APPENDIX II. CLOSING REPORT OF THE COMMIT TEE ON THE PROGRAMME. AT the closing session, the Rev. Dr. John Hall, in behalf of the Programme Committee, made the following report: Christian friends have forwarded to the Committee on the Programme papers and suggestions, on which it is deemed proper and respectful to make a report here, for the satisfaction of those who have opened communication with the Alliance in this manner, and for the purpose of completing the materials of the volume or volumes which will constitute the permanent record of this Conference. And it is proper to recall, in this connection, that the Conference does not pass resolutions of a legislative character. It is, in its own department, precisely identical with those great assemblies of students of science or of social reform whom observation and experience have taught that comparison of views, statement of opinions, and consequent impulse to thought and inquiry, are adequate results of their meetings and ample rewards for their labors. Mr. Henry Bergh, the President of the Society, to make a concise statement to the Conference, and have arranged accordingly. No. 2. In regard to the important subjects of war and peaceful arbitration, concerning which several memorials from England and the United States have been presented, the Committee report that these topics, together with pauperism, its causes and remedies (too important to be overlooked by the Evangelical Alliance), had been committed to persons of the highest ability, whose presence was expected till within a few days of the opening of the Conference; and with this explanation they recommend that the memorials* now referred to be printed in their proper place in the proceedings of the Conference. No. 3. Three papers have come from the Rochester branch of the Alliance in relation to infringements of the law of toleration in a nominally Christian country. In the judgment of the Committee, the interests of the sufferers would not be promoted, nor the cause of toleration served, by giving publicity to this report at the present time; and the Committee recommend that the paIn making their final announcements to pers be handed to the Alliance here, with the the Conference, the Committee on the Pro- request that they be the subject of inquiry gramme beg leave to say that in all their and of communication with the British Allipreparatory arrangements it was their hon-ance, in order to concerted and efficient acest aim and endeavor to exercise the utmost tion, should cause appear. impartiality as regards denominations, na- No. 4. A careful paper on the subject of tionalities, and sections. Few can be aware the Church of Rome in Canada, by Mr. Murof the manifold difficulties to be surmount-ray, the Committee recommend to be taken ed in realizing such an ideal, involving fre- as read, and handed to the editor of the quent correspondence with persons dispersed forthcoming volume.t over two continents, or the amount of time No. 5. The same recommendation is made and labor actually expended on the general in reference to a communication from the programme. If this programme does not Rev. James Long, on the Christian Aspects exhibit such an exact adjustment and bal- of Russian Progress in Asia-a subject litancing of devious interests as is entirely sat-tle thought of, and of great practical imporisfactory to all, it must be borne in mind that the names of several persons for whom an appropriate place was provided do not appear in this document solely because they disappointed the confident expectations of the Committee at an hour too late to arrange for substitutes. No. 1. A paper has been presented by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. The Committee recommend that an opportunity be afforded to tance. No. 6. A communication has been received from a newly-formed Branch in Brazil, conceived in the best spirit, and expressing regret that a personal representative could not be sent. The Committee recommend * [One of these papers came to the editor's hands incomplete and without any indication of its authorship, and hence has been omitted.-Ed.] + [This paper was returned to the author at his own request.—Ed.] end of the nineteenth century of the Christian era, we find the earth, and even that part of the earth which professes to submit to Christian authority, filled with violence and blood. Within the last twenty years, those nations who collectively call themselves Christendom have been engaged in six desolating and sanguinary wars, which have involved the sacrifice of between two and three millions of human lives, while the waste and destruction of property, and the suffering and demoralization they have occasioned, are absolutely incalculable. And what is still more sad and disheartening, when the actual conflicts have ceased, we find the studies, the labors, and the resources of peace incessantly directed to extending and perfecting an enormous war organization, as though the chief end of human life is to fight and to prepare for fighting. It is estimated that there are between four and five millions of the picked men of Europe dedicated wholly to the service of war, besides as many more who are partly trained to the use of arms. The cost, direct and indirect, to European nations of these armaments, and the interest of their war debts, can not be less than £500,000,000 sterling annually, while they are growing and, according to the present race of emulation, must grow rapidly year after year. It is hardly possible to exaggerate the evils of this system of armed rivalry. It ulcerates the heart of nations with mutual terror, hatred, and jealousy. It is the means of diffusing through society an amount of immorality and vice which it is fearful to contemplate. It diverts to purposes of destruction incalculable resources in men and money which might otherwise be devoted to the moral and material amelioration of the people, and to the furtherance of the great objects of Christian civilization. It mocks the spirit of the Gospel and belies the hopes it has held forth to the world, and gives ample scope to the infidel and the heathen to scoff at its pretensions and promises as a religion of peace. DEAR FRIENDS,—We, the Committee of the London Peace Society, representing a considerable body of persons who are united together, irrespective of religious or political distinctions, for the one sole purpose of promoting peace on earth and good-will among men, venture respectfully, but most earnestly, to call the attention of the Conference to a question scarcely second in importance or urgency to any that can engage the deliberations of your great Assembly. As those who are associated to promote Christian union among men of all nations, the relations which exist between those nations as organized communities can not be a matter outside the province or the sympathies of such a body as yours; and as Christians, it is impossible that the present state of those relations generally can be regarded by you with any other than feelings of profound humiliation and sorrow. No one can deny that Christianity is emphatically a religion of peace and charity and brotherly love. No one can deny that the obvious tendency, as the avowed design of its teaching, is not only to unite men with God, but to unite them with each other, without regard to diversities of race or country or language, by virtue of the common fatherhood of God and the common brotherhood of Christ. No one can deny that among the glorious hopes of the future on which it has taught human-gelical Alliance at New York to lift up its ity to rely, none are more clear and precise than those which relate to the disappearance of war and the establishment of universal peace. But, alas! how sad is the contrast of what ought to be and what actually is. Near the Is it not time, then, that the Christian Church should gird itself to confront and resist this portentous system? Is it becoming that it should stand as, alas! it has too long stood, dumb and cowed in the presence of an evil so appalling, uttering at best only faint and faltering words of general lamentation, too often conniving at it, if not using in reference to it, language of direct apology and sanction? We appeal to the Conference of the Evan voice like a trumpet, and that with no uncertain sound, in favor of international peace. A signal, a glorious illustration has been recently given, by the example of Great Britain and the United States, of the fact, that there are other means than an appeal to the sword by which Christian nations can settle their | empires to be like France and Germany, differences—means more in accordance with thwarting and impeding each other? are reason and justice, humanity and religion. they to be military rivals, as France and EnAnd still more recently the British House gland were in the last century, pursuing a of Commons has, by a deliberate vote, recog-policy of antagonism destructive to the real nized as susceptible of general application interests of both in the East? Or are they the principle which in that instance was to pursue a nobler career-to rival each applied with such auspicious results. other in the arts of peace, in improving the native races, in giving that protection of life and property so necessary as the basis of missionary, mercantile, and philanthropic efforts; to set an example of what good Christian government is; and to extinguish the last glimmering rays of hope in Asiatic feudalism and in Islamism, whose strength has been, like that of Romanism, in maintaining the temporal power? May we not hope that a voice may issue from the bosom of your Conference which may strengthen the hands of those who, in the face of great opposition and manifold discouragements, are laboring to establish the dominion of right over might, to substitute the reign of law in the place of brute force, in regulating the relations and intercourse of civilized states? HENRY PEASE, President. Offices of the Peace Society, 19 New Broad Street, London, September 3d, 1873. ENGLAND AND RUSSIA IN CENTRAL TION IN THE EAST. The recent conquest of Khiva by Russia, like the fall of Bokhara-"The Holy"-is a severe blow to Mohammedanism. England has brought down Moslem pride in Delhi and Lakhran, as Russia is now doing in Samarcand and Khiva. Islam is struggling to recover lost power in Asia. In Central Asia the Moslem chiefs and priests proclaimed a jehad, or holy war, against Russia that has signally failed, as has the corresponding Wahati movement in India. The Euphrates is drying up for the By the REV. J. LONG, Church Missionary in Calcutta. kings of the East to pass over. They have MUCH has been written on the political thrown their last stake now, in exciting the and military aspects of Russia in the East, mutual jealousies of England and Russia, hopbut scarcely any thing on what is, for Chris-ing, in the spirit of the common proverb, tian men, a very important subject: THE PRESENT POSITION OF RUSSIA IN CEN- I myself having labored twenty-eight years in India as a missionary, and having visited Russia twice-in 1863 for five months, and lately for fifteen months—the above question has constantly come before me in relation to mission work. I have discussed it with many Russians as well as Englishmen, and have published several pamphlets on the subject. I regret it is not in abler hands, but I will do my best to open it in its bearings on Christianity. "When rogues fall out, honest men come by their own." As allies with the Mohammedans, in making "a cat's-paw" of England and Russia, are all the millions in Asia who are opposed to regular government and to industrious habits, and who, like the sipahis of the Indian mutiny, owl-like, shun the light of Christian civilization the adherents of fallen, worn-out dynasties—the priesthood of a decaying idolatry-those who have nothing to lose and every thing to gain by revolution, who wish for a life of plunder and bloodshed-all these exult like the petrel in prospect of the storm, hoping it might redress their desperate fortunes; they look to war as the straw for the drowning man. The present position of Russia in Central With these are allied all native princes and Asia is practically that of a neighbor to En-chiefs who wish to rule their subjects with a gland in her Indian dominions. The recent rod of iron, like the Khan of Khiva, who apconquest of Khiva and Bokhara has given pealed to England for support against RusRussia a strong point on which to move ei-sia; but England wisely declined to take any ther for war or peaceable development in relation to England and the East. Russia, with a great future before her in respect to extension of dominion down to Eastern Turkistan and the Chinese Wall, is laying slowly but surely the foundations of a mighty Eastern empire in connection with Central Asia, as England has already done in Southern Asia. Arising out of this new state of things, the great problem is, "Are these two great step to support such a barbarous government. I have lived in intimate intercourse with natives in India for more than a quarter of a century; and of all the arguments brought by them against Christianity, the one I found most difficult to meet was this: If your religion be so good, how is it that Christians have acted so bad? The history of Christian nations is one series of wars; the annals of Europe are written in blood. See how these Christians hate one another! Should two such empires as those of En- | may endanger the stability of her Indian gland and Russia come into collision in empire by undermining her outworks, and Asia, or maintain a hostile policy, what ad- by the exercise of a disturbing power in ditional food will be given to these objec-India, while little is known in England of tions? the progress of peaceful reform in Russia. I am neither an alarmist nor a Russophobist; but the political aspect looks lowering there are grave issues at hand. In our present relations, ambitious generals or intriguing diplomatists may any day endanger peace between the two empires. England is doing a great work in India in promoting Christianity and civilization, and in training up the natives for self-government: much of this would be paralyzed by a hostile policy between England and Russia. Many pamphlets have been written on the Central Asia question; the majority take America and Germany have an interest in this question in relation to their mercantile and missionary establishments, which flour-only the military aspect of the question, ish under the ægis of British protection. Russia is making great progress since her glorious work of serf-emancipation. The Russia of the present day is very different from the Russia of Nicholas, and her spirit of reform deserves our thorough sympathy. I have made the tour of Russia from the Caucasus to Finland, and have observed with deep interest the contrast the Russian Church presents to the Romish, in her having an open Bible: everywhere I saw encouragement given to the circulation of the Scriptures. The Russian Church is not bound by a Council of Trent, or shackled by the ecclesiastical despotism of a papacy; there is no law of celibacy isolating her priesthood from the laity; but much of the present and proposed reform would be checked by a war, or mere military objects. It is obvious, then, what advantages would arise from a good understanding between Russia and England—the two great empires of Asia—in enabling them to co-operate with each other against the common foe of ignorance, feudal oppression, the cruel rites of paganisın, and the destructive tendencies of Islamism. The governments of England and Russia are in friendly relations; and were the peoples of both empires to know each other better, they would be still more so. In this respect the visit of the Czarowitz to England and the proposed marriage of the Duke of Edinburgh to the Emperor of Russia's only daughter, are auxiliaries to the cause of peace. Englishmen and Russians should see more of each other. But the shield has a reverse. While the Russian people is pacific, and the Czar a friend of peace, there is a strong military party in Russia, influential in the press, whose policy is aggressive and intriguing in Central Asia, looking forward to a war ultimately with England on Asiatic questions. This party is reckless, for it has not to pay the costs or penalties of war. The Russian press, ignorant of Asiatic affairs, is too much influenced by this party, and is becoming more opposed to England, thinking she is averse to Russian progress in Asia. On the other hand, England is jealous of any Russian encroachment that that England and Russia must some day fight about Central Asia, ignoring the mutual interests of both countries. If Christian men leave this important question in the hands of military men, tortuous diplomatists, or mere secular politicians, natural animosities and susceptibilities may be so inflamed that England and Russia, like as in the Crimean war, may drift into, or be driven by an unenlightened public opinion into war, or an armed peace almost as bad as war. The friends of Christianity and civilization in the East must take this up. We know that on the recent Alabama question their influence had something to do with the peaceful solution of the difficulty, which saved two kindred nations from the horrors of war. An enlightened public opinion must be brought to bear on the action of diplomats, and a counter action must be used against military writers on both sides who regard a state of war as the natural condition of society. The public mind must be indoctrinated with the view that the points in which England and Russia agree are far more important than those in which they differ; that, as the two leading Christian empires of Asia, their real interest is to welcome each other as co-workers; that England should not view with such jealousy Russian advances in Asia, nor should Russia encroach too closely on the Indian frontier; that both empires have sea-room enough in Asia, and they should so act that contact may not lead to collision. As one of the means for rousing public attention to this side of the question, the plan of prize essays may be of use. A prize of from £300 to £500 might be offered for the best essay, or essays, on the following subject: A good understanding between England and Russia on the Central Asia question of great importance to the spread of Christianity and civilization in the East. The obstacles to this good understanding, and the best way of removing them. The very advertising this subject in the leading journals of Europe would arouse attention to this aspect of the question, which has, strange to say, been so much overlooked. Men have written as if the only solution of the problem was the ultima ratio regum-war. The present time is favorable, as the two governments of England and Russia have shown in their recent correspondence on the Central Asia question a calm and peaceable spirit. It is not when men's passions are inflamed, and the storm of war hushes the quiet voice of calm discussion that the question can be raised. CONCERTED ACTION ON SUNDAY [A communication to the Conference was presented by Professor Pronier from Mr. Alexander Lombard, of The writers for the prize essay should treat, not of mere platitudes on the advantages of peace in general, but of peace between England and Russia; they should point out that the past relations of England and Rus- To the Committee of the General Conference of sia have, with the exception of the Crimean the Evangelical Alliance at New York: war, been on a friendly footing; that in Eu- DEAR AND HONORED BRETHREN IN CHRIST, rope commercial, social, literary, and relig-—As I am unable to comply with the kind ious ties tend to maintain that friendly foot- invitation of the Committee of the Confering, secured still more by the spirit of re-ence about to be held in New York, I must form in Russia; that in Asia friendly relations might conduce most powerfully, not only to the moral and material interests of both empires in Asia, but might also serve as a weapon against their common foeAsiatic barbarism, ignorance, superstition, the tyranny of native princes and chiefs; that nations may be on friendly relations, though not agreeing in all points of policy. transfer to others the duty of representing our society. I can not do better than to charge with this mission my honored friends, Professor Pronier and Pastor Coulin, who are delegated to your Conference by the Evangelical Alliance of this city. They will be very glad, I am sure, to carry word to you in our name, and to aid in carrying out the views formally expressed by the Conference of 1867, at Amsterdam, which I with certain friends proposed. It is a result more and more to be desired, that a joint arrangement be made on a practicable basis for an energetic and united action before the political authorities and the managers of the great industries, for the purpose of securing to every man the enjoyment of his weekly rest-day, and the benefits temporal and spiritual of the Lord's day. But the writers should grapple mainly with the best modes of removing the chief obstacles to this good understanding-viz., the influence of political and military agents on the frontiers in intriguing, sowing dissensions on both sides; a tortuous, doubledealing diplomacy, which regards patriotism as hating other countries; the Press, fed by correspondents who love to fish in troubled waters, and to publish sensational articles; the Turkish question as connected with the Since it is not permitted me to make my Central Asia one; the Russian public's ig- feeble voice heard among you, and since the norance of the great moral and material thoughts expressed in my essay on "the improvements carried on by England in In-State and Sunday Laws," transmitted at your dia; the English public's corresponding ig-request, in 1870, do not fully meet the presnorance of the reforms being worked out in ent requirement, I dare to hope that at any Russia, and of Russia's natural and necessary tendency to development in an easterly direction; the unsettled condition of the Persian and Afghan frontiers. rate the essential result which our society proposes will be reached in some measure, and that the questions relating to the Christian and social functions of the Lord's day Much of the future progress of Christian- will be examined with the attention they ity and civilization in Asia may depend on deserve. I know that they have place in a good understanding between England and your Conferences, and that Christian men Russia; the points in which they agree are qualified for the task have been designated far more important than those in which by your Committee to treat them; but what they differ; and both should remember that I must needs wish is that some more subthe eyes of the Moslem world now regard a stantial results follow from your Conference rupture between England and Russia as the than from that at Amsterdam. If the basis only means of their regaining lost power. of an accord is once fixed, it will devolve on The crescent and the cross are placed face you to carry it into effect, and, with the help to face. of our God, we love to hope that the revival of the divine institution of the Lord's day in Europe, and everywhere, will date from the Conference at New York. |