so fully as in that of the militia in the several States of our Union. Wherever any apparently similar system exists, it will upon investigation be found to involve characteristics opposed in greater or less degree to the condition named. In but one of the continental nations-Switzerland-does the system shape itself to the material of a free citizenship. As there organized, it partakes of conditions too frequently at variance with the legitimate pursuits of the citizen. As found in other of the European States, its existence is practically null, because having form only in enrollment, and then rendered useless by the presence of a disproportionate standing force. As exemplified in the English system, it partakes of a character of dependence upon the aristocratic classes, which deprives it of its least invidious features; while at the same time its efficiency and purpose are rendered practically void, by the existence of a numerous and powerful regular army. In nearly all, too, if not in all these connections, it is a system contemplating a class as its material, and that a class least calculated to give it influence as an instrument of social order and peace.

There is, however, a more marked feature of these institutions, as thus existing, upon which I desire to speak more at length. Perhaps I should rather say, that they sustain governmental relations, which, uniformly existing, must forever give force to the objections to any military organization. It may be regarded, I think, as an axiom, that the character of a government marks and controls that of its agencies. The stream no more surely rises only to the level of its source, than do the spirit and forms of Executive instrumentalities to those

of the power in which they originate. A hoary absolutism, seeking to sustain and perpetuate an unquestioned dominion, either seeks its instruments in kindred elements, or else creates them by sedulously repressing every liberal impulse on the part of its subjects. Hence its executive, so far as it partakes of a military form, is a power outside and independent of the citizen, or else identified with him only so far as the idea of the citizen has been lost in that of the subject. The same remark applies in a degree to the agencies attaching to constitutional monarchical forms. In so far as the elevation and perpetuity of an hereditary authority are elements in their policy, in just so far will a measure of the same qualities characterize their executive forces. In other words, in so far as a government is contracted and centralizing in its objects; in so far as it designs the elevation of the few and the subordination of the many; in so far as it limits the activities of the people to channels tending directly to its own support; in so far-to come back to the analogy of the text-as it excludes "the builder" from a common interest in the work, and an equal participation in its recollections and associations, its duties, rights and honors, in the same measure does it tend to the creation of agencies for its support, inimical to the best interests of society, and directly productive of the social evils whose history has been written in blood throughout the ages. Had Nehemiah proposed to himself a kingly rule at Jerusalem, instead of an object near to the hearts and stirring to the best energies of the souls of his brethren, then our text had never been written. The hosts of the Persian would have manned the walls against the Ammonite,

and the children of the prophets been bowed anew to the burthen and the toil.

It is just here, I apprehend, that the honest advocate of peace mistakes the issue. While, as I before remarked, the ultraist fails to discriminate as to the evil he opposes, so the earnest opposer of the war spirit errs also in the object of his attack. The true issue is not with the bayonet and sword themselves; it is rather with the policy which gives them power and legitimates their abuse. The same burning sarcasm which has played so impotently around the enginery of war, might have pierced, like the lightning, into the very vitals of a policy which clothes war with all its terrible energy. The same splendid rhetoric, which has so often depicted the fiery features of the battle-storm, and so often invested the mathematics of military and naval expenditure with a poetry not their own, might have roused a sentiment in the souls of crushed and abject millions that would have brought to the dust every semblance of the political forms by which the curse is perpetuated. The real issue, I repeat, is with the governmental policy which gives birth to, and creates the necessity for, the vast armaments of aristocratic power, rather than with the outward phases of the power itself. So long as this issue is unrecognized, argument, invective and ridicule, all are alike nerveless in the effort for a practical and permanent reform. The surges of an occan may dash impotently against the rock; while by the right direction of but the tiny spray, which is flung torn from the contact, the same craggy barrier might be swept into the depths of the sea.

I recur to the idea to which these remarks are inci

dental. My text, affording Scriptural warrant for the existence of military organizations, seems also aptly illustrative of that which obtains under our own liberal institutions. The citizen soldier, as represented in the militia system of the several States, finds in "the builder" at Jerusalem the proximate type of his own character and relations. His relations are also to "a work." Primarily he sustains that of a builder: incidentally he has "the sword girded by his side." The work itself involves no inherent necessity for the sword; the circumstances under which it is to be. carried forward alone create that necessity. Arbitrary and aristocratic forms of government, involving the will and interest of individuals or classes, not only carry with them the sequence of an executive of force, but they also generate that spirit of violence which embodies itself in the sword. Liberal institutions, on the contrary, contemplating no end but the highest individual and social happiness of the greatest number, carry with them a sequence of moral and educational forces, generating only the spirit of a generous emulation in the work of their support and extension. The work with which the citizen soldier is identified under such institutions is in great measure a work upon his own character; the institutions themselves are but the form with which

the

aggregate social character invests itself and its progress. As with the spiritual temple, composed of “lively stones,” resting upon "the chief corner-stone," compacted and knit together by that which every joint supplieth," so with the political fabric of a popular and free government; its materials are the compacted intelligence and souls of free men, instinct with the energiz

ing life of free principles, and cheered by the heavenborn hope of their ultimate triumph over every form of oppression. Need I add, that the work is, with us, a work initiated by the prayers of God-fearing founders, and consecrated, through every step of its progress, by the counsel, the labors and the lives of God-honoring master builders. Need I add, that it is a work, beneath every stone of which, the cementing elements of a pure religious faith are hourly laid, in the sanctions and influence of God's word, and the preaching of His truth. Such a work is in a certain sense its own safeguard; at any rate, it pre-occupies the mind and heart of "the builder" by motives and pursuits sustaining little affinity with those of aggression and war.

I assert then, that in the exigencies which must attach to the progress of this work in existing social conditions, that system which renders the builder the protector also, is least liable to the objections drawn from the tendencies of military organizations. I assert that in the contingencies implied in the apostolic precept, it is the system least liable to abuse, and best calculated, both to mitigate the evils of war, and soonest secure the blessings of peace. "If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.” I hold this precept equally applicable to governments and individuals. I know of no other mode of interpreting its force; but I view the subjunctive clause in the same relation. That the possibilities of national strife diminish in the exact ratio of the hearty and lofty interest of the good citizen in the elevation of national character, no thoughtful man before me can doubt for a moment. That in the range of those possibilities, the associations,