respect, we can afford to lay aside all petty jealousies of other nations, that inflammable sensitiveness which is a sign of weakness, that combative spirit, which is flinging out constant challenges. We can with manly dignity make it apparent to the world that we seek peace 5 with all nations, but that we know our rights, and are bound, if necessary, to defend them with our good right arms, that much as we dislike war, we believe there are calamities more dreadful than war, and that we are ready to resort to war to avert them. But with the 10 same manly dignity we can show to mankind that we are willing to submit to a properly constituted arbitral court all questions which are suited for arbitrament, and that by our words and our example we desire to commend to all nations this peaceful method of dispos- 15 ing of most international controversies, which cannot be adjusted by the usual methods of diplomacy.

I have thought it wise to direct your attention to this theme at this time, since you, as educated citizens, go out now into life to exercise an exceptional influence on 20 public opinion, and I wish you to exercise a wise and conservative influence in shaping our policy towards other nations. Occasionally I hear the charge that life in our American colleges and universities is tending to beget a spirit of languid patriotism and political indif- 25 ference in the students. I believe the charge to be utterly without foundation. It probably grows from the fact that after the careful study of economic and historical subjects, many young men find themselves unable to assent unqualifiedly to the sweeping or am- 30 biguous statements of some political platforms. But with the recollections fresh in our memories of the days when so many of the bravest and best of our young men

rushed from these halls and from every college to the battlefield, many of them, alas! never to return, it is difficult to imagine how any one can question the burning patriotism of the American students. There is no 5 brighter chapter in the history of our civil war than that which records the valor of the young men who rushed from the colleges to the front in 1861. No more is it true that the college students are not deeply interested in our political affairs, though it may be true, as it 10 should be, that they are disposed to use their independent judgment in deciding on political doctrines.

It is because I have this confidence in your patriotism and your purpose to bring a calm and thoughtful consideration to public questions that I have asked you 15 to-night to reflect on what is our proper attitude as a Christian nation towards the other great powers, and especially on our duty in establishing an arbitral arrangement for the settlement of international difficulties. The European nations have cheerfully recognized 20 the great services we have rendered to mankind by laboring for the vindication and the enlargement of the rights of neutrals and by furnishing so many illustrious examples of arbitration. They envy us for our exemption from the dreadful military burdens under which 25 they groan. Is there any higher and nobler service we can proffer them than by showing them how to escape in many cases the dread arbitrament of war by the establishment of permanent courts? No nation questions our military strength. All nations will listen with re30 spect to our appeal for peaceful methods of settling controversies and will watch with sympathetic interest our well considered efforts to introduce these methods in our own intercourse with other powers. Remembering that

"God hath made of one blood all nations of men," what higher honor can we wish for our people than that they should add to all their triumphs in the industrial arts and in the establishment of free and republican institutions the splendid triumph of teaching all nations to 5 live together as brothers under the blessed command of the Prince of Peace.

NOTES AND SUGGESTIONS

PATRICK HENRY'S SPEECH IN THE SECOND REVOLUTIONARY CONVENTION OF VIRGINIA

THE SPEAKER.

Patrick Henry (1736-1799) entered the Virginia House of Burgesses in 1765, the year of the Stamp Act, and almost immediately became the leader of those who wished to resist Parliament's colonial measures. This brought him into opposition also to the aristocratic element of the colony. It was in a speech on his own resolution, declaring that the colony had never forfeited the right to be taxed by its own representatives, that he startled even the most radical by his outburst, "Cæsar had his Brutus, Charles the First his Cromwell, and George the Third-[Cries of "Treason! Treason!"]may profit by their example." Following the Boston Port Bill, Lord Dunmore dissolved the Virginia House of Burgesses. In August of the same year (1774) the First Revolutionary Convention of Virginia, of which Henry was a member, met and chose him a delegate to the First Continental Congress, which met in Philadelphia, September 5, 1774. The Second Revolutionary Convention of Virginia assembled in the old church at Richmond, March 20, 1775. Henry was a member and moved the adoption of resolutions for the establishment of a well-regulated militia, "that this colony be immediately put into a posture of defence." In moving the resolutions, he made the speech that we are studying. In the legislature and in the various conventions, Henry was not merely the orator; he was a worker on committees and was esteemed for practical business sagacity. He was made commander of the two regiments enlisted in Virginia "and of all to be enlisted"; was Governor of Virginia 1776-1779 and 1784-1786, serving again in the legislature in the interim. He was chosen to the convention that was called to meet in Philadelphia in 1787 for revising the Articles of Confederation, but refused to attend. Bad as a weak confederation was, he feared that a strong central government would prove worse, since it might enable one section of the country to oppress another. The

immediate cause of this fear was the proposal to surrender by treaty to Spain the navigation of the Mississippi for twenty to thirty years, to the great injury of the South and West. He opposed, therefore, the ratification by Virginia of the present Federal Constitution.

THE AUDIENCE.

Henry's audience was composed of his fellow-members of the Second Revolutionary Convention of Virginia. All were patriots; all were essentially in revolution; probably all believed that war was now inevitable; yet not all of them thought it prudent or timely to speak and to act as if no hope of a peaceful settlement were possible. No public body in America, and no public man, had as yet openly declared war to be unavoidable; for, to do so would be equivalent to declaring war Patrick Henry's object was to convince the more timid of his hearers that the time had come to speak out the fact and to act accordingly.

EXERCISES.

What parts of the speech are plainly directed to those who thought the resolutions premature? What use of the argument from experience do you find in this speech? What use of the method of exclusion? What use of facts? What use of inferences from facts? The rhetorical question? Note the two points of climax. On the manner of the speaker, the immediate effect of the speech, and the doubtful authenticity of the version which has come down to us, consult Tyler's Patrick Henry, pp. 140-151 (American Statesmen Series). What two passages in the speech are pure excitation?

BENJAMIN FRANKLIN:

A MOTION FOR PRAYERS

THE SPEAKER.

Franklin's dates are 1706-1790. In colonial days he had been post-master general for the Crown in North America and colony agent for Pennsylvania in London. In 1775-6 he was delegate to the Continental Congress; in 1778, Minister to France. In 1785, after the treaty of peace, which was mainly due to his diplomatic skill, he became President (Governor) of Pennsylvania. He was a member of the Constitutional Convention of 1787. He is the only American who requires a volume in all three of the series devoted to