« 이전계속 »
promise. Our ancient teachers say that that column gave way to no obstacle; mountains were levelled before it, hills were dispersed like dust. Even thus will be our journey into the land of the promised universal peace : God goeth before us, and every obstacle must disappear. And never do I behold those wonderful wires that carry upon their wings the words of men with the rapidity of thought, without a feeling of rapture at the reflection, that an electric current is passing through the hearts of men; that we are placed within the magic circle of love, which conveys from man to man, from nation to nation, the vibrating motion of its presence. It is, however, the spirit of the times that carries every thought with the rapidity of lightning through the world. To this spirit of the times, one of God's messengers, may be applied what was said of one of the liberators of America, Franklin
“Eripuit cælo fulmen, sceptrum tyrannis.'” M. Joseph Garnier, Dr. Bullard, U.S., M. E. Girardin, Dr. Hitchcock, President of Amersham College, U.S., the Rev. E. B. Hall, U.S., and Mr. Cobden, followed in the same line of argument; and the subject of disapproving of foreign loans for paying the expense of war having been discussed by Herr Ducker from Holland, M. E. Girardin, and Herr Zachariah of Stettin, the sitting was adjourned.
At the third and last sitting the subject of non-intervention was introduced, and a resolution condemning it was moved by KahGe-Gah-Bowh, (Firm-standing, now the Rev. G. Copway, lately a chief of the Red Indian tribes! He addressed the Congress in an animated speech, which he closed with the following words:
" When I look at tliis assembly I am astonished-astonished at its success; when I consider the state of Europe, and the difficulties to have been overcome, difficulties which rise up like hills and mountains in the way of civilisation—and being thus astonished, who need wonder if I predict that the time must soon come when all the courts of Europe will send its representatives to this Congress, even Rome itself? You may say this is not possible. It is possible : as much so as the existence of those mighty machineries which your forefathers would have called miraculous. When I left my country in the West, my aged father came to me and said, 'Here, my son, take this,'-(unrolling the Indian pipe of peace :) yes, when I took my seat at this table, many persons seemed afraid to sit near me, as if I had arms in my hand; but, Mr. President, it is not a weapon of war, it is a weapon of peace, which, in the name of my countrymen, I present to you—it is our calumet. And I will add, of this great question of Peace
"Waft, waft, ye winds, the story,
And you, ye waters, roll;
It spreads from pole to pole.'”
Non-Intervention-Duelling. After a short speech from Dr. Weil of Frankfort, Dr. Bodenstedt of Berlin addressed the meeting in English; but having entered upon the discussion of the Schleswig-Holstein question, which was contrary to the standing order of the Congress, that reference to present political events should be avoided, he yielded to the request of the president. Dr. Bodenstedt“had arrived only that morning from Berlin, bringing with him an address to the Congress, signed by the leading men of the Constitutional party in that city, as well as by the ambassador of Schleswig-Holstein, entreating the Congress to appoint a Commission of Inquiry into the matters at issue between Denmark and the Duchies, with a view to put a stop to that deplorable and unnatural war. But the Committee, before whom this proposal was laid at a preliminary meeting, did not feel that this was a work which lay properly within the province of the Congress.” Had the two contending parties sent an official offer to submit their differences to the arbitration of the Congress, the case would have had another aspect; but under the present circumstances any interference on the part of the Congress would have been justly regarded as a violation of the very principle of non-intervention, which the Congress had laid down for the government of States.
The subject under discussion having been resumed by M, E. Girardin, and pursued by Dr. Creizenach of Frankfort, Mr. Edward Miall, and Signor Madono from Piedmont, Dr. Jaup read a short historical treatise on the principle of non-intervention as recognised in the law of nations. Mr. Burritt then, in a vigorous speech, submitted a resolution on the subject of a general congress of the representatives of the various states, with a view to the formation of a code of international laws. The resolution was supported by various speakers, English, French, and German, and after being unanimously adopted, M. Cormenin moved the following supplementary resolution :
“ The Congress condemns the practice of duelling between individuals, equally with war between nations; and every person joining this Society binds himself not to be a party to a duel, and ceases to be a member if he violates the pledge.”
When the proposition had been seconded by Mr. Cobden, and the resolution was about to be put, M. Emile Girardin, who is well known to have given the mortal wound to M. Armand Carrel, rose and said,
“ Duelling is war between individuals. We here give a guarantee to obtain credit, and that guarantee is to be found in the solemnity of our acts—that guarantee is to deny duelling publicly and openly. A legislative assembly has, at this moment, as subject for future debate, a law upon duelling. In my life there is a painful reminiscence. I fought a fatal duel twenty years ago, and I still feel remorse for it at this moment. If we were to leave no other trace in Frankfort than this resolution, we might say we had done enough.”.
When the resolution had been adopted, the Rev. Henry Richard moved different votes of thanks to the authorities in Frankfort for their liberality and kindness. The Congress agreed to hold their next meeting in London in 1851; and after thanks had been returned to Mr. Jaup, the president, the proceedings of the Congress were closed.
The Fourth Congress of Peace met in London on the 22d of July 1851, under the presidency of Sir David Brewster. Its meetings were held in Exeter Hall, a building which could accommodate upwards of four thousand persons; and owing to the vast number of strangers whom the Great Exhibition had brought to our inetropolis, the attendance of the friends of peace to countenance and advance its cause was numerous and brilliant beyond all former example. In the two temples of peace, then filled with all that is great and noble and estimable in society, there were assembled two different classes of true worshippers. In the one, beauty, piety, and philanthropy were listening to strains of eloquence and poetry, addressed to their reason and their humanity. In the other, the prince and the peer, and the citizen and the peasant, were learning the anthein of peace, which through every heart thrilled from the countless creations of industry and genius. No sounds of battle were heard there. The brazen throats of war thundered no death-notes from their polished lungs, and the implements of battle hung around in peaceful insolation, guiltless of human blood, and forged for the admiration, not for the destruction, of man. They disappeared even among the fabrics and products that were to deck the prince and the peasant; among the luxuries that were to cheer them ; among the mechanisms of advanced civilisation, and among the instruments of science that are yet to explore the invisible creation at our feet, and make known to man the distant glories of the universe. Unfurled above all these elements of peace rose the meteor flags of Europe, that had often “ burned terrific” above her bloodiest battle-fields; but though now dimmed before the brighter banners of industry and commerce, the patriot still sees under the symbols which they bear the deeds of the heroes that had carried them to victory, while he feels, and glories in the feeling, that war's troubled night has passed, and that the star of peace has returned.
Although the thousands that assembled for three days in Exeter Hall could not be compared with the hundreds of thousands which thronged the Crystal Palace, yet it has been stated, 'on authority which cannot be doubted, that there had never
Composition of the London Congress.
before been gathered in the British metropolis an assembly embodying so large an amount of the highest elements of English society, its intelligence, its moral and religious worth, as that which met to plead the cause of peace and philanthropy. More than a thousand men were there from every district of the United Kingdom, representing all the principal cities of the empire, and selected, for the most part, on account of the honourable local distinction they had acquired among their fellow-citizens. There, also, were the official delegates from the important municipal and religious bodies—the chief magistrates from many towns—the parliamentary representatives of not a few influential constituencies—more than two hundred ministers of religion of various denominations, appointed by their respective congregationseminent professors in our collegiate establishments, and a considerable body of men inferior to none in this country for their scientific, literary, and theological attainments.
Of the foreign delegates America sent upwards of sixty, representing sixteen different States in the Union, some of whom had travelled more than a thousand miles before they embarked on the Atlantic. France and Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Holland, Sweden and Norway, sent also their contingent; and thus were arrayed on the neutral ground of humanity, a brotherhood from nations that had often assembled on the battle-field, for the purposes of vengeance and mutual destruction.
Such was the composition of the Congress of Peace, as held in the capital of the British Isles. Lest we mislead our readers, we must tell them also who were not there. No member of the British Cabinet, either of the past or of the present, was there; no expectant, and no occupant of place; no British or Irish or Scottish peer; no Archbishop or Bishop or Golden canon was there ; no Catholic priest; no Érastian Presbyterian ; no teacher from our national universities; no worshipper of the muses, to welcome the Lamartines, the Victor Hugos, and the Bérangers of other lands; no military, or naval hero, with star and medal, was there; no healer of gunshot wounds; no spiritual stipendiary of the camp; no compounder of gunpowder; no primer of copper caps; and no stretcher of kettle-drums: Nor saw we there the rigger of our hearts of oak and our hulls of iron-of the Bloodhound and the Bulldog; of the Devastator and the Firebrand; of the Savage and the Serpent; of the Vindictive and the Vengeance—those arks of mercy, freighted with the benevolence of gun-cotton and grape-shot, to make friends of natural enemies—to civilize aboriginal barbarians; and, perchance, what no Englishman can do, to stifle liberty in its cradle -replace the man of sin on his unrighteous throne, and restore the inquisitor to his bloody judgment-seat.
We record not these facts as proofs either of hostility or indifference to the interests of humanity. They have, doubtless, some other origin, which may be discovered in the nature and peculiarities of our institutions; but when the foreign members of the Congress recollect the respect and hospitality which they received from Cabinet Ministers and official men in Paris, Brussels, and Frankfort, and the support freely proffered to their cause by distinguished generals, both in France and Germany, they may be excused for misinterpreting the coldness and inhospitality of our political, military, and municipal authorities.
After the Bureau of the Congress had been constituted, Sir David Brewster, as President, delivered the inaugural address, of which we can find room only for the following extracts :
“I should have shrunk," said he, “from occupying the chair in which your kindness has placed me, were I required to address to you any formal and lengthened argument in favour of the grand object which the Congress of Peace has been organized to accomplish. I shall consider this part of my duty discharged by a brief reference to the nature and the justice of the cause which we are this day met to plead. The principle for which we claim your sympathy and ask your support, is, that war undertaken to settle differences between nations is the relic of a barbarous age, equally condemned by religion, by reason, and by justice. The question, "What is war?' bas been more frequently asked than answered; and I hope that there may be in this assembly some eloquent individual who has seen it in its realities, and who is willing to tell us what he has scen. Most of you, like myself, know it only in poetry and romance. We have wept over the epics and the ballads which celebrate the tragedies of war. We have followed the warrior in his career of glory, without tracing the line of blood along which he has marched. We have worshipped the demigod in the temple of fame, in ignorance of the cruelties and crimes by which he climbed its steep. It is only from the soldier himself, and in the language of the eye that has seen its agonies, and of the ear that has heard its shrieks, that we can obtain a correct idea of the miseries of war. Though far from our happy shores, many of us may have seen it in its ravages and in its results in the green mound which marks the recent battle-field-in the shattered forest-in the razed and desolate village, and, perchance, in the widows and the orphans which it made! And yet, this is but the memory of war—the faint shadow of its dread realities—the reflection but of its blood, and the echoes but of its thunder. I shudder when imagination carries me to the sanguinary field-to the deathstruggles between men who are husbands and fathers and brothersto the horrors of the siege and the sack-to the deeds of rapine and violence and murder, in which neither age nor sex is spared. To men who reason, and who feel while they reason, nothing in the history of their species appears more inexplicable, than that war, the child of barbarism, should exist in an age enlightened and civilized,