« ZurückWeiter »
being the greatest example of protracted peace and comparative immunity from bloodshed known in history. Not to compare it with the almost perpetual and interminable war history of the ancient civilizations, or of the governments of the Middle Ages, which were founded and carried on in blood, or even with the ceaseless wars of modern Europe prior to our independence, in which, since the Reformation, all the States, from Sweden to Turkey, have been involved (once for a period of thirty, and once for a period of seven years), when peace was only an armistice, and new wars could not commence because old ones never ceased; not, I say, to compare our history with those times, when, certainly, it cannot be said that monarchies were a preventive, of war, or that empires meant peace; but to confine ourselves to the last hundred years, and to the parallel courses of other nations with ours, we find that we, inexperienced as we were in government and diplomacy, and having new principles to establish and illustrate, have given the noblest peace example of them all. For, in this same period, while we have had but two wars, England has had eight foreign wars, besides her Indian, Persian and China wars, France has had nine wars, Prussia six, Russia fourteen, Austria five, Spain four, and Italy five.
Comparing more at length our history with that of England in this respect, we find that, while we have been enjoying a hundred years of peace (or 113 since our Declaration of Independence), broken only in 1812 and in 1845 with wars, which together aggregate but six years, England at the same time has had twenty-eight years of war. From 1778 to 1783, she had a war with France. From 1780 to 1783, she had a war with Spain. During the same time she had a war also with Holland. In 1793, she commenced the war of the Revolution, which lasted till 1802, or nine years, and in 1801 the war against the Confederation of the North, all of which wars were had before our peace was once broken. Then, in 1803, she began the war against Bonaparte, which lasted twelve years. From 1812 to 1815, she carried on a war with the United States, and from 1854 to 1856, she carried on the Crimean War with Russia. During the same period she has also had nine wars with India,
two with China and one with Persia. Accordingly, while our first century has been a century of peace, England's, with which more than any other we are unfavorably compared, has been a century of war.
Comparing, again, our history with that of France, we find that, in the period in which we have had but two short wars, France has been almost perpetually at war, aggregating forty years out of the hundred. For, in this time, she engaged in 1778, in a war with England, rendering aid to the American colonies in their efforts for independence; in 1792, she entered the field against the allied powers of Europe, continuing the struggle for, twenty-three years, till 1815. In .1793, she declared war against England; in 1812, she declared war also against Russia, and in 1813 against Austria, Russia and Prussia.
In 1854, she engaged in the Crimean War; in 1857, she, with Sardinia, aided Victor Emanuel against Austria. In 1862, she fought with Mexico, to enthrone Maximilian, and in 1870, commenced her fatal war with Prussia. In short, while we have pursued a policy of peace, France has pursued one of glory and conquest, the result of which, compared with our prosperity, bas been humiliation and defeat.
Comparing, in the next place, our history with that of Prussia, we find that the strongest of monarchies while professing a traditional peace policy, has had three times as many wars as we. In 1792,' she commenced a war with France, which she carried on through the whole revolutionary period. In 1803, she renewed it, as a member of the Holy Alliance, and continued therein till the fall of Napoleon 'in 1815. In 1848, she assisted the duchies against Denmark, fighting till 1850. In 1866, she again fought against Denmark in the Schleswig-Holstein War. In 1866, she commenced the war against Austria and the South-German States, and finally, in 1870, eritered into the Franco-Prussian War. Thus, monarchical Prussia, as compared with republican America, has had a career of war, and established her monarchy in blood rather than in sweat.
Comparing, again, our history with that of Russia, we get a similar result. Instead of an almost uniform reign of peace,
as in the United States, Russia has in this time had war as the rule, with only short intervals of peace. In 1795, she had war with Poland, entered into to complete her subjugation of that country. In 1784, she completed her war with Turkey, and her invasions of the Crimea, which were begun as far back as 1769. In 1796, she fought with Persia. In 1799, she took part against the French revolutionists. In 1805, and again in 1812, she took part against Napoleon. In 1809, she fought with the Turks; in 1826, with Persia again, as also in 1840. In 1849, she fought against Hungary; in 1853, against Turkey; in 1854, against France and England in the Crimean War, and in 1877 against Turkey.", In short, Russia's history, as com
ared with ours, shows that we are far less inclined to war than she, and that republicanism is more peaceful than absolute monarchy.
Comparing, next, our history with that of Austria, we have a similar showing. Though more inclined to peace than most European countries, and though suffering frequent dishonor and loss of territory for the sake of peace, Austria has yet had a large number of wars. In 1805, she fonght against France in the Holy Alliance, and, until the fall of Napoleon, was fighting in one capacity or another for her Italian possessions. In 1848, she had the memorable war with Hungary and its allies. In 1849, she fought with Sardinia and France for her Italian interests. In 1864, she engaged with Prussia in the Schleswig-Holstein War against Denmark, and in 1866, she fought against Prussia and Italy in the disastrous war which decided her fate at Sadowa, and compelled her to withdraw from participation in German affairs.
Our history, when compared with that of Spain, shows a like result. For, in this time of comparative peace with us, Spain has had a comparative season of war. In 1796, she had a war with England; in 1807 she had a war with France, as also in 1823; and in 1859 one with Morocco. In short, that most monarchical of countries, with unlimited loyalty to king and pope, knowing nothing but submission and obedience, has, besides her endless rebellions, had twice as many foreign wars as our independent and individualized Americans who have ac
knowledged no authority but themselves.
And, comparing finally our history with that of Italy, we have still the invariable result-peace in America and war abroad. For, in this time, Italy has engaged in the following wars: First, those growing out of the French Revolution and of the intervention of Napoleon in Italian affairs, which lasted till 1814; secondly, that of the Milanese and Venetians against Austria in 1848, for their independence and supremacy; thirdly, the wars of independence between Piedmont and Austria, into which the rest of the Italians were largely drawn; and finally, the wars of Garibaldi for the Union of Italy, conducted against Austria and the Pope. In short, Italy has, as far as it can in this period be considered a nation or people in itself, had a history of war, while most of its individual states have been separately at war, or been drawn into the wars of their dependencies.
Such, therefore, is our record as compared with that of England, France, Prussia, Russia, Austria, Spain and Italy, in re gard to war. And yet these constitute all the great powers of of Europe, so that the comparison is exhaustive, and can be said to be with the whole world. It is a record of peace compared with seven records of war; so that, when compared with the other great countries, our showing, notwithstanding the patronizing forebodings of war which others indulged in at our beginning, is the best of all. As far, therefore, as eight exantples of history running through a hundred years can prove anything, they prove that a free republican government is more calculated to keep at peace than a monarchy, and in so far to keep the peace of the world and promote the happiness of mankind.
And here we may pause to observe that in' both of our wars we have been successful ; so that never yet, as a nation, have we been conquered. In the same period, however, all the other nations mentioned have been once or oftener conquered. England was overcome in the first war of the French revolution, as well as in the American war. France was finally overcome in the wars of the Empire, and again in the war with Prussia in 1870. Prussia was overcome in the first war of the Revo
lution. Russia was badly conquered in the Crimean War. Austria was conquered in her wars with Napoleon, with Italy, and with Prussia. Italy was conquered in the Napoleonic wars, and in the war with Austria, in 1864, until she was rescued by Prussia. And Spain was conquered in her war with Napoleon and her first mentioned war with England. All this comparison proves, not only that a republic is as good as any other government in keeping at peace, but also as good, if forced into war, in raising armies and fighting its battles.
So much, then, for foreign wars, which comprise generally a great part of the faults and failures of governments, as well as of the misery of mankind; all of which have been so signally avoided by our republic. I shall speak next of rebellions and civil wars.
In this respect, it was thought, at the beginning of our career, that we, as a nation, would particularly suffer. It was believed in the firsi place, that, as a republic, with all the people free, and alike entitled to rule, we should be more exposed and inclined to civil dissensions; and in the second place, that, without a monarchical government, we should not be able to quell our 'rebellions when they should arise, and so to preserve the internal peace with force.
In comparing ourselves with other great powers, however, we find that our history in this respect is not only creditable, but vastly better than theirs. For, during all this time, we have had but one great rebellion or civil war; while m the same time England has had two, France eight, Prussia two, Russia four, Austria six, Spain six, and Italy three.
To compare more minutely, we observe that, in our long reign of internal peace, broken only once in the year 1861, England has had her Irish rebellion in 1798, and her Sepoy rebellion in 1857. I do not here speak of our bloodless whisky rebellion in 1786, or of Shea's rebellion in 1793. These will be mentioned tercafter in comparing our insurrections and riots with those of Europe, when speaking of the so called rebellion against England of Robert Emmett and his followers in 1803, and of the Chartists at Newport in 1839.
In France, in the same period, there have been the rebellions