11. XI.
MORALS OF REVENGE.
Historians have been divided in opinion with regard to the
propriety of that wild justice which Dominique de Gourgues inflicted
upon the murderers of his countrymen at La Caroline. One
class of writers hath preached from the text, “Vengeance is mine
saith the Lord;” another from that which, permissive rather than
mandatory, declares that “Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man
shall his blood be shed.”
Charlevoix regrets that so remarkable an achievement as that
of Gourgues, so honorable to the nation, and so glorious for himself,
should not have been terminated by an act of clemency, which,
sparing the survivors of the Spanish forts, should have contrasted
beautifully with the brutal behavior of the Spaniards under the
like circumstances; as if the enterprise itself had anything but
revenge for its object; as if the butcheries which accompanied the
several attacks upon the Spanish forts, and the butcheries which
followed them—where the victims were trembling and flying men
—were any whit more justifiable than the single, terrible act of
massacre which appropriately furnished the catastrophe to the
whole drama!
If the Spaniards were to be spared at all, why the enterprise at
all? No wrong was then in progress, to be defeated by interposition;
no design of recovering French territory or re-establishing
the French colony was in contemplation, making the enterprise
necessary to success hereafter. The entire purpose of the expedition
was massacre only, and a bloody vengeance!
It is objected to this expedition of Gourgues, that reprisals are
rarely possible without working some injustice. This would be an
argument against all law and every social government. But it is
said that revenge does not always find out the right victim, particularly
in such a case as the present, and that the innocent is
frequently made to suffer for the guilty.
Gourgues could not, it would seem, have greatly mistaken his
victims, when we find one of them confessing to the murder of five
of the Huguenots by his own hand, and none of them disclaiming
a participation in the crime. But there is a better answer even
than this instance affords, and it conveys one of those warning lessons
to society, the neglect of which too frequently results in its
discomfiture or ruin.
That society or nation which is unable or unwilling to prevent
or punish the offender within its own sphere and province, must
incur his penalties; and this principle once recognized, it becomes
imperative with every citizen to take heed of the public conduct
of his fellow, and the proper exercise of right and justice on the
part of his ruler. There are, no doubt, difficulties in the way of
doing this always; but what if it were commonly understood and
felt that each citizen had thus at heart the wholesome administration
of exact justice on the part of the society in which he lived,
and the Government which can exist only by the sympathies of
the people? How prompt would be the remedy furnished by the
ruler to the suffering party! how slow the impulse to wrong on
the part of the criminal!
The suggestion that magnanimity and mercy shown to the
Spaniards by Gourgues, after his victory, would have had such a
beautiful effect upon the consciences of those guilty wretches, is
altogether ridiculous. The idea exhibits a gross ignorance of the
nature of the Spaniards at the time. Gourgues knew them thoroughly.
A more base, faithless, treacherous and murderous character
never prevailed among civilized nations, and never could
prevail among any nation of
warlike barbarians. We do not
mean to justify Gorgues; but may say that it is well, perhaps, for
humanity, that heroism sometimes puts on the terrors of the
avenger, and visits the enormous crime, which men would otherwise
fail to reach, with penalties somewhat corresponding with the
degree and character of the offence! There are sometimes criminals
whom it is a mere tempting of Providence to leave only to
the judgments of eternity and their own seared, cold, and wicked
hearts. The murderer whose hands you cannot bind, you must
cut off; not because you thirst for his blood, but because he
thirsts for yours! But ours is not the field for discussion, and
we may well leave the question for decision to the instincts of humanity.
The vengeance which moves the nations to clap hands
with rejoicing has, perhaps, a much higher guaranty and sanction
than the common law of morals can afford.
