Disquisitions may be ethical, political, scientific, or literary, according to the nature of their subjects.

AN ETHICAL DISQUISITION.

Example.

The strict Application of Moral Rules to the Policy of States.

We all hold to the strict confinement of individuals by the rules of morality; nations are but assemblages of individuals; why, then, should states be exempt from these rules?

Our rules of morality are laid down in the New Testament, as given by Jesus Christ; he appears to have made no distinction between man considered as a single being, or regarded collectively, as existing in states. The spirit, if not the letter, of his sayings, is in favor of the universal application of these principles; and it becomes all, who dispute this position, to take upon themselves the onus probandi. Let us spend a few moments in the survey of their objections.

They say, in the first place, that the magnitude of the interest at stake justifies them in resorting to chicanery, the rupture of treaties, the opening of ambassadors' letters, and many other honorable exploits. This interest is the welfare of the community in worldly matters. Can it be obtained by chicanery? No! in the language of a most eloquent writer, personal and national morality, ever one and the same, dictate the same measures under the same circumstances."

Moreover, the opponents say, that expediency requires the deception commonly practised in national affairs, and laugh at the idea of any other system. "Let those laugh that win!" but remember that derision is no proof of the validity of one position, or the fallacy of another. Long enough has this world grovelled beneath pretended expediency, as if shortsighted man could better frame regulations for the future, than he who holds eternity within his grasp; let us, if no others will, rise as a nation and shake off the chain; let us stand forward in the pursuit of our best interests, for, till the influence of Christianity is combined with that of philosophy, no system of policy can be perfect.

The Holy Alliance is the only instance in which this union has been attempted, and although the title has been branded as deceptive, yet it affords the testimony of the most powerful princes, that its object was just. Having thus done away with the principal objections of our opponents, we come now to a consideration of the benefits to be derived from a strict application of these rules; time will only allow us to touch upon some of the most important, and point out their influence upon our condition.

The laws of the land first claim our attention; not, indeed, as they now are, based upon the narrow views of man, but fixed on the broad and sure foundation of morality. The Saviour has nowhere freed man from his obligation to attend to the interests of his fellow-man; on the contrary, his especial command was, "Do unto others as ye would that men should do unto you." If this precept were observed in all the laws, we should no longer see kings oppressing their subjects, or men of one

opinion rising to crush those of an opposite, in defiance of every princi ple implanted in the human breast.

There is a spirit abroad in the land, which would fain do right, but overdoes in its eagerness; men actuated by it do not wait to see if their fellow-men fully comprehend them, or their object. This is not the spirit of true morality, which makes its path as clear as the perfect day, and leads the good man to consider not merely his own benefit, but also to relieve, as far as possible, the situation of the poorer classes; he would secure their earthly happiness by the only sure means, firm and salutary laws. In these times it becomes every man to consider, that his influence is something; when the wagoner applied his shoulder to the wheel, the cart was dragged from the miry slough. Particularly in this country, where the poorest has an equal interest with the most wealthy, is it necessary for all to coöperate for the support of right views in regard to the power of laws over the governed. We have thus briefly adverted to the policy to be exerted by the state towards its own subjects; there is yet another point of view, the connexion existing between different govern

ments.

In the first place, nations may be regarded as having the same feelings towards one another with individuals. The chicanery and fraud, practised by states towards each other, has already been adverted to; but after a consideration of the relation of state and subject, the matter is again forced upon our attention. Not only are these practices opposed to all morality, but they would not be tolerated between individuals; and the man whose suspicion induced him to open letters, or break the bonds he had voluntarily given to another, would be ejected from the lowest society.

In the whole system of international morality, there is perhaps nothing so unsettled as the rules for the construction of treaties, and yet the way seems clear. A treaty is neither more nor less than a promise between two or more nations, commonly for mutual benefit.

Mankind in a body have no higher interests than they have as individuals; each member of society is anxious only for certain natural rights, and to insure these privileges to posterity; these, we have shown, can best be secured by a strict conformity to moral rules. It is no argument against the introduction of this policy to say, it would not succeed; on the contrary, we have every reason to believe perfect success would crown the effort; the old reasons are vain and futile; let something new be tried; not a diplomatic, but a bold daring, based on the principles of divine justice. When this system of things is adopted, wars will be abolished; in the beautiful language of the prophet, "Men will turn their swords into ploughshares and their spears into pruning-hooks, and learn war no more." These principles, properly carried out, would check the boundless ambition of mankind, and remove those petty jealousies which commonly give rise to the wanton destruction of God's creation; the poet could no longer exclaim with truth, "Devil with devil damned firm concord holds; men only disagree of creatures rational."

The common origin of war is from the pretended or real infringement of a treaty. How can this be remedied? First, by being careful before a treaty is formed. Second, by a firm yet respectful statement of the case, when one has been broken. A man of sound common sense, guided by a Christian spirit, is far more likely to frame treaties that will endure, than the wily diplomatist, whose aim is merely to make as much money

as he can for his country, regardless of the injuries he may commit. Such a man acts for a nation as he does for himself; he carries into practice the precept, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Many writers have touched upon war, and much has been said, both for and against it; those of the present day are, however, generally opposed; and the Congress of Nations, which, but a few years since, was ridiculed as an emanation from the brains of hot-headed fanatics, is already occupying the attention of the wisest legislators throughout the world.

What a blissful state of things, when all nations shall be at peace! when we shall see each pursuing its own interest with benefit to the rest! This shall be the consequence, and not the cause of the universal spread of Christianity. The situation of our own country is particularly favorable for the application of its rules. It may, indeed, be urged, that they would not yet be appreciated; let us then hasten the period, and not rest in the work of well-doing, till all tribes and nations shall be brought to know their God, and his law. Onward! should then be the cry of every moral man; our time of action here is but short at the most, yet much may be done, and is there one, who, with an immortal's happiness within his grasp, is too indolent to put forth his hand for it? No! that man is unworthy the name of republican, whose sole aim is self, who regards not his country, and his fellow-men throughout the world.

Let us, then, as a nation, stand forward for the introduction of moral precepts to direct our relations with foreign countries. The experiment is new, but does not the interest at stake warrant us in the risk, if there can be danger, in preferring the dictates of conscience and our God, to the precepts of short-sighted man.

XCIII.

A DISCUSSION.

A Discussion is the treating of a subject by argument, to clear it of difficulties, and to separate truth from falsehood. It is generally carried on between two or more persons, who take contrary sides, and defend them by arguments and illustrations.

Discussions are of several kinds, such as philosophical, literary, political, or moral, according to the subjects of which they treat; or colloquial and deliberative, according to the style in which they are written, or the occasion for which they are prepared.

Discussions serve for amusement, rather than for any solid purpose; the cause of truth seldom derives any immediate benefit from them, although the minds of men may become invigorated by a collision of sen

timent.

PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSION.

Example.

PART I.

On the Expediency of making Authorship a Profession.

In modern civilized communities, a certain opinion or maxim is often prevalent, which, would we strip it of the shroud of conceit and the glit ter of cant, would appear unwarrantable prejudice. Of this description is the objection so constantly urged against the profession of the author; a man whom few will call their brother, the laughing-stock of the merchant's clerk, and a laborer poorly paid in the world's coin. The broker seldom meets him on the exchange; the usurer never chaffers with him on the mart; the old man clinks his bags and shrugs his shoulders at his prospects; the schoolmaster takes to trade, and presently rolls by him in his coach, and, perhaps, worst of all, the bright eye is turned away, and the fair hand withheld by one who can never be the wife of an author! This prejudice which I describe, was once common throughout the old world; now it is particularly confined to America. Still everywhere the man whose pen is to be his support is thought a visionary, or an idler. The author's garret has long since passed into a by-word, and the gaping elbow has become the escutcheon of his family. His poverty is a kind of general butt, and his sensitiveness a fair subject of caricature. I am aware, that I shall not speak agreeably to the judgment of most who hear me; let us, however, examine fairly some of the errors which have led people to think authorship unprofitable and inexpedient.

There are many persons, who, having neither the vigor nor refinement of mind to distinguish between what is material and intellectaal, would measure poetry by the yard, or fill a library by the bushel! To such, whatever yields the greatest amount of tangible, improvable product is the best producer; unless mind acts openly, as a machine, they suppose it to be dormant. Let such persons first comprehend the purpose of the author whom they censure; let them learn, that there possibly may be higher motives of action than gold or silver, loftier contemplations than those of the counting-house or factory! And, although this is a working-day world, and man must labor for hire, let them thank God, that there are men, who find times of communion with better thoughts; and, but for whose speculations, and grasps at the infinite, these shortsighted cavillers would be as lifeless as the clods on which they tread! Coleridge says, with the enthusiasm of a genius, expect neither profit nor general fame by my writings, and I consider myself as having been amply repaid without either. Poetry has been to me its own exceeding great reward; it has soothed my afflictions; it has multiplied and refined my enjoyments; it has endeared solitude, and it has given me the habit of wishing to discover the good and the beautiful in all that meets and surrounds me." Urge such a man, if you can, to convert his "Christabel " into an interest-table, and limit his peace of mind by the rise and fall of stocks!

"I

We of America complain, that we have no established literature; and until more among us are willing to devote themselves to the cause of literature, we must be content to reflect the literary splendor of England. Some of the brightest creations, indeed, of modern days, some of the fairest creatures of love, and poetry, and romance, belong to America, but they are not very numerous, and, ten to one, our poet or novelist, like the poor author's garment, which was, a cap by night, a stocking all the day," pours forth his strain after completing the routine of a pleader at the bar, a bank officer, or political editor! Among the respectable and vitally important cares of professional life, literature has a poor chance of encouragement; the philosopher's speculations, or the poet's theory, having nothing to do with the brief or the dissecting knife.

"This is the language," says the objector, "of romantic folly; we must live, so let us labor for the readiest recompense; intellect will not support life, nor secure comfort." Such an one, be it observed, mistakes the ambition of the literary man. Without altogether neglecting, he seeks something infinitely better, than pecuniary ease. True, Goldsmith was needy, and Chatterton was driven to despair, and Otway died of starvation. But I do not believe that either would have foregone one sublime conception, or erased from his writings one maxim of sound morality, to gain the wealth of the princes who neglected him! A lying tombstone tells the story of many a rich patron of their time, their memorials are, "The Deserted Village," and "Venice Preserved."

I am not advocating that sickly, sentimental, "love-in-a-cottage" kind of doctrine, which teaches, that mind is above ordinary necessities, and that the wants of life are not our common inheritance. But I do contend, that the time is coming, and that it should speedily come, in America, when a class of men whose wants are not extravagant, but attainable and refined, will meet with support. The human powers are unfairly and unprofitably employed, if turned to many different subjects; and this truth should be better known in America. The lawyer has an end before him, which only a life can attain; so has the physician, the clergyman, and the author. Unite the duties of either two, and you injure both.

Assuming, what we need not enlarge upon, the importance of a high national literature, let any one observe, who are the supporters of that which adorns England. "Not those, he will find, who united two or three occupations! Goldsmith was a professional man at first, but his patients were few, and he soon became what he was born to be, an author! Scott never figured at the bar, and Shakspeare was an indifferent actor. The problem may be easily solved. Some minds are fitted to investigate by help of the data of others, and apply to God's work their conclusions, and others are designed more exclusively to create ;a distinction rarely sufficiently observed. The author has no common work to perform; he who would instruct others, must untiringly improve himself; presenting no theories undigested, and familiar with the wildest speculations. In America, and everywhere else, we want a race of thinkers; men who will keep aloof from the eddy, which draws in politician and merchant, and even the professional man, and give us the results of long meditation. The mere words are no part of an author's labor; they but represent long previous mental action. The silence of the study is to mature the observations of the world.

Professional men generally appeal to their race only in one capacity; the author, by enlarged views of life, and illustrations of moral truth, may