspicions, and sees the preparation, he in his turn must take a bludgeon to preserve the balance of power, and proclaim a threatening to awe his antagonist, who must now take a sword and return a threatening, in order to maintain his dignity; for it will not do for men of honor to retract, however much they may be in the wrong. The other again must take a deathly weapon for his defence, and nothing is now wanting but an unhappy meeting to set each other's blood a flow. ing.

Much in the same way do nations often get into desperate warfare. One nation is busily increasing its military strength, on the plausible maxim of preserving peace and maintaining its rights. Another nation views the preparations with a jealous eye, and also goes to work on the same principle to make formidable preparations. All the nations around take the alarm, and on the same principle begin active preparations, all vieing with each other to become the most formidable. If one sends an ambassador to enquire the cause of the great preparations; the an

swer always is, let the motive be what it may, for their own defence. Then the other makes new exertions and begins to fortify towns on the confines of his neighbour; who must not only do the same, but march a large army for the defence of his frontier; and the other must do likewise. By this time, if no old quarrel remained unsettled, perhaps one charges the other with encroachment on territory; the other denies the charge, and contends sharply for his pretended rights. Ministers may be interchanged, and while negociations are pending, a high tone must be taken by both parties, for this is an essential principle in the doctrine of self-defence. The contrary would betray weakness and fear; newspapers must be ushered forth with flaming pieces to rouse, as it is called, the spirit of the countries; so as to impress upon the populace the idea that the approaching war is just and necessary; for all wars must be just and necessary on both sides. In the mean time envoys extraordinary may be sent to other powers by each party to enlist their aid; most of whom are already prepared for war, and each one selects his side according to his interest and feelings. At length the ultimatum is given and refused and the dreadful conflict commences.

But few wars, however, begin in this slow and progressive mode; a trifling aggression is sufficient to blow up the flame with nations already prepared.

Thus we see nations resemble bull-dogs who happen to meet; they will first raise their hairs, shew their

teeth, then growl, and then seize upon each other with all their strength and fury; and bull-dogs have something of the same kind of honor, for they scorn to retreat.

Hence we see that the acknowledged principles of defensive war are the vital springs of most of the wars that agitate and desolate our world. The pretended distinction between offensive and defensive war is but a name. All parties engaged in war proclaim to the world that they only are fighting in defeace of their rights, and that their enemies are the aggressors; while it may be impossible for man to decide which are most in the wrong.

The popular maxim of being prepared for war in order to be at peace, may be seen to be erroneous in fact, for the history of nations abundantly shows, that few nations ever made great preparations for war, and remained long in peace. When nations prepare for war, they actually go to war, and tell the world that their preparations were not a mere show.

Thus we may see, that the principles and preparations of war, actually engender war, instead of promoting peace, and of course they are unwise, and if unwise, then it is folly for christians to engage in them.

2. War is unwise, for instead of diminishing, it increa ses difficulties.

As the principles and preparations of war have a natural tendency to generate war, and are actually