AMERICA AND HER FUTURE.
There is something in the very name of America, when applied to the United States, which carries with it an inspiring influence,—an ideal of freedom and of true manhood. In referring to the incidents of her origin, in connection with the events of her subsequent career, it would seem that America is none other than a "child of destiny."
She was born amid the storms of a revolution, and commenced at birth to work out the great problems of civil and religious liberty. She has an abiding faith in herself, and believes it to be her mission to originate new views and discover new principles, as well as to try new experiments in the science of popular government. The greatest peculiarity in her character is that her past cannot be safely accepted as an index of her future; in other words, her past is not likely to be repeated. In fact, she does not wish to repeat or perpetuate anything that can be improved. Her political creed is as simple as it is brief,—the "greatest good to the greatest number;" and yet it is the most complex creed, perhaps, that ever existed, involving questions which have not been, and cannot be, satisfactorily settled.
America knows what she has been, but does not know what she will be. It is doubtful if she knows what she would be. She has several favorite watchwords, such as progress, freedom, and equal rights, and but few, if any, settled opinions. Her present position, unstable as it may be, is her standpoint of judgment. In attempting to achieve what she most desires, she relies on experiment rather than precedent. In her forecast consist her welfare and her political sagacity; yet she can no more predict than control her future. None but a divine intelligence can comprehend the extent or grandeur of her future.
One thing is certain, the rapidity of her career approaches railway speed. What impediments may lie in her track, or what collisions may occur, it is impossible for man to foresee. It would seem, however, that she is an instrumentality in divine hands; a nationality, whose task it is to work out the great problem of a just government,—one in which all political power is vested in the people, and exercised by the people for the common purpose of securing the greatest possible good to the greatest possible number. The right to live under such a government is a natural right, and should be accorded to every human being, the world over.
In all human governments there are, and probably ever will be, more or less imperfections growing out of mistaken theories, or arising from their practical workings. Though it may not be possible by legislation or otherwise to remedy every imperfection, yet there can be no political inequality which may not be so far modified as to extend to every citizen equal rights and equal justice. There is a natural love of freedom and of justice implanted within the human breast, which lies at the foundation, not only of the political, but of the social, fabric. This love of freedom and of justice is an instinctive feeling, if not an inspired sentiment, which ennobles the patriot, and converts him into a hero. When oppressed, the true hero smites his oppressor. This is a law of his nature—an attempt to redress a wrong—and therefore an element of human government. When a civil government has been instituted, positive law becomes the rule of right. But when nations differ, and diplomacy fails in its mission, there remains no recognized alternative for adjustment but a reference to the arbitrament of the sword. This final method of redressing national wrongs has descended to modern times from the primitive ages of barbarism, and when adopted, as often terminates in perpetuating the wrong as in redressing it. It is, to say the least of it, a method which is entirely inconsistent with the refined civilization of the present age.
There seems to be no good reason why an international code of laws might not be adopted by all civilized nations for their common government in redressing their grievances. If such a code could be framed and accepted, it would not only secure the just rights of nations from infraction as against each other, but would unite them in their mutual interests and sympathies by the indissoluble ties of a common fraternity. Then all differences and dissensions could be settled, as they should be, by negotiation or voluntary submission to arbitration; and then wars would cease, and rivers of blood no longer flow.
Nations, in their relations to each other, are but individuals, and should, as such, be subjected to wholesome restraints by some recognized authority. The proper authority would seem to be a representative Congress of Nations. This view of the matter is an American idea, and one which has been suggested by American experience. The assumption that every nation is an independent sovereignty, if not absurd in theory, is by no means true in fact. No civilized nation can live within itself and for itself, but must and will, in order to supply its wants, hold commercial intercourse with other nations. The productions of the earth belong to man, and are essential, whether of this or that clime, to his health and happiness, and will therefore be sought and distributed. Even the social relations of one nation with another are hardly less conducive to the general welfare than their commercial relations, especially since steam-power and the telegraph-wire have comparatively made all men next-door neighbors.