would be pleasing to God. The story of his persevering faithfulness, in the discharge of duties which took him for years, 'out of the pale of civilization,' and of the cheerful spirit with which he met repeated disappoint ments and trials, and of the triumph of his faith in all, cannot fail to encourage and strengthen every reader who sympathizes with him in the great object of life."

The above notice is selected from one of our best religious Quarterlies, the February number of the New Englander, simply as a specimen of the manner in which military and naval heroes are held up to public view, not only as men of courage and conduct, but also as eminent Christians.

Now, we do not question the assertion that Capt. Bate may have been a Christian, nor do we deny that there may have been eminently pious distillers, nor that there has been a respectable and truly pious class of rumselling deacons and church-members. Nay, we are not prepared to deny that there have also been pious, godly officers of slave-trading ships, as for example, that eminently devout man, John Newton, who was for years the captain of one. Indeed, as we become better acquainted with men, we are never prepared to deny, that seeming incompatibilities may be combined in the character of a real Christian man.

But why are such incompatibilities found? Very plainly because the Christian is misled by education, custom, and a corrupt public sentiment. What is needed to render a real Christian consistent, is rightly to instruct him on those points in which he errs. So thoroughly has the nature of the liquor-traffic been discussed, that the charity which "hopeth all things," refuses to believe that the ordinary distiller or liquor dealer is a sincere disciple of the Saviour. Though pious John Newton was the captain of a slaver, yet the charity that "believeth all things," cannot conceive of a pious, praying captain of a slave ship at this time. What would the public think of the grave biographer of an eminently pious distiller, or of a very godly, praying negro-trader? Could they be persuaded that it could be otherwise than a burlesque on the Christian profession? Upon these points public sentiment is enlightened, and therefore correct; but how with a pious, praying officer in the British navy, or of our own, 66 one who daily sought in all that he did, to act in a way that would be pleasing to God?"

Let us examine into the nature of the contest which resulted in the instant death of not only Capt. Bate, but of many others, innocent men, women and children, as well as of soldiers and sailors. The world knows, that for many years the British East India Company, engaged on a grand scale in monopolizing the opium trade within its own dominions, first buying it of the producer, at to him starvation prices, and then, contrary to the laws of China, and with the full knowledge of its deadly influences, smuggling it into the Empire, as a regular business. The evil at length became such, that just, but stringent measures were adopted by the Chinese Emperor to abolish it. This led to a war, in which the British

government willingly engaged, to avenge the breaking up of the smuggling of opium. At the cannon's mouth, and after the wanton destruction of thousands of lives, the Chinese government was compelled to pay the expenses of its own chastisement, and the opium trade was renewed by force of arms. Since that time the aggressions of the British have been continued, and the doctrine that might gives right, has been practically maintained, and enforced by British agents, and British ships. Instead of taking the position of an enlightened Christian nation, desirous of commending itself and its religion to a barbarous people, its policy has been to awe them by its power to do them mischief, and to demand and secure its own pecuniary interests, regardless of the rights or happiness of those with whom it has intercourse.

To this system of fraud and force combined, Capt. Bate appears to have lent all his skill and energy. When the people of Canton repelled the attack of their enemies, he volunteered to expose himself to "imminent danger," in order to facilitate the scaling of the walls, and the storming of the city. He was willing to risk his own life, in order to destroy the property and lives of thousands of innocent victims. In this murderous attempt, he fell. He died the death he sought to inflict upon others. Such was the conduct of him, who gave "the exhibition of a noble Christian character, one who daily sought in all he did to act in a way that would be pleasing to God."

In all candor, allow me to inquire if there is not as much need that the ethics of the war system should undergo a thorough investigation and discussion, as that of the liquor traffic, or of slaveholding? When will the time arrive that every man shall be held responsible to God and society for his acts, as much in wholesale murder, as in his capacity as a private citizen?

S. Y. E.

field, and one are almost as

The closing questions of our correspondent cover a broad on which the great mass of Christians, probably nine in ten, wrong in their habits of reasoning, if they reason at all on the subject, as all Christendom was about the slave-trade at the time when Clarkson and Wilberforce began the work of its abolition. We trust our friend will continue the discussion, and bring the general question more widely before the Christian public in other Christian periodicals. ED.

INCREASE OF THE WAR SYSTEM.

As nearly as can be ascertained, the European war-system has increased fifteen-fold since the commencement of the Christian era. The armed men in Europe at that period were about 300,000; they are now, of all ranks, including the navies, about 4,500,000. The system has baffled, and continues to defeat, the combined influences of both religion and civilization; and this it does by enlisting both alike in its corrupt and guilty service. It has bribed each alternately, and induced them both, like another Judas, to sell the Prince of Peace for paltry "pieces of silver." Consequently, they are shorn of their strength, and, denuded of their true power, they lie asleep in the lap of this treacherous Delilah.

That nearly five millions of men, in the prime of life, should be taken from industrious pursuits, and placed upon the funds of the several European communities,-where, from the nature of their position, they become consumers of the produce of other men without being producers themselves, is a burning shame, and a perpetual injustice. By this mischievous arrangement, the industrial portions of all these communities are injured, in a very material degree, by being compelled to support a large number of men, who are able, but not permitted, to support themselves. The total loss to Europe, including Great Britain, cannot be less than £117,000,000 ($585,000,000); and according to this calculation, the industrious classes of Europe will have sacrificed at the shrine of war, during the present century alone, no less a sum than the enormous one of £7,020,000,000 ($21,100,000,000); and this, be it remembered, is the loss of labor alone!

Great Britain has taken far too large a share in this system of extravagant expenditure. If we go back no farther than 1835, we find that the entire outlay for war amounted to a little above £14,000,000; but the average for the year 1860, including the expense of collecting, will exceed £30,000,000, or above double that of 1835. But, large as this expenditure is, an increase is inevitable, unless an early change shall pass over the views of the government. And where is this system of folly and extravagance to stop? Are the nations of Europe, and the toiling millions of Great Britain, to be for ever borne down by this incubus of a war policy in times of peace? And if in these years of peace the burden is thus oppressive, and the load increases in weight and magnitude from year to year, what will be the case in a period of actual war? Is the industry of a whole continent to be drained of its last coin, to support a system that can return no solid advantage for the amazing outlay by which it is supported? In one word, is this false policy to be pursued for ever? Yes, even for ever, unless the wisdom and good sense of the world shall supply a substitute. That substitute will be found in a permanent Congress of the Nations.-Wiltiam Stokes.

ROBBERIES OF WAR.

Common robberies are induced by want; but war commits them by choice, and often robs only to ravage. A man who rushes to the highway to rob, maddened by the sight of a famished family, may plead powerful temptation. But armies rob, burn and destroy in the coolest malice. See a file of men, well fed and well clothed by a great and powerful nation, proceed on a foraging party. They enter a retired vale, where a peaceful old man by hard-handed toil, supports his humble family. The officer coolly points with his sword to the few stacks of hay and grain, laid up for winter. Remonstrances are vain - tears are vain. They bear off his only supply; take his cow, his pet lamb; add insult to oppression, and leave the ruined family to an almshouse or starvation. Aye, but the poor old man was an enemy, as the war phrase is, and the haughty soldiery claim merit for forbearance, because they did not conclude with burning down his house.

The seizure or destruction of public stores, is not less robbery. A nation has no more right to steal from a nation, than an individual has to steal from an individual. In principle, the act is the same; in magnitude, the sin is greater. All the private robberies in a thousand years are not a tithe of the robberies of one war. Next to killing, it is the very object of each party to burn and destroy by sea, and ravage and lay waste on land. It is a malign and inexcusable barbarity, and constitutes a stupendous mass of theft.

In one of the Punic wars, Carthage, with 100,000 houses, was burnt and destroyed so that not a house remained. The plunder carried away by the Romans, in precious metals and jewels alone, is reported to have been equal to five millions of pounds of silver. Who can compute the number of similar events, from the destruction of Jerusalem to that of Moscow ? Arson, that is the setting fire to an inhabited dwelling, is, in most countries, punishable by death. But more of this has been done in some single wars, than has been committed privately, since the world began. When some villain sets fire to a house and consumes it, what public indignation! what zeal to bring to justice! If, for a succession of nights, buildings are fired, what general panic! Yet how small the distress, compared to that which follows the burning of an entire city. In one case, the houseless still find shelter, the laborer obtains_work, the children have food. But oh, the horrors of a general ruin! Earthquake is no worse.

It should not be overlooked, that a great part of the private robberies in Christendom, may be traced to the deterioration of morals, caused by war. Thousands of pirates received their infamous education in national ships. Thousands of thieves were disbanded soldiers. War taught these men to disregard the rights of property, to trample upon justice and refuse mercy. Even if disposed to honest labor, which a military life always tends to render unpalatable. the disbanded soldier often finds himself unable to find employment. The industry of his country has been paralyzed by the war, and the demand for labor slowly recurs. The discharged veteran therefore is often compelled to steal or starve.

Thus war, by its own operations, involves continual and stupendous thefts, and by its unavoidable tendencies, multiplies offenders, who in time of peace prey upon community.-Dr. Malcom.

BRITISH BUDGET IN 1860.-The British Chancellor, (Mr. Gladstone), has recently brought forward his budget for this year, which shows the steadily increasing expensiveness of the war-system. Indeed, it has no natural limits; and, if allowed to proceed unchecked by some healthy control, it will continue to demand so long as there remains the least ability to supply. That, in a year of general peace, an expenditure for war purposes should amount to the large sum of £29,000,000, ($748,500,000) is unparalleled in the history of Great Britain. Never before, in any former period of peace, has it reached a sum so frightful; nor ever in any period of actual warfare, except on two occasions, namely, the latter years of the great French war, and during the Russian war in 1856, and 1857. It is a larger sum than the annual average expended on the forces during the first sixteen years of the great French war, that average being £29,237,819; and, notwithstanding the extraordinary expenditure incurred by the Russian or Crimean war, the sum demanded by Mr. Gladstone for war-purposes during the present year, exceeds the average of the last ten years by £6,250,065. The average annual war expenditure for those years, including the heavy additional costs of the Russian war, amounted to £23,449,935, but in the year of peace 1860, (China alone excepted) an illustrious Chancellor of the Exchequer, a man pre-eminently favorable to a pacific policy as an indispensable condition of enlarged commercial success, is compelled to ask for £29,700,000, for war-purposes alone! Where is this frightful extravagance to stop?

There is yet another view to be taken of the fatal tendency of the warsystem to an exorbitant increase, and that is in the startling disproportion between that increase and the corresponding one of population. According to the best authorities on the subject, the population of the United

Kingdom has increased since the Revolution in 1688 rather over threefold; but the direct war-expenditure (exclusive of interest for the National Debt) has advanced in the same period more than twelve-fold; or, in other words, war budgets have travelled upwards of four times faster than the law of nature in the supply of population. This is "National Protection" with a vengeance!)

A PART OF OUR OWN WAR EXPENSES.

The payments of our general government for war-purposes, form only a part, a small part, of what our own war-system, though our own army and navy are comparatively so small, costs in a time of peace. Still, the following appropriation bills now before Congress, show how large a proportion of our expenses are for objects connected with war :For Pensions,..

$849,000 180,000 1,907,000

1,082,000

605,000

13,984,000

5,870,000

3,491,000

11,182,000

6,000,000

$45,140,000

Just analyze these items, and you will find six of the ten are for war purposes, and amount to $28,707,000, or more than three-fifths of all our national expenses. This, too, after large reductions from last year, when the expenditures for the same general objects reached, if we remember right, some $35,000,000 in all. The army and navy alone eat up more than twenty-five millions, ($25,166,000,) besides nearly a million for pensions, and more than $600,000 on fortifications. In a right state of public opinion, such as the friends of peace are gradually creating, how superfluous, and worse than useless, would be nine-tenths, if not nearly nine-hundredths, of these expenses.

A CONGRESS OF NATIONS.

I. Its composition.-The members of this Congress should be civilians exclusively, and on no account whatever ought military men to be appointed, unless, as may sometimes happen, a military man has resigned the profession of arms altogether, and become, to all intents and purposes a civilian. In that case only he would be equally eligible with other competent men.

The number of members appointed by the different nations should be, it is presumable, according to population, at least no better or more rational basis appears at present before the world. And, assuming this as the rule, the members might be apportioned thus:-To each nation having a population of thirty millions and upwards, three members; to each nation with a population under thirty millions, but above fifteen