London, July 25, 1851.

The fourth Annual Congress of the friends and champions of Peace, universal and perpetual, was closed last evening, after a harmonious and enthusiastic session of three full days. The number of Delegates in attendance was between eight and nine hundred, while the spacious area of Exeter Hall, which is said to hold comfortably thirty-five hundred persons, was well filled throughout, and densely crowded for hours together. Having been held at a most favorable time and at the point most accessible to the great body of the active friends of Peace, I presume the attendance was larger than ever before.

Two thoughts were suggested to me by the character and proceedings of this assemblage—first, that of the eminently popular and plebeian origin and impulse of all the great Reform Movements of our age. Every great public assemblage in Europe for any other purpose will be sure to number Lords, Dukes, Generals, Princes, among its dignitaries; but none such came near the Peace Congress; very few of them take part in any movement of the kind. In the list of Delegates to this Congress, under the head of "Profession or Trade," you find "Merchant," "Miller," "Teacher," "Tanner," "Editor," "Author," "Bookseller," "Jeweller," &c., very rarely "Gentleman," or "Baronet," and never a higher title, I rejoice to say that "Minister" or "Clergyman" appears pretty often, but never such a word as "Bishop" or "Archbishop," though the most liberal of the Established Hierarchy, Archbishop Whateley of Dublin, sent a brief note expressing sympathy with the objects of the meeting. And I think among the clergymen present there was hardly one belonging to either of the two Churches which in these realms claim a special and exclusive patent from Heaven for the dispensation of Religious Truth.

The other thought suggested by this mighty gathering concerns the character and efficacy of the organizations and sects in which Christianity is presumed to be embodied. Let a Convention be called of the Friends of Peace, of Temperance, of Personal Liberty, of the Sacredness of Human Life, or any other tangible and positive idea, and many hundreds will come together from distant nations, speaking diverse languages, and holding antagonist opinions on other important subjects, and will for days discuss and deliberate in perfect harmony, unite in appropriate and forcible declarations of their common sentiments and in the adoption of measures calculated to ensure their triumph. But let a general Convention of the followers of Jesus Christ be called, with a view to the speedy Christianization of the world, and either three-fourths would keep away or the whole time of the meeting be wasted in an acrimonious quarrel as to the meaning of Christianity or the wording of the Shibboleth whereby those who were should be distinguished from those who were not entitled to bear the Christian name.

This contrast implies a great wrong somewhere, and for which somebody must be responsible. I merely suggest it for general consideration, and pass on.

Not fully sympathising with the Peace Movement in the actual condition of Europe, I was not a Delegate, and did not attend the first two days' deliberations. I see not how any one who does not hope to live and thrive by injustice, oppression and murder, can be otherwise than ardently favorable to Universal Peace. But, suppose there is a portion of the human family who won't have Peace, nor let others have it, what then? If you say, "Let us have it as soon as we can," I respond with all my heart. I would tolerate War, even against pirates or murderers, no longer than is absolutely necessary to inspire them with a love of Peace, or put them where they can no longer invade the peace of others. But so long as Tyrannies and Aristocracies shall say—as they now practically do say all over Europe, "Yes, we too are for Peace, but it must be Peace with absolute submission to our good pleasure—Peace with two-thirds of the fruits of Human Labor devoted to the pampering of our luxurious appetites, the maintenance of our pomp, the indulgence of our unbounded desires—it must be a Peace which leaves the Millions in darkness, in hopeless degradation, the slaves of superstition and the helpless victims of our lusts." I answer, "No, Sirs! on your conditions no Peace is possible, but everlasting War rather, until your unjust pretensions are abandoned or until your power of enforcing them is destroyed." I have felt a painful apprehension that the prevalence of the Peace Movement, confined as it is to the Liberal party, and acting on a state of things which secures almost unbounded power to the Despots, is calculated to break the spirit of down-trodden nations, and, by thus postponing the inevitable struggle, protract to an indefinite period the advent of that Reign of Universal Justice which alone can usher in the glorious era of Universal Peace. And, had I been a Delegate to this Universal Peace Congress, I should perhaps have marred its harmony and its happiness by asking it to consider and vote upon some such proposition as this:

I rejoice in being able to say that the general tendency of the speeches was towards universal Emancipation, mental and physical. I doubt whether an English audience composed in so large proportion of the conventionally "respectable classes" ever listened to so much downright Democracy before. The French speakers, the French writers, were full of it, and the great event, at least of the last day's session, was the entrance of a body of fifteen French workmen, delegates to the World's Exhibition of the "Working Associations" of Paris, who came in a body to pledge their hearts and hands to the cause of Universal Peace, and to assure the Congress that the Laborers, the Republicans, of France, were eminently pacific in their ideas and purposes, and that the preservation of the Republic, which is the immediate object of their exertions, is valued not more in its relation to their personal rights and aspirations than as a step toward the formation of a European confederacy of emancipated Nations, and thus as the corner-stone of the temple of Universal Peace. The Speeches of these Workmen just from their benches in the work-shops of Paris were every way admirable, and were received with the heartiest enthusiasm. They breathed the true spirit not of Peace only but of hearty coÖperation in every work calculated to promote the moral and social well-being of mankind. The wretched cant which implies natural enmity between France and England, or any other two nations, was emphatically repudiated by them, and every variety of forcible expression given to the earnest desire of the Laboring Classes of France that Peace, Freedom and Brotherhood shall prevail, not in their own country merely, but throughout the world.

Mr. Cobden had made his great speech on the preceding day, wherein the grievous expensiveness and hideous immorality of Standing Armies were vividly portrayed. He did not hesitate to speak straight out on the subject of the demoralizing influence of Armies on the People among whom they were quartered or posted, and the broad track of moral desolation which an armed force everywhere leaves behind it. If the facts in this connection were but generally known, I think there would soon be a loud call from Christians, Moralists and Philanthropists for the entire disbandment and dispersion of every Standing Army.—Emile Girardin, Editor of "La Presse," spoke more especially of the enormous expense of Armies and the ruinous taxation they render necessary.—Mr. Cobden spoke again yesterday, in more immediate denunciation of the enormous Standing Army maintained by Austria, not merely throughout its own but in other countries also, the Loans which its Government is constantly contracting, and the gulf of bankruptcy to which it is rapidly hurrying. He said there were intimations that another Austrian Loan would be attempted in London, and if it should be he should urge the call of a public meeting to expose the past knaveries of Austria in dealing with her creditors, and to hold up to public reprobation whoever should touch the Loan.—Mr. Samuel Gurney, the Quaker banker, also spoke in reprehension of Loans for War purposes and all who subscribe to or encourage them.—Edward Miall (Editor of The Non-Conformist), also spoke forcibly against War Loans.

M. Cormenin, an eminent French Statesman and writer, read a witty, piquant essay in reprehension of War and all other contrivances for shortening human life, which, being given first in French and then substantially in English, elicited very hearty plaudits.

There were many more speakers, including Mr. Hindley, British M. P., M. Bouret, French Chamber of Deputies, Elihu Burritt, M. Avignon, an Italian banker, J. S. Buckingham, Dr. Schertzer of Vienna, and Joseph Sturge, who moved that a similar convention be held next year, at a time and place to be afterward agreed on, which was unanimously carried. It was announced that Mr. Geo. Hatfield of Manchester had suggested and agreed to bear the expense of fifteen Silver Medals to be presented, in behalf of the Congress, to the representatives of the French Workmen's Association for their attendance and sympathy.—Sir David Brewster, being warmly thanked for his services as Chairman, responded in a few excellent remarks, urging each person present to instill the principles of Peace into the hearts of the children who are or may be committed to his or her guidance. He remarked that he had not once been called upon to exercise authority or repress commotion during the whole period of the Congress,—a fact proving that the principles of Peace had already taken root in the breasts of the Members; and there was not, I believe, a single proposition submitted to the Congress on which its vote was not substantially unanimous. The following are the Resolutions adopted: