from which these extracts are taken, see Monthly Repository for 1815, pp. 81, 431, &c.

Many of the continental Anabaptists shewed no want of a disposition for turbulence and bloodshed; but the pacific principles of their founders were always cherished by others of the party, and have been preserved by their descendants, the Mennonites, or Unitarian Baptists, of Germany, Russia, and Holland.

We must not omit an honourable mention of others, who, though adopting the military profession, have held out against the common maxim that they had nothing to do with the justice of the cause for which their swords were drawn. Many of the Independents in Cromwell's army threw up their commissions rather than serve in the war which he commenced, in their opinion so wantonly, against Spain, by the seizure of Jamaica. Algernon Sidney argues this point very conclusively against Filmer: "His second instance concerning wars, in which he says, the subject is not to examine whether they are just or unjust, but must obey, is weak and frivolous, and very often false. Though God may be merciful to a soldier, who by the wickedness of a magistrate, whom he honestly trusts, is made a minister of injustice, it is nothing to this case. For if our author say true, that the word of a king can justify him in going against the command of God, he must do what is commanded,

though he think it evil; the Christian soldiers under the Pagan emperors were obliged to destroy their brethren, and the best men in the world, for being so such as now live under the Turk have the same obligation upon them of defending their master, and slaughtering those he reputes his enemies for adhering to Christianity; and the King of France may, when he pleases, arm one part of his Protestant subjects, to the destruction of another; which is a godly doctrine, and worthy our author's invention. But if this be so, I know not how the Israelites can be said to have sinned in following the examples of Jeroboam, Omri, Ahab, or other wicked kings. It is impertinent to say they were obliged to serve their kings in unjust wars, but not to serve idols; for though God be jealous of his glory, yet he forbids rapine and murder as well as idolatry. If there be a law that forbids the subject to examine the commands tending to the one, it cannot but enjoin obedience to the other. The same authority which justifies murder, takes away the guilt of idolatry." (Discourses concerning Government, Ch. iii, Sect. 20.)

Now arose the Quakers, whose profession of faith is too well expressed by Barclay not to be given in his own words:

"If to revenge ourselves, or to render injury, evil for evil, wound for wound, to take eye for eye, tooth for tooth; if to fight for outward and

perishing things, to go a warring one against another, whom we never saw, nor with whom we never had any contest, nor any thing to do; being, moreover, altogether ignorant of the cause of the war, but only that the magistrates of the nations foment quarrels one against another, the causes whereof are, for the most part, unknown to the soldiers that fight, as well as upon whose side the right or wrong is; and yet to be so furious, and rage one against another, to destroy and spoil all, that this or the other worship may be received or abolished; if to do this, and much more of this kind, be to fulfil the law of Christ, then are our adversaries indeed true Christians, and we miserable heretics, that suffer ourselves to be spoiled, taken, imprisoned, banished, beaten, and evillyintreated, without any assistance, placing our trust only in God, that he may defend us, and lead us by the way of the cross into his kingdom. But if it be otherways, we shall certainly receive the reward which the Lord hath promised to those that cleave to him, and, in denying themselves, confide in him."

Three observations suggest themselves on this account of the principal classes of Christians by whom war has been condemned:

1. The Unitarian will, perhaps, not be sorry to remark, that a conviction of its criminality has generally been found in connexion with those notions of doctrine which bear most affinity to

his own, or with that religious liberty which usually precedes or accompanies their adoption.

2. The history of this aversion from war furnishes a presumption in favour of its being inseparable from pure Christianity. It appears strongest at the nearest period of which we can gain information to the apostolic age; it gradually wore out as religion became corrupt, until it was quite lost; as the New Testament was again studied, and made the rule of faith and practice, it reappeared; and it was most powerful in those who, according to our opinions, were the most enlightened and consistent of all who aided in the great work of Reformation.

3. Whether recourse to arms be essentially unlawful, or allowable in some extreme cases, of rare occurrence; and whether the military profession should be altogether avoided by Christians, or only when they deem the cause unjust, or the means forbidden; are differences comparatively of little moment, so long as there is a common and lively sense of the miseries and crimes which war produces; this feeling pure Christianity unquestionably excites, and will excite and diffuse as it becomes better understood and more generally adopted; and its tendency, therefore, is to mitigate the evils and prevent the recurrence of wars, until its full influence shall realize the promised universal reign of the Prince of Peace.

Of late, the subject has been regarded as less belonging to theology than to humanity and benevolence. This is by no means to be regretted. Numerous and laudable efforts are making by societies in this country and in America, to communicate information upon it, and who will not heartily wish them success? For an account of these, and of the tracts issued by them, I must refer the reader to the Annual Reports of the Society for the Promotion of Permanent and Universal Peace, established in London June 14, 1816.

I have lengthened this Appendix much beyond my intention, which was merely to put together two or three quotations and remarks, which could not conveniently have been placed in the Notes. It cannot conclude better than with the following extract from a most useful work, which I should be glad to persuade its able Author to republish, and every Englishman to read and profit by.

"Those who reason in favour of the perfectibility of man, draw all that is solid in their arguments from the possibility of the reduction of the moral evil by which the world is oppressed. They see the labour of man employed rather in preparing the apparatus of death, than in producing the means of life; and they say, were the moral sentiments of men corrected, war and show would have no place; and the expense of war and luxury being converted to the uses of life, would supply all the real wants of all that