In these days, since we have evolved into a fighting nation, our young men feel within them the instinct of battle, which, like Job’s steed, “when it heareth the trumpet, saith:  ‘ha, ha’; that smelleth the battle afar off, the encouraging of the captains, the shouting of the army.”  Military trappings are no longer looked upon as stage furniture, good only for Fourth-of-July parades and sham manoeuvers.  War with us has become a stern reality, and promises to continue such, for people do not yield up willingly their independence, even to a world-power with a providential “destiny” to fulfil.  And since war is slaughter, it might be apropos to remark on the morality of such killing as is done on the field of battle and of war in general.

In every war there is a right side and a wrong side; sometimes, perhaps, more frequently, there is right and wrong on both sides, due to bungling diplomacy and the blindness of prejudice.  But in every case justice demands the triumph of one cause and the defeat of the other.  To determine in any particular case the side of right and justice is a very difficult matter.  And perhaps it is just as well that it is so; for could this be done with truth and accuracy, frightful responsibilities would have to be placed on the shoulders of somebody; and we shrink instinctively from the thought of any one individual or body of individuals standing before God with the crime of war on his or their souls.

Therefore it is that grave men are of the opinion that such a tremendous event as war is not wholly of man’s making, but rather an act of God, like earthquakes, volcanic eruptions and the like; which things He uses as flails to chastise His people, or to bring them to a sense of their own insignificance in His sight.  Be this as it may, it is nevertheless true that a private individual is rarely, if ever, competent to judge rightly by himself of the morality of any given cause, until such time at least as history has probed the matter and brought every evidence to light.  In case, therefore, of doubt, every presumption should favor the cause of one’s own country.  If, in my private opinion, the cause of my country is doubtfully wrong, then that doubt should yield to the weight of higher authoritative opinion.  Official or popular judgment will be authority for me; on that authority I may form a strong probable opinion, at least; and this will assure the morality of my taking up my country’s cause, even though it be doubtful from my personal point of view.  If this cannot be done and one’s conscience positively reprove such a cause, then that one cannot, until a contrary conviction is acquired, take any part therein.  But he is in no wise bound to defend with arms the other side, for his convictions are subjective and general laws do not take these into account.

Who are bound to serve?  That depends on the quality of danger to which the commonwealth is exposed.  First, the obligation is for those who can do so easily; young men, strong, unmarried, with a taste for such adventure as war affords.  The greater the general peril, the less private needs should be considered.  The situation may be such as to call forth every able-bodied man, irrespective of family necessities.  To shirk this duty when it is plainly a duty—­a rare circumstance, indeed—­is without doubt a sin.