Oncons cious Cerebrati on in History. 
 
 AN ADDRESS 
 READ before; the 
 
 Kansas Society of the Sons of the American Revolution. 
 
 BY 
 
 GUSTAVUS FRANKLIN KIMBALL, 
 
 AT THE STATE HOUSE, TOPEKA, KANSAS, APRIL 19. 1899. 
 
 PRINTED BV REQUEST OF THE SOriETY. 
 
Unconscious Cerebration in History. 
 
 AN ADDRESS 
 
 READ BEFORE THE 
 
 Kansas Society of the Sons of ttie American Revolution. 
 
 AT THE STATE HOUSE, TOPEKA, KANSAS, APRIL 19, 1899. 
 
 This paper was read before the Kansas Society of Sons of the American 
 Revolution not without some doubts as to its reception, and hence the apolog-y 
 with which it opened and which is retained. The paper did not fail to mee^ 
 with some criticism, but not altogether as expested. The greatest and almost 
 only objection made has been that Gen. John A. Logan was given some credit 
 for the abolition of slavery that more properly belonged to William Lioyd 
 Garrison, Wendell Phillips and Charles Sumner. There is a shade of humor in 
 this criticism. The failure to comprehend the thought of the writer is evi- 
 dent. Not a particle of approval of Logans antebellum course was intended^ 
 His well defined record on the slavery question was thought to afford a perti 
 nent illustration of "unconscious cerebration" in United States History. John 
 A. Logan, in and out of Congress, and until some months after the breaking 
 out of the civil war, had been a most subservient tool of the slave power. He 
 was probably more responsible for the so called "Black Laws' of Illinois than 
 any other one person. The extremists of the south had been give ample reason 
 to believe that he was and would remain in sympathy with their cause. It 
 
was suppased that he represented a very considerable northern element. He 
 made no attempt to correct this impression until weeks and even months -after 
 such democratic leaders as Stanton and Douglas had declared their devotion 
 to the Union 
 
 Very few are now ignorant of the fact that at the outbreak of the wa ^ 
 Log"an's sympathies were all with the south, and that it was )nly after the most 
 persistent efforts on the part of Stephen A. Doug-las, in which he exhausted 
 argument and even threats that Logan was induced to declare for the Union. 
 Even then room is left for a possible ungenerous suspicion. No one imagined 
 the war would be so serious. It was predicted that it would be over in ninety 
 days. Douglas was the great democrat of the state. Logan stood next in or- 
 der of precedence. Douglas died June 3 unexpectedly. This left a vacancy 
 in the United States Senate. What influence this had may not be known. 
 But the Rubicon once crossed, Logan threw his whole soul into the Union cause. 
 It was not his nature to do otherwise. He dazzled the army and the country 
 by his dash and vigor, but, according to the evidence of the late C.A. Dana, in 
 papers recently published, written while he was assistant secretarj'- of war, 
 and while with Grant at Vicksburg, Logan was greatly overrated if not as a 
 ' fifhter, certainly as a leader, in any such sense as Grant or Lee were leaders. 
 
 W« admit having little admiration for the class of men to which Logan 
 belonged. He had little of that devotion to principle that gave character to 
 Wendell Phillips on the one extreme, and Wm.L. Yancey on the other. He was 
 simply a machine politician and a njachine soldier, — a gattling- gun soldier if 
 one chooses. But he had no such qualities as go to make the memory of Lincoln 
 and Grant and Robert E. Lee a benediction to all, both north and south, who 
 are willing to let the past rest in peace. 
 
 No merit is claimed for chis paper. If there is anything of value herein, 
 it appears in the effort to show that the struggle in which we are now engaged, 
 was not sought by this nation, but that, once in^-olved, any turning back would 
 be cowardly, if not infamous. There are those who saw only virtue in the in- 
 terference of this nation to prevent the extirpation of the Cuban people. 
 
 Some of these men are now lining up in history alongside the tories of 
 the revolution and the blue light federalists of the second war with Great 
 Britain. Instead of peace their influence has been to prolong the war. Many 
 tories were good men; many blue light federalists were sincere and honest: 
 many "Anti-Imperialist Leaguers" are now just as sincere. Perhaps they may 
 yet come to see that they are just as mistaken now as their protypes were in 
 their days. They fail to tell how, or when, or where a halt could have been 
 made. Humanity's call in the Philippines was asurgent as that in Cuba, and in 
 both it is probably slight as compared with that which may soon come to us' 
 unless Asia is saved from the ravishment of continental Europe. It at least 
 seems possible that it may be the destiny of England and America -to prevent 
 this in the name of humanity. If this shall prove to be the result we shall 
 find the subject of this paper illustrated anew, and again realize the truth of 
 what our own "Ironqxtili/' has expressed when he says: 
 
 "States like men, 
 Have destinies that take them — 
 That bear them on, not knowing why or how. 
 Office of 
 Kimball pAMrLY News, 
 Genealogical and Historical Monthly. 
 
 IVIay 22, 1899. G.F.KIMBALL. 
 
 KIMBALL PRlNT:Ni^i.50.J NORTH TOPEKA, KANSAS' 
 
•'How often do events, as if by chance, come unexpectedlv to pass, for 
 which not one had even dared to hope." — Terence. 
 
 As the dimensions of the tree are not always regulated by the size of 
 the seed, so the Consequences of things are not always proportionate to the 
 apparent magnitude of those events that have produced them. Thus the 
 American Revolution, from which little was expected, pi-oduced much; but the 
 French Revolution, from which much was expected, pi-odueed little. — \jolton.. 
 
 ■.-■^»^^®^^!;«^-^• 
 
 Mr. President and (ienti.emrx; 
 
 On this anniversary of the battle of 
 Lexington, as well as that of the dec- 
 laration of peace that followed the 
 clo.se of the seven years of war, natur- 
 ally it might be expected that any ad- 
 di-ess delivered before this Society 
 would dwell largely upon the events 
 pertaining to the opening daj^s of 
 the American Revolution. Certainly 
 this would be most -appropriate, but 
 as there are others present who will 
 do full justice to the anniver.sary oc- 
 ca.sion. I purpose leaving- that field to 
 them alone. 
 
 I have preferred to touch upon 
 some other phases of more general 
 history, cherishing a hope that possibly 
 some profit may result in view of the 
 existing condition of affairs in our own 
 young, but historjf making country. 
 
 Permit me to add, however, at the 
 very outset, that I do not feel abso- 
 lutely secure in the position I have 
 taken, or to be more definite, in some 
 of the illustrations that I have at- 
 tempted. 
 
 If, therefore, any apology were nec- 
 essarj'^ for any portion of^this paper, I 
 prefer to make it at the beginning. I 
 say this because I do not expect it to 
 meet the approval of all. Then, it is 
 possible, that by a stretch of the ijnag- 
 ination, if one be so disposed, it may 
 appear to trench upon the forbidden 
 ground of both polities and religion. 
 
 So I wish to aver at this time, that in 
 any sense that reasonably can be con- 
 templated by our constitution or rules, 
 nothing of the kind is intended. 
 
 Really I have no thought that there 
 can be any intent to debar allusion to 
 either religion or polities, in the liber- 
 al use of these terms, in papers or dis- 
 cussion that may come before this so- 
 ciety. In saying- this much if I could 
 have the least reference to dogmatic 
 sectarianism, in the one ca.se, or to 
 partisan bigotrj^ in the other, there 
 could be no doubt of its being a viola- 
 tion of the spirit of this society. But 
 such is not the ease. 
 
 As a matter of fact religion, in some 
 form is, and always hat been, the hand- 
 maid of civilization. Yes, more, it is in 
 fact the handmaid of barbarism the 
 stage next lower than that of a crude 
 civilization. 
 
 So, too, politics is in truth the hand- 
 maid of government, even in govern- 
 ments of low order, unless every per- 
 son or subject is absolutely subservient 
 to the will of one ruler. The higher 
 the form of government the more of 
 politics there must be in it, such real 
 politics being the science of govern- 
 ment itself. 
 
 Now do not imagine that I propose 
 an essay upon these subjects, not even 
 in the highest sense of the term. I 
 have simply made this introduction in 
 order, perhaps to disarm possible criti- 
 cism. 
 
I consider the Sons of the American 
 Revolution as essentially and intensely 
 a historical societj'. It may be that to 
 some this simply means a sketch here, 
 and a record there, of Lome man or 
 some event in which one has a person- 
 al interest. To some it may mean only 
 a record of oattles foiight and won, or 
 foug-ht and lost, of deeds of valor, of 
 of chivalrous acts, of heroic ventures 
 and marvelous escapes. Finally it may 
 mean a record of military victory, a 
 change of government, the birth of 
 
 liberty. 
 
 Now all this is history, one phase of 
 history, the most common phase of 
 history. But it is not higher history. 
 It is not a record of that subtile g-rowth 
 of humanity from a lower to a higher 
 life that we call civilization, such as 
 cannot easily be portrayed in words. 
 It is surface or primary history. It'is 
 not the philosophy of history, whi(?h is 
 about all there is to history beyond 
 the quality it possesses of affording- 
 interest and amusement to the reader, 
 and little if any real worth to the 
 thorough student. There is more to 
 history than mere romance. 
 
 A bit of canvas and a variety of pig- 
 ments do not constitute a picture. The 
 canvas may be finely wroug-ht and the 
 colors brilliant in their intensity, there- 
 fore interesting and attractive, but 
 there is no artistic spirit seen until the 
 artist has added his skill. So it is with 
 historic canvas. The groundwork and 
 the coloring must be such that great 
 principles underlying- national growth 
 shall stand out to be seen and read in 
 the age.« yet to come. To write such 
 history admits of no prevarication, no 
 duplicity, no prejudice, but a devotion 
 to iruth, with the rare ability to ana- 
 Ij'ze authorities and comprehend mo- 
 tives and purposes not always capable 
 of explanation. There have not been 
 many such svriters of histoi-y. 
 
 It is said that an English lord once 
 remarked to his son whose duty was to 
 
 entertain his invalid father; "Read me 
 no history. It is all, all false." The 
 different lights in %vhich historians por- 
 tray the working out of events, and 
 the part that man takes in that work, 
 are often so contradictory that no one 
 need wonder that men like this Eng-- 
 lish noble are found to distrust all 
 written history. Evidently the great- 
 est task of the impartial historian is 
 not the mere writing of facts, but the 
 work of sifting the true from the false. 
 
 Some of the best writers have held 
 that the historian ought only to state 
 facts leaving the conclusions to be 
 drawn from them to the student alone. 
 If this were done oftener there would 
 be less sifting to do on. the part of lat- 
 er historians, and less of prejudice be 
 engendered. 
 
 At a recent meeting of this associa- 
 tion I took occasion, briefly to com- 
 ment upon some features of American 
 history as we have it — this surface his- 
 tory to which I have referred, and to 
 comment iipon the injustice done to 
 some heroes of the American Revolu- 
 tion, and to enter complaint at the un- 
 deserved honors heaped upon some who ' ' 
 were not heroes. 
 
 It was in this connection that our , 
 fellow associate, Mr. Scott, remarked, I 
 that, after all, it is Kot so material 
 that just credit be given to the indi- 
 idual, as to know that the principle 
 involved in the issue has been gained. 
 With this proposition we cheerfully 
 agree. . 
 
 It is a mooted question among his- ] 
 torians, whether it is man who makes 
 history or history that makes the man. 
 I shall not attempt to discuss it in any 
 way. In the philosophic sense man 
 sinks into nothingness in either case. 
 The man is nothing, the principle ev 
 erything. But what is the principle, 
 and why do we stop to deal with the 
 individual? These are the questions 
 I now wish to consider. 
 
Whatever ma>' be said as to the crea- 
 tion of history, I mean that living' es- 
 sence of prog-ressive civilization — the 
 individual is the instrument used, co.n- 
 sc'ously or unconsciously, by God, Fate, 
 Providence, or whatever term may be 
 used todesignate that unseen and in- 
 comprehensible power that conti'ols 
 "the universe, and directs the destinies 
 of nations •often times into channels 
 least expected by the most astute, the 
 most righteous, and supposedly the 
 most inspired of men. 
 
 It this position is sound, it then does 
 become, in reality, a matter of impor- 
 tance whether the individiial, living or 
 dead has the credit he deserves. The 
 living man may be supposed to act 
 under orUinai'y circumstances, up to 
 his convictions of duty, and on a line 
 parallel with his g'eneral intelligence, 
 whether it be Nebuchadnezzar feeding- 
 upon grass, Simeon »Styiites wasting 
 thirty j^ears upon a monument, or Tar- 
 quenado at the Inquisition. But 
 whether honest of purpose, or not, 
 thd follies and errors of the dead are 
 to be avoided as well as those of the 
 livmg. The men from whom we ex- 
 pect heroic deeds have a right to' be- 
 lieve that the honors they win will not 
 be stolen by others. The dead are the 
 models to which the living look as 
 worthy to be copied, or as examples bo 
 be shunned. It is important, there- 
 fore, that we have a correct estimate 
 of those "vho take an active part in 
 the making of history, not entirely as 
 a matter of justice to them, but for 
 the benefit of the existing generation. 
 The light of the past is the guiding 
 star of mo5t people, and if it be a false 
 or distorted light it is not strange that 
 
 many ai'e led astray. 
 
 Now if there is anything to this 
 point. I wish to illustrate it fuither by 
 a few examples. At the meeting of 
 this society above referred to I briefly 
 mentioned the fact that nearly all our 
 1 written histories, 'including our school 
 
 histories, name Horatio Gates as the 
 hero of the battle of Saratoga. I shall 
 not enlarge upon this at this time 
 further than to state in general terms' 
 that Gen. Gates was really one of the 
 most incompetent of our Revolutionary 
 generals, and one always suffering 
 from petty jealousies. 
 
 His unworthy ambition induced him 
 to cruelly rob Gen. Schuyler of honors 
 that belong'ed to him. No purer patriot 
 than Phillip Schuyler is mentioned in 
 American History. Whether as citizen, 
 statesman, or soldier, his character 
 was one to challenge admiration. The 
 plans of the campaigm to entrap Bur- 
 goyne were largely his. Gates had no 
 part in them. Yet ne was able to se- 
 cure the appointment of ranking officer 
 of the American army a short time be- 
 fore the bat' le and thereby to reap the 
 fruits that rig"htfully belonged to oth- 
 ers. 
 
 General Gates took no active part in 
 the battle of Saratoga. If he did not 
 sulkjin his tent, he lounged there and 
 left the fighting to his generals and 
 soldiers. His jealousy of Arnold whose 
 heroic qualities had displayed renewed 
 vigor at Stillwater, had caused his re 
 lief from duty, and therefore he had no 
 command when the battle began. But 
 Arnold could not stand idly by and see 
 the patriot army waver and give way 
 for the want of leadership, and so as a 
 volunteer he rushed to the rescue, 
 and he and Daniel Morgan became the 
 actual heroes of Saratoga. 
 
 The pusillanimity of Gates made him 
 as willing to steal the honors of Arnold 
 and Morg-an on this occasion, as he had 
 been to rob Schuyler of merits that 
 were his. 
 
 Why, then, were the earlier writers 
 of our history willing to pervert the 
 truth that later historians have made 
 clear? The answer is found in the 
 simple fact that Benedict Arnold the 
 traitor was the hero of Saratoga. 
 
Our narrow, big-oted and sometimes 
 over zealous historians of that day 
 could never persuade themselves, after 
 he became a traitor, to g-ive Benedict 
 Arnold credit for any good thing- done 
 before or afterwards. It was all the 
 more ag'g'ravating' for them to admit 
 that Arnold won the battle of Saratoga 
 holding no official command, because 
 that was the turning of the tide — the 
 decisive battle of the war. It was hard 
 to admit that the traitor Arnold, had 
 in all probability saved the cause of 
 the revolutionary patriots. 
 
 But to disguise the truth is not the 
 pi-oper way to write histoi-y. It is not 
 history at all. And yet, until within 
 the last few years, at least, our revolu- 
 tionary histories have been full of such 
 conceits. Probably no one can be 
 found, in the least degree, to apologize 
 for the overwhelming error of Benedict 
 Arnold. Nothing can palliate his crime 
 of treason. But there is an old saying 
 that the devil should have his due, and 
 so should Benedict Arnold. He was 
 one of the ablest generals of the revo- 
 lution, and stood next to Gen. Greene 
 in military capacity and in the confi- 
 dence of Washington. If he was a 
 traitor he is not the only one who 
 would have betrayed the patriot cause. 
 It is more than probable that Gates 
 himself, under conditions similar to 
 to those under which Arnold was 
 placed, would have been no better. Cer- 
 tain it is that up to this period Arnold 
 had shown greater devotion and had 
 endured more sacrifices for the patriot 
 cause than Gates. 
 
 Gen. Charles Lee was a more con- 
 temptible traitor than Arnold. His 
 schemes to supplant Washington be- 
 gan almost as soon as the latter was 
 appointed commander of the American 
 forces. But the traitor General Lee 
 had the skill to conceal his duplicity, 
 and until recently, about all that was 
 really known of his traitorous at- 
 tempts we learn from the slight cen- 
 
 sure given him by Wa.shington at Mon- 
 mouth, and his temporary suspension 
 from service. More recently letters 
 from his own hand have come to light 
 wherein he deliberately proposed to 
 betray the American Army into the 
 hands of General Howe and only a 
 change of plans by the American gen- 
 erals prevented its consummation. 
 
 The actions of the Continental Con- 
 gress were often incomprehensible, 
 and no subsequent light has made them 
 quite clear. The patience of Washing- 
 ton was often taxed. His greatness 
 nowhere shows to better advantage 
 than in his dealings with this erratic 
 body. "Friends at Court" appear to 
 have had remarkable influence. Gates 
 was made by them. Gen. Schuyler 
 was one of their victims. Arnold was 
 another, but without the saving condi- 
 tions that surrounded Schuyler. De- 
 spite his great record in Canada, at 
 Hei-kimer and wherever a deadly con- 
 flict was on, Arnold was the victim of 
 persecution and misrepresentation. He 
 was aggravated to a needless degree 
 by his enemies, and that he might 
 have been influenced to some extent 
 by his wife, who was in sympathy with 
 the tcries is altogether probable, but 
 none of this can be urged in his de- 
 fense. But General Charles Lee had 
 no reason for his conduct, except a 
 mean jealousy and desire to supplant 
 Washington. The injustice done to 
 Arnold was not allowed to die with 
 him. ,Our prejudiced historical writers 
 have always portrayed him in the most 
 offensive light. As a child he is made 
 to appear cruel, delighting in tortur- 
 ing insects and animals, playing truant 
 at school, and growing up in ignorance. 
 There is little foundation for all this. 
 His childhood averaged well with that 
 of other boys. His education was fair 
 to say the least. He wrote and spoke 
 well and had some knowledge of Lat- 
 in. This much at least is due to Bene- 
 dict Arnold. That he suffered mental 
 
ag-ony in after years is well known. 
 His repentance was deep and sincere, 
 as shown by the pains he took to edu- 
 cate his sons so that his name might 
 to some extent be redeemed. And they 
 iiived to do him honor. 
 
 The name of another revolutionary 
 hero I shall mot fail to mention. His 
 heroism was not like that of Arnold's 
 before his treason, but it was as patri- 
 otic, and was never tarnished by treas- 
 on nor cowardice. Yet this name is ob- 
 scured in American History. It would 
 not be easy omitting- the names of 
 Washington and Franklin, to say who 
 did more for the revolutionary cause 
 than Thomas Paine. And yet his name 
 has been seldom mentioned by the 
 winters of popular American History, 
 and then as one to be treated with op- 
 probrium. And all this because he was 
 not a believer in the orthodox religion 
 of that day and of this. Unfortunate- 
 ly much of American History, espec- 
 ially that of an early day was written 
 by narrow sectarian preachers, who 
 seemed to have held theories similar to 
 those held by promoters of the inquisi- 
 tion, and so evei'ything- necessary must 
 be distorted to serve their purpose. 
 The truth was withheld where it did 
 not line up with their ideas. If any 
 thing seemed lacking to make a lively 
 incident, some myth was invented like 
 that of Parson Weems about Washing- 
 ton and his hatchet. Or Arnold must be 
 made to torture dumb animals, or sto- 
 ries made up of Connecticut blue laws 
 that prohibited a man from kissing his 
 wife on Sundays. And many there are 
 who believe these fictions and cherish 
 them as interesting f satures of Ameri- 
 can history. 
 
 The revolutionary period developed 
 many heroes and statesmen. They 
 wei-e by no means of one mind, but 
 while Hamilton and Jefferson differed, 
 no one dares question the patriot- 
 ism and honest purpose of both. But 
 the great democrat of the revolu- 
 
 tionary period was not Jefferson, nor 
 Madison, nor Franklin. Remember 
 I do not use the name democrat in the 
 modern party sense. The one person 
 who had a clearer perception, of the 
 rights of man, than any other of the 
 early American patriots was probably 
 Thomas Paine. Without any reference 
 to his religious convictions, no man of 
 that age foresaw so clearly the possi- 
 ble development of the democratic idea 
 — the right of man to govern himself — 
 as did Thomas Paine. The influence 
 of no man of that age was more far 
 reaching, or is more felt at this day, 
 unconscious as we may be of the fact. 
 
 And yet the name of Paine does not 
 figure conspicuously in our common 
 histories. As intimated before, much 
 of our history has been written simply 
 to unveil what the writers desired to 
 show and to conceal what they did not 
 care to make known. If these same 
 writers could have obscured the names 
 of Jefferson and of Franklin, whose 
 religious views were not greatly differ- 
 ent from those of Paine, they would 
 probably have shared the same fate. 
 Fortunately for them and for the coun- 
 try, they both were many sided men. 
 They both shone with marvelous 
 brilliancy along too many lines of use- 
 fulness to permit their namps to be ob- 
 scured. 
 
 But enough in relation to individ- 
 uals. So far we have dealt solely with 
 what we termed surface history. We 
 might compare this feature of history, 
 and it is about all the average reader 
 understands by the term, with our 
 earthly body that exists only for a 
 time, and then passes away. But as 
 there is more to human life, as is gen- 
 erally understood, than the mere body, 
 so 'there is a living spirit— a soul in 
 history as in human life. We call it 
 philosophy of history It is the re- 
 sultant effects of time and human ef- 
 fort. It is the birth and growth of 
 
events without .special relation to indi- 
 vidual human effort. It is to this that 
 I now call attention. 
 
 It would seem to matter little what 
 the individual does, or whether his 
 memory is preserved at all, so far as 
 concerns results. Events seem to de- 
 develop regardless of human agency, 
 sometimes as contemplated, and often 
 directly the opposite. The fact is that 
 civilization has seldom been a product 
 of premeditated design. This thought 
 long ago found expression in the old 
 adage that "Man proposes, but God 
 disposes." A hurried glance into the* 
 past shows that civilization has steadi- 
 ly progressed westward, fii-st finding- a 
 centre in one place then in another. 
 One readily recalls Alexandria, Con- 
 stantinople, Venice, Bruges, London. 
 It will be noted that these have all 
 been consecutively, the great centers 
 of commerce. Civilization has followed 
 lines of trade, for the obvious reasdn, 
 that the wants of mankind, supplied 
 only by trade, are the foundations of 
 civilization. These wants consist of 
 physical and mental necessities, which 
 include also the spiritual needs of hu- 
 manity. Trade meets these physical 
 wants and religion in some form, the 
 spiritual or mental. 
 
 In civilization where the imagination 
 is the active mental element, this reli- 
 gion will naturally be fanciful. It ap- 
 peals to the curiosity, to faith, to the 
 love of the marvelous^ to necromancy 
 and even to the vagaries of the alchem- 
 ist. 
 
 As the average mind grows stronger 
 and more practical the religious or 
 worshipful idea of mankind, grows 
 stronger also, and becomes more or 
 less based in intellectual thought. 
 
 But this is a line we have neither 
 time nor disposition to follow further 
 than it illustrates Dur subject. At the 
 outset we said that religion is the 
 handmaid of civilization, and that civ- 
 ilization is the event of history. Now 
 
 this handmaid is often, as justice is por- 
 trayed, quite blind. In treating of the 
 human brain the physician will dis- 
 course to us about "unconscious cere- 
 bration." The philosophical historian 
 may, and indeed often does the same 
 thing. Hence he is often compelled to 
 notice how apt the plans of men are to 
 miscarry. It is the unexpected that 
 happens. We have made no distinction 
 between the religious and the moral 
 purpose that has most to do with ad- 
 vancing civilization. There are few 
 men of prominence in the active work 
 of life who do not claim to be actuated 
 by a moral purpo.se. With a civilized 
 people moral qualities go hand m hand 
 with physical energies. One writer of 
 political science has said that the pre- 
 dominance of a moral purpose in poli- 
 tics is always a portentous phenome- 
 non under a constitutional g-overnment. 
 
 Now let us glance briefly at some 
 examples of human development for 
 the purpose of seeing how frequently 
 the "best laid plans of mice and men 
 gang aft aglee," 
 
 In one of his lectures on the growth 
 of civilization, M. Guizot remarks on 
 the revolutions that took place during 
 the sixteenth and seventeenth centur- 
 ies, that if the men most active in pro- 
 ducing them had been con.scious of the 
 results to follow their action, there 
 would have been no such revolutions. 
 Other historians have remarked to the 
 same effect, so that to some degree it 
 may be said that in history making 
 the law of negative prevails. Let us 
 cite a few examples. It will be nec- 
 essary to refer mostly to nations older 
 than our own. We have ourselves not 
 made much history. We are to 3 young. 
 Probably we have made a good be- 
 ginning and may afford a few youth- 
 ful examples. 
 
 We beg'in by referring to the grant- 
 ing of Magna Charta. And right here 
 we also strike one of the falsities of 
 history. It is usually represented that 
 
the Great" Charter was g-ranted as a 
 concession to the people. This is the 
 popular idea still, but is by no means the 
 fact. If either King- John or his barons 
 could have foreseen i-esults, there would 
 have been at Runnymade, no demand 
 for the charter by the barons on the 
 one hand, and none granted by the 
 king- on the other. Neither party had 
 any conception of events that were to 
 follow. It affords a fine sample of un- 
 conscious cerebration in history. It 
 was destined to weaken, and finally to 
 practically destroy the prerog-atives of 
 both kings and barons. 
 
 Mag-ua Charta was forced from John 
 by his barons purely in their cwn in- 
 terests. It was at the time a victory for 
 the aristocracy. The people were mere 
 hewers of wood and drawers of water. 
 Neither king- nor barons cared more for 
 the people than for their cattle. The 
 king- was pressing- the barons and they 
 resented it. The barons rebelled. The 
 people had no part in it. They were 
 mere vassals, serfs to be bartered and 
 sold with the lands they tilled if it was 
 transferred. They were without rep- 
 resentation in tlie g-overnment. It was 
 a later king- who rebelled against the 
 encroaching" power of the lords, who 
 took advantag-e of the provisions found 
 in the g-reab charter which had lain 
 dormant more than a hundred years, 
 and called the people :o his aid to sup- 
 press the movement of the barons to 
 usurp the whole power of government. 
 It was not 'till then that a parliament 
 of the people was instituted. From 
 that time on the power of both loi'ds 
 and kings began slowly to decline. 
 And thus was England's greatest revo- 
 lution an unpremeditated event. It 
 was not only the greatest of English 
 revolutions, but the greatest known to 
 civilization. 
 
 It is by no means our purpose to dis- 
 cuss the general effect of the great re- 
 ligious Reformation of the sixteenth 
 century. Certainly Martin Luther con- 
 
 templated no such results as followed. 
 Even if he had counted upon the build- 
 ing up of a i-eligious hierachy in compe- 
 tition with that of Rome, he would have 
 stood horrified at the thought that out 
 of his reformation there would spring 
 up widespread infidelity. And yet this 
 was one result of the great reformation . 
 There is little doubt today that the 
 skepticism of France and of some other 
 portions of continental Europe, may be 
 traced to the reaction of the extreme 
 teachings of many of the early pro- 
 testing reformers. The simple fact has 
 often been a matter of comment and 
 regret among religious peoples. What 
 may have been the influence of this 
 skepticism upon civilization is not for 
 us to say. Such results were surely 
 far from those intended, but that they 
 followed has been held by many learned 
 thinkers. It has also been observed 
 that this so called spirit of infidelity 
 prevails largely among the most in- 
 tellectual communities who claim the 
 need of a more satisfying religious be- 
 lief than is offered by any extreme sec- 
 tarian creed, and that therefore more 
 liberal and more rational forms of wor- 
 ship have grown up more in har- 
 mony with this enlightened age. W'e 
 instance this as a historic feature 
 neither to alfirm nor to deny its truth, 
 but only to illusti-ate another phase of 
 the points herein made. But perhaps 
 an instance of the kind under consid- 
 eration, that has scarcely commanded 
 a thought until quite recently, is one 
 that promises to be the most remark- 
 able in the world's history. This Amer- 
 ican nation of ours that has so startled 
 the activities of all other nations with- 
 in the last twelve months, and clearly 
 bids fair to be the greatest civilizing and 
 the grandest christianizing power the 
 whole world has ever known, undoubt- 
 edly had its origin in the persecution of 
 the Engli.sh Puritan. It was the Puritan 
 that gave spirit and virility to this na- ' 
 tion. and the Puritan was driven 
 
10 
 
 from his island home and forced to a 
 new continent, to build up a new na- 
 tion the destiny of which it is impossi- 
 ble to conseive. How little was sus- 
 pected then chat seeds were sown that 
 would bring forth, in the early twenti- 
 eth century, a christian power that 
 would surpass that of the mother coun- 
 try and becoine the dominating- civiliz- 
 ing- influemce of the earth? 
 
 We might here allude to an illustra- 
 tion with opposite results. Four cen- 
 turies ago, Spain, the most powerful 
 nation of Europe was a center of cul- 
 ture and refinement. It led in com- 
 merce and discoveries. Its naval 
 and military power was the admiration 
 as well as the dread of the world. 
 Ferdinand and Isabella were among 
 the most enlightened rulers of the age. 
 Their statesmen were men of capacity 
 and their purpose was to lay the foun- 
 dations, after the union of Castile and 
 Aragon, of agreat and beniticent king- 
 dom. By no stretch of the imagina- 
 tion can it be held that the best Span- 
 ish intelligence of that age deliberate- 
 ly contemplated national suicide. Yet 
 nothing could more surely have pi'o- 
 duced this result than the wholesale 
 extirpation of the Jews and the banish- 
 ment of the Moriscoes from the coun- 
 try. The one class represented the 
 trade intsrests of the nation, and the 
 other the skilled labor. It left the 
 country without capital and without 
 artisans. Had it not been for the vast 
 wealth poured in by the new world 
 the national decay would have been 
 far more rapid. 
 
 To return now to our own national 
 history. We have not much ripened 
 fruit to show. We can hardly say 
 that the pilgrim fathers would not 
 have braved the dangers of the new 
 world, if they could have been fore- 
 seen. They might have done so. They 
 were maae of that kind of material. 
 There is more doubt perhaps in case of 
 the settlers of Jamestown. In the case 
 
 of our Revolutionary fathers thei'e is al- 
 so doubt. It seems marvelous now that 
 they dared to rebel. They knew neith- 
 er their own strength nor that of the 
 mother country. From every rational 
 standpoint the odds were against them. 
 With justice on their side and their 
 lives in their hands they went to bat- 
 battle for independence. What this 
 really meant was ill understood when 
 Paul Revere made his midnight ride to 
 Lexington. It was imperfectly under- 
 stood for a long time afterwards. It 
 was simply a combination of circum 
 stances that prevented Great Britain 
 from bringing its full power against 
 the rebellious colonies that enabled 
 them to conquer. It is safe to say how- 
 ever that the Revolutionary fathers 
 could have had no comprehensicn of 
 what the United States would become 
 in a century aftei the adoption of the 
 constitution. If tney could not con- 
 ceive the material advancement we 
 wei'e to make, no more could they 
 imagine the new phases oifr civilization 
 would assume before the opening of 
 the twentieth century. What to do 
 with the slavery system that had be- 
 come fastened upon the colonies, was 
 the great problem of the day. It con- 
 tinued for more than seventy years to 
 overshadow every other question, and 
 finally it brought into action a new 
 party organization whose destiny was 
 to effect its ultimate downfall. The 
 growth of this party affords another 
 example in American history of this 
 unconscious cerebration to which we 
 ha/e alluded. 
 
 While there was a class of extreme 
 abolitionists who were willing to g-o 
 to any length in opposition to slavery, 
 we believe it to be quite certain that if 
 the organizers of the republican party 
 could have foreseen in 18.55, all that 
 was to follow within ten year from that 
 date, the party would simply never 
 have been organized. 
 
11 
 
 In this connection there occurs anoth- 
 er thoug-ht along this line. As this 
 whole question of slavery has long 
 since passed into history, and is no 
 longer a question of party politics, we 
 assume that we may treat it as past 
 history. We shall only aim to touch 
 one incident as it bears upon the subtile 
 development of events to which we 
 have .so far mostly confined this paper. 
 The slave holding .states themselves 
 were foolhardy in rushing into the re- 
 bellion. Nor would they have done so 
 but for false hopes that were held out 
 to them by northern sympathizers 
 with the slave system. Slavery was 
 abolished by war, not directly, but in- 
 cidentally. It is curious to note some 
 facts in this connection. There were 
 a few northern men of much promi- 
 nence upon whom the rebellious states 
 relied. One of these was Edwin M. 
 Stanton who entered Buchanan's cabi- 
 net, and did more to save the union be- 
 fore the inauguration of Lincoln than 
 any other one man. This was a blow 
 to the southern cause, as severe as it 
 was unexpected. Another was Stephen 
 A. Douglas who promptly declared for 
 the Union, but died when the war had 
 hardly begun. 
 
 But there was one other character 
 more in touch with the southern leaders 
 than either of these. Today that name 
 occupies a strange place in American 
 history. Some two years ago there was 
 unveiled in the city of Chicago, the 
 largest equestrian statue in the Unit- 
 ed States. It was of a soldier who had 
 won laurels on many a heroic field. 
 Perhaps no other soldier had a firmer 
 hold upon the hearts of the people at 
 that time than John A. Logan. And 
 that popularity he retained, especially 
 with the veterans of the aimy until his 
 death. 
 
 He had been a life-long aggressive 
 supporter of the slave system. If the 
 men who were working for the ex- 
 tension of slave territory, depended 
 
 more upon any one northern sympa- 
 thizer than another, that man was John 
 A. -Logan, They believed he had the 
 power and they relied ,upon him to 
 create a division in the north. Yet no 
 one, with all his deyotion to the slave 
 power, did more, possibly no one did 
 so mucn to overthrow it. Not any nor 
 all the abolitionists of New England 
 did more. 
 
 Garrison and Phillips and Sumner 
 labored lor a purpose. They sought a 
 definite end, and that end was the aboli- 
 tion of slavery which was anchored 
 in the constitution. It might have 
 been reached m time. Not certainly 
 during the present century by their 
 methods. 
 
 Slavery was abolished by war. Lo- 
 gan's influence in abolition was the 
 work of a two-edged sword. He was a 
 leader, a representative, far more -than 
 either Stanton or Douglas, of a small 
 class of northern men devoted to slav- 
 ery, who by alluring promises led the 
 slave states into rebellion. He intro- 
 duced bills into the Illinois legislature 
 and secured their passage that made 
 any colored man in that free state but 
 little better than a slave. His course 
 in congress was of the same general 
 character, so that the slave power, as 
 it was called then, trusted him implic- 
 ity. 
 
 It is not improbable that in those 
 troublous days, during the clo.sing 
 weeks of Buchanan's administration, 
 the war might have been averted, had 
 northern men like Logan joined early 
 with Stanton and Douglas in defense 
 of the union. Southern hopes must 
 have been checked at least. But great 
 numbers hesitated, and among them 
 Logan. His position was doubtless to 
 inim a trying one. As has been said 
 his sympathies were, and always had 
 been with the south. It is certain that 
 at one time he contemplated raising a 
 company in southern Illinois to aid in 
 the rebellion. Later on he was led to 
 
l:.' 
 
 a change of irtind. This was throug-h 
 the influence of Stephen A. Douglas, 
 but it was not until the battle of Bull 
 Run, nearly six months aftei- the war 
 had practically opened that the die 
 was finallj' cast. From that time on 
 Gen. Logan wielded his sword for the 
 union cause with all the vigor he had 
 before displayed in favor of slavery. 
 In other words he fought valiantly to 
 put down the rebellion, "that all his in- 
 fluence previously had, unconseiously 
 helped to bring about, and with that 
 downfall followed the abolition of the 
 slave system he had so vigorously up- 
 held. With any partisan thought in 
 mind the revival of themes like this 
 and of so recent date would certainly 
 be out of nlace before a society such as 
 this. It is not easy to handle reminis- 
 cent subjects of this character even 
 when they have pa.ssed into history. 
 Partisan feelings cast their shadows a 
 long way behind, but with a judgment 
 sufficiently philosophical one may profit 
 largely by delving into fields even re- 
 cently tilled. 
 
 But little can we gain of immediate 
 benefit from all that has .so far been 
 said unless we can learn the lesson we 
 have intended to illustrate. If I cor- 
 rectly understand the underlying pur- 
 pose of this society it is something 
 more than to make a fad of the Ameri- 
 can Revolution. It, and other patriotic 
 societies have more important work to 
 do. We need not flatter ourselves that 
 this age is very greatly different from 
 those that have passed. 
 
 There have been changes in methods 
 and an accelerated pace is manifest. 
 Thei-e is clearly a difference in our 
 civilization. The quality is higher. 
 More has been granted to this age and 
 more will be expected. An infinity 
 of future lies before mankind. Democ- 
 racy is in the ascendant but not yet 
 triumphant. Religious liberty does 
 not prevail. The rights of man are 
 not recognized, not even among the 
 
 most civilized and enlightened of na- 
 tions. The world is still struggling in 
 darkness, even though the light seems 
 now and then to be breaking. The 
 work of ev^ry historical society and 
 every civilizing influence should lend 
 its aid. All philanthropic and educa- 
 tional bodies desire the upbuilding of 
 the human family. 
 
 The sincere purpose of all organiza- 
 tions that claim to seek the alleviation 
 of mankind is not to be lightly ques- 
 tioned. 
 
 The greatest need of this age, as it 
 has been of other ages, is a broader 
 and higher intellectual light. '■'■Liclit, 
 licht, mere licht," is said to have been 
 the despairing cry of Goethe. Such has 
 been the despairing cry of the ages. 
 
 If it is true that history teaches a 
 lesson, how then are we to take it 
 home to ourselves as a natiDn. Within 
 the past year an epoch has opened in 
 American history. One hundred years 
 ago today the battle of Lexington was 
 fought. It opened the fire of the 
 American Revolution. Some thought 
 it a mistake, a terrible calamity. Good 
 men conscientiously opposed it. Phi- 
 lanthropists like Benjamin Thompson, 
 afterwards Count Rum ford, could not 
 favor it. Bitter antagonisms grew up 
 not only in American but in England, 
 where strong elements favored the colo- 
 nists But these were mere idcidents. 
 They exist wherever conflicts exist. 
 Opposing influences haye been present 
 in all our wars. Well meaning opposi- 
 tion. Good men, scholarly men, states- 
 men, senators, men in hig'h places, are 
 present examples. Their antagonism 
 is not serious, but it is illustrative. The 
 individual developments are the same 
 now as ever. National developments 
 change. The civilizing- force moves 
 onward. It is interesting as well as 
 instructive to note its steps. 
 
 Reference has already beeu made to 
 the Puritan movement That move- . 
 ment was the crvstallization of what 
 
i:^. 
 
 may be called the Cromwellian idea. 
 We want to dwell somewhat upon this 
 point, for out of this Puritan move- 
 ment have grown the most powerful 
 civilizing foi-ces the world has yet 
 known and whose future is now but 
 dimly realized. 
 
 Oliver Cromwell has no place in 
 Westminister. His name never ap- 
 pears among the rulers of England: 
 Even the old Puritar, both in England 
 and America has largely dropped from 
 the popular memory. Yet the Puritan 
 influence has never been so powerful as 
 today. Cromwellianism is doubtless the 
 greatest embodiment .of the Puritan 
 idea. Up to his time there had been 
 little segregation of Anglo Saxon pow- 
 er. There is no complete recognized 
 segregation now. But it began to form 
 about the Elizabethan era. It began 
 by persecution and by disintregration. 
 The bi'oken and despised portions 
 were forced ott", or allowed to "seek 
 homes in a new and unknown land. 
 They built up a new nation with high 
 ideals, i-elig-ious, political, social. As 
 it grew into power and recognition its 
 reflex influence was felt in the mother 
 country. It was accelerated hy the 
 liberal thought that had been left be- 
 hind. The American iReyolution, not 
 only gave liberty to the American colo- 
 nies, bringing to 1 hem a new and vig- 
 orous growth, bnt it also ser'^ed to 
 broaden English thought. English 
 liberty surely received' a new impetus. 
 Puritan influence had its effect upon 
 the English church and is still at 
 work. In the new America the same 
 English church began gradually to 
 have its effect upon the Puritan 
 thought. And so the two nations, both 
 christian, and both liberty loying, be- 
 gan to draw into close union. As great 
 national powers thej' were both Anglo 
 Saxon in character. United they were 
 able! to be the arbiters of the world. 
 
 The late Spanish war brought these 
 two great powers together. We need 
 
 not here go into the causes of this war. 
 We prefer to deal with conditions as 
 they appear at present and in the 
 distant norizon. 
 
 There is much useless discussion in 
 regard to national expansion. The 
 very thought is trifling. The war is 
 said to have been one of humanity be- 
 cause of the sufferinrj- of thousands of 
 people in Cuba. There is something 
 in this, a trifle only. 
 
 Apparently we have reached an ep- 
 och in the wold's history. As a- people 
 we are changing our national policy, 
 not in regard to territorial expansion, 
 for we have always done that asoppor- 
 tunit3' offered But we are lending 
 our power and influence for the exten- 
 sion of civilization. In doing this we 
 are but keeping step to the music of 
 the ages. We are extending the field 
 of christian influence. It is clearly 
 not the studied thought of man. The 
 christian recognizes in it the hand of 
 God. Others will say it is the natural 
 outgrowth of material conditions which 
 unwittingly is equivalent to the chris. 
 tian idea. Others say "Manifest Des- 
 tiny." Whatever it may be clearly our 
 duty is to accept the situation which no 
 power seems able to change and bravely 
 meet the responsibilities as they arise. 
 They will not be light. We shall need 
 the highest degree of patriotism, the 
 greatest wisdom and the wisest Chris- 
 tianity and civilization. The very 
 thought of religious and political liber- 
 ty implies it. If territorial expansion 
 follows as a necessary sequence, such 
 necessity must have recognition, and 
 instead of playing the part of a Jonah 
 the American citizen must meet his 
 duties as becomes men and heroes. 
 
 The flag of this western Anglo-Saxon 
 nation has been chosen to lead a world 
 wide christianizing movement, not 
 yet within the comprehension of men. 
 It is a duty handed down from Ply- 
 mouth Rock. It is the more refined 
 
14 
 
 and universal Cromwellian idea of 
 Christianity. 
 
 This flag- is the symbol of advanced 
 civilization. In peace it has been the 
 symbol of commercial progress, of per- 
 sonal freedom and relig-ious libert3^ It, 
 is the sjanbol of National and personal 
 energ-y, of refinement and cultivation, 
 and modest worth. 
 
 In war it is the symbol of National 
 power, determination and self reliance. 
 In victory it is the svmbol of a g-ener- 
 osity and chivalry hitherto unknown 
 among the nations of the earth. The 
 American Flag is symbolic of more than 
 all this. It is .symbolic of a new Na- 
 tional g-enius, — a-genius as varied and 
 novel in character as it is marvelous 
 in strength. Something has been heard 
 of the wonderful capacity of American 
 mind before this. The world saw some- 
 thing of it during the war of the rebel- 
 lion. It was regarded then, and since, 
 as exceptional, spasmodic, ephemeral. 
 Wha^^ever the old world nations saw 
 th.>n of American characteristics they 
 regarded as temporary or abnormal. 
 The last year has brought new light to 
 the world. 
 
 The old nations have cherished the 
 idea that no government could be a 
 war power without a large standing 
 army. They have had an idea that 
 any nation would be weak in diplom- 
 acy whei-e no class existed that had 
 not years of aitful diplomatic exper- 
 ience. Our little war with Spain has 
 set the woi'ld a' wondering. It has set 
 some of our own people a thinking. 
 The ability of the Nation to meet these 
 g-reat emergencies we call our reserved 
 power. But in what does it con.sist? 
 Where does it lie dormant, 3'^ear after 
 year, until some great event brings it 
 into action? 
 
 When the conditions are threaten- 
 ing we are wont to ask ourselves where 
 are the men for the times. Where are 
 our great statesmen, our diplomats, our 
 admirals, our generals'? The crisis 
 
 comes on and then come the men to 
 meet it. A .seafaring man, generally 
 unknown, sends out a report from Ma- 
 nila Bay that resounds throughout the 
 world. Others destroy an entire fleet, 
 in an hour or two at Santiago, where 
 skill and daring did far more than 
 Drake and Hawkins did against the 
 same national enemy before the powers 
 of the air stepped in to finish the de- 
 destruction of the Armada. An un- 
 known country lawyer is called to take 
 the helm of State and proves himself 
 the equal of any in skilled diplomacy. 
 Another country lawyer from Ohio, 
 comes up as another once did from Illi- 
 nois, the first man in the nation, and 
 with a firmness and sagacity not 
 equalled since the da3^s of Lincoln laj's 
 his hand upon the unsteady elements, 
 «— the jingoes of the Nation, and holds 
 them in leash, until the time for ac- 
 tion comes. It is human greatness, 
 spring'ing apparently from nowhere. Tt 
 is the Anglo-Saxon type of Minerva 
 springing fully armed from the head 
 of love. And where is all this great- 
 ness, this reserved power, born and 
 nurtured, and kept ready to appear at 
 the Nation's call? We answer that it is 
 bred and preserved in the greater aver- 
 age intelligence and education of the 
 American people. Its foundation lies 
 down in the christian sentiment of the 
 Puritan descendants. It is born in our 
 .system of common schools. It is an 
 outgrowth of our newspapers and mag- 
 azines that go into every household 
 and make every home in the land a 
 forum for discussion of public affairs. 
 From this substratum we build that 
 broader education of the masses that 
 marks a difference between this and 
 other peoples. It is this higher and 
 broader education of the masses, cou- 
 pled with our sj^stem of self-govern- 
 ment that gives the naturally superior 
 minds of our people that alertness of 
 perception that enables them to meet 
 all conditions as they arise. 
 
 The old fogies of the old world and of 
 
the new world talk of our t4*aditions, 
 It is an old world theory this worship 
 of political traditions. The spirit of 
 the American Nation has due regard 
 for tradition and learns the lesson it 
 has to teach. But it is not to be handi- 
 capped by usage and tradition. It meets 
 conditions as they appear. If the Amer- 
 ican Indian will be civilized and chris- 
 tianized, we are ready and willing to 
 do it. If not, he simply becomes ex- 
 terminated. But we do not do it as 
 Spain exterminated the Jews and the 
 Moi-iscoes, the Caribbean Indians; the 
 Aztecs, or the natives of Peru. 
 
 So we will bo able to meet every de- 
 mand in the regeneration of the Philip- 
 pines. It is the call of humanity, of 
 civilization, of Christianity. We are 
 ready and able to meet this call. We 
 declare this when we raise the Ameri-^ 
 can flag over new territorj'. The prom - 
 ise of the American flag is current 
 throughout the earth today. 
 
 That promise may prove to be that 
 500,000,000 Asiatics shall not ruthlessly 
 be torn asunder by grasping and 
 greedy continental Europe. The Ameri- 
 llag planted in the Philippines sup- 
 ported by England means just this. It 
 indicates peace, not war. 
 
 The great English nation has with- 
 in the last twelve months come 
 to realize all this as never before. 
 This first branch of the Anglo-Saxon 
 power has heretofore carried on its 
 christian civilizing work alone. Heath- 
 en India and savage Africa have been 
 brought to a higher plane. A century 
 of unaided effort has been given to 
 this woi-k, while the American branch 
 of the Anglo-Saxon race has been pre- 
 paring itself for what now appears to 
 be its great destiny. 
 
 During this century two notable 
 movements have been going forward. 
 While the United States has been dor- 
 mant neai'ly all the continental Euro, 
 pean nations have been reaching out for 
 portions of Asia and Africa. Wherever 
 
 an opportunity offered .some national 
 octopus has sought to fasten its tenta- 
 cles. It would be difficult to point out a 
 case of this kind inspired by or accom- 
 panied with any sort of christian pur- 
 pose. A thought of a better civilization 
 has had little place in. all these efforts. 
 In the case of Spain its colonizing 
 schemes, began much earlier, are too 
 well known to need further reference. 
 
 The time has now come when no 
 more reallj' savage or so-called unoccu- 
 pied or ungoverned country can be 
 foulid. In consequence every consider- 
 able nation of continental Europe is 
 today casting about for weaker nations 
 to plunder, either in. Africa or Asia. 
 China seems to be the favorite victim 
 of all. Thus we .seem to approach the 
 culmination of the first movement. 
 
 The second movement may be found in 
 the gradual drawing together of the 
 two Anglo-Saxon families. For more 
 than a century thei'e has been a de- 
 crease in national, political and sectar- 
 ian antagonisms. The cavalier and 
 the puritan have met and understand 
 such other better. The I'oyalist and 
 the democrat are not so far apart. 
 The churchman and the dissenter are 
 more oolerant. Even the non-con- 
 formist has grown to be something of 
 a ritualist. Even the great Wesleyan 
 movement, an event that might in it- 
 self afford a chapter on unconscious 
 cerebration in history, had its influence 
 in modifying the English church. 
 
 And so there is today more of chris- 
 tian and national unity between Eng- 
 land and America than ever before. If 
 therefore we read historjr aright, there 
 is more in this than has yet appeared 
 en the surface. Not the war with Spain 
 nor the present war with the Fillipinos, 
 can be regarded as a war of humani- 
 ty in the usual limited sense. Up 
 to this time only preliminary steps 
 have been taken. It is hoped that no 
 more may be needed. At all events it 
 is almost certain that the utter dis- 
 
16 
 
 membennent of Asia by brute force, 
 with no civilizing and christianizing 
 purpose, will not be tolerated. The 
 power to prevent this will be Anglo- 
 Saxon, England and the United States 
 
 combined. 
 
 The present condition of these east- 
 ern peoples is n ot popularly understood. 
 There is not one, probably, that is not 
 on a decline. Not one is really chris- 
 tianized — not one that has religious 
 strength. Even- the Moslem faith in 
 Arabia and Turkey is without power to 
 preserve and protect itself. Persia is 
 liable to be overrun at any time. The 
 inroads upon China by Russia, France, 
 Italy and Germany have no significance 
 beyond that of ruthless seizure and 
 
 robbery. 
 
 The vast difference between the colo- 
 nizing work of England and that of 
 continental Europe must tiot be over- 
 looked. English colonies are remark- 
 ably independent. They are civilized 
 and christianized. Arts and industries 
 are encouiaged. Trade and manu- 
 factures follow. One can hardly re- 
 call a single colony of any continental 
 nation that receives any siich consider- 
 ation, while the English colonies have 
 always been more or less under hu- 
 manitarian influences. Missionary and 
 educational institutions, very different 
 from those tliat followed the track of 
 Spanish settlement have gone hand in 
 hand with British colonization. Here- 
 in may be seen the impress of the Pur- 
 itan. It may be said that trade and 
 commerce and ambition have inspired 
 British policy. Confessedly so to a great 
 extent. But never as in the invariable 
 case with Spain to the sacrifice of all 
 humanitarian principle. The Anglo- 
 Saxon is practical. It may be that the 
 humane policy is the best political pol- 
 icy. Pity if it were not so. Better it 
 certainly is than the Spanish policy of 
 priestcraft, robbery and extermination. 
 Better indeed than a more liberal colon, 
 ial policy in which none but mercenary 
 considerations enter. 
 
 The United States has not been a 
 colonizing nation. Anglo-Saxon Amer- 
 ica has been more than one hundred 
 years in training as a national athlete, 
 seeking no combats, believing in hu- 
 man freedom, shirking no responsibili- 
 ty. No conflict with Spain was sought. 
 
 Abraham Lincoln spared no more ef- 
 fort to prevent war with the South, 
 than President McKinley did with 
 Spain. No other nation similarly situ- 
 ated would have done so much. No 
 war with the Fillipinos was contem- 
 plated. It followed as an unavoidable 
 incident. Altogether this whole Span- 
 ish affair affords another probable illus- 
 tration of unconscious cerebration in 
 history. We say probable illustration 
 because final results are by no means 
 in view. There is every indication that 
 we are on the verge of tremendous 
 events, the like of which the world has 
 never known. We may have no belief 
 in manifest destiny. We may be peace 
 loving as we are. But no people has 
 ever yet been able to resist the powers 
 that be. The events of the past j'ear 
 could not haye been avoided. We can- 
 not escape the conditions of the pres- 
 ent without opening the way for un- 
 told calamities. They must be met. 
 
 As there is no course for this nation 
 to follow than that into which it has 
 unconsciously drifted the duty of every 
 American patriot seems clear. In view 
 of all historic precedents and in Lhe 
 light of modei-n civilization, our indi- 
 vidual and national duty would seem to 
 be plain. There is no occasion for 
 captious argument and faultfinding. 
 What is just the wisest policy may not 
 always be clear. But the hands of the 
 government in what appears to be the 
 wisest will be upheld by every clear- 
 minded patriot. Responsibilities may 
 be great. They have been great be- 
 fore, but in no emergency has the na- 
 tion failed in its ability to meet tliem. 
 It will not fail now. 
 
LIBRftRY O^oWfS? 
 
 iii 
 
 "*^ 527 938 5