CRUSADES
No
'By
tlie
JUSTIFIED.
rulos of
did
not make a formnl
They
demand of reparation for
wrong, and of security
against danger.
They did nst inquire whether tho
possession of Palestino could directly
add to their
means
of dofenco. Nor did they
content tbomsolvos
with a moderato succour
to the Greek
empiio, ns
some
philosophers hnvo required.
modem
But, is
tho disregard of technical rulos
always attended by
violation of the:r principio 1
Tliero was
no doubt,
that embassy and negotiation
would bo vain. It was
lawful for timm to defend tho safo
oxorciso of their
roligious worship in Palestine;
and it was for them
to dstormino whore
they could best dofond
nny of
their rights which were
either violated or threatonod.
The avowed principle of all
Mahometans, that thoy
aro ontitled to nnivorgal
monarchy, n principio consecrated by their religion, and onforcod
hy their
law, might, in itself, be considered
aa a
porpotual
declaration of war agninst states of
different
faith.
a
Butin the eleventh contury this insolent
pretension
our
international laws.
was
mnintiiiuod
iiiDr
to
different
showed
'the
sinso
of
The
'
principles of
and compolled to
to
the
most
rigjd
http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article2198318
international law,
Mahometan
tho
territory
was
an
act
an
attack on
any
of self-dufenco': it
means
tack.
rouse
cite
to
wrong-doors, and
ox
effectual
exercise of
just dofonce. Tho only moans
hy which thoso ends
could be reached,'were nn appeal te tho fellow-feel-
ing and
rolisioiis
subjects.
wero
made
their
territory
cannot
more
wound- and degrade
thom than outrncro towards what they
mo3trovoronce.
They had acquired, by an usage older than Mahometan potter, a right peaceably to visit
Bethlehem
and Cu'vary, aud their rulers were
morally bound to
protect that right. 'As
every state may maintain its
honour because-it is essential to its snfoty,
so Europe
hud a right'to defend her common
honour,
common
Ltir-duer's
or
or
which
averting by
religion.-Dr.