ligent citizens, who, when fighting for their liberties and homes, are a match for any soldiers on Earth. But who will "stand sponsors" for their bravery, when fighting against their wills, and for the barren wastes of Oregon?

The sentiment of loyalty has much to do in making a British soldier brave. When the Spanish Armada threatened England, the Queen rode bareheaded through the camp at Tilbury, exclaiming, "I have the body but of a weak and feeble woman, but I have the heart and stomach of a King, and I take foul scorn that Parma, or any other prince of Europe, should dare invade the borders of my realm." "And," says the narrator, "men who saw that sight, and heard that speech, would have battled to the death in her behalf, against the armies of all Europe." But loyalty is a word unknown in the dialect of Americans. For which of our brave rulers, are the peaceable citizens of this nation, ready to pour out their blood, on the field of battle. Before we calculate upon victory, let us "count the cost whether we be able with ten thousand to contend with him that cometh against us with twenty thousand."

But suppose we were victorious, would that settle our right to Oregon? We should only have to return to the very position from which we started, and settle the question by negotiation or arbitration. Let me ask those who suppose that a war will help us out of this difficulty, in what way fighting will decide whether the 49th or the 54th parallel of latitude is our true boundary.

Our appeal to this tribunal in 1812, ought to teach us wisdom iu such mat ers. England claimed the right to take her seamen, though she found them sailing under the American flag. The United States denied this doctrine, and declared war to prove it false. We prosecuted the war for three years-our commerce was swept from the ocean,―our frontier villages were laid in ashes,-thousands of lives and hundreds of millions of money were expended-the capital of the nation was captured; and when peace was made, not a word was said on the subject which was the only cause of war. That question remained precisely where it was before. Thus it is that war decides questions of right. It is with nations as with individuals. The duellist fights till he is satisfied, and if his antagonist is alive, he must commence again where he ended, before the fight, with negotiation. So we may fight with England till Congressional pugnacity is satisfied; and if one party or the other be not annihilated, they must return to negotiation at last.

4. I have endeavored to show that the war which threatens us, would be dishonorable, impolitic, and useless. I deem it an important additional consideration that it would be contrary to the will of the vast majority of the people of this country.

All that I have said of the evils of war, would be true of it, if it were undertaken voluntarily, and unitedly. But to be forced into it by the recklessness of a few ambi ious men, who would be lifted

by its tumultuous waves into stations of power; would be doubly horrible. The great mass of the people of all parties-those who must bear the burden, endure the suffering, and do the fighting; and who have every thing to lose and nothing to gain by war; are opposed to it. But if we are a self-governing people, as we profess to be, we may ask, what right have our representatives and servants, to plunge us into a war against our interests and will? And if we be a Christian nation, as we claim to be, we may ask what sort of morality it is, which compels the peaceful inhabitants of one country, to shoot and be shot by the peaceful inhabitants of another country, to gratify the ambition or revenge of their rulers?

Who then wishes that our difficulties with England should be referred to this tribunal? Not our merchants and ship-owners, for thousands of them would be bankrupt in an hour;-not the planters of the outh, for the closing of foreign markets against their great staple, would be their ruin ;-not the farmers of the North, who are rejoicing to see the ports of England, now opened for the first time, to their products;-not the manufacturer who depends upon foreign commerce for his materials, or his markets, for the hum of his machinery would be silenced for years ;-not the poor mechanic, or day-laborer, the carpenter, the mason, the painter, the smith, the carman, the porter, the clerk, the journeyman ;-they would lose their employments, and starve in idleness, or be driven into the army, to shoot and be shot by the British, at eight dollars per month; not the wives and mothers of our land, whose husbands and sons, in case of war, would be sacrificed upon its Moloch altars; not the Christian, who sees in war the mightiest conceivable obstacles to the progress of Christ's cause, and the salvation of a lost world. Who is it, then, that would embroil these mighty Christian nations in war, and entail upon the forty millions of their inhabitants its untold miseries? They are a few mercenary leeches, who would fain fatten themselves upon the blood of expiring thousands;—a few aspiring military chieftains, who would be raised to the high places of power, upon the hurricane of war. They are not the thousandth part of the people, whose dearest interests are staked upon the issue of this question. Then let every friend of God and man, fearlessly lift up his voice against the contemplated iniquity, and if the curse must come, let these Ahithophels bear the responsibility, and answer for the consequences, to the God of a

tions.

5. The threatened appeal to arms is entirely unnecessary.

Many, who assent to all that I have said respecting the evil, folly, and absurdity of war, as a tribunal for the decision of disputed questions; still claim that in many cases it is necessary.

I have already said that war has no tendency to settle disputes; so far from it, it is itself the worst of all disputes; and every moment that it continues it renders the original breach wider and wider.—

Negotiation, which must follow war, should be a substitute for it. "But suppose the negotiation fails, what shall be the court of last appeal?" I answer, a court of arbitration. This mode of adjustment, is as rational and honorable between nations as between individuals. It is so pronounced by Vattel, and other writers on the laws of nations; and has often been adopted with happy results. To the adoption of this principle Switzerland owes her preservation. Had she depended, for the settlement of her disputes, upon the arbitrament of war, she had long ago been swallowed up in the devouring jaws of surrounding nations. France and Mexico have provided for the same mode of settling their controversies. But, it is said, other nations are prejudiced against us, and will not do us justice. Facts prove the opposite. We have already tried this method with advantage. A controversy between the United States and England, respecting our last treaty of peace, was decided by the Emperor of Russia in our favor, The question respecting our N. E. boundary, was referred to the King of the Netherlands, and the line proposed by him was nearly identical with that which was finally adopted. He, who in this age of the world, denies that there is justice enough, and humanity enough, and love of peace enough on earth, to secure the amicable settlement of all disputes between enlightened Christian nations,-slanders his race. He who declares the hazard of war more equitable than any other tribunal,slanders himself.

That such arbitration in our existing controversy with England," should be declined, so long as there is hope from negotiation, is doubtless no ground for complaint, ; but if all other methods of adjustment shall fail, and the reference proposed by England shall then be rejected; and thus these sister nations shall be plunged into a bloody war; as surely as there is justice on earth or in heaven, so surely shall we draw down upon our heads, the execration of the world, and the curse of Almighty God.

6. Once more, let us look, for a moment, at the moral aspect of the contest in question.

No one can question the truth, that God holds nations responsible for their conduct as well as individuals. If any one does question it, let him read God's threatenings against Assyria, Idumea, and Egypt; and the fulfilment of those threatenings in their utter destruction; and he will question it no longer. What then will be God's estimate of the war which threatens us ?

A declaration of war will mean one of these three things:-That we appeal to arms to determine our right to Oregon; or that we we are determined to possess the land right or wrong; or that as England has encroached upon our supposed rights, we will inflict all possible injury upon her, by way of redress.

If the first of this triplet expresses our intentions, then I ask, if muskets, and cannon, and submarine batteries, are wise and impar

tial judges of right; I ask, if the strongest regiments and the best marksmen, are sure to be on the side of justice; I ask, if might makes right? Are we heathen, barbarians, duellists, that we should avow a doctrine so monstrous? Do we live in the dark ages, that we should resort to the judicial combat? If we expect the war to determine the right in this controversy, we offer an insult to the conscience of the world, and to the God of Heaven.

If we intend by a war to take possession of the territory irrespective of right, then plainly, it is a glaring act of iniquity and wrong. If we mean by a war to retaliate upon England for encroaching upon our rightful domains ;-if, because she will not relinquish her claim to Oregon, we mean to derange her commerce, burn her ships, shoot her subjects, and do her all possible injury; I ask if this is the principle of the gospel of peace,—that gospel which says to nations as well as to individuals, "avenge not yourselves?" On whichever plea then, a resort to arms should be determined, it wonld be wholly opposed to the spirit of the gospel, and a monstrous iniquity in the sight of God.

Set as I am for the defence of the interests of Christ's kingdom, and to utter the testimony of God against every sin, I have deemed it my duty to speak to you plainly, respecting the sin of war, which now threatens us; and which would be fraught with infinite disaster to the interests of Zion, at home, and all over the world. I have endeavored to steer clear of the Scylla and Charybdis of the great political parties; and to state those principles and facts bearing upon the question, which may assist us to determine the course of our duty.

"Blessed are the peacemakers," said Christ, and doubly blessed, when their interests are involved both in the peace itself and the making of it. May that blessedness be ours. As we value the prosperity of the country we so much love, as we value the lives, and the souls of our brethren in this land and in England, and as we value the favor and smile of our country's God, let us use our influence, to pour the oil of peace upon the troubled waters; and invoke the God of peace, to save us from the awful scourge of war. I rejoice that the latest intelligence from England, is calculated to inspire more confident hopes of a speedy reconciliation. While therefore we should avoid needless agitation and alarm, we are not to forget that so long as this question is open, and this popular excitement lasts, war is at least possible. And the possibility of so tremendous an evil, should keep every Christian in earnest prayer to him, who has the hearts of rulers and the destiny of empires in his hands. If Christians in this land, will thus act and pray, we may expect that these boding clouds will speedily disperse, that peace will continue to reign in our borders, and that we shall still be "that happy people, whose God is the Lord."

BY THE REV. GEORGE POTTS, D.D. PASTOR OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH IN UNIVERSITY PLACE, NEW YORK.

THE HO U R.*

"Father! the hour is come."-JOHN, xvii. 1.

We cannot believe ourselves mistaken in maintaining that, although every religious service should be perfumed with the odour of Christ, the service which so distinctly and affectingly records his death, should with especial sacredness, be consecrated entirely to such thoughts as grow immediately out of that grand subject. Surely if at any time we are to know nothing but Christ, and him crucified, this is the time. Remoter topics however important in their place, would divide attention and exhaust a portion of the energy of thought and emotion, which the great duty of the occasion, requires and deserves. Then let the first and the last thought of the soul upon this day be-the love wherewith He loved us, who gave himself for us-the more especially as the appointment upon which we are to attend, comes with the emphasis of a special injunction, "Do this in remembrance of me."

In this spirit, we have now, as upon all similar occasions, selected words from the pages of sacred scripture, which directly summon us into the very midst of the wonders we commemorate. We wish, not so much to reason as to feel: not to present truth in controversy, but truth admitted, and so to present it, as to draw our souls out of the range of their ordinary associations; and from the eminence which our subject alone affords, to contemplate the most momentous realities which human history presents to our view. Such a height is the historical period of the passion of the Redeemer of men: and to reach it, let all our energies of thought, attentive thought, excited and consecrated by the Divine. Spirit, be given to the deep significance which belongs to the words, of our text "Father! the hour is come."

A Communion Sermon.