Earlier text: About Right"You never signed the pledge, did you, Uncle John?" Uncle John was Harry's ideal of a great and noble man. And it was not a mistaken ideal. Uncle John's hair was white with the passing of over eighty winters, but his eye was bright, his step firm, and his voice earnest and kindly as ever. His life had been one of uprightness as well as one of what the world calls success. "I never signed a pledge on my own account; I presume I have signed several as an example or aid to others," replied Uncle John. "Casper Firmstone is all the time teasing me to sign," said Harry; but I know I can drink a gill of cider and not want any more, or let it alone if I do want it. And I can take one sip of the best wine Mr. Fraser has and not take the second. So I don't see any use in hampering a fellow with a piece of paper." "Don't be too sure about what you can do, Harry. I've seen a good many 'sure' people in my life, as well as a good many 'cautious' people, and I've always noticed in the long run that the cautious people were the safest. I'll tell you where I first learned that lesson, if you'd like to know." "I should," said Harry, always ready at the first hint of a story. "When I was a boy, a good deal smaller than you, I lived in a small town in Vermont. There was a large creek by the village, and at a place called 'The Mill's' there was a beautiful fall of water, of ten or twelve feet, pitching off from an even-edged, flat rock. Reaching quite across the creek, a distance of twenty feet, over this fall of water, was a bridge spanning the stream. "The sides of this bridge were boarded up some four feet high. These side-pieces were capped by a flat railing of boards of from four to six inches wide. Some of the more daring school-children used to walk on this narrow capping-board when crossing the bridge, and more than one fall and serious injury happened there. "There was one thing that saved me from getting hurt or killed by the dangerous crossing. You would like to know what it was? The easiest thing in the world. It happened from the small circumstance that I never had the courage or disposition to walk there at all! In other words, I wasn't 'sure' of my head, and I was sure on the broad, open bridge. "I can think of a great many places that boys and men try to pass safely which are quite as dangerous, and where multitudes fall and ruin themselves, and perhaps perish, both soul and body, forever. The safest way is never to take the first step on a dangerous path."—Youth's Temperance Banner. Worshiping in Letter and Spirit.
THERE are views widely differing on the subject of worshiping in letter and in spirit. Those who object to the law, and lay claim to a system of license, for this is what no-lawism amounts to, affirm that to serve God according to the letter of the law is a slavish service, a service of bondage, being bound and hedged in by forms which leave no freedom to the human spirit and will. They say there is a higher and purer service, a voluntary service, one of the affections only; not guided by any expressed rules and regulations, but in which all is left to the choice and will of the worshiper. They declare that where there are legal injunctions and restrictions there is no freedom, and therefore no pure spiritual worship. This theory appears plausible to many; and to such as love to have their own way it is captivating. But it is both defective as a theory and contrary to Scripture. The true theory of choice or of freedom of the will, is the choice between that which God requires and that which our own hearts would suggest. This choice God gives to every one. This is probation. Of course true worship is to do that which God requires; false worship is to offer to God that which our own hearts devise, or, in other words, to choose our own way. If we try that theory in the State or in the family circle, we shall find it to be destructive to order, and subversive of every correct principle. A citizen scorns the restraints of legal enactments. His ideas of serving the government he thinks are far too exalted to be trammedled. He loves the service of his country, but he must be left to serve in a manner dictated by his own mind and approved only by his own will. If he is a soldier, he refuses to obey the orders of his superior, and maneuvers according to tactics of his own devising, and moves only when he chooses, without regard to the rules adopted for the army. If he is a civil officer, he disregards the statutes and forms for the government of his office, and adopts forms and regulations of his own. If he is a private citizen, he pays no heed to the enactments of the State, but acts as the impulse of his own heart may prompt at all times and on all occasions. Now, what shall we say of such a citizen as this? As a soldier, he would soon be tried for insubordination, and punished for his disloyalty. As a civil officer, he would be broken of his office, and have to retire in disgrace. As a private citizen, he would soon end his career in prison. And why not? Is not the best service to the State rendered by obeying the laws of the State? Rather, is not this the only service the State can accept? Certainly it is. Any other course has its origin in self-will and leads to open rebellion. This much for no-lawism in the State. Take it in the family circle. A child professes great love for his father; he assumes to be very exceedingly anxious to honor and serve his father. When his father commands him to do a certain thing, he considers it altogether beneath such exalted love as he bears to his father to obey the command; he must do what the father orders in a manner quite different from that in which the father said it should be done; or he must substitute something entirely different in the place of that which is required by the father. He says that he loves to serve his father, but his love must not be cramped, nor forced, nor restrained, by rules and restrictions laid down by his father. He must be left free to carry out those plans formed in his own mind, and to follow the promptings of his own heart. This, he claims, is the only way to manifest pure love for his father. But what shall we say to such a love as that. Without hesitation we pronounce it spurious—a mere mockery of love. Such a son would constantly dishonor his father, and become a disgrace to the family to which he belonged. When we refer it to Scripture, we find such a system always and everywhere denounced. Both the word of God and the providence of God have always been against it. This spirit led the priests to offer strange fire before the Lord, instead of that fire prescribed by the Lord. It caused them to offer polluted bread upon his altar; and to change his offerings, substituting the lame and the blind at their own wills. It is the fruit of this perverse spirit of which the Lord asks, “Who hath required this at your hand?” It is such professed service to God which Paul calls “voluntary humility,” and of such persons he says: “Intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.” Col. 2:18. The “fleshly mind” is the same as the “carnal mind, which is not subject to the law of God,” which volunteers an offering not required, and withholds that which is commanded. All such is “will worship.” Of such voluntary worshipers the Lord says: “Woe unto the foolish prophets that have followed their own spirits, and have seen nothing. . . . Have ye not seen a vain vision, and have ye not spoken a lying divination, whereas ye say, The Lord saith it; albeit I have not spoken?” Eze. 13:3-7. They declare that to be the will of God, of which the Lord hath not spoken. Truly, they have followed their own spirit. They claim this as “true Christian liberty.” To do that which the Lord has spoken is to them bondage, a legal service, worshiping in the letter; not by them to be borne. But the Lord pronounces a woe upon them. Thus we learn that to be guided by our feelings and our will, and to disregard God’s commandments is will worship—is to follow our own spirits. This is not worshiping God in spirit, though by some supposed to be so. Such, instead of worshiping God in spirit, are vainly puffed up by their fleshly mind. There may be a false worship in the letter. For this we never plead. This is a Pharisaical, heartless, outward observance of precepts, without the promptings of love. Some are so blind that they think all obedience to commandments is of this kind. A greater mistake cannot be made. The Lord himself has distinctly assured us, “This is the love of God, that we keep his commandments.” Obedience is required of the citizen in the State. Obedience of the child is the only evidence of love in the family. Obedience is the only manifestation of love recognized in the Bible. “If I be a father, where is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the Lord of hosts.” Mal. 1:6. Paul says, “We know that the law is spiritual.” Therefore loving obedience to it is spiritual service, the only true worship. To disobey is to deny the Lord the honor and fear which are his due. Professed worship in willful disobedience is will worship and mockery. God’s Seventh Day Man’s First Day.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
THERE is nothing that can be proved so conclusively that no one can find a chance to cavil, if his inclination or selfish interest prompts him to do so. The infidel Hume once said that if there were anything in the forty-seventh proposition of Euclid that crossed any person’s selfish interest, or limited the power of any man or class of men, there would be hundreds who would dispute the mathematical demonstration that the square of the hypotenuse of a right-angled triangle is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides. And so it is. It is not difficult, with the mass of mankind, to gain their assent to the most absurd theories, if their passions or business interests lead the way; but it requires more than mere human reason to thoroughly convince a man of the plainest truth, against his inclinations. Only the grace of God can subdue the evil heart of unbelief. By no other means than by the existence of the principle just cited, can we account for some of the (so-called) arguments against the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. One of the weakest of these is that “the day which is observed by the majority of people is indeed the true Sabbath of the fourth commandment, since “God’s seventh day was Adam’s first day.” We would not think this objection worthy of notice in this paper, had not several correspondents especially requested it. What is meant by the expression “God’s seventh day”? Of course nothing else can be meant but the seventh day of time, according to God’s count. This, it is claimed, is man’s first day, because he could not have any knowledge of time that had passed before his creation! To be consistent, the advocates of this theory should keep as their Sabbath, the seventh day, counting by sevens from the day of their birth. If this chanced to be on Wednesday, then they should keep Tuesday, for how do they know that there was any such thing as time before they were born? It will be replied that others have kept a record of time, and we accept their testimony and reckoning. Exactly so; and is it not possible that the same God who imparted to Adam the knowledge of the Sabbath, could inform him of the fact that there was a measurement of time before he was created? It seems that Moses found out a great deal about things that occurred before his own time, even as far back as the very beginning, because he was willing to take the Lord’s word for it; and the first day of Adam’s existence is rather early for him to be setting up his own reckoning in opposition to that of his Maker. But it is strange that none of those who have stumbled at this objection raised by their leaders, have ever questioned the truth of the assumed fact. They have never thought to inquire if God’s seventh day was indeed man’s first day. This point can be settled by reading the first chapter of Genesis, which contains a record of the transactions of each day of the creation week. There we learn that man and the lower animals were created on the sixth day of the week. If Adam, then, as is claimed, commenced an individual reckoning of time, the seventh day of his week would have been the fifth day of the week according to God’s reckoning. No one can deny this. We know it is claimed that Adam was created late on the sixth day, and that the next day was really his first day. Really, it was no such thing. We are not informed as to the exact hour of the day when Adam was created, nor does it matter; we do know that he was created on the sixth day, and, consequently, that was his first day of life. If a child is born on the twelfth of June, the twelfth and not the thirteenth of June in each succeeding year is celebrated as his birth-day, even though he were born late in the afternoon. Now why do not the advocates of the theory in question stick to the facts in the case? Simply because361 the facts would demolish their theory. If the facts were adhered to, they could find in them no semblance of an excuse for Sunday-keeping, and it would not be for their interest to advocate the observance of either the fifth or the sixth day of the week. The absurdity of the theory is apparent enough, but we want to consider it a moment in the light of the fourth commandment. That says, “The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work.” Did God mean by this the seventh day, or the first day? “Both,” say our friends; “he meant the seventh day according to his own private count, but the first day according to man’s reckoning.” We have heard that the Jesuits say a thing that they do not mean, and which is not true, and make a mental reservation, or repeat the truth in an undertone; but this theory charges God with the same duplicity. The commandment was spoken to and for men, and must of course, be in the language to which men are accustomed, otherwise it would be meaningless. Now if God’s seventh day was Adam’s first day, then man’s seventh day must be God’s sixth day; and, this theory being true, it follows that the fourth commandment enjoins the observance of neither the first nor the seventh day, but the sixth! But this, and similar absurd theories, arise from the assumption that the Sabbath is a human institution, and that God has nothing much to do with it, except to advise man to rest when he feels like it. The fact is, that it is God’s day upon which we are to rest,—the one upon which he rested, and which he blessed and set apart. It is “the seventh day” which is “the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.” Man could not make a day holy if he tried; but God made the Sabbath holy, and he commands man not to desecrate it. Man had nothing to do with making the Sabbath; his only duty in regard to it is to keep it. One word, in closing, to our brethren who may sometimes be at a loss to know how to answer an objector. Do not hold yourselves under obligations to refute at sight every assemblage of words that may be called an argument. Ask the objector first to prove his proposition, and in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred he will demonstrate that there was nothing to refute. In the remaining instance you may need to aid him by quoting a few texts of Scripture. E. J. W. Lodges and Prayer Meetings
By Editor
WEEK before last a lawyer in this State shot himself through the heart. The paper which recorded the fact stated that he was a member of the following orders: “Workmen, Knights of Honor, Chosen Friends, Odd Fellows, Knights and Ladies of Honor, Knights of Pythias, Freemasons (Blue Lodge and Chapter), Red Men, and American Legion of Honor.” And yet they wonder why he committed suicide! If he had attended prayer-meeting one-half as often as he must have been obliged to attend lodge, any number of papers would have promptly ascribed his suicide to insanity caused by too much religion. Facts Against Supposition.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
IN THE SIGNS of March 6, the editor, commenting on a sermon on Spiritualism, penned the following words: "We record our emphatic denial of the assertion that the Scriptures give any instances of the spirits of the departed reappearing; and we invite any one to point out to us the texts wherein such reappearing is supposed to be given." Had the call been for texts which prove the return of departed spirits, eternity might pass before a response could be made, but the word "supposed" gives the Spiritualist considerable latitude; for there is no limit to what a man may "suppose" about a Bible text, if he only gives loose rein to his fancy. A gentleman from Boston, taking advantage of the above invitation, sends us his supposition as follows:— "Permit me to call your attention to one of the many to be found in the Bible. Luke 16, verses 9, 12, 14; Luke 24, verses 15, 29, 30, 31, 36; John 20, verses 19, 20, 26, 27, and 29. The latter part of the 29th verse contains the following: 'Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.' To what extent the above will apply to those of the present day, who have the opportunity to see and believe, and wont do either, remains to be seen." We are willing to give our correspondent credit for believing without seeing, for we doubt much if he has ever seen some of the texts to which he refers. If he had, he certainly would not have used them. We refer to those in Luke 16, not one of which contains even the most indirect allusion to a spirit either present or absent. As we said before, though, there is no accounting for what a man may "suppose," especially if he is wandering in the fog of Spiritualism. In the references made to Luke 24 and John 20, our friend is equally unfortunate. These texts speak of the appearing of Jesus to his disciples after his resurrection; but they say nothing about the return of his spirit. Jesus was then alive, not dead; and we do not question the fact that living beings may appear to whomsoever they please. Luke 24:36, one of the verses referred to, says: "And as they thus spake, Jesus himself [not his spirit] stood in the midst of them." And verses 38 and 39, verses not referred to, plainly declare that it was not a spiritual manifestation. They read thus: "And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself, handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." We are inclined to think that it is far easier to believe some things without having seen them, than after the light of truth has shone clearly upon them. We are well aware that Spiritualists, and many who are pleased to style themselves orthodox, claim that the resurrection is simply the act of the soul or spirit leaving the body at the death of the latter. In such a case there would be no resurrection from the dead; there would, in fact, be no death. But the Scriptures invariably speak of a resurrection "from the dead." Paul was willing to suffer all things if by any means he might attain unto the "resurrection from the dead;" literally, from "dead ones." Phil. 3:11. When Jesus was transfigured before his disciples, he charged them to tell no man of it until after he was "risen again from the dead," Matt. 17:9. And this resurrection was not the escaping of the spirit at the dissolution of the body, for we are told that "he began to teach them that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again." Mark 8:31. Those who claim that the real Christ did not die, or that it was his undying spirit that appeared to the disciples the third day after the crucifixion, must squarely deny the above and many other Scripture texts. And right here we would drop a word of warning, and urge upon all the necessity of a well-grounded, intelligent faith in the Scriptures. There is no doctrine upon which it is more necessary that we be firmly settled than that of the state of the dead. Error is wonderfully blinding and seductive. We may think that we are proof against temptation on this point, but the human heart is itself deceitful, and Satan knows how to take advantage of it, if it is left unguarded. Our only hope of safety is in having a thorough knowledge of the true teaching of the inspired word, and in being led by the Spirit of God, that when we are brought into the conflict with Satan, we may meet him at every point with, "It is written." We are to resist him steadfast "in the faith." Our correspondent says: "Your paper is good in many ways. Pray be good enough to spend half as much time in the investigation of Spiritualism as you have in attacking it, and give the readers the result of your investigations." Why, we have spent a great deal more time in the investigation of Spiritualism than we have in attacking it. But we don't propose to investigate it in the way that our friend wishes us to. We do not like to investigate in the dark. We have studied the Bible, and we find Spiritualism there exposed so plainly that we have no need to go nearer. As we said before, error is blinding; and those who investigate Spiritualism by going into it, or by going where spiritual manifestations are given, will do so at the peril of their souls. It is simply putting themselves on the devil's ground and inviting him to try his power upon them. Christ will not accompany us when we needlessly go on to the enemy's ground, and without him human strength is powerless against the prince of darkness. The man who is groping about blindfolded in a dark cavern does not have nearly so good a chance to know what it is like, as the man does who stands outside with open eyes, and holding in his hand a lamp whose beams shine into its utmost recesses. The man who sinks in the ocean knows nothing of its depth, compared with the one who stands secure in a boat and casts in a sounding line. So the man who ventures into the mazes of Spiritualism, is no proper judge of its real nature; while the man who holds in his hand the lamp of God's word can see all its terrible dangers,—dangers all the more terrible because they are so seductive. We do not need to take poison in order to know its deadly character. We learn its nature and effects from books, and are therewith content. And so we would say again to all: Study the word of God carefully; and earnestly and continually pray, "Lead us not into temptation." E. J. W. SINCE it has become a point of some importance, in view of the theories entertained by some upon this subject, to determine whether or not ten tribes have been lost, as is claimed, or whether they were recognized as existing in the Land of Palestine, from their first settlement there, till the days of Christ, we wish to offer the following considerations bearing upon the point:— 1. The ten tribes which revolted from Rehoboam, and were carried away captive in the days of Hoshea, were not after their removal "out of the sight of the Lord," recognized as Israel. 2 Kings 17:1, 23. 2. After these ten tribes, as many of them as still persisted in their revolt were carried away, the twelve tribes still existed in the land of Judah; for all such as set their hearts to seek after the Lord God of Israel, out of all the tribes of Israel, disgusted with the idolatry of Jeroboam, came to Jerusalem to sacrifice unto the God of their fathers. 2 Chron. 11:13-16. 3. At the end of the seventy years' captivity, when Cyrus made proclamation for the restoration of the house of the Lord at Jerusalem, he gave liberty to all the people of Israel throughout his realm, who were so minded, to return to their native land. Ez. 1:2, 3. And this favor was granted throughout all Media where the ten tribes were in captivity, as well as in Chaldea and Assyria where the Jews were in captivity. Prideaux's Con., Vol. 1, Book 3. Many of those who belonged to the ten tribes availed themselves of this decree; and hence we read in 1 Chron. 9:1, 3 that there dwelt in Jerusalem, not only the children of Benjamin and Judah, but also of Ephraim and Manasseh; and we find again still later (Neh. 7:73), that all Israel (an expression never applied to any other than the twelve tribes) dwelt in their cities. 4. We learn from the history above quoted, p. 160, that, according to the authority of Jewish writers, the "Urim and Thummim" was established "to seek counsel only about that which belonged to the common interest of all Israel; and therefore, whenever the high priest asked counsel of God in this way, it was with the names of all the tribes of Israel upon his breast to denote that what was asked was for the common interest of all of them." Let us apply this fact to the question under consideration. In the ministrations of the Sanctuary, this side the captivity, did not the high priest on the day of atonement, bear into the most holy place upon his breast the breast-plate of judgment which contained the names of the twelve tribes of Israel? Of course; as much as he did before. Then was not the ministration362 then performed, for the common interest of all Israel? Certainly. Every tribe whose name was on the breast-plate of judgment, had an interest in the services therewith performed; and had there been but two tribes recognized as existing about Jerusalem at that time, it would have been proper that they only should be represented on the breast-plate. But as we find no notice of anything of this kind, we conclude that each tribe retained its name upon the breast-plate of judgment, and maintained its existence in the land, and that those only were recognized as Israel, who still persevered in adhering to the worship of the true God, as ordained for that dispensation. From these few considerations alone, regardless of many others which might be offered, it is sufficiently evident that the twelve tribes maintained an uninterrupted existence in the land of Canaan, except, perhaps, during the seventy years' captivity, till the days of Christ, since which time he is an Israelite indeed who is one at heart, and not outwardly. And the view, therefore, which claims that there are ten tribes of literal Israel somewhere existing, who must at some time in the future be restored, in order that great and gracious promises which are supposed to concern them, may be fulfilled, is a dangerous fallacy, unworthy of our serious belief. U. S. “Where Is Your Faith?”
By R. F. Cottrell
THE importance of faith in the plan of redemption and salvation can hardly be over-estimated. “Without faith it is impossible to please” God. The promises are to those who believe. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” “Being justified by faith,” says an apostle. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.” It seems that the first sin of our race arose from doubting the word of God. The tempter suggested a doubt of God's veracity: “Yea, hath God said,” &c. Then follows the positive denial: “Thou shalt not surely die.” Now as doubting and unbelief resulted in sin, it is reasonable that faith in the word and promise of God should be made of great importance in the plan of saving men from sin. Unbelief leads us away from God; faith leads us back to God. Faith is not sight. It takes hold of the naked promises of God. It does not believe that we shall be saved from our past sins, because we have done so well in keeping the commandments of God, but because we simply rely upon his promise of pardon. We believe God. We believe his love toward us. We believe on his Son, who is set forth as a propitiation for our sin. Our sins were laid upon him. We believe it, and accept him as our Saviour. We believe in the efficacy of the blood that cleanseth from all sin; and are freely justified by his grace. But faith does not release us from our obligation to obey God and keep his commandments. “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid! yea, we establish the law.” If we simply believe for the remission of past sins, we acknowledge sin to be sinful and the law which condemns it to be right. If doubt and unbelief lead to sin, faith leads us out of sin, which is the transgression of God's law, back to obedience. The person that is saved by faith from his transgressions is no less careful to obey the good law that condemned him. He knows that it is right; that in justice it condemned him; and, consequently, it should be the rule of his future life. It was his transgressions of the holy, just, and good law that nailed Him who did no sin to the cross. To take license then to sin would crucify the Son of God afresh. Those who appreciate his grace in their salvation through faith in his blood cannot do this. The law has been honored in the death of the sinless One for our transgressions of it. It has been magnified, lauded, praised, not only in the teaching of Jesus Christ, but in his death for its transgression. His teaching established every jot and tittle of the law (Matt. 5:17-19), and his death for its transgression establishes it; and he that is saved from its curse by his death will praise, exalt, and establish it by future obedience. Hence, while we realize the importance of faith in order to salvation, we will no less realize the importance of future obedience to the commandments of the law of God. While we rely solely on faith in Christ for pardon for the past, we should live as though our final salvation depended upon our future obedience. The saved in the kingdom of God will be those that have washed their robes of character and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. “The just shall live by faith;” and “the doers of the law shall be justified” in the Judgment. There is present truth in the unfolding of the plan of salvation. Do we believe it? Where is our faith? Are we growing strong in faith and love? Ah! there is danger. Our faith must be made perfect by works. Shall we be so unwise as to let our faith die, choked out by the cares and love of the world, and finally fail of the great salvation which is so near? Those who lay hold on eternal life by faith, hold fast, and endure, will be saved. We may be saved; let us make it sure. R. F. COTTERELL. The Missionary.
By S. N. Haskell
This meeting was held in Bismarck Grove, Lawrence, a city of about 10,000 inhabitants. The park is about one mile from the main part of the town, and contains seventy-five acres. It is as beautiful a grove of the stately elm, and a younger growth of black-walnut as can be found in the State of Kansas. The grove is owned by the Union Pacific Railroad Company, who granted us, not only reduced fare on their road, but the use of this beautiful grove with its buildings free of charge. The meetings were held in a tabernacle arranged for public speaking, capable of seating about 6,000 people. There are also many buildings in the park, varying in size from 20 feet square to 50x100 feet. These buildings were occupied by our brethren as dining-rooms and for lodgings. This saved the necessity of as many tents as would otherwise have been needed. There were, however, about forty tents pitched, and it was estimated that not less than 1,000 of our people attended the meeting. The meetings commenced promptly on time, Wednesday evening, May 21. Elders Van Horn and Cudney were the only ministers present from abroad, at the beginning of the meeting. Elders Farnsworth, Olsen, and Conradi reached the ground Friday, while the writer did not arrive till about three o'clock Sabbath morning. The meeting was therefore well under way, and much of the Spirit of God was evidently in their midst, when we arrived. The ground was lighted up at night by electric lights, furnished by the railroad company for a small compensation. The weather was fine throughout the meeting, except a little rain the first day. The outside attendance was not as large as was expected, although there was a fair congregation during the entire meeting. On Sunday it was estimated that there were 4,000 persons present from the city and elsewhere. Four discourses were given to interested hearers. It cannot be definitely stated how extensive the interest is in the city, but from remarks made we have reason to believe that many became deeply interested. There were services each day in both the Scandinavian and German languages, quite a representation of each nationality being on the ground. On the Sabbath, both forenoon and afternoon, much of the Spirit of God seemed to be present. About seventy-five came forward for prayers at the close of the afternoon discourse. Twenty-nine were baptized on the closing day, quite a number of whom were those who had given their hearts to God during the meeting. Most of the discourses given bore directly on the nature of our work and the relation we sustain to the work of Christ in Heaven. A solemn, realizing sense of the Judgment rested in large measure on the people, who at times were deeply moved. Bro. Edson White was present, and made many interesting and instructive remarks on the Sabbath-school work. His assistance was appreciated in this branch of the exercises. The testimonies of our brethren and sisters were of a character that showed not only a depth of feeling, but that the meeting had given them different and enlarged views of the work. The wants of the cause, both at home and abroad, were set before them, and many hearts were stirred. A resolution was passed recommending that the sum of $20,000 be raised—$5,000 for the building and stocking of a depository; $5,000 for the city missions in the State; $5,000 to aid those who wish to qualify themselves to labor in the cause of Christ, and $5,000 to be used as a reserve fund for such branches of the work as might be most needy. On Monday, at the close of a meeting of the Conference which had continued from 10 A. M. to 1 P. M., the brethren were asked to make pledges toward this fund, and within a half hour $16,750 was pledged. This added to the $4,000 which had been pledged previous to the meeting, raised the sum above $20,000. After duly considering the matter, it was thought by the friends that $5,000 was not enough to carry forward the work of city missions, and the desire was expressed that an additional amount be raised, so that 5,000 could be appropriated to the foreign missions, as no money was raised for this work in this Conference last year. It was therefore decided by unanimous expression, that the sum be raised to $30,000 instead of $20,000. This will give those not at the camp-meeting an opportunity to manifest the same liberality. It is but justice to state that this money was largely pledged by those who were most able; $7,000 was pledged by five persons, thirteen gave $500 each, and no pledges were taken for less than $10. The sums less than $100 were taken at the special request of the brethren, and the amount of pledges less than this sum was only $700, and of this amount there were eight $50 pledges. We never saw brethren give more cheerfully than at this meeting; and there was the same promptness manifested in bearing their testimony in meeting. It is reported, although at this time of writing the exact figures cannot be ascertained, that the book sales amounted to over $600. There was an eagerness manifested on the part of the citizens present to purchase our publications. One lady purchased to the amount of $14, another $6, etc. This may be attributable to the fact that the city was thoroughly canvassed for about two months prior to the meeting, many subscribers obtained for the SIGNS, and thousands of pages of tracts distributed. About one hundred subscribers were obtained on Sunday for our periodicals. Orders were also taken on the ground for one hundred and thirty-four copies of Vol. 4 of "Great Controversy." There were but two serious drawbacks to the meeting: One was that it did not continue half long enough to accomplish what should have been done. Our camp-meetings must become seasons of instruction on the nature of our work, and how it can best be carried forward. Councils of our leading brethren at these gatherings are essential if we would work in the most successful manner. The city missions are important, and we are certain they can be made a success in every case, as well as363 all other branches of the cause of God. But much deliberation, consultation and prayer with those bearing responsibilities is needed. We have a wily foe, and nothing but divine wisdom and a firm, united front will enable us to safely go through the perils of the last days. Another unfortunate circumstance was that there were not enough large tents in which meetings could be held. There should be a number of tents not less in size than 18x24 feet (and larger would be better) at all our camp-meetings. These can be used for giving instruction in canvassing, colporter work, holding Bible-readings, ministers' meetings, making especial efforts for the young, etc., to be carried on at the same time. Many of our brethren remained over all day Tuesday, which was one day more than was appointed, that business matters might be closed up, and they receive instructions in canvassing and colporter work. Thus closed the first camp-meeting of the season, this side of the Rocky Mountains, and it was a very successful one. This Conference needs help. We know of no Conference where there are more individuals who are ready to enter the field than in this, and who would better appreciate instruction how to labor. There should be at least a four weeks' drill given in this State, to those who wish to go out in the field to labor, by experienced ministers. Such an effort would be of priceless value to the Kansas Conference, and to many others. We hope such an effort may be put forth next fall or winter. It is time we prepare in a special manner for what is coming on the earth.
S. N. HASKELL.