WILL EVIL DESTROY ITSELF?
By E. J. Driver
IN an article calculated to show that war is doomed, Alexander Sutherland, writing in the Nineteenth Century magazine, declares that the "brutal and unsympathetic strains" of human nature are being worked out, thus "leaving the earth to be possessed by the sympathetic." This seems to be a new version of the "peace and safety" cry, and we notice his argument with interest as showing the lack of accuracy in the "working hypothesis" usually employed by such reasoners. "If," he says, "the unkind and unsympathetic parent loses more of his children than the average parent, then here again we have a culling process. . . . As with individuals so with races. . . . A vast process of elimination is therefore going on, by means of which the world is given, more and more, into the possession of the sympathetic type. . . . On the whole, the kindly dispositions tend ever more and more, to prevail over the cruel. And therefore, czar or no czar, wars are eventually doomed, and peace must come in its own good time." Mr. Sutherland also refers to the cruelty of pagan warfare as contrasted with the more "humane" wars of to-day. Now as to the death of children of unsympathetic parents, Dr. Brewer, one of Chicago's leading physicians, said in a recent lecture: "The percentage of criminals has increased so rapidly in the United States that we now have one habitual or hereditary criminal in every thousand people. Criminals also propagate, marry and multiply unrestrained, and unless we change our laws, will continue to increase at the same ratio they have in the past, until it is appalling to contemplate the result." Much more might be given to show that the unsympathetic side of human nature is fast gaining an overpowering ascendancy over the sympathetic. But let us turn to the question of "humane warfare." The Nation (April 20) says: "This war [Anglo-Philippine] is the most savage war which was ever known in the history of our republic. . . . The war of 1898, 'for the cause of humanity,' has degenerated into a war of conquest, characterized by rapine and cruelty worthy of savages. . . . The fact is now fully established that in many cases the rule has been that our troops take no prisoners." Do they let them go free?—Alas, no. Chas. Brenner (of Minneapolis, Kansas) writes: "Company I had taken a few prisoners and stopped. The colonel ordered them into line time after time, and finally sent Captain Bishop back to start them. Then occurred the hardest sight I ever saw. They had taken four prisoners and didn't know what to do with them. They asked Captain Bishop what to do, and he said, 'You know the orders,' and four natives fell dead." Leonard F. Adams (of the Washington regiment) writes: "I don't know how many men, women, and children the Tennessee boys did kill. They would not take any prisoners. One company of the Tennessee boys was sent into headquarters with thirty prisoners, and got there with about a hundred chickens and no prisoners." F. B. Hinchman (Company A., U. S. engineers) says: "I met one of the company, who told me that the 14th and Washingtons were driving all before them, and taking no prisoners. This is now our rule of procedure." These letters and hundreds like them tell a story that makes our hearts burn with horror and indignation. O, why, when the earth is filled with violence and inhuman deeds, will men declare that the world is growing better? But, more than this, "evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived," till "sudden destruction cometh upon them, . . . and they shall not escape."