Earlier text: Direct Proof that the Kingdom is FutureSometime since, we clipped the following from a San Francisco paper:— "A sensible writer in the California Christian Advocate notices the concessions to Spiritualism which have been made by Rev. Joseph Cook, Professor Phelps, and other evangelical clergymen, assuming the superhuman [demoniac] origin of ancient witchcraft, necromancy, etc., and not only allowing but asserting that the phenomena of modern Spiritualism are from the same source. He says that Dr. Buckley, in his review of Professor Phelps' book, entitled 'How Shall the Pulpit Treat Spiritualism?' denies emphatically the superhuman origin of the witchcraft, etc., forbidden in the Old Testament, and shows that the mode of treating the subject is wrong. 'If we concede spirit agency in the rappings, writings, and table tippings we have surrendered to the enemy, and must be vanquished by him in every conflict. . . . Let the Christian church acknowledge the supernatural origin of these phenomena, and the Spiritualists then have two-thirds of the battle." From all of which we dissent. Joseph Cook saw things for which he could not account on natural principles; and so did Dr. Crooke, who studied the phenomena carefully for a series of years. Dr. Buckley says the Spiritualists have two-thirds of the battle if you concede the supernatural origin of the phenomena. But if you deny it, and the Spiritualists prove it, as they have to the satisfaction of hundreds of thousands, among whom are some of the ablest minds and most careful investigators, then the Spiritualists have the whole of the battle. And so it happens every time; when an investigator, who long and patiently examines it, determined not to acknowledge any superhuman agency in the manifestations, finds that which baffles every effort, and defies every test, to detect collusion, he yields entirely to its claims. But concede the fact that Satan works "with all power, and signs, and lying wonders," to deceive the world; that miracles are of two kinds, to lead and to mislead, as in the days of Moses and the magicians of Egypt; that a power described in511 Rev. 13:11 and onward (which we believe applies to our own country), which, in the words of prophecy, "deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by those miracles which he had power to do," and we cannot see where Spiritualists have any advantage. Their works uniformly tend to evil—to prove that which is false and wicked, turning away the minds of the believers from God, the Bible, Christ, and from everything that is pure and good. The difficulty with the theologians of the present day is that, as the pagans and papists before them, they deify the dead; make them objects of reverence, and ascribe to them more than mortal wisdom and power, often declaring that they are the guardian angels of the living. So doing and so believing, they yield at once to the false claims and pretences of the spirits, and accept them as their friends and kindred. If they believed the words of the Bible, that "the dead know not anything," Eccl. 9:5, and remembered that "Satan and his angels" fell from Heaven by sin, "kept not their first estate," and that "the spirits of devils," or demons, are "working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty," they would have a shield from the snare and the deception without the necessity of ignoring the testimony of the Bible, as their theory compels them to do. But that course would be attended with another disadvantage: If they used these scriptures to meet the present phase of Spiritualism they would have to confess that we are in the last days, and that the battle of the great day, and the coming of Christ are near. But that would never do; the people would call them "Adventists," which they could never bear. So they flee to Tarshish, and go down into the sides of the vessel and quietly fall asleep, and let Satan work on and gather his followers by the millions without a word from the armory of the Lord being hurled at him. "Orthodoxy" lays the track by making the Platonic philosophy their chief dependence; Satan furnishes the rolling stock; Spiritualists run the trains; and thousands go together there, in the broad road to perdition. Sabbath-Keepers in the Sixteenth Century.
By John Nevins Andrews
IN Russia the observers of the seventh day are numerous at the present time. Their existence can be traced back nearly to the year 1400. They are, therefore, at least one hundred years older than the work of Luther. The first writer that I quote speaks of them as "having left the Christian faith." But even in our time, it is very common for people to speak of those who turn from the first day to the seventh that they have renounced Christ for Moses. He also speaks of them as holding to circumcision. Even Carlstadt was charged with this by Luther as a necessary deduction from the fact that he observed the day enjoined in the fourth commandment. Such being a common method of characterizing Sabbath-keepers in our time, and such also having been the case in past ages—for when men lack argument, they use opprobrious terms—the historian, who makes up his record of these people from the statements of the popular party, will certainly represent them as rejecting Christ and the gospel, and accepting instead Moses and the ceremonial law. I give the statements of the historians as they are, and the reader must judge. Robert Pinkerton gives the following account of them:— "Seznevtschini. This sect are, in modern time, precisely what the Strigolniks originally were. They are Jews in principle; maintain the divine obligation of circumcision; observe the Jewish Sabbath, and the ceremonial law. There are many of them about Tula, on the river Kuma, and in other provinces, and they are very numerous in Poland and Turkey, where, having left the Christian faith, they have joined the seed of Abraham, according to the flesh, in rejecting the Messiah and the gospel." The ancient Russian name of this people was Strigolniks. Dr. Murdock gives the following account of them:— "It is common to date the origin of sectarians in the Russian church, about the middle of the seventeenth century, in the time of the patriarch Nikon. But according to the Russian annals, there existed schismatics in the Russian church two hundred years before the days of Nikon; and the disturbances which took place in his time, only proved the means of augmenting their numbers, and of bringing them forward into public view. The earliest of these schismatics first appeared in Novogorod, early in the fifteenth century, under the name of Strigolniks." "A Jew named Horie preached a mixture of Judaism and Christianity; and proselyted two priests, Denis and Alexie, who gained a vast number of followers. This sect was so numerous, that a national council was called, toward the close of the fifteenth century, to oppose it. Soon afterwards, one Karp, an excommunicated deacon, joined the Strigolniks; and accused the higher clergy of selling the office of priesthood, and of so far corrupting the church, that the Holy Ghost was withdrawn from it. He was a very successful propagator of this sect." It is very customary with historians to speak of Sabbath-keeping Christians in one of the following ways: 1. To name their observance of the seventh day distinctly, but to represent them as turning from Christ to Moses and the ceremonial law; or, 2. To speak of their Sabbatarian principles in so vague a manner that the reader will not be likely to suspect them of being Sabbath-keepers. Pinkerton speaks of these Russian Sabbath-keepers after the first of these methods; Murdock, after the second. It is plain that Murdock did not regard these people as rejecting Christ, and it is certain from Pinkerton that the two writers are speaking of the same people. What was the origin of these Russian Sabbath-keepers? Certainly it was not from the Reformation of the sixteenth century; for they were in existence at least one century before that event. We have seen that the Waldenses, during the Dark Ages, were dispersed through many of the countries of Europe. And so also were the people called Cathari, if, indeed, the two were not one people. In particular, we note the fact that they were scattered through Poland, Lithuania, Sclavonia, Bulgaria, Livonia, Albania, and Sarmatia. These countries are now parts of the Russian Empire. Sabbath-keepers were numerous in Russia before the time of Luther. The Sabbath of the Lord was certainly retained by many of the ancient Waldenses and Cathari, as we have seen. In fact, the very things said of the Russian Sabbath-keepers, that they held to circumcision and the ceremonial law, were also said of the Cathari, and of that branch of the Waldenses called Passaginians. Is there any reasonable doubt that in these ancient Christians we have the ancestors of the Russian Sabbath-keepers of the fifteenth century? Mr. Maxson makes the following statement:— "We find that Sabbath-keepers appear in Germany late in the fifteenth or early in the sixteenth century according to 'Ross's Picture of All Religions.' By this we are to understand that their numbers were such as to lead to organization, and attract attention. A number of these formed a church, and emigrated to America, in the early settlement of this country." Mr. Utter makes the following statement respecting Sabbath-keepers in Germany and in Holland:— "Early in the sixteenth century there are traces of Sabbath-keepers in Germany. The Old Dutch Martyrology gives an account of a Baptist minister named Stephen Benedict, somewhat famous for baptizing during a severe persecution in Holland, who is supposed by good authorities to have kept the seventh day as the Sabbath. One of the persons baptized by him was Barbary von Thiers, wife of Hans Borzen, who was executed on the 16th of September, 1529. At her trial she declared her rejection of the idolatrous sacrament of the priest, and also the Mass." We give her declaration of faith respecting Sundays and holy days:— "God has commanded us to rest on the seventh day. Beyond this she did not go: but with the help and grace of God she would persevere therein, and in death abide thereby; for it is the true faith, and the right way in Christ." Another martyr, Christina Tolingerin, is mentioned thus:— "Concerning holy days and Sundays, she said: 'In six days the Lord made the world, on the seventh day he rested. The other holy days have been instituted by popes, cardinals, and archbishops.'" There were at this time Sabbath-keepers in France:— "In France also there were Christians of this class, among whom were M. de la Roque, who wrote in defense of the Sabbath against Bossuet, Catholic bishop of Meaux." M. de la Roque is referred to by Dr. Wall in his famous history of infant baptism "as a learned man in other points," but in great error for asserting that "the primitive church did not baptize infants." It is worthy of notice that Sabbath-keepers are always observers of Scriptural baptism—the burial of penitent believers in the watery grave. No people retaining infant baptism, or the sprinkling of believers, have observed the seventh day. The origin of the Sabbatarians of England cannot now be definitely ascertained. Their observance of the Sabbath of the Lord, strongly attest their descent from the persecuted heretics of the Dark Ages, rather than from the reformers of the sixteenth century, who retained infant baptism and the festival of Sunday. That these heretics had long been numerous in England, is thus certified by Crosby:— "For in the time of William the Conqueror [A. D. 1070] and his son William Rufus, it appears that the Waldenses and their disciples out of France, Germany, and Holland, had their frequent recourse, and did abound in England. . . . . . The Beringarian, or Waldensian heresy, as the chronologer calls it, had, about A. D. 1080, generally corrupted all France, Italy, and England." Mr. Maxson says of the English Sabbatarians:— "In England we find Sabbath-keepers very early. Dr. Chambers says: 'They arose in England in the sixteenth century,' from which we understand that they then became a distinct denomination in that kingdom." Mr. Benedict speaks thus of the origin of English Sabbatarians:— "At what time the Seventh-day Baptists began to form churches in this kingdom does not appear: but probably it was at an early period; and although their churches have never been numerous, yet there have been among them almost for two hundred years past, some very eminent men." John Nevins Andrews A Criminal Theology.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
The American Baptist Flag recently contained the obituary notice of an infant, to which the following lines were appended:— “Asleep in Jesus,
Oh so young,
Yet the Lord has said
‘Suffer them to come.’”
We have no disposition to criticise the so-called “poetry,” but to call attention to the implied comment on the well-known words of Christ, “Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me; for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” It has never occurred to us that there could be more than one meaning attached to this verse. In it Christ shows his care for the children, and indicates that even the little ones may believe on him, and he will receive them; that they are nearer the kingdom than any others, for all must become as little children before they can enter therein. But now a new idea is presented. A little one has died; it is, as the writer says, “asleep in Jesus.” In the popular mind, however, the Bible never means what it says, and when it says that the dead are “asleep,” it is taken for granted that it means that they are alive and more acutely conscious than they ever were on earth. According to this writer, people “come to Jesus,” only when they die. Paraphrasing Matt. 19:14 to express the view thus taught, it would read, “Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come,” etc. No one can deny that this is a legitimate rendering, according to popular notions. The idea expressed in the lines quoted is, Do not prevent the children from dying, for Jesus has invited them to come to him, and that is the only way they can get there. And then the inference might easily be drawn that it would be a pious deed to quietly help them off, or in other words, to kill them. This is written with no irreverence, except for the false doctrine which makes such an interpretation of Scripture possible. To be sure, natural affection causes the majority of people to take care of the children as much as possible, and there is implanted in the natures of all an instinctive dread of death, which no amount of false teaching about the benefits which death confers can eradicate. Still there are instances where persons of weak minds have been led to destroy their children, in order that they might sooner enter upon the bliss of Heaven. And who that believes as the writer of that obituary notice does, could say that they were not right? Believing that the ten commandments are abolished, and that death “is but the voice which Jesus sends to call departing friends to his arms,” why should they hesitate to enter upon a war of extermination, and slay all the righteous? We are glad that people are often more consistent in their practices than in their theories otherwise the scenes of the papal persecution would be outdone, by an immolation from love of the victims. We have no sympathy for a doctrine which makes Herod a benefactor of the race, and gives to Satan the key of Heaven. The word of God is pure, and the one who strictly follows it cannot be guilty of inconsistency either in faith or practice. But error is always inconsistent with itself, and the man who adopts one error, is driven to the acceptance of a hundred more. THERE are people in the world who are still skeptical in regard to the great benefit of the work of the missionaries among the heathen. Let them read the following, and then tell by what other means so great changes could be wrought in so short a time. It is from "At Home in Fiji," by Charlotte Gordon Cumming:— "It was only people who had been killed that were considered good for food. Those who died a natural death were never eaten—invariably buried. But it certainly is a wonder that the isles were not altogether depopulated, owing to the number who were killed. Thus in Namena, in the year 1851, fifty bodies were cooked for one feast. And when the men of Bau were at war with Verata they carried off 260 bodies, seventeen of which were piled on a canoe and sent to Rewa, where they were received with wild joy, dragged about the town, and subjected to every species of indignity ere they finally reached the ovens. Then, too, just think of the number of lives sacrificed in a country where infanticide was a recognized institution, and where widows were strangled as a matter of course! Why, on one occasion, when there had been a horrible massacre of Namena people at Viwa, and upward of 100 fishermen had been murdered, and their bodies carried as bokola to the ovens at Bau, no less than eighty women were strangled to do honor to the dead, and corpses lay in every direction about the mission station! It is just thirty years since the Rev. John Watsford, writing from here, described how twenty-eight victims had been seized in one day while fishing. They were brought here alive, and only stunned when put into the ovens. Some of the miserable creatures attempted to escape from the scorching bed of red-hot stones, but only to be driven back and buried in that living tomb, whence they were taken a few hours later to feast their barbarous captors. He adds that more human beings were eaten on this little isle of Bau than anywhere else in Fiji. It is very hard, indeed, to realize that the peaceful village on which I am now looking has really been the scene of such horrors as these, and that many of the gentle, kindly people around me have actually taken part in them." A Thing Quite Indispensable.
Nothing is more essential to the building up of a well-rounded Christian character than the formation of right habits of Christian life; and chief among those habits must be placed the daily reading of the Scriptures and secret prayer. Whatever methods of spiritual culture the Christian may adopt, he must not neglect these. The public preaching of the gospel and the social prayer-meeting are justly esteemed as a means of Christian edification—which means, by the way, not gratification, or pleasing, as it is sometimes taken to mean, but the building up of character. But these cannot take the place of private devotions. As well might one expect to build up a strong and symmetrical body without proper food and pure air, as to build up a Christian character and neglect to feed on the word of God, or forget prayer, the very breath of one's spiritual being. We do not say that a man cannot possibly be a Christian and neglect this duty—the grace of God may keep a spark of the divine fire alive in him in spite of his neglect. But he will be a starved, stunted, dwarfed Christian all his days. We know what the excuse is for neglect—"no time." That is always the excuse given by people for not doing what they really do not wish to do. Whenever a man comes to the conclusion that a thing must be done, he always finds time for the doing of it. A multitude of minutes go to waste in the lives of even the busiest of men; things are done that after all do not need to be done; attention is wasted on trivial details, with the idea that to be continually busy is a virtue in itself, independently of what is accomplished. Any man by a little more method in his affairs, or a little curtailing of things that are not strictly necessary, can make room for what is necessary. Nevertheless, we are willing to admit that in this restless, rushing age, and particularly in a bustling city, there is some difficulty in gaining time for private meditation over the word of God, and for secret prayer. A business man in New York cannot well spend hours in his closet, but that is no reason why he should spend no time there. It is not so necessary that a definite amount of Scripture should be read every day, and a prayer of just a certain length be offered, as that the heart should once at least, and twice if possible, each day be brought into closest communion with God. There is an inspiration to faithful performance of daily duty in such devotions that once felt will be recognized as the chief source of developing Christian character, not to speak of the power they give one against hourly temptation. But the spiritual blessings of this life, like the temporal, are given only to those who are willing to make some effort for their attainment. Men can make a fetich of anything, and we have often thought that many good Christian people make something very like a fetich of the idea of "reading a chapter in the Bible." If the chapter begins in the middle of a paragraph and ends in the middle of a sentence, they will insist on reading just the chapter and no more. If it contains four verses or forty, it is all the same. Much the same idea is entertained of family prayer, and for aught we know, of secret prayer. It is too much viewed as a certain round of duties, to be gone through with machine-like precision. But such devotions, public or private, rob the heart of the sweetest and most blessed experiences that flow from communion with God. The better rule is to follow one's spiritual impulses for the time, taking care that they are healthy, rather than be bound by any rigid limits. Many Christian people pressed for time have found great help and comfort in reading a few verses in the morning until some truth was reached that made a special impression on the mind; and then carrying that truth about with them during the day, from time to time meditating on it as their duties permitted them. Is it Tennyson who speaks of "short swallow-flights of song"? Short swallow-flights of prayer, offered at intervals in business, have been a great means of grace to men so pressed by affairs as to find it very difficult to get time for private devotion. In short, it will be found in this, as in all other matters, that where there is a will there is a way. The soul that thirsts after communion with God will put, if need be, everything else aside until that thirst is satisfied.—Examiner. The Missionary.
By Charles L. Boyd
WE do not always appreciate the help of opposition. Paul says, "Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will." The truthfulness of this text is forcibly illustrated in a family who recently embraced the Sabbath here in Washington Territory. A missionary worker had given them a package of tracts and papers. Being destitute of religious interest they laid the tracts on a shelf at the side of the room. Time passed, and a shepherd of the flock with which this family once had a connection, came to their home. A glance at these tracts and papers called forth the most solemn warning against their perusal. He pronounced them the most dangerous and corrupting literature, unfit even to remain in the house; and desired the privilege, Jehoakim like, of burning it "in the fire that was on the hearth" before him. This privilege was denied. A daughter, a young lady of active mind, said that she had read some of them and thought them good. The dangers of permitting such literature to be before their child was presented in such glaring colors as to excite the curiosity of the parents, and they determined upon its perusal. They were astonished at the high tone, purity of language, and strength of Scriptural argument in support of the doctrine. They continued to read, weighing all on the scales of the Bible, until they became established in present truth. This man was "an inveterate tobacco user." He had tried several times to overcome the growing evil, but suffered so severely, both in body and mind, in the struggle, that he had met as many times with an inglorious defeat. Once more he resolved to make an effort; and this time he looked to God for help. His smoking tobacco was lying on the shelf, and that for chewing was in his pocket. From that time, he says he never tasted tobacco, suffered no incon-venience either in body or mind; and, wonderful as God's works are, has had no craving for it since that time. A family altar was erected, and a neighborhood difficulty, in which he had probably suffered the greater wrong, was settled, and last Sunday, in company with his wife, he followed the Saviour into a watery grave. My fellow-missionary laborers, do not mourn if some enemy of the truth, with the plowshare turns the soil where with tender hand you have scattered the precious seed. Some kinds of soil require this kind of tilling. With Paul, let us "glory, whether in pretense, or in truth, Christ is preached," and souls are saved from the wrath to come. CHAS. L. BOYD. Renton, W. T., Oct. 28, 1882. REV. JOHN BUTLER of the Presbyterian mission to China, just before returning to China, from a visit to this country said:— "Two things we cannot get people in America to realize fully: 1. What has been done in China, and 2. What needs to be done there. The more I see, the more I am astonished at our success. People will hardly believe me when I tell them about our Chinese Christians. 'I suppose they are rather slippery,' one says. I answer, No. They are fully equal in Christian character to church members in this country. . . . . "When we get the Gospel into a Chinaman he is sure to be a noble Christian. Our Chinese preachers take their Bibles as literally true and as authoritative. They have no commentaries to explain away the obvious meaning. Hence they don't cavil or rationalize, but literally 'tremble' at God's word. They believe what they read and obey it. Hence, they give a tenth of all they earn to the Lord. We are building up in China self-supporting churches under native pastors. The pastor's salary is $100 a year, and he gives a tenth of it. China is a third larger than the United States, and has but one missionary to a million of its population. We need, especially, female missionaries. The women of China are all Buddhists, and are very religious in their way. There is no heaven for them as women. They must go to hell. But their hope is that if they are pious here, they may return to the earth as men, and so have a chance to get to heaven. These women receive the missionaries kindly, and we cannot send them too many." Upper Columbia T. and M. Society.
By Mrs. G. W. Colcord
REPORT FOR QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1882. | Districts |
No. of Members |
No. Reports Returned |
No. of Members Added |
No. of Members Dismissed |
No. of Missionary Visits |
No. of Letters Written |
No. Signs taken in Clubs |
Signs |
Review |
Good Health |
Instructor |
Other Periodicals |
New Subscribers |
|---|
| No. 1 |
26 |
20 |
. . |
. . |
46 |
14 |
22 |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
| No. 2 |
45 |
28 |
16 |
. . |
12 |
25 |
40 |
1 |
19 |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
| No. 3 |
34 |
21 |
. . |
. . |
9 |
27 |
11 |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
. . |
| Agents |
3 |
3 |
. . |
. . |
178 |
204 |
. . |
8 |
18 |
3 |
10 |
4 |
. . |
| Totals |
108 |
72 |
16 |
. . |
245 |
270 |
73 |
9 |
37 |
3 |
10 |
4 |
. . |
| Districts |
Pages Tracts and Pamphlets distributed |
Periodicals Distributed |
Annuals Distributed |
Membership & Donations Tract Fund |
Sales |
Periodicals |
T. and M. Reserve Fund |
Total |
Collected on Other Funds |
|---|
| No. 1 |
1264 |
512 |
. . |
$ 3 50 |
$ . . |
$ . . |
$ . . |
$ 3 50 |
$ . . |
| No. 2 |
5412 |
338 |
. . |
11 40 |
1 60 |
13 75 |
. . |
26 75 |
. . |
| No. 3 |
2884 |
291 |
12 |
5 70 |
70 |
4 00 |
. . |
10 40 |
. . |
| Agents |
36 |
94 |
. . |
8 00 |
30 95 |
47 61 |
. . |
86 56 |
. . |
| Totals |
9596 |
1285 |
12 |
$28 60 |
$33 25 |
$ 65 36 |
$ . . |
$127 21 |
$ . . |
MRS. G. W. COLCORD, Secretary. UPPER COLUMBIA V. M. WORK—QUARTER ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 1882.
| SOCIETIES |
Visits |
Letters Written |
Letters Received |
Signs Mailed |
Signs Distributed |
Other Periodicals Given |
Subscribers Obtained |
Pages of Tracts Mailed |
Pages of Tracts Loaned |
Pages of Tracts Given |
Annuals Distributed |
Cash Donations |
|---|
| Milton, Or. |
41 |
51 |
4 |
297 |
25 |
199 |
. . |
529 |
2096 |
23 |
$ 25 |
|
| Walla Walla, W.T. |
173 |
122 |
6 |
71 |
174 |
182 |
7 |
640 |
510 |
312 |
. . |
5 15 |
| Dayton, W. T. |
30 |
36 |
4 |
112 |
30 |
8 |
. . |
3902 |
356 |
. . |
. . |
65 |
| Total |
244 |
209 |
14 |
480 |
229 |
389 |
7 |
640 |
6941 |
2764 |
23 |
$605 |
To license saloons is to license murder. It has been estimated that in the United States alone 60,000 die prematurely from drink every year. When we license the manufacture and sale of these drinks, we authorize the premature death of 60,000 of our people annually, and make the saloon-keepers our agents to accomplish the work. But these men object to being called murderers. What is murder? Webster: "The act of killing a human being, with malice, prepense, or forethought. Verb: To kill with premeditated malice; 2. To destroy; to put an end to." But they say, "We are not angry with the men to whom we sell our goods, and hence there is no malice on our part. This is their mistake in words. Anger is not necessary to malice in its legal sense. We quote the authority again:— Webster: "Malice (Law), any wicked or mischievous intention of the mind; a depraved inclination to mischief; intention to do an act which is wrongful, without just cause or excuse; a wanton disregard of the rights of others; willfulness." These men engage in the work with full knowledge of the aggregate results. At least, most of them do. Those who license them to do this work, also know the results. They wantonly do this for money, in "disregard" of the rights of others. Hence it is murder, neither more nor less. If this work only murdered or assasinated men physically, it might be borne with. I know it is terrible to think that there is a foe in our land that is killing 1,155 of our people every week, and still worse, that such a foe is licensed and protected in this deliberate slaughter by our law-makers, but the worst of all is the murder of character, manhood and morals. Every one, too, who gives any attention to this question, knows this. And yet, in the face of this evil and the knowledge of it, men who claim to be philanthropists, nay, even Christians, will sanction it with their votes and clothe it with the authority of law! We do in this as we would not do in any other evil. If a man should come to us who is skilled in the black art, and advertise that he is competent to dement all our young men, and upon trial he should actually for a small fee, destroy the minds of fifty of our young men, would we think of licensing him to prosecute his calling in our community? Such a thought would be preposterous! He would not have wasted their fortunes, nor destroyed their physical manhood or shortened their lives, to think and reason. His work is not nearly so bad as that which is being done by the saloons, and yet no one would think of licensing it. We prohibit the smaller crimes, and license the greater. The power that makes is greater than that which is made. Now when we note the causes of fraud, theft, rape, fighting, brawling, killing, etc., we find that about ninety per cent. is properly put to the account of the sale and use of rum. We license one man to make another man drunk, and then fine the man for getting drunk! We license the saloon man to craze the brain of one of his customers who kills another man as the result, and then we hang the man who killed the other, while he who really did the deed, or did that which caused the deed to be done is petted as a gentleman of good moral character and standing! Why can we not learn to be consistent and license men to get drunk and then do the work of drunken men, or else stop the iniquitous business altogether. What can we expect but failure as long as we continue to act thus sinfully? We license both the use and the abuse of drinking. It is common for men to try to shield themselves from the consequences of the liquor traffic, by claiming that they have only authorized the use and are not responsible for the abuse of these liquors. This will not do. Any beverage use whatever, is an abuse of intoxicants. This has been determined upon by the highest medical authority both in Europe and America. Here all science is agreed. Hence, when they license the sale as a beverage, they have licensed the abuse. But we have no need of making fine points on this subject. The truth is, when we license a saloon we license that which is everywhere done under that name. We license them to do what we know they will do by virtue of the authority we give them. But suppose that those who get drunk were the only responsible persons in the matter, what then? We know that they get drunk on drink, and that they get that drink in the institutions which we have sanctioned. Such has ever been the case, and such will be the case as long as we continue the same regime. If a baker make bread in our city which men could not eat temperately; of which if a man should once taste he would become a glutton and would then continue till he would thus kill himself, we venture to say that this too successful baker would be excused from our city. No matter how much he might plead that his bread was good and if a man would only eat of it moderately, it would do him good, and would not do him any harm, if we find that the bread can't be used in that healthful manner, we will dispense with the further service of our over-successful bread-maker. And if these men were right in claiming that their beverages might be used in unhurtful moderation, still, the fact that they are not so used, is positive proof that they cannot be so employed, and therefore should be banished from the land.—N. W. News. How I Would Paint a Bar-room.
By T. Griffith
If I had the adorning of a bar-room it should be done somewhat in this wise:— On one side I would paint death on the pale horse, his arm weilding to the thunder-bolt, the fiery hoofs of his flying steed treading down everything that is fair and lovely; the garden of Eden before him, a blackened waste behind him. On the other hand I would draw the picture of a wretched hovel, once a happy home; the roof broken in, the windows stuffed with rags; in the doorway a weeping wife with ragged children clinging to her skirts, piteously beseeching her for bread. In the distance should be seen the once happy husband and father, now a reeling drunkard, on his way from the village tavern to the hut he calls home. Back of the bar, in full view of the bloated creatures that stand with the cup to their lips, I would paint a company of demons, in the death dance of fiendish hilarity around a fire kindled with the flames of alcohol, and over which I would write in lurid letters: “Moderate drinking lights the flame that burns to the lowest hell.” Opposite the bar should be a lonely and dishonored grave; a lightning-blasted tree should stretch its leafless branches over it; and on some withered bough should perch the melancholy owl hooting to the wintry moon. At the foot of the grave should kneel the angel of mercy, with eyes and hands upraised to the pitying heavens, and at the head of the grave should be the angel of justice, carving with stern, relentless hands upon the tombstone those fearful words of doom, “No drunkard shall enter the kingdom of God.” In the intervening spaces I would have, here a grinning skeleton, there a broken heart, a shattered hour-glass, a stranded boat, a torch extinguished in blackness of darkness; while from over the doorway and from the ceiling should look down all kinds of woful faces—pale, imploring, wrathful, deadly, despairing. The walls of the room should be shrouded in sackcloth, and the floor covered with ashes, and the bar wreathed in weeping willow and gloomy cypress, while all the vessels that held the damning fluid should be black as the gates of doom. Then I would call the rumseller, if he would, to take his place behind the bar; and, though a few besotted wretches, hardened in crime, might stagger up to the bar and drink defiance to their fate, yet I should hope that the young—the pride of mothers and the light of homes—might turn away as though they had caught a glimpse of the infernal world.—Rev. T. Griffith. DR. J. B. FINLEY was for many years chaplain of the Ohio penitentiary. He was very careful to study the characters and observe the change in the dispositions of the convicts. Of the effect of diet, he says in his "Memorials of Prison Life," p. 40:— "These men were once among the boldest of villians, but the diet, the temperance, the active and steady labor, and the moral discipline of a prison, soon soften down the most daring and reckless spirits, and sometimes effect a perfect change in their dispositions. We learn from the facts here daily presented, the great law, that the dispositions of men are made very much by their habits. Let a person eat much meat, feed abundantly, drink spirituous liquors, spend much time in idle and wicked conversation, and take no thought of governing or even checking his natural appetites, and he is almost sure to become a fearless, violent, ambitious villian; but take him now from the excessive indulgence of his animal propensities, oblige him to spend his time in silence, keep him from the use of spirits, let his diet be nourishing but not exciting, consisting chiefly of vegetables, then raise his mind to intellectual, moral, and religious topics, even though it be only occasionally, and the whole man begins to wear a new aspect—to feel a new current of emotions—to enjoy a serener and higher kind of being. Imprisonment, therefore, on any plan, is often a blessing to these desperate characters, some of whom go out reformed in soul, mind, and body. We see, too, that the world at large has a great interest in the habits of the people. Savages, who live mostly on flesh, are the most ferocious of mankind; while those nations and tribes which feed on vegetables, chiefly, are generally the most peaceable, docile, and intellectual."