glory of his name? "Very wonderful!" as Dr Johnson would say. *' Would that it were impossible."
This is exactly what individual combatants did a few centuries ago, and which we now so righteously condemn. The only vital difference between war and the duello is that one is a national and the other an individual affair; and we are not yet sufficiently advanced in reason to realize that what is wrong in a unit of the nation is wrong in the nation. True, when the units of society delegate their rights to a general government acting for the common good, it is tbeir duty to leave them there, and not to interfere with the functions of government by breaking its laws in the effort to right their own wrongs. Society alone possesses the right to chastise. But should the government become impotent or corrupt, and fail to deal justly with the individuals composing it, then the individuals may withdraw the rights delegated, and act for themselves if they have the power. Either duelling is right or war is wrong.
In Christian countries the actions of men are measured by two tests, the approbation of the creator, and the happiness of the creature, though as the subject is more closely inspected, one test appears to be equivalent to the other. How much needless dispute there has been about reason and revelation, their contradictions and absurdities. Between the two there is no discord, else reason is unreason and revelation a lie. The law of nature and of morality and the law of God are one; not that God and nature are thereby made one, but nature's law and nature's morals are God's law and morals.
Some call this appeal to battle God's plan, and so, indeed, it is ; else in place of this now apparently only way, he would appoint some other. Probably religious wars have exceeded all others in extent and intensity among civilized nations. Now, why should God wish a hundred thousand of his creatures in God's name to slay another hundred thousand who assembla
