highwaymen are not more repugnant to the principles of justice, humanity, and benevolence, than the usual conquests of nations. These national conquests are not only a glaring outrage on the principles of justice and mercy in relation to the people of the conquered countries, but also in relation to the soldiers employed by the conqueror. For, generally, if not always, these conquests are made by the sacrifice of men for property or territory. But what government has a right to give the life of a single subject for the acquisition of a province? May we not boldly affirm, that no government on earth has any such right-unless despotic power and right are but different names for the same thing?

It is gratifying that the President is aware of the inconsistency of a career of conquest with the principles of a just and free government, and also inconsistent "with the interests of the nation."

"Honesty is the best policy" for nations as well as individuals. Yet this maxim has been too generally disregarded in the conduct of governments towards each other. We have no doubt, that temporary benefits might be acquired by individuals from a war with Spain. But hundreds of our people would probably either lose their lives, or be ruined as to property or morals, to every individual who would be really benefited. The nation also might receive a tempo. rary" aggrandizement" by a conquest of the Floridas. But the spirit of war and rapine would be diffused among our citizens; thousands of them might become adepts in the arts of piracy, robbery, and murder ; the number of military slaves would be greatly augmented, and perhaps a foundation would be laid for the final overthrow of our republican institutions, and for distressing scenes of havoc and horror throughout the land.

Therefore, to the important decision of the President, that a career of ambition and conquest is not consistent with the principles of our government, "nor the interest of the nation," may the Members of Congress, and all our fellow Bitizens cordially respond-Amen.

PROCEEDINGS AT WHICH HUMANITY SHUDDERs.

IN the Report of the Committee of the Senate of the United States, on the Seminole War, we have the following remarks:

"In reviewing the execution of Arbuthnot and Ambrister, your Committee cannot but consider it as an unnecessary act of severity on the part of the Commanding General.-Humanity shudders at a cold blooded execution of prisoners, disarmed and in the power of the conqueror."

These sentiments do honor to the Committee, and they are worthy to be diffused throughout the United States, transported to other countries, and transmitted to future generations. It is, however, a question which demands the serious consideration of our rulers, and of all our fellow citizens, whether there are not other things tolerated in our country which are more barbarous and unjust, and more to be deplored, than the execution of the two Engishmen.

1. Does not humanity shudder at the deliberate and "cold blooded" declaration of a war which consigns to inevitable destruction to extreme sufferings by wounds, or to the depths of poverty and despair, many thousands of innocent persons-perfectly innocent as to any offence for which the war is made?

2. What does humanity say to deciding the awful question in favor of war, and against the lives and happiness of so many innocent persons, by a bare majority of votes-while a notorious robber or murderer is allowed an impartial trial by jury, and cannot be sentenced to death so long as there is one dissenting vote?

3 What is the voice of humanity when she sees a powerful nation, making war on a whole tribe of people for the wanton acts of a few individuals-acts too, perhaps, which were committed in revenge of greater wrongs on the part of those who make the war?

4. What does humanity say of the conduct of a great nation in exciting one feeble tribe of Indians to aid in the destruction of another? Does she not shudder at the idea of such wars, made by a people professing the Christian religion

while it is well known that Indians are as capable of being "conquered by beneficence," as "by force?"

5. What must be the feelings and language of humanity while she beholds the people of every nation in christendom, glorying in their military character and war exploits, and employing the greater part of their revenues in the business of manslaughter or in preparations for that inhuman and antichristian work? If humanity shudders at the coldblooded execution of prisoners, disarmed and in the power of the conqueror," must she not weep day and night in view of that "cold blooded" policy which makes a glorious trade of war, murder, and devastation," under the delusive pretext of "self-defence" and "fighting for peace ?"

Here we again present that magnanimous proposition of Mr. Fuller-Let us then examine, without fear, any existing practice which violates the rights of humanity; and whenever it shall be found substantially unnecessary, let us boldly explode it, and not doubt that our example will be approved and adopted by other nations."

It is firmly believed that cach of the several practices which have been mentioned in this article, is not only "substantially unnecessary," but highly injurious and unjust; and that posterity will regard it as a reproach to the people of the present generation.

If posterity shall read the history of our times, and compare the boastings of humanity in different nations with the atrocities allowed in war, will they not imagine that M'Fingal's definition of the word was popular in this age?—

"For now in its primeval sense,
This term, humanity, comprehends
All things of which, on this side hell,

The human mind is capable."

Trumbull's M'Fingal, Canto II.

THE AMERICAN EAGLE.

"For my own part," said Dr. Franklin, "I wish the bald Eagle

had not been chosen as the Representative of our country. He is a bird

of bad moral character. He does not get his living honestly. You may Vol. II. No. 7.

have seen him perched on a dead tree, where, too lazy to fish for himself, he watches the labors of the fishing-hawk; and when that diligent bird has at length taken a fish, and is bearing it to his nest, for the support of his mate and young ones, the bald Eagle pursues him and takes it from him. With all this injustice he is seldom in good case, but, like those among men who live by sharping and robbery, he is generally poor and often lousy." Letter to Mrs. Bache.

He

The Eagle is a bird of prey, of a war character. lives by privateering, robbery, and bloodshed. He is therefore a proper Representative" of a people who delight in war and glory in mischief. Bartram says, "The bald Eagle is a large, strong, and very active bird, but an execrable tyrant. He supports his assumed dignity and grandeur by rapine and violence, extorting unreasonable tribute from all the feathered nations." Travels, p. 8.

With Dr. Franklin "I wish that the bald Eagle had not been chosen as the Representative of our country " But this is less to be regretted, than that we should be a people who may be fitly represented by a plundering, bloodthirsty bird. Such, however, seems to be too much the character which is made the boast and glory of the nation.

We profess to be a Christian nation, but, in choosing our "Representative," we have followed the Pagans of Rome, and selected the EAGLE as the fittest emblem of our soaring and fighting character! And if we should inquire of the va rious tribes of Indians, they would doubtless give it as their opinion, that the Eagle is a fit Representative of our nation. In this decision too the sons of Africa would acquiesce.

In one respect, however, there is a striking disparity between a warring people, and birds of prey. Though the Eagle is said to be of a bad moral character,” he is not so base as to make a trade of destroying his own species.

May it not then be expected, that either a sense of the injustice done to the Eagle, or a regard to our own character as a Christian nation, will induce our government to dismiss the bird of prey, and adopt some symbol for the American standard which shall denote a just, magnanimous, and pacific people? The symbol in which a nation glories, and by

which they choose to be known, will naturally have some influence on the character of the people. So long as the Americans shall glory in being represented by the Eagle, they will be likely to imitate his depredating and sanguinary character, and, of course, like the Eagle, they will be watched as enemies, by the people of other tribes and countries.

THE BRITISH LION.

GREAT BRITAIN has for her Representative, not the EAGLE, but the LION, the king of the beasts of prey; and that it might be the more appropriate, it is the "Lion rampant" —that is, reared in the posture of defiance, or the attitude for fighting. All who are well acquainted with the history of that nation must admit, that she has amply supported the character which she has assumed. But she, as well as our nation, has surpassed the ferocity of her Representative, -she kills her own species, and kills for fame rather than food.

If the reader wishes to know the advantages of supporting this character, let him peruse attentively the histories of her wars, at home and abroad, for the last thousand years. Let him observe the millions of human beings slain, the millions wounded, the millions reduced to beggary, wretchedness, and despair, and the millions educated for theives, robbers, and murderers. Let him also estimate, if he can, the many thousands of millions of property destroyed, wasted and expended in the wars of that people. How horrible the result! Will it not be found that to support the character of a beast of prey, the people of Great Britain have been for a thousand years, nearly two thirds of the time engaged in war, and the other third in preparing for this horrid work,

that by war they have caused the destruction, waste, or ependiture of more property than the whole island is now worth, and the untimely death or ruin of more human beings