UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY Class nz.+ Book Volume Ja 09-20M rfc of ILLINOIS. Disarmament of Nations OR, Mankind One f^dy BY GEORGE DANA BOARDMAN, D.D., LL.D. 1 ' f ; s\ Is AV FOURTH EDITION Philadelphia: 921 Arch St. HOWARD M. JENKINS ' PREFATORY NOTE. ^ppIE substance of this pamphlet, particularly its pro¬ posal of Disarmament, was originally given in a public address delivered in Washington City on March 4, 1890, in the presence of a large audience, including the then Secretary of State, several members of the Cabinet, many members of Congress, many foreign ambassadors, etc., Mr. Justice Harlan, of the Supreme Court of the United States, presiding. It was substan¬ tially repeated before the Peace Congress at the World’s Fair in Chicago, August 18, 1893. The original pamphlet has long been out of print. In view of recent public events, such as the American-Spanish war, the Czar’s invitation to an international conference to consider the problem of Disarmament, etc., the writer deems it advisable to comply with the request of many friends to issue a fourth edition, enlarged and revised. Of course the writer might have discussed this Problem of Disarmament from other points of view, such as the commercial, the economical, the legal, etc. But he confines himself, at least in this brochure, to what he deems the fundamental point in this discus¬ sion, namely, the point of Christian Ethics. May the Prince of Peace bless this brochure to the unification of Mankind ! G. D. B. Philadelphia, April 15, 1899. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2017 with funding from University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates https://archive.org/details/disarmamentofnatOOboar DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS OR MANKIND ONE BODY T HE various theories of Society may, substantially speaking, be reduced to two—the constructional or legislative, and the natural or biological. LEGISLATIVE THEORY OF SOCIETY. And first, the constructional or legislative theory of Society. According to this theory, Society is not a divine organism—it is only a human organization. That is to say—Society is but a human contrivance ; a conventional arrangement; a voluntary association which men may join or change or leave just as they please. No wonder then that those who hold this view should think that they can regulate Society by methods that are mainly external or constructional ; such as organizing leagues, passing resolutions, cast¬ ing ballots, enacting statutes, and the like—methods all well enough in their place ; but after all, mechani¬ cal, undertaking to work out the problems of Society from without rather than from within ; and therefore working superficially rather than radically. In other words, this method of* managing Society is as thor¬ oughly artificial as when a florist lays out a garden, or a machinist constructs an engine. No; legislation is neither the base nor the law nor the cure of Society. We must look more deeply, and therefore more wisely. BIOLOGICAL THEORY OF SOCIETY. The other theory of Society is the natural or biological. According to this theory, Society is 6 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS more than a human organization—it is a divine or¬ ganism, into which, ideally speaking, every human being is born, from which no human being can escape, the nature of which no human being can change, to the essential terms of which every human being is morally bound to conform. In other words, Society is not an outward law ; Society is an inward life. In summary: the difference between these two theories of Society is the difference between a lifeless manikin and a living body. ANCIENT BIOLOGICAL ANALOGIES. Now this biological theory that Society is a natural, living, divine organism is by no means novel. For example: When in the days of legendary Rome the plebeians in their first great rupture with the patricians angrily withdrew to Mons Sacer, the ven¬ erable and patriotic Menenius Agrippa, himself a worthy patrician, effected at least a temporary recon¬ ciliation by his humorous apologue of the Belly and the Members, as follows : “THE BELLY AND THE MEMBERS.” In olden times, when every member of the body could think for itself, and each had a separate will of its own, they all with one consent resolved to revolt against the belly. They knew no reason, they said, why they should toil from morning to night in its service, while the belly lay at its ease in the midst of all, and indolently grew fat upon their labors. Accordingly they agreed to support it no longer ; the feet vowed they would carry it no more ; the hands, that they would do jio more work ; the teeth, that they would not chew another morsel of meat even were it placed between them. Thus resolved, the members for a time showed their spirit and kept their resolution. But they soon found that instead of mortifying the belly, they only reduced themselves to the last degree of emaciation.— Livy , II., 32. [Shakespeare has admirably managed this fable in his tragedy of ‘ ‘Coriolanus. ”] DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 7 More than five hundred years afterward, another Roman citizen, trying to reconcile factions which were rending a certain community in Corinth, and perhaps remembering the apologue of old Menenius, wrote them as follows : ANALOGON OF THE HUMAN BODY. As the body is one, and has many members, and all the members of the body, being many, are one body ; so also is the Christ. For in one spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free ; and were all made to drink of one Spirit. For the body also is not one member, but many. If the foot say, Because I am not a hand, I am not of the body ; it is not therefore not of the body. And if the ear say, Because I am not an eye, I am not of the body ; it is not therefore not of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing ? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling ? But as it is, God has set the members each one of them in the body, even as he wished. And if they were all one member, where were the body ? But now there are many members, but one body. And the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee : nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay, much more the members of the body which seem to be more feeble are necessary : and those parts of the body which we think to be less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor ; and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness ; but our comely parts have no need. But God tempered (adjusted, organized,) the body together, giving more abundant honor to that part which lacked, that there might be no division in the body, but that the members might have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffers, all the members suffer with it ; or one member is honored, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are Christ’s body, and severally members of it (members each in his part).—/. Cor ., XII ., 12-27. THE BODY AN ANALOGON OF MANKIND. But while the Roman Menenius applied his analogon of the body specifically to the Roman State, and the Christian Paul specifically to the Christian 8 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS Church, I think we are justified in enlarging the same analogon and applying it to that auguster organism which we call Mankind. Indeed, I have such su¬ preme confidence in the all-conquering power of the Nazarene that I feel absolutely sure that the day is coming when the terms “ Man ” and “ Church” will become actually synonymous ; so that we may in strictest truth speak of the “ Church of Mankind.” In truth, is not this the goal of Christianity itself? Thus surveyed, Christianized Mankind is the culmi¬ nating sample, the realized ideal, of St. Paul’s “ Body.” For it is only when we conceive mankind as one colossal ideal body, having all its organs in coordination and all its functions in reciprocal action that we can truly grasp this mighty word —mankind. It is a sublime conception, which shall yet by God’s grace dominate humanity. DISTINGUISH ANALOGUE AND HOMOLOGUE. But before proceeding to details it is well to make an explanation. This classic analogon of the human body is not of course to be taken literally, as though mankind were really a bodily organism having bodily organs. Yet this is the impression which our analo¬ gon leaves on many minds. For instance, I have a bright clerical friend for whose judgment in most things I have a profound respect; but he seems to lack what I may call the analogical imagination. For in a conversation which I once had with him on the great subject of Sociology, during which I par¬ ticularly pressed on him this analogy of the bodily organism, he objected with the utmost sincerity, say¬ ing that he could not imagine how society could be such an organism ; for it would require, he thought, a gigantic body, weighing thousands of tons, with DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 9 arms and legs leagues long, a nose a mile or more in length, and so on. What my friend lacks is the analogical or functional imagination ; that is, the im¬ agination which enables us to see in the psychical world the functional workings of psychical organs which have no correspondent physical organs in the physical world. For example—it is not absolutely necessary that we should have bodily eyes in order to see, or bodily ears in order to hear ; the blind man sees with his fingers when he traces his em¬ bossed type; the deaf man hears with his eyes when he watches his friend talking in sign-manual. Or to illustrate by terms drawn from biology : When two organs resemble each other, not in function, but in structure, as the arm of a man and the pectoral fin of a fish—these organs are said to be homologues. On the other hand, when two organs resemble each other, not in structure but in function, as the wing of an eagle and the so-called “wing” of a bat—these organs are said to be analogues. Now the resem¬ blance between the human body and the social body is not a homologue or similarity in anatomical struc¬ ture : it is an analogue or similarity in biological function. 1 So it is with St. Paul’s classic analogon of the human body; it is not, I repeat, an anatomical homologue, to be taken structurally; but it is an ideal analogue, to be taken functionally. Accord¬ ingly, his language is not to be taken literally or 1 Here is one of the troubles with Schaffle’s masterly work entitled, “ Structure and Life of the Social Body.” Holding to the biologic concept of Society, he presses his biological analogies too literally and minutely; as for instance, when he insists that biology and sociology are not only similar but even identical; or when he likens the cells to individuals, the capillaries to families, the tissues to national relationships, the muscles to business life, the epidermis to protective in¬ stitutions, the nervous organs to intellectual life, etc. But though the temptation is strong to press these biologic analogies too fancifully (and fanciful is often but a synonym for prosaic), yet it is perfectly proper, within due limits, to use such biologic terms as “social anatomy; social physiology; social pathology; social therapeutics,” etc. IO DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS sound-wise, but ideally or hint-wise. In other words, his analogon is ideally true. And ideas are often the truest of truths. Let not our familiarity with this analogy deaden our sense of its varied and profound significance. And now we are prepared for some of the rich lessons which this great analogon of the bodily organism suggests. AN OUTLINE STATEMENT. Let me first make a general statement. What our Apostle’s analogon suggests is in main outline this: The relation between men and men as being fellow- members of the one great body of mankind is a functional relation as real, vital , reciprocal, organic, as the relation between the fellow-members of the human body. That is to say, As the human body is a single organism, con¬ sisting of many different organs and functions, balanced in common counterpoise, and working in mutual inter¬ action ; so mankind is a single moral organism, con¬ sisting in like manner of many diversities, balanced in similar counterpoise, and working in similar inter¬ action. It is Christianity’s positive, majestic contribu¬ tion to Sociology, or the Philosophy of Society. THE BODY THE TRUEST ANALOGON OF MANKIND. Thus the human body is a profound and telling symbol, or rather suggestive functional analogue of that majestic ideal organism which we call the Social Body or Corporate Mankind. How significantly we hint all this when we use such familiar expressions as “ body politic,” “corps legislatiff “ ecclesiastical body,” “taking the sense of the body,” “esprit de corpsf etc. We shall never rise to a higher or truer conception of human society or mankind than under this biologic analogue of the bodily organism. We outlive human theories ; we shall never outlive divine DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS I biology. And now let us attend to some applications of this biological analogon to international life. “ BODY ” IMPLIES DIVERSE “ MEMBERS.” On the one hand, the term “ body” itself implies “ members.” And “ members ” imply diversity, and diversity implies specific functions. Accordingly, in the one great body of mankind, the individuality of the component nations is preserved. For each nation—oh, that all the nations understood it!—is charged with its own divine mission. Surveyed in this light, each nation, at least while we are surveying it, is as it were a single person. Recall how Jehovah,— the Covenant-God of the Hebrew people,—in pro¬ claiming his Ten Commandments, addressed the millions of Israel as a single personality or one cor¬ porate unity, saying : I am Jehovah, thy God, who brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage ( Exodus , xx., 2). and continuing to use the singular pronouns “ thou,” “thee,” “thy,” throughout the whole decalogue. The Jews surveyed as individuals were many Israelites ; the Jews surveyed as a nation of individuals were one Israel. In like manner, every other nation worthy of the name of nation is also a person, having at least some of the attributes of personality ; that is, each nation has its own peculiarities or natural idiosyncracies. Recall, for example, Hebrew devout¬ ness ; Babylonian constructiveness ; Egyptian serious¬ ness ; Greek culture ; Roman jurisprudence; Indian (Asiatic) mysticism ; Gothic impetuosity; Scandi¬ navian valor; Chinese conservatism ; Japanese flexi¬ bility ; African docility ; Indian (American) nomadism ; Spanish pride ; Italian aestheticism ; Russian persist¬ ence ; Swiss federalism ; French savoir faire; German DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS I 2 philosophism ; English indomitableness; Scotch shrewdness ; Irish humor; Welsh eloquence ; Cana¬ dian thrift; American versatility ; etc. Each nation has its own role definitely assigned it in the great drama of mankind. What an insight into the philoso¬ phy of history is given us by the great missionary Paul when addressing the proud autochthones of the Areopagus, he announced : God made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having fixed appointed periods and the bounds of their habitation.— Acts , xvii. , 26. DIVERSE “ MEMBERS ” IMPLY A COMMON “ BODY.” On the other hand, the term diverse “ members ” itself implies one common “body.” If all the mem¬ bers were one member, where were the body ? But now there are many members, each having its own office ; yet there is but one body, and all are severally members one of another. Accordingly, while it is true that each nation has its own individual mission, it is also true that all the nations constitute one common Nation, namely, the one august body of Mankind, the one sublime corporation of Humankind ; whereof each nation is, so to speak, a component member, and each individual a specific organ, having its own definite function to discharge in the one organism of Mankind. In other words, each nation in simple virtue of its own existence as a nation is also strictly international, being a corporate member of the one divinely incorporated Society of Mankind ; so that its relation to its fellow-nations is a relation, not of hostile competition, but of integrant cooperation. In still other words, the relation of nationalism to internationalism is the relation of the members and functions to the body. What could the thumb do if it were not in the body? “ Unus vir nullus vir .” DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 13 Even Socrates caught a glimpse of this noble truth when he said he was “ not an Athenian or a Greek, but a citizen of the world,” a sentiment which Terence echoed when he declared, “ I am a man ; and nothing that concerns a man do I deem alien to me ” ; and which William Lloyd Garrison re-echoed when he announced as the motto of his “ Liberator,” “ Our country is the world; our countrymen are all man¬ kind.” Precisely here is one of the rich providential meanings of that sublime event in the history of Mankind which our Columbian Exposition com¬ memorated—the Discovery of America. For it is the rare felicity of America, in virtue of her geographical isolation, being laved on both coasts by mighty oceans, and also in virtue of her political isolation, being free from what Jefferson called “ entangling alliances with foreign nations,” that she occupies the vantage ground of being to large extent the neutral territory of the nations, and therefore of being the natural mediator for the peoples ; being, so to speak, the median line or spinal column of the body of Man¬ kind. It is the majestic possibility of America that, looking toward the Northern Aurora, she can, as it were, stretch her right hand across the Atlantic, and her left hand across the Pacific, and speak peace to the trans-oceanic races; or, as George Canning in his “ King’s Message ” says : “ I called the New World into existence to redress the balance of the Old.” But America can never realize this magnificent pre¬ rogative until she distinctly conceives herself as being not only national, but also international ; not only as one great nation among other great nations, but also as a corporate, organic member of a still vaster Nation—even the body politic of Humanity, the one corporation of Mankind. Now the discovery of America, by opening the two great oceans of Atlantic 14 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS and Pacific for common transit and intercourse and property, made the two hemispheres complemental, rounding the angles of the nations into the one globe of Mankind ; thus helping to realize the Pauline con¬ ception of the old twain becoming the one new man in Christ. In fine, we shall never get beyond or above St. Paul’s basal biological concept of the ideal Society, to wit, this, “We are members one of another.” WAR IS NATIONAL SELF-MAIMING. And now let me apply this sublime idea of inter¬ national life or corporate mankind to that frequent and sad violation of it, namely, war. For from what I have said concerning the bodily organism as the divine ideal of the one organic, corporate mankind it follows that all war is not only international wound¬ ing, but also national self-maiming. Indeed, it is just because we persist in conceiving society as a mechanical organization, like Hobbe’s “ Leviathan,” rather than as a natural organism, like the human body, that we also persist in resorting to mechanical methods like war rather than to natural methods like peace for settling human quarrels. In fact, war is the culminating sample of what St. Paul calls “ a schism in the body ” ; that is, a rending asunder of human society, a dismemberment of mankind. PAST WARS SOMETIMES RELATIVELY RIGHT. I would speak advisedly and justly. Devoutly believing as I do the Bible, I must admit that in the inscrutable counsels of the Eternal even war has had its divine office; as, for example, when Jehovah used it as his minister of doom against the Canaanites. For aught I know, even heathen Attila himself was rightly named the “Scourge of God.” No doubt there is a DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS I 5 sense in which it is true that the instinct of self-defense is divinely implanted. But self-defense, at least physical, is not one of the ordinary conditions of society ; it is an exceptional emergency ; and it is manifestly absurd to deduce a principle from an ex¬ ception. I do not like to make absolute promises : for I am finite and fallible, and may see just occasion for changing my mind. But as I feel to-day, following the banner of the Prince of Peace, I do not think that I can ever defend another war. No man can go be¬ yond me in my profound admiration and reverence for the patriotism, the courage, the self-sacrifice, of the thousands—I might almost say millions—who so sublimely braved every hardship and peril in defense of my glorious country. All honor to the illustrious dead ! All honor to their illustrious survivors ! God grant that their heroic sacrifices may indeed prove the indissoluble bond of reunited “ Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable ! ” god’s government progressive. Nevertheless, we are living under the government of Almighty God. One of the fundamental princi¬ ples of that divine government is progress. Accord¬ ingly, what may have been relatively right in the past may become absolutely wrong in the future. For we must distinguish between absolute truth, or truth as it exists unconditionally in the infinite mind; and relative truth, or truth as it appears to our finite minds, now under this set of conditions, now under that set. In other words, God in revealing himself to men has been pleased to use the law of adaptation ; or, as the philosophers say, “the lav/ of economy of action.” For example, Christ in his doctrine of divorce admitted that Moses allowed his countrymen a bill of divorcement for other causes than the one 1 6 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS cause which Christ himself specifies ; but he imme¬ diately adds that Moses allowed divorcement because of his countrymen’s “ hardness of heart”; that is, because of that moral obtuseness into which they sank as one of the sad results of their long servitude in polygamous Egypt; but it was not so in the beginning; in Eden’s primal estate no provision was made for divorce. Moses for your hardness of heart, permitted you to put away your wives ; but from the beginning it has not been so. — Matthew , xix ., 8 . And as it was with divorce, so it was with poly¬ gamy, slavery, retaliation, war. In the generations past, God suffered all the nations to walk in their own ways ; those being times of ignorance which he over¬ looked ; in his forbearance passing over the sins formerly committed. FUTURE WARS ABSOLUTELY WRONG. But now the times of knowledge have come. God, having of old spoken to the fathers in the prophets, in these last days speaks to us in his Son. That Son commands us, not from the wrathful heights of Sinai, but from the peaceful heights of Calvary. Moses said: Thou shalt give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.— Exodus , xxi. t 23-25. But Jesus said : Blessed are the peacemakers : for they shall be called sons of God. Resist not the evil man : but whoever smites thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. Love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you ; that ye may be sons of your Father who is in heaven : for he causes his sun to rise on evil men and good, and sends rain on righteous and unrighteous. Return thy sword into its place : DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 17 for all they who take the sword will perish by the sword. My kingdom is not of this world : if my kingdom were of this world, my servants would fight, that I might not be delivered to the Jews ; but now is my kingdom not from thence. If it be possible, as far as depends on you, be at peace with all men. Avenge not yourselves, beloved, but give place to the wrath (of God) : for it is written (Deut. xxxii., 35), To me belongs vengeance ; I will recompense, says the Lord. But, if thine enemy hungers, feed him ; if he thirsts, give him drink. For, in doing this, thou wilt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.—Matt, v., 9, 39, 43, 44, 45 ; xxvi., 52 ; John xviii., 36 ; Rom. xii., 18-21 ; II. Cor. x., 3, 4 ; etc. Thus the whole New Testament, not only in its trend but also in its details, is distinctly and emphat¬ ically against all war. Study it from Matthew to Revelation; I do not think you can cite from it a solitary statement that even hints that Jesus Christ or his apostles ever approved of physical war. No, the Son of Man came not to destroy men’s lives but to save them. The only way in which you can defend war from the Bible is by quoting from an expurgated edition ; striking out the whole New Testnment or ministration of life, leaving only the Old Testament or ministration of death. Thank God, the New Covenant is gaining on the old ; Moses is giving way to Jesus. Even within the comparatively short time since our own desolating civil strife ceased, the con¬ ceptions of men concerning mankind have wonder¬ fully cleared and broadened; the great problem of Sociology itself has come conspicuously to the very front of human thinking. In fact, this great problem is no longer a local problem concerning societies or men; it is henceforth a universal problem concerning Society or Man. Thinkers begin to see that war of whatever kind, foreign as well as civic, is suicidal as well as murderous. It is as though the members should again revolt against the belly, or the foot should kick I 8 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS against the nose, or the right hand amputate the left. In fact, it is war which is the real stupidity ; it is peace which is the real sagacity. The time is fast passing by when thoughtful men will any longer cherish the sentimental tradition and barbarous fancy that a ques¬ tion of national honor or international right can really be settled by an appeal to gunnery, however elaborate. If we were materialists, and really believed that the national honor is a matter of molecular bulk—say a hundred cubic feet, or of molecular weight—say a hundred tons, then we might with some consistency undertake to defend the national honor by a molecular appeal to bayonets and bombs. In fact, molecular force is the brute’s standard of ethics. As good Isaac Watts, in lines probably more remarkable for accuracy of observation than for accuracy of theology, naively sings : Let dogs delight to bark and bite, For God hath made them so ; Let bears and lions growl and fight, For ’tis their nature, too. — Watts' “Divine Songs," 16. But if we believe that honor and right and truth are in their nature spiritual, not molecular, let us be consistent and maintain them by spiritual weapons, not by molecular. PROTEST AGAINST BOYS’ BRIGADES. Let me seize the opportunity as I pass on to enter a protest against a custom which I conceive to be both hurtful and vicious—namely, the “ Boys’ Brigades.” So far as the drill of the Boys’ Brigade tends to develop muscle, vigor, erectness, poise—in a word, manliness, no one can approve it more heartily than myself. What I protest against is not the mili¬ tary discipline, but the military accoutrements, par- DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 19 ticularly the gun, even though that gun be wooden. I do not believe in fostering in our boys a martial or a fighting spirit. What blinds us to the cruel wicked¬ ness of war is the brilliant appeal it addresses to the eye and the ear, “the plumed troop, the neighing steed, the shrill trump, the spirit-stirring drum, the ear-piercing fife, the royal banner, pride, pomp, and circumstance of glorious war.” If our boys must shoulder an arm in addition to their natural arms, let it not be a gun, symbol of cruel destruction, but let it be some symbol of useful construction, a broom, a hoe, an oar, a rake, a sledge, a spade, anything that will help society instead of harming it; thus literally beating swords into plowshares, spears into pruning- hooks, the nations learning war no more. DIVINE SUMMONS TO AMERICAN DISARMAMENT. Here then I take my stand as a Christian Soci¬ ologist. Solemnly believing that the policy of my Divine Master is a policy of peace, I as solemnly believe that my Divine Master is summoning earth’s nations to a policy of disarmament. 1 How they shall effect this disarmament, whether suddenly or grad¬ ually, whether separately or simultaneously, I do not presume to assert. But I do presume to assert unhesi¬ tatingly and unqualifiedly, that the time has come when the nations should commit themselves openly to the policy of disarmament. I remember, indeed, that George Washington declared before Congress, Jan. 8, 1790, that “to be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.” Allow me however to submit, as I do humbly, whether in this late age of Christendom the converse of Wash¬ ington’s maxim is not even truer: To prepare for 1 The writer took this stand in a public meeting in Washington. March 4, 1890, (see Prefatory Note to this pamphlet), eight years before the Czar proposed his international conference for considering the policy of reducing armaments. 20 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS peace by disarmament is the most effectual means of preventing war. Nor is this suggestion novel; so long ago as 1798, Dr. Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, proposed the establishment of a Department of Peace at Washing¬ ton, which should be coordinate with the Departments of the Army and Navy. I am well aware of the com¬ plexity and gravity of the problem. I still believe that we need a body of armed men who shall serve, if you please, as our national police on land and sea. But let us be peacefully content with calling it our police department instead of vaunting it as our military armament, ready to accept and if need be offer martial challenge. Of course you will call me an idealist. But ideals have ever been the uplifting forces for mankind. The visionary of to-day is the conqueror of to-morrow. America’s great opportunity. Meanwhile, if I had the ear of my beloved country, I would venture to offer so much as this : Let our American nation propose to our brother nations to disarm ; substituting arbitration, or some other pacific policy, for armament. I feel sure that all of us, whether Republicans or Democrats, whether natives or immigrants, will agree that if there is on earth a nation that can afford to disarm and be known as the great peace people, it is the American nation, for our fortunes do not vibrate in the oscillating balance of European powers. We are strong enough, and ought to be brave enough, to say to our brother nations of mankind : We believe that war is a foolish, antiquated, wicked policy. Let us disarm, referring our disputes, not to the bloody decisions of capricious war, but to the peaceful arbitrament of Christian common sense. Let us enter into a covenant of DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 21 everlasting amity ; organizing a peace-league that shall be not only Pan-American, but also Pan-Human. We Americans take the initiative in inviting all the nations of the earth to meet with us in that greatest of Congresses— “the parlia¬ ment OF MAN, THE FEDERATION OF THE WORLD.” DISARMAMENT PRACTICABLE. Nor is this by any means so impracticable as you imagine. For example: The Geneva Arbitration alone has done wonders in shedding light on the feasi¬ bility and duty of disarmament: for it has shown mankind how war may be averted, and at the same time the national honor be kept unstained. Within our own century there have been nearly a hundred cases of successful international arbitration, to nearly one-half of which, I am proud to state, the United States has been a party. Do you say that our Master’s precept of non-resistance is visionary ? The pacific policy of William Penn, founder of the great Commonwealth which bears his own friendly name, fighting barbarous aborgines with no sword but the olive branch—this is my sufficient answer. Talk about Utopia ? Bravely obey Jesus Christ, and Utopia, ideal land of Nowhere, becomes Pantopia, actual land of Everywhere. TRIBUTE TO WILLIAM PENN. And here I halt for a moment to offer my tribute to the memory of one of the exalted characters in human history. Not that William Penn was faultless—far from it; he was but a human being, and therefore had his own share of human defects and infirmities. Never¬ theless, God gave him a great distinctive mission to accomplish ; and gloriously did Penn accomplish it. That great distinctive mission in rough outline was this : To found under guidance of the Inner Light in this western hemisphere a Christian Commonwealth 22 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS on the basis and in the spirit and for the purpose of Human Brotherhood. This, of course, involved such fundamental principles as the following: Unity of Mankind ; equal rights ; abolition of primogeniture ; separation of Church and State; freedom of con¬ science; justice to the aborigines; universal peace. These majestic principles were almost novel in Penn’s own day, proving him to have a prophet’s inspiration. Nor can I do better here than to quote the words of America’s noble historian, George Bancroft: This is the praise of William Penn, that in an age which had seen a popular revolution shipwreck popular liberty among selfish factions, which had seen Hugh Peters and Henry Vane perish by the hangman’s cord and the axe ; in an age when Sidney nourished the pride of patriotism rather than the sentiment of philanthropy, when Russell stood for the liberties of his order, and not for new enfranchisement; when Harrington and Shaftesbury and Locke thought that govern¬ ment should rest on property, Penn did not despair of humanity, and, though all history and experience denied the sovereignty of the people, dared to cherish the noble idea of man’s capacity for self-government. Conscious that there was no room for its exercise in England, the pure enthusiast, like Calvin and Descartes, a voluntary exile, was come to the banks of the Delaware to institute “The Holy Experi¬ ment.” —Bancroft's "History of the United States," Vo/. //., PP- 379 > 3 $o. ELM OF SHACKAMAXON. And majestic has been the success of “ The Holy Experiment.” There have been other historic land¬ ings : the landing of Julius Caesar on the coast of Britain ; of Hengist and Horsa on the isle of Thanet; of William the Conqueror on the field of Hastings ; of Cortez in the harbor of Vera Cruz ; of Pizarro in the bay of St. Matthew ; these landed with shout and spear and battle-axe, to found empires of force and hate and greed. But William Penn landed at the DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 23 mouth of Dock Creek with no force but that of the In’ner Light, to found a republic in the name of God and for the weal of man. Perhaps the most char¬ acteristic scene in his career, forming one of the brightest pages* in American and even human history, was when he stood unarmed under the great elm of Shackamaxon, with the sun and the river and the forest and the Inner Light for witnesses, and said to the dusky warriors of the primeval wilds : “We are met on the broad pathway of good faith and good will; no advantage shall be taken on either side, but all shall be openness and love ; I will not call you children, for parents sometimes chide their children too severely ; nor brothers only, for brothers differ ; the friendship between me and you I will not compare to a chain, for that the rains might rust, or the falling tree might break ; we are the same as if one man’s body were to be divided into two parts ; we are all one flesh and blood.” And the dusky warriors of the primeval wilds, overcome by this evangel of peace, gave to him in token of their hearty friendship the belt of wampum, saying: “ We will live in love with William Penn and his children as long as the moon and stars shall endure.” This is the memorable scene to which the scoffing Voltaire refers when he says: “This was the only treaty between these people and the Christians which was not ratified by an oath, and which was never broken." For more than seventy years, so long as the Society of Friends administered the government of Pennsylvania, the covenant of peace beneath the elm of Shackamaxon was never broken ; the blood of not a single Quaker was ever shed by an Indian. “Aye, peace hath her victories no less renowned than war.” 24 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS There is a story told In Eastern tents, when autumn nights grow cold, And round the fire the Mongol shepherds sit With grave responses listening unto it ; Once, on the errands of his mercy bent, Buddha, the holy and benevolent, Met a fell monster, huge and fierce of look, Whose awful voice the hills and forests shook. “ O son of peace ! ” the giant cried, “ thy fate Is sealed at last, and love shall yield to hate.” The unarmed Buddha looking, with no trace Of fear or anger, in the monster’s face, In pity said : “ Poor friend, even thee I love.” Lo ! as he spake the sky-tall terror sank To hand-breadth size ; the huge abhorrence shrank Into the form and fashion of a dove ; And where the thunder of its rage was heard, Circling above him sweetly sang the bird : “ Hate hath no harm for love,” so ran the song ; “ And peace unweaponed conquers every wrong ! ” — J. G. Whittier s ‘ ‘ Disarmament. SUMMARY. Here I rest my argument. I might, of course, have descanted on the wastefulness of war—its fright¬ ful waste of money, of time, of strength, of health, of capacity, of love, of joy, of morals—in one great word—of life. Never producing, forever consuming, war is the very genius of that monstrous, pitiless, ghastly fugitive from the infernal abyss, whose name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon; in the Greek, Apollyon ; in the English, Destroyer. Eng¬ land’s Iron Duke, “foremost captain of his time,” never said a truer or sadder thing than in his dispatch from the red field of Waterloo : “ Nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won.” Our own brilliant Sherman exclaimed: “ War is hell! ” But while such considerations as these might perhaps have been more thrilling, I have chosen to take higher ground, appealing to a loftier principle. DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 25 That loftier principle is this : The divine conception of all mankind as constituting one vast, many- membered moral body, one colossal corporate Organism. In this majestic conception lies the secret of the reconciliation of the great schism or dismemberment in the one body of Mankind. The cure of war lies not in the suspicion and enmity and rivalry that are entrenched in armaments; the cure of war lies in the confidence and brother¬ hood and cooperation that are announced in disarmament. For in what proportion Mankind feels itself to be what its Maker and Lord meant it should be, namely, one organic person rather than a congeries of organized structures—in that proportion race strifes will cease, nation saying to nation, “We are members one of another.” THE CHURCH OF THE LAMB. Trust not then in man, nor put your confidence in princes. From the battlefields of warriors, with their garments rolled in blood, from cabinet and forum, soar into that purer, diviner realm where the ambas¬ sadors of the Prince of Peace hold high court. Ah, here is the secret of the world’s true reconciliation and immortal amity. What no earthly force—military, legislative, judicial, executive, international, academic, aesthetic—ever has been able to accomplish, or ever can accomplish, the Church of the Lamb of God, without staff or force or sword, can and will, with the blessing of her pacific Chief, serenely achieve. March¬ ing under his peaceful labarum of the cross and dove and lamb and olive, repeating his precepts, breathing his spirit, reproducing his graces, feeling and manifest¬ ing in daily life his manifold loves, the Church of the Beatitudes will yet girdle earth, with the shining zone of love ; and then— 2 6 DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS Shall all men’s good Be each man’s rule, and universal peace Lie like a shaft of light across the land, And like a lane of beams athwart the sea, Thro’ all the circle of the golden year. — Tennyson ’ s * ‘ Golden Year. ’ ’ / THE TRANSFIGURED MENAGERIE. Then shall be realized the prophet-evangelist’s vision of the transfigured menagerie : The wolf shall dwell with the lamb, And the leopard shall lie down with the kid ; And the calf and the young lion and the fading together ; And a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear shall feed ; Their young ones shall lie down together : And the lion shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, And the weaned child shall put his hand on the adder’s den. — Isaiah , xi., 6-8. For it must be confessed that mankind is at present a heterogeneous, jarring humanity. Behold the wars of races, the feuds of clans, the conflicts of classes, the campaigns of parties, the rivalries of trades, the collisions of schools, the broils of cliques, the crusades of sects, even the ruptures of friendships. Whenever the angels look down from their peaceful home on this discordant world of ours, I think it must seem to them an unleashed, ever quarreling menagerie. But this shall not be so always. The Babe of Bethlehem is the true usherer in of that Golden Age concerning which philosophers have idealized, for which poets have sighed. He it is who makes wars to cease to the end of the earth, who breaks the bow, who cuts the spear in sunder, who burns the chariots in the fire. In his days, when he shall come in the sway of his glorious Palingenesis, the wolf of war will indeed dwell with the lamb of peace; the leopard of hate DISARMAMENT OF NATIONS 27 will lie down with the kid of love ; the bear of raven¬ ing will feed with the cow of serenity ; the lion of wrath will eat straw like the ox of patience; the sucking child of the Sunday-school will play on the hole of the asp of danger; and the weaned child of the Church will put his hand on the basilisk’s den of wickedness. Or, to translate the ancient poetry into modern prose, Mankind will become in very truth one vast cooperative Society, pervaded by one esprit de corps. In briefest phrase, men will be organized into Man. THE CHILD-KING. And observe who it is that will thus re-organize and imparadise society. It is not an angel, not a warrior, not a philosopher, not even a priest. It is the Babe of Bethlehem : “A little child shall lead them.” The Son of the Manger is immortally young. From the womb of the morning he has his perennial dew of youth. As such, he, the undying Child, is taming the wild, growling, gnashing menagerie of mankind, slowly but surely transfiguring it into the City of God. Be it for us all to share in the beatitude of the Infant —Ancient of Days. Aye, “ Blessed are the peace¬ makers : for they shall be called sons of God.” Down the dark future, through long generations, The echoing sounds grew fainter and then cease ; And like a bell, with solemn, sweet vibrations, I hear once more the voice of Christ say, “ Peace ! ” Peace ! and no longer from its brazen portals The blast of War’s great organ shakes the skies ! But beautiful as songs of the immortals, The holy melodies of love arise. — Longfellow's “Arsenal at Springfield." / Books of History and Genealogy By Howard M. Jenkins, (Author of Volume I. “ Memorial History of Philadelphia.' 1 ) The Family of William Penn, Founder of Pennsylvania : His Ancestors and De¬ scendants. 8vo. Pp. 270. With 19 full- page illustrations, including rare portraits. $3.50 net. Postage 20 cents additional. Historical Collections Relating to Gwyn¬ edd, (a township of Montgomery County, Pennsylvania, settled, 1698, by Welsh immigrants). Second Edition. 8vo. Pp. 494. Cloth. Beveled edges. With 8 illustrations. $4.00 net. Postage 23 cents additional. In Press. Genealogical Sketch of the Descendants of Samuel Spencer, of Upper Dublin, Pennsylvania. 8vo. About 300 pages. Illustrated. $3.00 net. Postage addi¬ tional. HOWARD M. JENKINS, PUBLISHER, Y. F. A. Building, N. W. Cor. 15th and Cherry Sts. P. O. Box 924. PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA.