The friends of peace were actuated by various motives. With statesmen and politicians peace was preferred because it was cheaper than war, and all countries were burdened with debt. England has sometimes been praised because she so uniformly threw her influence on the side of peace, after she had accomplished her purpose in the war against imperial France. Time and again, she might have waged popular wars, and in which she would have probably been successful; but she would help neither the Spaniards against France and the Holy Alliance, nor the Turks against the Russians, nor the Poles against the Czar, nor the Hungarians against the Austrians, nor the Italians against the Kaiser, nor the Greeks against the Turks. She settled all her disputes with the United States by negotiation, and showed no disposition to fight with France, except when she had all the rest of Europe on her side. But this praise has not been deserved. England did not quarrel with powerful countries, because she could not afford to enter upon costly warfare. She had gone to the extent of her means when her debt had reached to four thousand million dollars, and she could not increase that debt largely until she should also have increased her wealth. Time was required to add to her means, and to lessen her debt; and to such a state had her finances been reduced, that it is now twenty years since she began to derive a portion of her revenue from an income tax, which, imposed in the time of peace, was increased when war became inevitable. The bonds she had given to keep the peace were too great to admit of her breaking it. She did not fight, because she doubted her ability to fight successfully. She had no wish to behold another suspension of cash payments by her national bank; and a general war would be sure to bring suspension. But she was as ready as she had ever been to contend with the weak. The Chinese and the Afghans did not find her very forbearing, though with neither of those peoples had she any just cause for war.