But here the superior being would interrupt.—­What, he would say!  Are they not to resent injuries, and yet do they go to war?  And are they not afraid of fighting in this manner, when they are to give an account of their conduct in a future state?  It would be replied, No:  they have their philosophers among them, and most of these have determined, that, in this particular case, responsibility lies at the door of those who employ them.  But, notwithstanding this, there are others living among them, who think otherwise.  These are of opinion, that those who employ them cannot take the responsibility upon themselves without taking it from those whom they thus employ.  But the religion of the Great Spirit no where says, that any constituted authorities among them can take away the responsibility of individual creatures, but, on the other hand, in the most positive terms, that every individual creature is responsible wholly for himself.  And this religion does not give any creature an exemption on account of any force which may be used against him; because no one, according to its precepts, is to do evil, not even that good may come.  But if he be persecuted, he is to adhere to that which is right, and to expect his reward in the other state.  The impossibility, therefore, of breaking or dissolving individual responsibility, in the case of immoral action, is an argument to many, of the unlawfulness of these wars.  And those who reason in this manner, think they have reasoned right, when they consider besides, that, if any of the beings in question were to kill one of his usually reputed enemies in the time of peace, he would suffer death for it, and be considered as accountable also for his crime in a future state.  They cannot see, therefore, how any constituted authorities among them can alter the nature of things, or how these beings can kill others in time of war, without the imputation of a crime, whom they could not kill without such an imputation in time of peace.  They see in the book of the Great Spirit no dispensation given to societies to after the nature of actions, which are pronounced to be crimes.

But the superior being would say, is it really defined, and is it defined clearly in the great book of the Spirit, that if one of them should kill another, he is guilty of a crime!  It would be replied, not only of a crime, but of the greatest of all crimes, and that no dispensation is given to any of them to commit it in any case.  And it would be observed farther, that there are other crimes, which these fightings generally include, which are equally specified and forbidden in the great book, but which they think it proper to sanction in the present case.  Thus, all kinds of treachery and deceit are considered to be allowable, for a very ancient philosopher among them has left a maxim upon record, and it has not yet been beaten out of their heads, notwithstanding the precepts of the great book, in nearly the following words:  “Who thinks of requiring open courage of an enemy, or that treachery is not equally allowable in war?"[15]