Waterbury evening Democrat., 1892-05-30


 the names of the engagements tn which he participated; that his halting gait or scared body may not be regarded as Q pitiable deformity, or hin children be taught to reckon him in the ranks of robbers, mnrderers and assassins.
 It is not necessary to assert, in opposi- tion to the advocates of peace at, any price, that war in itself or peace in it. self is right. War is contest between nations or states or between parts, ,of the same state waged for various pur- poses. It is sometimes right and some times wrong; that is, one party to the controversy may be in the right, and the other in the wrong, or that each party may be partly in the right land partly in the wrong. The commandment of God on which all the reasoning of ex4 treme peace men is based is: t'Thou shalt do no murder" It was certainly never intended by the great Law Giver that human life should never be taken; for in thousapds of instances the same Giver of Law sanctioned and directed the talE- ing of human life. And I believe it is Q mistake to assert that the principlestof law were changed by our Lord He e6> pressly states that he came not to,de- stroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfill. The everlasting principle was always the same as given by Moses, when he says: ''Thou shalt not ave1age nor bear any grudge against the -Chil- dren of thy people, but thou shalt love thy people as thyselE" Our Lords sum- mary puts the whole in brief and conn prehensive terms: Glove the Lord thy God with all thy heart and thy neighbor as myself" The taking of human life is not necessarily contrary to this principle = this eternal law. A man may take life in self-defense. He may strike the thief creeping into his house by night or the drenSor attempting to burn his homeJ Society may institute police force for it's protection-be it army or navya mili- tia or uniformed police, the principle is ever the same. The exercise of extreme force often becomes absolutelyyneces- sary to existence. The men who exc cute the extreme sentence of the41aw, and take human life, almost never1do it in hate. They are not murderers.- It is the final and the solemn act of self preservation on the part of human,so- ciety.
 , CGJtUtOT OUHtU6T HII6GC6TS Ntn186I.
 Notice how thoroughly Mir. Sumner reversed his wheels in the senate of the United States, May 19, 1869, and how clearly and forcibly he states my views of the rights of war. He says: ssHarsh and repulsive as these rights unques- tionably are, they are derived from the overruling instinctive laws of self-de- fense; common to nations as they are to individuals. Every community Shaving the form and character of sovereignty has a right to national life, and in de- fense of such life may put forth+aN it's energies. Any other principle would leave 1t the wretched prey to wicked men abroad and at home"
 ThS z1itSgGtGo's of tedr qIgAE&
 This is all we ask-this is Charles Summers maturer thought, wrought out iIa the glory of that fearful struggle for national existence, and indeedndy whole heart says to him q glad ansHasshe adds the following noble words, halfin rem iniscence: q rejoice to believe that civilization has already done much to mitigate the rights of war, andtis among ong-cherished visions, which present events cannot make me renounce, that the time is coming when all theserights will be further softened to the mood of permanent peace" Yes, indeed, suore and more do the ministfations ofSlove follow close upon the rights of swar. The minister of religion enters theldun- geon of the criminal condemned.to to die; the missionary precedes and often pre- vents the warlike savage frommaking his meditated forays and attacks; the Christian commissions follow the armies to refresh and succor the sick and the wounded, and towards those plowshares of permanentpeace civilized Christian men are seriously and actively projecting methods of settling controversies betw cen themselves without the use of the sword.
 The settlement of our recent difficulty with England, as once before in 1865 and '66, without war, is a wonderful fact. It is a stepping stone to a broader platform of international law, a genuine tribute to the moral courage, quiet firmness and clear-sighted wisdom of our statesmen. Gen. Grant, successful soldier as he was, nevertheless wrote peace higher than war. He preferred right doing to punishment, and mercy to sacrifice.
 Sherman and the citiEens of AtEGnta.
 You cannot forget the words of our beloved Sherman in '64 to the citizens of Atlanta: But, my dear sirs, when that peace does come you may calpupon me for anything. Then will I share with you the last cracker, and watch with you to shield your home and fami- lies against danger from any quarter; once admit the union, oncemore acknowledge the authority of the gen. eral government, and instead of de- voting your houses and streets and roads to the dread uses of war, I and this army become at once your pro- tectors and supporters; shielding you from danger, let it come from what quarter it may"
 The genuine subordination of Grant and Sherman to the authority over them was shared by all the million of men,