Earlier text: Wait for GodThe Little Foxes
By F. M. W.
THE little things of life have much to do with the success or failure which comes to each individual. Careful attention to details will often avert what otherwise might prove a great disaster. This is true in affairs of temporal concern, and equally true in matters pertaining to the spiritual life. Solomon teaches this when he says: “Take us the foxes, the little foxes, that spoil the vines: for our vines have tender grapes.” In the vineyards of the East small foxes burrowed in the ground, and undermined and destroyed the vines. At first their work of evil was hardly perceptible, but if uninterrupted in their efforts, they brought the vineyard to destruction. In human experience it is not so much the great outbreaking sins which cause men to fall or to make shipwreck of their faith. Probably none who read these words will go out and murder, or steal, or openly profane the Sabbath. From the commission of these great sins their souls would recoil in abhorrence. But there is danger that every soul may cherish lesser evils, the ultimate effect of which will prove as disastrous to the soul’s salvation as the greater sins mentioned above. The cherishing of envy, jealousy, or malice in the heart; allowing the mind to dwell upon the evil and impure; speaking harsh, impatient words; indulging in idle, foolish jesting,—these are some of the ways whereby the Spirit is grieved, the character building weakened, and the soul prepared to yield to the greater evils with which Satan will seek to engulf the believer. Apostasy from God does not come in a day. It comes as the result of the subtle, insidious working of evil in the heart. Sometimes we wonder why men who stand high in the world’s esteem, and apparently are true to the right, are suddenly overthrown, and brought low under the power of sin. Have they been loyal and pure up to the time of test, and then gone down before the unexpected7 assault of the adversary? Rarely, if ever, is this the case. Evil had taken root in their lives. While appearing strong outwardly, sordid motives were controlling the deeper impulses. Little sins which their fellows might pass by unnoticed were undermining the character. Gradually, step by step, Satan was preparing them for his assault; and when he saw they were sufficiently weakened, he made his attack, and they went down before it. The strength of the child of God is in holding no compromise with evil. Not for a day or an hour can he safely parley. He can not cherish sin in his soul, and go uncontaminated. It will surely do its insidious work of undermining, as did the foxes in the vineyards. Says the apostle Paul: “Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. But exhort one another daily, while it is called To-day; lest any of you be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.” By constant dependence upon God, unceasing prayer, daily study of his Word, and the resistance of every suggestion of evil, may we be fortified to stand in the hour of temptation. God will permit no soul who fully trusts him, to be overcome. F. M. W. A Lesson From the Ninevites
By C. M. S.
THE decision of the great Judge is primarily against sin. The sinner finds it to be against him because he has identified himself with sin and become a part of it. Because of the wickedness of Nineveh, God decreed the utter destruction of that great city, and Jonah was sent to apprise the Ninevites of impending doom. As God's mouthpiece, Jonah spoke the decree of the sin-hating Judge against the city and its sin-loving inhabitants. Then the Ninevites awoke to the terrible reality of their condition, and sought God that the overhanging calamity might not fall upon them to blot them out of existence. In sackcloth and ashes they put away sin, and laid their confession and their plea before “the Judge of all the earth.” They had merited death; but the Judge was also the pitying Father; and repentance, the forsaking of sin, and the plea for pardon, saved them in the hour of their great need. God had not changed; but the Ninevites had. He was still the same just Judge, the same pitying, compassionate, loving Father; and such he is to-day. God has condemned and decreed judgment upon sin, and the penalty is soon to be executed. It will fall upon every individual who refuses to part from his sin, and seek righteousness. The Ninevites did so, and were spared. The inhabitants of earth to-day may learn wisdom from the children of Nineveh, and by following their example, may have the gracious gift of life eternal. Seventh-day Adventists to-day are giving to the people of this world a message similar to that which Jonah bore to the inhabitants of that long-buried city. The destruction of the sinners of this world is decreed. Now, as then, the door of repentance is open, and they who will may find shelter in an eternal city of refuge. There was nothing for Jonah but to bear the message given him to carry to that people. Likewise, there is nothing for us but to give the warning message of the third angel, and let its reception witness for or against those who hear. The obligation resting upon us is no whit less than that which rested upon him. He could not be excused from bearing his testimony; no more can we. Many men have scoffed at, scouted, or laughed at the record of Jonah; but that reluctant witness against a sinful people will stand exonerated in the judgment before the thousands who have made light of his experience. Beyond the message that Jonah gave, there was to be nothing but destruction. So with the message due at this time. Then it was the destruction of a city, with its people; now it is the destruction of a world, with its people. If the message committed to Jonah was important, how much more the message committed to this people! Repentance then saved to temporal life; repentance now saves to life eternal. Wise are those who heed this message, and wise are those who do not refuse to give it.
C. M. S. THE present tendency on the part of ministers of the gospel to substitute Socialism for the plain teaching of the Scriptures is considered in a thoughtful editorial in a recent issue of the Nation. From the concluding paragraph we take the following statement concerning the true work of the successful minister:— If he has the soul to endure as one seeing the invisible, and a heart to throb in unison with all the varied humanity about him; and if to all this he adds the sense of a high mission and the burden of a spiritual message, he need not trouble himself overmuch to become “socialized.” He will find his true power, and wield it. Into the striving and sorrow of the world, he will be able to bring something of peace and comfort; and will be the better enabled to do it for having braced his mind by hard study and fed his spirit by long meditation while the fire burns, than by taking out a card in all the labor unions from here to California, or running, now here, now there, after the latest sociological fad. This sociological gospel is only one phase of the effort to substitute self-salvation for the way of life through faith in the merits and work of Christ, and is clear evidence of the present widespread apostasy from the truth as it is in Jesus. DURING the past few months, there has been much said in this country by Catholic writers and speakers in opposition to the claim that the pope of Rome was a factor of interference in the temporal affairs of nations. While the history of the past disproves their assertions in toto, a recent incident in disproof is interesting because of its proximity to the time of these declarations. Long ago the head of the Roman Church placed an embargo on the visits of Catholic rulers to the king of Italy. The pope, because of his claim of temporal sovereignty over the papal states, considered it a matter of personal offense, as well as an act of disloyalty for a Catholic sovereign to recognize the sovereignty of Italy’s king by visiting him. For that reason the kings of Spain and Portugal and the emperor of Austria do not call on the king of Italy. For that reason also the emperor of Germany, after visiting the king of Italy, must return to the German embassy in Rome (technically German territory) before he will be received by the pope. In 1881 King Humbert of Italy made an official visit to Emperor Francis Joseph of Austria. The emperor, being a Catholic, has never returned the visit. Now, in order to enhance the stability of the triple alliance, Emperor William of Germany has been seeking to induce the emperor of Austria to return the visit of the Italian king. He has not been successful. Concerning the matter a despatch from Rome to the Washington Post, dated May 29, speaks in the following manner:— The opposition of the Vatican could not be overcome, but the idea was to get the emperor to write to the king of Italy that old age prevented his making the long journey to Rome, thus giving the Italian king an opportunity for offering to receive him in some other city. The scheme failed, as the emperor would not consent, basing his refusal on the ground that it was his duty as a Catholic sovereign not to oppose the wishes of the pope. So far as the emperor of Austria is able, it must be understood that he rules his realm in accordance with the wishes or commands of the Vatican. The same is true, then, of other Catholic rulers. They do not rule on their own initiative, but as it may please the head of the Roman Church. Thus, as far as permitted, the pope makes himself a king of kings. To this position he has ever aspired. Revealing Christ
By Ellen G. White
The Father in heaven desires that the world shall see Christ in his followers. Life and immortality are to be brought to light through those who are one with God in Christ. It is our privilege to have the spirit of light and knowledge that is the wisdom of heaven. All who have this spirit, in whatever position they may be placed, the highest or the lowest place of service, will reveal in their work the power of this light and knowledge. Constantly we are to behold him who lived among men a life of perfect obedience. And the more closely we study him, the more nearly shall we resemble him in character, and the greater will be our efficiency in working for others. The sacrifice of the Son of God was made that human nature might be elevated, and restored to its original purity. Jehovah suffered the glory of his Son to be veiled that the fallen race might be redeemed. Amazing love was revealed in the sacrifice thus made. He who was rich with the riches of eternity became poor, that we through his poverty might be made rich. He was high and exalted in heaven, crowned with glory, and honored by all the angelic host, yet he, the brightness and glory of heaven, consented to sojourn among fallen mortals, and by dying in their stead, rescue them from death. It behooved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might elevate them from the degradation into which they had fallen through sin. The condescension of Christ in behalf of men was a marvel to the angels. Redemption through Christ was to them a mystery of love and wisdom, and it absorbed their interest even more than had the work of creation. Such love amazed and enraptured them. It was so ardent, so matchless, so devoid of selfishness, they could not comprehend it. The creation of man in the beginning, the formation of the heavens and the earth, the beauty and glory with which the Creator had clothed all nature, had called forth the wonder and admiration of the universe of heaven, their reverence and love. But this condescension of their Commander in exchanging a throne for a manger in Bethlehem, and subjecting himself in mockery and insult, poverty and a felon’s death, called forth from the shining hosts of heaven the highest adoration and the deepest joy. Their joy and praise burst forth, at the announcement to the shepherds on the hills of Bethlehem, in the song, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.” Man alone, he for whom this great sacrifice was made, manifested indifference. He who should above all others have been interested, charmed, captivated, and filled with the deepest gratitude, was unmoved, untouched. This indifference is apparent to-day not only in those who are in open rebellion to God, but in those who profess to be the followers of Christ. These will receive the greater condemnation; for Christ is more greatly dishonored by those who profess his name, yet in works deny him, than by those who stand in open rebellion to his will. Christ is not put to shame by the sinful lives of sinners as he is by professed Christians whose lives are not circumspect, and sanctified by the truth they profess. The enchantments of the world, the riches of the universe presented with all their attractions, could not for a moment divert the Son of God from the work before him, though the path before him was marked with suffering, tears, and blood. The accomplishment of his purpose was more to him than the woe, more to him than the enrapturing joys of heaven. How should we, the objects of such love and condescension, appreciate the mystery of redemption. The splendors of the world, presented in their most attractive form, should sink into insignificance before this great condescension. Those who are true followers of Christ will be willing to suffer for his sake. As they contemplate this mystery, the heart will be filled with tender love, a lively devotion. They will feel that they must follow the example of him who went about doing good, and who cheerfully gave his life to ransom us from the degradation of sin. Selfishness and worldliness will be seen to be inconsistent with the profession of the name of Christ. They can not live for themselves and be Christians. We need in all our churches the evidences of the meekness of Christ. In order to do intelligently the solemn work committed to us, we must hide self in Christ. We have a short time in which to accomplish the work that is essential. Let us earnestly prepare for the conflict that is before us. I am instructed to say to all our people, Let your light so shine in words and deeds, that you will reveal that truth is cherished in the heart. If we reveal the meekness and self-abnegation that was seen in Christ’s life, the seed we sow will grow. As our experience enlarges, our opportunities will multiply, our knowledge will increase, and through Christ we shall become strong in bearing responsibilities. O precious privilege to co-operate with heavenly and divine agencies! Those who labor for souls need to remember that they are pledged to co-operate with Christ, to obey his directions, to follow his guidance. Every hour they are to ask for and to receive power from on high. They are to cherish a constant sense of the Saviour’s love, of his efficiency, his watchfulness, his tenderness. They are to look to him as the Shepherd and Bishop of their souls. Then they will have the sympathy and support of heavenly angels. Christ will be their joy and crown of rejoicing. Their hearts will be controlled by the Holy Spirit. They will go forth clothed with holy zeal, and their efforts will be accompanied by a power proportionate to the importance of the message they proclaim. Hills and Valleys
By S. O. JAMES
OUR life is a journey of ups and downs,
And the valleys are full of sorrow;
For our City in Canaan will sink from sight,
The shadows will come, and the chilly night,
When we dare not move to the left or right,
Only long for the sunny morrow. Yes, life is a journey of ups and downs;
But the valleys are seen from heaven.
Faith whispers, “I’ll order your steps aright;”
The just must follow, nor ask for sight;
True wisdom is certain to win the fight;
Just ask, and it shall be given. ’Twill help us all through the ups and downs;
Dear heart-broken one, believe it.
Whether you labor in country or town,
Whether you meet with a smile or a frown,
Jesus will furnish you stars for a crown;
Look up and prepare to receive it. The Mark of the Beast and the Seal of the Living God
By GEORGE I. BUTLER
IN our last article it was clearly shown four times by the Word of the Lord that the seal or sign of God's law is the seventh-day Sabbath. The work of restoring to the law its seal by calling the attention of mankind to the requirements of the fourth commandment, has been in progress ever since the proclamation of the third angel's message. This message is being proclaimed practically to all the nations under heaven to-day. Over one hundred thousand believers have already embraced it. Never did it make such rapid progress as now. The fourth command of the decalogue has been practically trampled under foot for ages, and another sabbath, nowhere taught in the Bible, has been substituted for the true by the papal beast, and blindly held as sacred by the majority of the Protestant world. The effort of some to make the people believe that the fourth commandment furnishes authority for the observance of Sunday is too transparently wrong to deceive9 honest people. Hence, the effort of opponents of the true Sabbath is to teach largely that the decalogue has been abolished, and with it the Sabbath of the Lord our God. The Roman Catholic Church, the largest professed Christian church in the world, comes out boldly and declares that she is responsible for the change of the Sabbath from the seventh day to the first day of the week. And there can be no question but that she is correct in this statement. If it be an honor to change God's law, then the papacy is entitled to that honor. But if it is an act of highest rebellion against the Sovereign of the universe to boldly claim the right to change the law of the Highest, then it is responsible for this great crime. We firmly believe that responsibility falls on that church. What do the Scriptures say about this matter? In Dan. 7: 25, we read: “And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and the law [American Revised], and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume and to destroy it unto the end.” Verses 25, 26. There is general agreement among many commentators of the Protestant world that the power referred to here is the papacy. There can be no reasonable doubt of this. The Roman beast is the fourth of this series. The little horn speaks great words against God by claiming to be his vicegerent in this world. His followers call him “Lord God upon earth.” He claims power to forgive sins, and assumes to grant indulgences, as he did in Luther's time. He wears out the saints of the Most High. He has, through his votaries, put to death fifty millions of those whom he calls heretics—the very salt of the earth. He shall “think to change . . . the law.” Whose law?—The law of the Most High, the very power whose saints he put to death, and whose name he appropriated. And lo! he himself comes right up and declares, in his catechisms and in other printed documents, that he “substituted” Sunday for Saturday, and claims he had the right to do it. Any intelligent person knows that this claim of changing the Sabbath is put forth by all prominent Catholics. Cardinal Gibbons himself claims it, and their leading men glory in this power of changing the law of God. Yea, they bring up this claim as one of the highest they have put forth, inasmuch as the Protestant world acknowledges it by keeping the substituted Sunday instead of the Sabbath of God's holy law. The prophet says, “All the world wondered after the beast.” In no one particular has the papal beast's power been more manifest than in this matter of his claim of changing the law of God and substituting Sunday in place of the Sabbath of Jehovah, and the general acceptance of this papal claim. To be sure, Protestants will not admit it; but the facts demonstrate that the change was made by the Roman Catholic Church as one of the results of the great apostasy. The change was gradual. There is nothing plainer than that there is no Scriptural authority for Sunday-keeping. Paul, in speaking of the papacy in 2 Thessalonians 2 uses the following words: “Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshiped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.” How would it be possible for the papacy to exalt itself above God. It could not get up into heaven and take from God his power to rule the universe, and rule it instead of God. There is but one way in which this power could exalt itself above God. That is by undertaking to change the law of God, and seeming to succeed in it. As Daniel says, he should “think” to change God's law, and it should seem to be given into his hand for the long period of twelve hundred sixty years, or a time, times, and dividing of time. The papists point to this change, and to its acceptance by almost the whole religious world, as an evidence of their power and their right to rule. What wonderful facts we have here! God points to the facts of creation, his work of six days and his rest on the seventh, as his authority and right to rule. The true Sabbath is his memorial of this mighty work, and hence we all ought to keep it. But up rises the papacy, the man of sin, who exalts himself above the God of heaven by claiming to have changed God's law, substituting a secular day, the great heathen holiday, Sunday, in the place of the Sabbath of the Lord God, and points to the fact that the religionists of all denominations are following the papacy in honoring and keeping Sunday as the Sabbath of the Lord. Here we see the two signs, seals, or marks contrasted: God's day, the creation Sabbath, God claims as his sign, seal, or mark; the papacy points to the almost universal practise of keeping Sunday as its mark, seal, or sign. And the question before this generation is, Which power shall we acknowledge? which institution shall we keep? This is one of the great issues now confronting us. The mighty struggle is on. God insists on a great reform, a returning of his true people to the Sabbath of the Lord before the Lord shall come in his glory. So he sends out the third angel's message, with the most solemn threatening to be found in all the Bible. Whoever shall receive the mark of the beast in head or hand shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God in awful torment and fearful woe. Christ is coming. This great message must be brought before the world with a loud cry, reaching throughout Christendom. It is now going to the ends of the world, and will constantly increase in volume, till the earth shall be lightened with its glory. The servants of God are said to be sealed in their foreheads. The followers of the papal beast receive the mark in their foreheads or in their right hands. The forehead is the seat of the intelligence. If the Lord's Sabbath is ever truly kept, it will be because of an intelligent acceptance of the Bible testimony in behalf of the true Sabbath. His people believe what the Bible says about it. In the crisis before us the acceptance of the Sunday sabbath in the place of the Sabbath of the Lord will constitute the mark of the beast. At just what time in the experience of each individual this mark will be received the Lord himself must determine. Do Seventh-day Adventists believe that everybody who keeps Sunday will be lost?—Certainly not. Multitudes of honest, noble Christians are yet keeping Sunday. They have never had the privilege of having the light of God concerning the Bible Sabbath brought forcibly before their minds. From their youth they have been taught to observe Sunday, and supposed the Bible taught it. The mark is received by individuals when they have been shown the light and have refused to accept it. Christ says, “Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you: for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.” In the great crisis before us, when the image to the beast is fully formed and persecution arises, the mark will be received by the multitudes. But as stated above, it is for God, not man, to judge in these matters; only God knows when an individual has rejected sufficient light to prove his condemnation. It is for us to kindly and plainly present the truth, and then leave the question with each soul and his Maker, without passing judgment upon any one. Dear reader, this question of the seal of God and the mark of the papal beast is a very solemn one. It is a live question upon which great issues hang. Eternal life, or eternal death in the lake of fire, is set before us. We shall choose one or the other. We must do it. Who will stand on the Lord's side? “Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.” Rev. 22: 14. PERCY T. MAGAN
By PERCY T. MAGAN
The Turkish Revolution—No. 2
On June 25, 1861, Abdul-Aziz was proclaimed sultan of the Ottoman empire. His was an unfortunate reign for Turkey. He first placed himself completely under Russian control, and later, by his extravagant administration, he plunged his country into an indebtedness of over one hundred million dollars. For the expenditure of this vast sum of money he had nothing to show. The bad state of the national finances for which his rule was responsible cost10 this monarch his throne. He was deposed May 29, 1876, and was succeeded by his nephew, Murad V. The wretched Abdul-Aziz committed suicide a day or two later. It was during the scandalous reign of Abdul-Aziz that the Young Turk party first came into prominence. Its first beginnings date back to a somewhat earlier period—the early fifties of the last century. At that time Zia Bey, Shinassi Effendi, and other patriots began to realize that unless there were radical reforms both in the state and in the social system, the knell of Turkey's doom had sounded. From these beginnings has grown the Young Turkdom of to-day. And the Young Turkdom of to-day is no insignificant affair; for “every one who feels Turkish, and speaks Turkish, is a Young Turk.” During the reign of Abdul-Aziz these Young Turks demanded that the absolute power of the sultan be abrogated, and that in the place of it there be promulgated a constitution and a liberal form of government. Murad V sympathized with the Young Turk party. This at once angered the Sheik-ul-Islam, the officials, and the entire court camarilla. These felt that drastic action must be taken to stop the growth of liberalism. On Aug. 31, 1876, the Sheik-ul-Islam declared Murad insane. He was deposed, and Abdul-Hamid II began that long and eventful reign which has just come to an end. Abdul-Hamid II succeeded to the throne of the Osmanlis at a more unhappy period than any of his predecessors. He was without training for the difficult position which had fallen to his lot. Of trustworthy friends he had none. His empire was bankrupt and in a state of rebellion, and its integrity was menaced from every quarter. During the later days of Abdul-Aziz insurrection had become rife in Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Bulgaria. During the brief reign of Murad, Servia and Montenegro had declared against Turkey. It took only until October to bring the Servian uprising to an end. The matter was attended to with brutal severity. The Bulgarian insurrection, however, was destined to fan the flames of hatred against the misrule of the Turk. The sultan sent large numbers of Bashibazouks and other irregular forces to repress it. Not content with doing their legitimate work, these devoted themselves to wholesale massacre. Twelve thousand men, women, and children were ruthlessly slaughtered in the district of Philippopolis alone. Mr. Baring, the English consul, saw “whole masses of the dead bodies of women and children piled up in places where the bodies of no combatants were to be seen.” What followed these revelations in the British empire, was described by the great John Bright as “an uprising of the English people.” The Tories were at the time in power. Mr. Disraeli, soon to be made the Earl of Beaconsfield, was prime minister. He and his cabinet championed, in part at least, the cause of the government of Turkey. Then it was that Mr. Gladstone emerged from his semiretirement and became the head and front of the agitation against Turkish misrule. He made speeches in the Commons. He addressed monster open-air meetings. He issued his long-since famous and never-to-be-forgotten pamphlet, entitled “Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East.” In this he climaxed his appeal with that plea which will remain as a classic as long as there shall be a Turkish question:— “But I return to, and I end with, that which is the omega as well as the alpha of this great and mournful case. An old servant of the crown and state, I entreat my countrymen, upon whom far more than perhaps any other people of Europe it depends, to require and to insist that our government, which has been working in one direction, shall work in the other, and shall apply all its vigor to concur with the other states of Europe in obtaining the extinction of the Turkish executive power in Bulgaria. Let the Turks now carry away their abuses in the only possible manner, namely, by carrying off themselves. Their zaptiehs, and their moodirs, their bimbashis, and their yuzbachis, their kaimakams, and their pashas, one and all, bag and baggage, shall, I hope, clear out from the province they have desolated and profaned. This thorough riddance, this most blessed deliverance, is the only reparation we can make to the memory of those heaps on heaps of dead; to the violated purity alike of matron, of maiden, and of child; to the civilization which has been affronted and shamed; to the laws of God, or, if you like, of Allah; to the moral sense of mankind at large.”—“Bulgarian Horrors and the Question of the East,” by the Right Hon. W. E. Gladstone, M. P., pages 61–63; London, John Murray, 1876. Such is the historic “bag-and-baggage” paragraph, so much misquoted and misunderstood. By the Tories it was denounced as “a demand for the expulsion of the Turks—all the Turks, the Turkish men and women—out of Europe. That, however, was not what Mr. Gladstone had said, and that was not what Mr. Gladstone intended. It could not have been, for to keep the Turkish people in Europe was one of his own pet policies. ‘What Mr. Gladstone meant was that the rule of Turkish officialism should cease in the Christian provinces; that these provinces should have autonomous governments subject to the sultan; not that all the individual Turks should be turned out.’”—Justin McCarthy, in “History of Our Own Times,” Vol. II, chap. 64, par. 1 from the end. Mr. Gladstone's pamphlet and speeches and the “uprising of the English people” greatly alarmed the sultan. He feared that the British, who had saved the Turkish empire in the Crimean War, were about to desert him. No other power would assist him, and war with the Russian Bear loomed big across the frontier. His exchequer, thanks to Abdul-Aziz, was empty, and as for the national debt, he could only default in paying the interest on the coupon. A wall of Russian bayonets menaced him from the north and east; the Greek army threatened from the south; and the Austrian sabers rattled on his western flank. In his despair, Abdul-Hamid summoned to his assistance the famous Young Turk leader, Midhat Pasha, and this truly great statesman became grand vizier. He counseled his sovereign that the only thing that could save the Ottoman empire from complete destruction would be the granting of a constitution and a liberal form of government. Abdul-Hamid was an autocrat, wedded to absolutism. Nevertheless he deemed it the course of prudence to follow the advice of Midhat Pasha. Consequently, Dec. 23, 1876, amid salvos of artillery and fanfare of trumpets, the new constitution was proclaimed. This constitution, which is the one proclaimed again July 23 last, was the work of Midhat Pasha, who, as previously stated, was one of the first of the Young Turks. “With singular sagacity he realized that the equality of the races before the law was the sole prospect of salvation remaining to Turkey.” It is frequently asserted that Oriental peoples and popular forms of government are not suited to one another. All the trustworthy contemporary authorities, however, assert that Midhat Pasha and the other leading Young Turks of the day behaved with remarkable moderation and cool judgment. Again it must be borne in mind that constitutional government is by no means a new thing in Islam. Anything more democratic than the doctrine of the Arab prophet would be difficult to find. True it is that only the first four caliphs adhered strictly to the text of the Koran and the Suma. Their successors made the caliphate into a sultanate. They sacrificed the spirit of democracy to the personal will of the ruler. The first attempt, already mentioned, upon the part of the Turkish people to obtain free institutions and to curb the power of the sultan, was nipped in the bud. The constitution and the parliament called into existence by virtue of it soon passed away. The parliament held but two sessions. It met first in March, 1877, and came to an end in February, 1878. This was by order of the sultan, who, under the constitution, had power to dissolve both houses of parliament. Abdul-Hamid used the war with Russia as a pretext for suspending the constitution, and suspended it remained till 1908. He was aided in this nefarious work by the machinations of the Christian powers. With the suspension of the constitution, Midhat Pasha fell from office, and the Young Turk movement went into hiding for a while. Some of the leaders preferred voluntary exile to remaining in their native land. Others chose to stay, so that when the time was ripe11 for action again, they would be upon the ground. The history of the Young Turks during the period intervening between 1878 and 1908 is difficult to narrate, from the fact that it is shrouded in secrecy. During the nineties there was some activity. From time to time it has become known that committees of progressive men of various blood, speech, and faith, came into existence, both inside and outside of the Ottoman empire. Headquarters were established at Paris and Geneva. Literature was sent out from these centers. The Ottoman Committee of Union and Progress called upon all good men to stand with it on the platform of racial and religious equality in Turkey for every blood and creed. It was this Midhatian plank that brought the jarring faiths and nationalities together. The oaths subscribed to by members of the Young Turk organization were, like most of those in vogue among secret societies, picturesque in the extreme. A revolver and a knife were laid upon the Koran, which was held to the brow of the new member, as he solemnly repeated— “I swear in the name of God and Mohammed that I will fight for nationality, freedom, and truth while a drop of blood remains in my body.” After taking this oath, the member next undertook to provide himself with a rifle, and to be prepared to abandon work, family, and friends at a moment's notice, and fight for the cause. During the time when the attention of the world was centered upon the political revolution in Russia, the Young Turks transferred their headquarters from Paris to Salonika. From this point they directed operations until the revolution was an accomplished fact. But what happened for a long period after this is what no man has yet undertaken to tell. A cloud of impenetrable darkness enshrouds their operations, with only the merest rift at big intervals in its inky blackness. Suffice to say that later we find a vast conspiracy ramifying throughout Macedonia. In Macedonia organization seems to have been brought to a fine point. Adherents were admitted upon the stringent and terrible oath elsewhere recorded in this paper. Then they were divided into sections of five, of whom one alone was informed as to other members. “Each had to subscribe two per cent of his income.” Communications were carried in person, and many were the devices for sending news to the capital or distributing revolutionary matter. Leading men stood, disguised as hawkers, in the streets of Salonika, to sell a match-box or deal out a paper from Paris, as occasion served; others took service as coachmen, to keep watch on dangerous pashas. Papers from Europe were essential. How could they be obtained without detection? First, the post-office staff was ‘educated;’ then the staff of the viceroy. The latter ordered the papers in the viceroy's name; when they arrived, a clerk at the post-office took them to the conspirators.”—Noël Buxton, Chairman of the Balkan Commission, in the Nineteenth Century, January, 1909. Such is the story of the men and party that have upset all the calculations and plans of the chancelleries of Europe. The regeneration of Turkey has ever been thought to lie in joint control by the concert of the powers. The powers had been interfering in Turkish affairs for nearly a century, but the Ottoman government remained as vicious as ever. “Diplomacy despaired of the task. The Young Turks accomplished it in a week.” The question now arises, What will be the attitude of the powers toward Turkey under the new régime? Writing on this point, Prof. Arminius Vamberry, the greatest living authority on the Turkish question, truly says:— “If the near East is to continue to be what it has been for the last three hundred years—the wrestling ground for the intrigues of the diplomatic West; if by continual and useless interference disorder is caused in the still loose joints of the constitutional structure; or if by forwarding individual interests the seeds of discord are sown afresh, and the work of reformation is impeded, then all our hope for better things will end in delusion.” To us it would appear as if the powers of Europe have already begun to answer the professor's query, and to answer it in such a way that all the friends of Turkey and of peace can only conclude that “all our hope for better things will end in delusion.”