ETERNAL PEACE

Author(s): IMMANUEL KANT

Source: The Advocate of Peace (1894-1920), Vol. 59, No. 5 (MAY 1897), pp. 111-116
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25751039
Accessed: 04-04-2018 14:47 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

Sage Publications, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Advocate of Peace (1894-1920)

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 1897. THE ADVOCATE OF PEACE. Ill
has since led to the conclusion of other treaties of
burga Committee of the Red Cross pledges an annual
pension to the founder*,?but at the same time also
similar character for the improvement of international
relations over the whole earth. u It is," says Dunant
with a feeling of shame that Germany, which first of all
himself in reference thereto, " a great step in social
lands, in the wars of 1866 and 1870, reaped the fruits of
progress that diplomacy to-day is inclined to giveDunant's
its labors, has allowed herself to be outstripped
earnest attention to works of benevolence and social im
by another land in paying this debt of honor. But if we
provement and that princes, the rulers of states, cooper
are not mistaken, Germany will seek to make amends
for her neglect and will follow the noble example of
ate in bringing about the beneficent results of important
movements whose only motive is charity, true and pureRussia. May the memorial festival which takes place on
humanity, the progress of hospitality and the general the 8th of May (1896), Dunant's birthday, at the insti
welfare of peoples. The human race is destined yetgation to of the Empress Augusta Victoria, in the White
form only a Mngle great family, in common accord Hall for of the Palace at Berlin, and to which all Red Cross
the general good, and in active mutal cooperation, led Societies
by have sent their representatives, be a turning
the different princes and governments, for the benefit of
point in the fate of the sorely tried man, that to the crea
the various peoples." tor of the Red Cross 4 4 may come a happy and peaceful
And if you ask me about the further history of theevening, and the Red Cross on the White Flag shed a
man, who by his own force accomplished so much, thegentle radiance on his hoary form."
answer unfortunately is that he fared as so many other
benefactors of the race have fared. In behalf of the* Unfortunately this statement which was published by several
papers has proved on closer investigation to be untrue. But in
work, the realization of which he had set as his life
Stuttgart a provisional committee has been formed, which pro
task, he neglected his own interests, and after he had
poses to make an appeal to the public, and, in order to relieve the
condition of the founder of the Red Cross, to ask the ladies and
run through with the large fortune which he inherited,
gentlemen of Germany to create a Dunant fund.
partly through the great sacrifices which he made for the
accomplishment of his noble purposes, partly through in
experience in business affairs and misplaced confidence, ETERNAL PEACE.
he was soon entirely forgotten, though he had after his by immanuel kant
first successes been the recipient of honors and distinc
tions of all kinds, while his work in the meantime overran 1795.
the world and spread blessing everywhere. Without "to eternal peace."
permanent home and often struggling for the necessities
Whether the above satirical inscription, once put by a
of life, he lived first in England, then in Germany, where
certain Dutch innkeeper on his signboard on which a
toward the end of the seventies known by few he spent
graveyard was painted, holds of men in general, or par
some years in the family of the already well known priest
ticularly of the heads of states who are never sated with
Dr. Wagner then residing in Stuttgart. Subsequentlywar, he or perhaps only of those philosophers who are always
lived in out-of-the-way places in his native Switzerland.
dreaming their sweet dream of peace, need not be here
For a series of years he has dwelt in retreat near Ror discussed. The author of the present essay claims for
schach in Switzerland, in a very simple way but in a phil
himself, however, in presenting his ideas, the protection
osophic disposition, and as in his youth so in his extreme
of one fact. The practical statesman when he comes in
old age inspired with love for everything great and noble.
contact with the theoretical statesman assumes a haughty
And now, though somewhat late, the man who is so high air, and looks down upon him with great self-satisfaction
ly deserving is again being remembered, be it said to as
thea mere theorizer whose empty ideas can bring no dan
honor of our time, and an effort is being made to rightger to the state, founded, as it must be, on the principles
the wrong which has been done him. While Dunant was derived from experience ; the worldly-wise statesman
as good as forgotten some years ago, his services may are therefore, without giving himself any concern, allow
now being recalled again with honor in all sorts of dailythe theorizer to throw his eleven skittle-balls all at once.
papers, periodicals and pamphlets. Especially in This his practical statesman must therefore, in case of a con
native land, Switzerland, where he is living in retirement,
test with the theoretical statesman, so far proceed con
people vie with one another in giving him, on all possiblesistently as not to suspect that any danger to the state
occasions, deserved recognition. Nevertheless the shame lurks behind the opinions which the latter ventures hon
ful fact remains that for twenty-nine years one of the estly and openly to express. The author of this essay
noblest and most deserving men of our century, who, but
feels assured that through this "saving clause" he will
for a meagre pension of 1200 francs allowed him by be
his in the best manner possible protected against all ma
own family, would long ago have died of hunger, licious
has interpretation.
been allowed to starve and in a hospital to reflect on the first section.
thankfulness of his fellowmen !
As the services of victorious generals and successfulWhich contains the preliminary articles of a perpetu
peace between states.
statesmen are recognized by donations, so this fighter
against the horrors of war ought to have received a gift 1. No conclusion of peace shall be held to be such, whi
of honor from all the civilized states. But no one is made with the secret reservation of the material for
thought even of returning to him the large sums (somefuttere war.
50,000 francs) which he had spent in publications and For, in that event, it would be a mere truce, a post
journeys in furtherance of his humanitarian work. Withponement of hostilities, not a peace. Peace means the
satisfaction, therefore, will the friends of Dunant have
end of all hostilities, and to attach to it the adjective
learned in recent weeks from the papers that the Empress
" eternal" is a pleonasm which at once arouses suspicion.
of Russia has signed a document in. which the St. Peters
The causes of a future war, whicfy are present though,

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 112 THE ADVOCATE OF PEACE. May,
perhaps not at the time known even to the powers which tacks from without. It would be exactly the same with
are making peace with each other, are entirely removed the accumulation of a war fund. Looked upon by other
through a treaty of peace, even those which a keen and states as a threat of war, it would lead to their anticipat
dexterous search might discover in documents laid away ing such a war by making an attack themselves. Because,
in the public archives. The mental reservation of old of the three powers, the power of the army, the power of
claims, to be brought forward in the future, of which alliance, and the power of money, the last might well be
neither party dares at the time to make mention, because considered the most reliable instrument of war. The dif
both are too much exhausted to continue the war, with ficulty of ascertaining the amount of the fund accumu
the base intention of taking advantage of the first favor lated might, however, possibly work a counter effect.
able opportunity to assert them, is genuine Jesuitic casuis 4. No national debts shall be contracted in connection
try. Such a procedure, when looked at in its true char with the foreign affairs of the state.
acter, must be considered beneath the dignity of rulers, The obtaining of money, either from witnout or from
and so must the disposition to pursue such deductions within the state, for purposes of internal improvement ?
be held unworthy of a minister of state. But if, in ac the improvement of highways, the planting of new colo
cordance with certain 4* enlightened " notions of political nies, the storing of supplies for years of crop failure, etc.
wisdom, the true honor of the state is held to consist in ? need create no suspicion. Foreign debts may be con
the continual increase of power by any and every means, tracted for this purpose. But, as an instrument of oppo
of course the judgment just given will be looked upon as sition between the powers, a credit system of debts end
visionar}' and pedantic. lessly growing though always safe against immediate
2. No state having an independent existence, whether it demand (the demand for payment not being made by all
be small or great, may be acquired by another state, through the creditors at the same time),?such a system, the ingen
inheritance, exchange, purchase or gift. ious invention of a trading people in this century,? is a
A state is not a possession or patrimony, like the soil dangerous money power. It is a resource for carrying
on which it has its seat. It is a society of men, subject on war which surpasses the resources of all other states
to the authority and disposition of none but itself. Since, taken together. It can only be exhausted through a pos
like a stem, it has its own roots, to incorporate it as a sible deficit of the taxes, which may be long kept off
graft into another state is to take away its existence as a through the revival of commerce brought about by the re
moral person and to make of it a thing. This contradicts flex influence of the loans on industry and trade. The
the idea of the original compact, without which no author faculty thus afforded of making war, coupled with the
ity over a people can even be conceived.* Everybody seemingly innate inclination thereto of those possessing
knows into what danger, even in the most recent times, power, is a great obstacle in the way of perpetual peace.
the supposed right of thus acquiring states has brought 'This obstacle must be made impossible by a preliminary
Europe. Other parts of the world have known nothing article, ? all the more because the finally unavoidable
of it. But in Europe it has been held that states can bankruptcy of the state must involve many other states
marry each other. This has been looked upon in part as innocently in the disaster, thus inflicting upon them a
a new kind of industry, a way of making oneself power public injury. Consequently, other states are at least
ful through family connections without putting forth per justified in entering into an alliance against such a state
sonal effort, in part also as a way of extending one's and its pretensions.
landed possessions. In the same category must be reck 5. No state shall interfere by force in the constitution and
oned also the letting out of troops of one state to an government of another state.
other, against an enemy not common to the two. Thus For what could justify it in taking such action ? Could,
the subjects of the state are used and abused as things forsooth, some offence which that state gives to the sub
to be handled at will. jects of another state ? Such a state ought rather to serve
3. Standing armies shall after a time be entirely abol as a warning, because of the example of the evils which
ished.
a state brings upon itself by its lawlessness. In general,
For they incessantly threaten other states with war, the bad example given by one free person to another (as
through their appearing always to be in armed readiness a scandalum acceptum) is no lesion of his rights. But
for it. States are thus provoked to outdo one another in the case would be different if a state because of internal
number of armed men without limit. Through the expense dissension should be divided into two parts, each of which,
thus occasioned peace finally becomes more burdensome while claiming to constitute a special state, should lay
than a brief war. These armies are thus the cause of claim to the whole. An outside state, if it should render
wars of aggression, undertaken in order that this burden assistance to one of these, could not be charged with
may be thrown off. In addition to this, the hiring out of interfering in the constitution of another state, as that
men to kill and be killed, an employment of them as state would then be in a condition of anarchy. But as
mere machines and tools in the hands of another (the long as this inner strife was not decided, the interference
state), cannot be reconciled with the rights of humanity of outside powers would be a trespass on the rights of
as we feel them in our own person. The case is entirely an independent people struggling only with its own inner
different where the citizens of a state voluntarily drill them weakness. This interference would be an actual offence
selves at stated times in the practice of arms with a view which would so far tend to render the autonomy of all
of defending themselves and their fatherland against at states insecure.
6. No state at war with another shall permit such kinds
* A hereditary kingdom is not a state which may be inherited by
another state, but one whose governing power may be transferred
oj hostility as will make mutual confidence impossible in
by inheritance to another physical person. The state thus acquires time of future peace ; such as the employment of assassins,
a ruler, not the ruler as such (that is, as already possessing an of poisoners, the violation of capitulation, the instigation oj
other realm) the state. treason, in the state against which it is making war.

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 1897. THE ADVOCATE OF PEACE. 113
These are dishonorable stratagems. Some sort of con ual peace. ? The Civil Constitution in every state shall be
fidence in an enemy's mental honesty must remain even in republican.
time of war, for otherwise no peace could be concluded, In the first place, a constitution founded in accordance
and the conflict would become a war of extermination. with the principles of freedom of a society of men is
For war is only the dire necessity of asserting one's right necessarily republican. In the second place, this is true
by force in a primitive state of society where there is no of one constructed according to the fundamental idea of
court at hand to decide in accordance with right. In this the dependence of all as subjects upon a common legisla
state neither party can be declared an unjust enemy, for tion. It is true, thirdly, of one formed according to the
this presupposes a judicial decision. The issue of the principle of the equality of the citizens of the state. The
conflict, as in the case of a so-called " judgment of God," republican constitution is the only one springing out of
decides on whose side the right is. But between states the idea of the original compact, on wl ich all legitimate
no war of punishment can be conceived, because between legislation of a people must be based. As far as right
them there is no relation of superior and subordinate. is concerned, the republican principle in fact lies origin
Whence it follows that a war of extermination, in which ally at the basis of all forms of the civil constitution. The
destruction may come to both parties at the same time, only question, therefore, is whether it is the only one
and to all right also, would result in perpetual peace only which will lead to perpetual peace.
when the whole human race was dead and buried. Such
In reality, then, the republican constitution, in addition
a war, therefore, as well as the use of the means which
to the fact that it springs out of the pure concept of right,
might bring it about, is wholly unallowable. But that the gives promise of realizing the desired end, namely per
means mentioned above inevitably lead to such a result is petual peace. The reason of this may be stated as follows :
clear from the fact that such hellish arts, which are in Where the consent of the citizens of the state is re
themselves degrading, when once brought into use, do not
continue long within the limits of war. The employment quired to determine whether there shall be war or not,
of spies, for example, in which only the dishonorableness as must necessarily be the case where the republican con
of others (which cannot be exterminated all at once) is stitution is in force, nothing is more natural than that
employed, goes over and is continued in time of peace, they should hesitate much before entering on so perilous
and thus the purpose of the peace is quite frustrated. a game. If they do so, they must take upon themselves
Although the laws above laid down would be objec all the burdens of war, that is, the fighting, the defraying
tively, that is, in the intention of the powers, only pro of the expenses of the war out of their own possessions
hibitive laws, yet some of them are strict laws, which the reparation of the destruction which it causes, and,
are valid without distinction of circumstances, and they greatest of all, the burden of the debts incurred, an end
would tend immediately to produce their prohibitive effects.
less burden because of the continual prospect of new wars
Such are numbers 1,5, and 6. Others, as numbers 2, 3, and one which therefore embitters peace itself. On the
and 4, though not to be considered as exceptions to the contrary, in a state where the government is not republi
principles of right, yet in respect to the application of can and the subject not a voting citizen, war is the easiest
these principles are subjective, because circumstances athing in the world to enter upon, because the ruler is not
fellow citizen of the state but its o<vner. War does not
often make the time of application indefinite. They ad
mit of delay in fulfilment, without losing sight of their therefore interfere the least with his table enjoyments, his
purpose. The purpose, however, does not admit of ever hunting, his pleasure castles, his court feasts, and the
lasting delay ? k'to the Greek Calends," as Augustus like. He decides lightly to enter upon it, as if it were a
was wont to say. The restoration, for example, to cer sort of pleasure party, and as to its propriety he without
tain states of the freedom of which they have been de concern leaves the justification of it to the diplomatic
prived, contrary to our 2d article, must not be indefi corps who are always ready to find him excuses.
nitely put off. The delay has in view, not non-restoration, That the republican constitution be not confounded
but that there may not be undue haste with its consequent with the democratic, as is generally done, the following
mischief. For the prohibition laid down by the article must be noticed. The forms of the state (cioitas) may
affects only the mode of acquisition, which is not to be be divided either according to the difference of the persons
allowed to continue, not the actual state of possession, holding the governing power or according to the mode of
which, though not conferring a really just title, yet at the government of the people through their ruler, whoever he
time of the supposed acquisition was held by all states may be. The first is properly called the form of the sov
to be legitimate according to the current public opinion. ereignty (forma imperil). Only three forms of this kind
are possible, according as either one only, or some allied
SECOND SECTION
together, or all who make up the body of citizens, possess
Which contains the definitive articles for a perpetual the governing power. Here we have autocracy, aristoc
peace between states. racy and democracy. The second is the form of the gov
The state of peace between men who live near one ernment an {forma regiminis) and has regard to the mode in
other is not a state of nature. The natural state is ratherwhich the state makes use of its supreme power, the mode
one of war. In this state, if there are not always actual of course being conformable to the constitution as an act
hostilities, they at least continually threaten. The state of the general will whereby the mass of indviduals becomes
of peace must therefore be created, for it is not necessa a people. Under this aspect the government is either re
rily secured by the mere absence of hostilities. Evenpublicanif or despotic. Republicanism is that form of gov
hostile acts are not committed by one neighbor against ernment in which the executive power is separated from
another (a state which only the existence of law can bring the legislative. Despotism is the irresponsible adminis
about), the one can always treat the other as an enemy tration of the state by laws which the ruler himself has
when he pleases to challenge him to hostilities. enacted. Here the public will is regarded by the ruler as
his own private will.
1. The first definitive article for the securing of per pet

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 114 THE ADVOCATE OF PEACE. May,
Of the three forms of the state that of democracy, in We now look with deep disdain on the attachment of
the proper sense of the word, is necessarily a despotism, savages to their lawless freedom, their preference to be
because it establishes an executive power in which All engaged in incessant strife rather than submit themselves
decide about and, possibly also, against One, who may to a self imposed restraint, of law, their preference of wild
freedom to rational freedom. All this we regard as sav
not be in accord with it. Hence the Ail are not really all.
agery, coarseness, and beastly degradation of human
This is a contradiction of the general will with itself and
with liberty. nature. One would think that civilized peoples, each
Every form of government which is not representative constituted into a state, would eagerly hasten to get out
is, properly speaking, not a form of government at all, of a similar detestable condition in their relations to one
because one and the same person can no more be law another, as speedily as possible. Instead of this, how
giver and at the same time executive administrator of the ever, every state considers its majesty (majesty of a people
lawgiver's will than the major premise of a syllogism can would be an absurd term) to consist in submitting itself
be at the same time the conclusion under the minor. to no external compulsion of law whatever, and the glory
Although the other two forms of state constitution are so of the ruler is held to consist in his being free from dan
far erroneous that they give room for such a form of gov ger himself and having at his command thousands ready
ernment, yet with them it is at least possible to have a to sacrifice themselves for him in a cause in which they
form of government in harmony with the spirit of a rep have not the slightest interest. The difference between
resentative system. Frederick the Second, for example, the European savages and the American consists chiefly
was accustomed to say that 14 he was simply the highest in the fact that while many tribes of the latter are entirely
servant of the state." On the contrary, the democratic eaten up by their enemies, the former know how to make a
constitution makes it impossible to have a representative better use of their captives than to roast and eat them.
government, because everybody wishes to be lord. We They ute them to increase the number of their subjects
may say, therefore, that the smaller the number of the and thereby the number of instruments for still more ex
personal administrators of the state, and the greater the tensive wars.
constituency represented by them, the more possible it is The baseness of human nature is openly exhibited in the
to have republicanism under the constitution, at least unrestrained relations of peoples to one another, whereas
finally, through a process of gradual reform. For this it is much concealed, through the restraint of government,
reason it is more difficult in an aristocracy than in a in the civil life of each people, where law is in force. It
monarchy to reach this only perfect form of constitution is matter of wonder therefore that the word "right" has
according to the principles of right In a democracy it not yet been wholly excluded from the policy of war as
is impossible to do so except by means of a violent revo pedantic, and that no state has yet been bold enough
lution. The mode of government is however of incom openly to declare itself in favor of such exclusion. For
parably more importance to the people than the form of Hugo Grotius, Puffendorf, Vattell and others ? all miser
the state, though upon the constitution also very much able comforters, unfortunately? although their philosoph
depends the state's capacity of reaching the end of its ically or diplomatically conceived codes have not, and
existence. But the mode of government, if it is to con can not have, the least legal force, because states as such
form to th? idea of right, must necessarily be in accord are not under any common outward restraint, are never
ance with the representative system. In this system theless always sincerely quoted to justify any outbreak of
alone is a republican form of government possible. war. No example, however, is to be found on the other
Without it, whatever be the nature of the constitution, hand where a state has been induced by arguments sup
the form of government is despotic and violent. None ported by the theories of these influential men to desist
of the ancient so called republics had this system. Hence from any warlike undertaking. This attachment shown
they could not help ending in despotism, of the different by every state, at least professedly, to the idea of right
kinds of which that is the most endurable in which the shows that there is to be found in man, though at the
supreme power is lodged in a single individual. time dormant, a moral principle of superior force which
2. Second definitive article for the establishment of per leads him to strive for the mastery over the evil principle
petual peace. ? International right shall be founded on a which is undeniably in him, and to expect such a mas
federation of free states. tery from others. For otherwise states which wish to
Peoples considered as states may be regarded as indi go to war with one another would never utter the word
vidual men. In their natural state, that is, without the " right," not even to make a jest of it, like the Gallic
restraints of outward laws, they are liable to do one an Prince who said: "It is the prerogative which nature
other injury because of their proximity one to another. has given to the strong over the weak, that the latter
Every one of them, therefore, for the sake of its own should obey him."
safety can and ought to demand of the others to enter The method by which states prosecute their rights can
with it into a constitution, like that of the citizens of a not under present conditions be a process of law, since
state, in which each of them can be secured in his right. no court exists having jurisdiction over them, but only
This would be & federation of peoples, but not necessarily war. But through war, even if it result in victory, the
an international state. For this would involve a contradic question of right is not decided. The treaty of peace
tion ; because each state contains the relation of a superior, puts an end to the present war, not to the condition out
or lawgiver, to an inferior or subject, while a number of peo of which a new pretext for war may arise. Nor can this
ples brought together in a single state would form but a pretext be declared out and out unjust, since in this con
single people. This would contradict the principle laid dition every state is judge in its own cause. It is not
down, since we are here considering the rights of peoples in true of states, according to the law of nations, as of men
reference to one another, in so far as they are to be regarded in a lawless state, according to the law of nature, that they
as so many different state and not as fused into one. " ought to get out of this state," because as states they

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 1897. THE ADVOCATE OF PEACE. 115
already have an internal constitution founded on right right do not wish this, and consequently reject in prac
and thus have outgrown the coercive right of others tice towhat is right in principle, if all is not to be lost,
bring them under a wider legal constitution, in accord there can be, in place of the positive idea of a world-re
ance with their conceptions of right. Yet reason, from public only the negative substitue of a permanent, and
its supreme throne of moral, lawgiving power, condemns ever growing federation, as a preventive of war. Such a
war absolutely as a means of establishing right, andfederation
on would hold in check the lawless and hostile
the other hand makes the state of peace an immediate passions of men, which however would always be liable
duty. This state, however, cannot be secured without a
to burst forth anew. As Virgil says :
compact of the nations with each other. There must " Furor
therefore be a compact of a peculiar kind, which may be Impius intus fremit horridus ore cruento."
called a pacific federation (Joedus poci/icum), which dif
fers from a treaty of peace impact am pacts) in that the 3. Third definitive article for the establishment oj per
latter aims to put an end to one war simply, whilepztwd the peace. ? The rights of men as citizens of the world
former seeks to abolish all wars forever. This federation
shall be restricted to conditions of universal hospitality.
would not be invested with a single power of a consti Here, as in the former articles, the question is not one
tuted state, but would secure simply the preservationofand philanthropy but of right. Hospitality here signifies
the right of a foreigner, in consequence of his arrival
security of the freedom of a particular state and of others
federated with it, without any of them having to submit on the soil of another, not to be treated by him as an
themselves to public laws and to compulsion under them, enemy. He may be expelled, if that can be done with
as men do in a state of nature. The practicability, outor his destruction ; but so long as he keeps his place
. capability of objective realization, of this idea of federa
and conducts himself peacefully, he must not be treated
tion, which ought gradually to be extended to all states in a hostile way. He can not lay claim to be treated thus
and in this way lead to perpetual peace, is capable of of any right as a guest, for this would require a
because
being demonstrated. For if it should happen that speciala friendly agreement to consider him for a time
powerful and enlightened people should form itself into as a member
a of some household. His claim is based on
republic, a form of government naturally tending toa per right of visitation, common to all men, by virtue of
petual peace, this would furnish a nucleus of federativewhich he may join any society of men, on account of the
union for other states to connect themselves with. Thus right of the common possession of the surface of the
the states would secure the conditions of freedom accord earth, over which people can not spread abroad indefi
ing to the idea of international right, and this federanitely, but must finally endure living near one another.
tion through the adhesion of other peoples might be ex
Originally, however, no one had any more right than an
tended more and more. other to occupy any particular portion of the earth's sur
It is easy to understand that a people should say toface.it The communities of men are separated by unin
self, " We will have no war among ourselves ; for wehabitable
will portions of this surface, the seas and the
form ourselves into a state, that is, set ourselves updeserts,
as a but in such a way that the ship and the camel,
supreme lawgiving, governing and directing authority "the ship of the desert," make it possible for men to
which shall peacefully dispose of our strifes." But visit ifone another across these unclaimed regions, and to
this state should say, "There shall be no war between useme the right to the surface, which men possess in com
and other states, although I recognize no supreme mon, legis for the purposes of social intercourse. The inhos
lative authority which secures to me my right andpitable to practice in vogue on some sea coasts, as of the
which I secure its right," it is impossible to understandBarbary States, of robbing ships in the neighboring seas,
on what ground confidence in the securing of right wouldor of making slaves of shipwrecked people, or that of the
be based, except it be something similar to the unioninhabitants
of of deserts, such as the Bedouins, of regard
men in civil society, that is, a voluntary federation, which
ing their proximity to nomadic tribes as a right to plun
der them, is thus contrary to the right of nature. The
reason necessarily associates with the concept of the right
of nations. Otherwise nothing more can be said of right the to hospitality which naturally belongs to foreign
subject at all. visitors extends no further than that degree of social in
The right to go to war is inconceivable as an element tercourse with the old inhabitants determined by the lim
in the concept of international right, for that would beitsa of possibility. In this way remote portions of the
world may come into friendly relations with one another
right based, not on universally valid external laws which
limit the freedom of every individual, but on the which one at last come to be regulated by public law, and
sided principle of determining by force what is right. thus bring the human race finally nearer and nearer to a
By the right of war, then, we must mean that menstate whoof world-citizenship.
are so minded do perfectly right when they destroy one If the inhospitable behavior of the civilized, commer
another and thus find perpetual peace only in the wide cial states of our portion of the world be compared with
tomb which conceals all the horrible deeds of violence this barbarian inhospitality, the injustice which they show
along with their perpetrators. For states in their rela when they go to foreign lands and peoples (for they con
tions to one another there can be, according to reason, sider their arrival the same as conquest) becomes sim
no other way out of the lawless condition which inevi ply horrible. America, the Negro lands, the Spice
tably results in war than that they give up their lawlessIslands, the Cape, etc., were considered by them, when
freedom, just as individual men do, accommodate them they discovered them, as belonging to nobody. For the
selves to public constraining laws and so form an inter inhabitants they counted as nothing. Into East India,
national state (civitas gentium) which will grow and at the pretext of simply establishing trading posts,
under
last embrace all the peoples of the earth. But inasmuch they introduced men of war, and with them oppression
as the nations according to their ideas of internationalof the natives, instigation of the different states of the

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 116 THE ADVOCATE OF PEACE. May,
country to widespread wars, famine, insurrection, treach fair as he alleges? so liable to rouse in children that
ery, and so on through the whole category of evils which "wrong feeling" which undeniably does exist? For
afflict the human race. every American boy, at some time, from some source,
China and Japan, which had had experience with such acquires a vigorous hatred for" redcoats " and British?
guests, have done wisely in limiting their intercourse, the a hatred that later years seldom entirely eradicate. Is
former permitting access to her coasts but not entrance the cause of this to be found in the school-books? and, if
into the interior, the latter granting access only to a so, is it an evil inherent in the presentation of the facts,
single European people, the Dutch, whom, however, or a mere accident, to be avoided by moderation and dis
like prisoners, they shut out from intercourse with the crimination ?
natives. The worst of the matter (or rather, from the Before considering what the text-books really say, we
standpoint of the moral judge, the best) is, that they get should note that there are, in our relation to England,
no satisfaction out of this violence, that all these com elements which, to a young and emotional reader, might
mercial societies are on the point of going to pieces, that cause a book really very moderate to inspire patriotism
the Sugar Islands, the seat of the most shocking and most intolerantly aggressive.
complete slavery, yield no real profit, but only an indi In Mr. PlinisolPs extracts from English books occur
rect and at the same time undesirable one, namely, the the following sentences: "The government sent out
furnishing of sailors for war-fleets, through whom they soldiers to force the Americans to pay taxes." " The
assist in carrying on wars in Europe. Thus these pow chief causes . . . are to be sought in the high notions of
ers, which make a great show of piety, drink injustice
like water and at the same time wish themselves to be prerogative held by George III., in his infatuated and
stubborn self-will, and in the equally absurd self-conceit
considered as the very elect in the Orthodox faith.
of his English subjects." " ' Taxation without representa
Since the community of the nations of the earth, in a
narrower or broader way, has advanced so far that an tion is tyranny' became the watchword of the brave
patriots who were to fight in America for the self-same
injustice in one part of the world is felt in all parts, the
rights that Englishmen of old had wrung from the tyrant
idea of a cosmopolitical right is no phantastic and John, the haughty Edward, and the reluctant Charles I."
strained form of the conception of right, but necessary "The ministers, who had not yet learned wisdom, placed
to complete the unwritten code, not only of the rights of new taxes on tea." It pleases us to read such state
states but of peoples as well, so as to make it coexten ments in English books, and undoubtedly the English boy
sive with the rights of men in general, through the estab who reads them is impressed with the unpleasant fact that
lishment of which perpetual peace will come. It is use his ancestors were unwise and unjust. But these same
less to flatter oneself that perpetual peace can be brought statements would rouse in an American boy a keen re
nearer and nearer under any other conditions.
CONTINUED NEXT MONTH. sentment. They tell of oppression and injustice exercised
upon his ancestors by the English. He is the one that is
hurt?it is hardest for him to forgive. Human nature,
SCHOOL HISTORIES AND INTERNATIONAL especially juvenile human nature, makes the reader alert
ANIMOSITIES. in sympathy for the under dog, especially when, as in this
case, the under dog is his dog. It is, in other words,
From the Outlook, with permission. easier for the English boys to read forgivingly of the re
Samuel Plimsoll, M. P. (the originator of the " Plim sentment and rebellion of the colonists?provoked by
soll line," which marks the limit to which vessels may be English injustice?than it is for American boys to read,
legally loaded), has been looking into the causes of the without symptoms of sympathetic resentment, of the in
" unjust dislike that Americans have for the mother justice that provoked it. A sentence that in an English
country." " We in England," he says, " have no such book evinces, by frank confession of an injustice, the best
feeling toward America. . . . I believe the prejudice of feeling toward America, might, in an American book,
starts with children, and is taught to them from school by pointing out that very injustice, inspire hostility to
histories, that misstate facts ; and in these histories I England. The American historian, then, must be fairer
think the remedy lies." to the English than they need to be to themselves. He
Mr. Plimsoll, in this belief, has examined the school must allow for the instinctive prejudices of his readers.
histories in use in England ; and his report, issued by the The writer of this paper has examined carefully ten
United States Bureau of Education, is now obtainable. histories in common use in American schools. He has
The New England Magazine for February last contained read, more or less carefully, many more. He began
the substance of this report, as well as several of Mr. his examination with the impression that the books
PlimsoH's extracts from the English text-books examined. were prejudiced and unfair; he ended it feeling that,
In thirty-four of these he finds not the slightest unkind while prejudice was roused, it was not roused by inten
allusion to the United States. Of American histories, tional unfairness or misstatement.
however, he is reported as saying, "I have been told, One may, indeed, well dismiss, from the first, the
and believe, that many of them are unfair, that they charge of misstatement. Few histories misstate, and
foster a wrong feeling toward the mother country." those that do are not those most in vogue. True, most
But Mr. Plimsoll, not relying on such a general pre err on minor points; few, however, err with the direct
conception, has delayed final decision till he should have end or result of misrepresenting the attitude of England
examined our books with the same thoroughness as theto America. The per cent, of real misstatement is so
English. It is with this purpose that he has come to small as to be ignored.
America, and it is interesting to look into the subject for There is more injustice of omission. The employment
ourselves?to anticipate, if possible, the results of his in of Indians by the British is described, sometimes in very
vestigation. Are school histories in this country so un strong terms; but there is little or no mention of the em

This content downloaded from 186.113.30.208 on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:47:55 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms