But it is now said by some that this policy must be changed.  Europe is no longer separated from us by a voyage of months, but steam navigation has brought her within a few days’ sail of our shores.  We see more of her movements and take a deeper interest in her controversies.  Although no one proposes that we should join the fraternity of potentates who have for ages lavished the blood and treasure of their subjects in maintaining “the balance of power,” yet it is said that we ought to interfere between contending sovereigns and their subjects for the purpose of overthrowing the monarchies of Europe and establishing in their place republican institutions.  It is alleged that we have heretofore pursued a different course from a sense of our weakness, but that now our conscious strength dictates a change of policy, and that it is consequently our duty to mingle in these contests and aid those who are struggling for liberty.

This is a most seductive but dangerous appeal to the generous sympathies of freemen.  Enjoying, as we do, the blessings of a free Government, there is no man who has an American heart that would not rejoice to see these blessings extended to all other nations.  We can not witness the struggle between the oppressed and his oppressor anywhere without the deepest sympathy for the former and the most anxious desire for his triumph.  Nevertheless, is it prudent or is it wise to involve ourselves in these foreign wars?  Is it indeed true that we have heretofore refrained from doing so merely from the degrading motive of a conscious weakness?  For the honor of the patriots who have gone before us, I can not admit it.  Men of the Revolution, who drew the sword against the oppressions of the mother country and pledged to Heaven “their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor” to maintain their freedom, could never have been actuated by so unworthy a motive.  They knew no weakness or fear where right or duty pointed the way, and it is a libel upon their fair fame for us, while we enjoy the blessings for which they so nobly fought and bled, to insinuate it.  The truth is that the course which they pursued was dictated by a stern sense of international justice, by a statesmanlike prudence and a far-seeing wisdom, looking not merely to the present necessities but to the permanent safety and interest of the country.  They knew that the world is governed less by sympathy than by reason and force; that it was not possible for this nation to become a “propagandist” of free principles without arraying against it the combined powers of Europe, and that the result was more likely to be the overthrow of republican liberty here than its establishment there.  History has been written in vain for those who can doubt this.  France had no sooner established a republican form of government than she manifested a desire to force its blessings on all the world.  Her own historian informs us that, hearing of some petty acts of tyranny in a neighboring