Earlier text: The Reformed MormonsThe Reform Dress.
By W. H. Littlejohn
That a reform in the dress of females, as worn at the present time, is necessary, few will be found ready to deny. The almost unanimous verdict of those who have given attention to this subject is, that many of the fashions in vogue at present are not only in the highest degree ridiculous, but that they are also, in many respects, destructive to life, and therefore criminal. In view of these facts, a style of wearing apparel has been adopted by many ladies, which, obviating the difficulties alluded to above, meets the demands of the case in the most satisfactory manner. While, by a change of material employed in its manufacture, it can easily be adapted to the rigors of a cold, or the greater heat of a warm, latitude, should the wearer see fit to imitate the example of those females of the continent, who, despite the annoying and inconvenient appendages which society has imposed upon them, are in the habit of seeking health and enjoyment upon the highway, or in the fields, she will find that that which hitherto has appeared like an irksome task, has now become a pleasant pastime. Should she, on the contrary, from necessity or choice, devote herself exclusively to the honorable discharge of home duties—clothed as she is in a dress which descends to a point not less than eight inches from the floor, and neatly fitting pants, which shield the ankles from the gaze of the vulgar, and protect them from the injurious effects of the snow, rain, and dew—she moves about the house or farm with a facility equal to that of her more stalwart brother, who, in the habit of seeking enjoyment of his more resolute sex, has stoutly repudiated every custom calculated to hamper him in his movements, as made in the pecuniary interest of its inventor. In fine, she has at a single bound, leaped every barrier in this direction which has hitherto separated her from a proper relation to the laws of life. That activity which is so indispensable to health, and yet which is so distasteful to very many of her sex, because of the artificial impediments in the way of easy and natural movement, now becomes a source of satisfaction, since by her own constitution—other things being equal—there is a spring of joy to be found in motion, similar to that which, in the animal kingdom, impels the unfettered lamb to skip upon the lawn, or the unrestrained bird to cleave the air with apparently tireless wing. With such advantages in favor of the proposed innovation, we should naturally anticipate for it a speedy and complete triumph. This, however, judging from its history hitherto, is not to be experienced. The same dogged opposition which changes—even in the highest degree beneficial—have ever met with, already characterizes this contest. One is reminded of the long, and on the one side disgraceful, struggle of the last, and the first portion of the present, century, between the friends of the old-fashioned, clumsy, and bungling wooden plow, and those of its more modern and highly useful iron rival. When demonstration had been made complete, and it had been shown again and again, by actual experiment that the new invention was superior, both as it regarded the character of the work which it performed and the amount which it was capable of executing in a given time, the opposers of the latter, unwilling to leave the field of debate, upon which they had been fairly vanquished, suddenly discovered satisfactory evidence for the retention of the old and the rejection of the new article, in the fact that the iron surface of the latter imparted a poison to the furrow which it so handsomely laid in its proper place! Thus the more modern adherents to the old style of dress, when at last compelled to give way before the practical and sound arguments presented by the friends of the new one, are in the habit of falling back upon one or the other of the following positions: Say they, on the one hand, It is immodest; or, on the other, It is out of taste. To the first of these objections, we have only to say that he who could discover, in a properly dressed foot and neatly panted ankle, that which would shock his conception of propriety, presents an acuteness of moral sense which is only to be compared with the chemistry which could detect in the soil through which the polished metal surface of the modern steel or iron plow had passed, the evidences of the subtle poison which it had imparted. In other words, so far as the objection under consideration is concerned, it might be shown that the facts are overwhelmingly in favor of the new system; but the same morbid conception of what is proper and what is not in these matters which has led the objector to oppose the reform from the standpoint taken above, would induce him to regard as indecorous an exposition in print of the indecent exposures which necessarily result from his own favorite system. As regards the other position, it is worthy of some consideration. However, before we allow it to turn the scale in the argument, it is highly proper to determine just how much weight—if true—it ought to have in this contest. Suppose we admit, for the moment, that it is in every respect sound, does that necessarily lead to the conclusion that the change should not be made? To our mind, it is very far from doing so. To illustrate: We are generally agreed that a prunella slipper furnishes a more graceful and becoming covering for a lady's foot than a heavy bootee or an arctic over-shoe. But who, as a consequence, would think of insisting for a moment that she should be compelled, in cold as well as hot weather, to wear the former and reject the latter for fear of offending some one's ideas of taste? By this it will be seen that we all recognize the fact that considerations of taste should never be regarded as primary, but are always looked upon as of a secondary nature. Before, therefore, the above argument is taken as being conclusive in its authority, it must be shown that it is supported by advantages of a more substantial character. But this, as we have already shown, cannot be done. Again: Before the objection urged should be regarded as final, it would be well to remember that it is one thing to assert, and another, and entirely different thing, to prove the accuracy of its statement. Who does not know that nothing is more contradictory and variable than the opinions of individuals in regard to such things? The diversity arises from the fact that there is, in matters of taste, no uniformly acknowledged standard to which the differences of individuals may be brought, and by the measurement of which they may be decided. Instance the nations who, differing widely from those among us who—apparently taking the wasp as their model, persist in girding themselves to such an extent as even to shorten life—have, on the contrary, gone to the opposite extreme, and for the purpose of enlarging rather than compressing the waist as a mark of symmetrical proportion are in the habit of winding themselves in numerous wrappings of cloth. As a better exemplification of this idea, and one which is not open to the objection that it represents the views of a rude class of people, since it is drawn from the history of the Greeks—a nation the accuracy of whose artistic conceptions will not be questioned—take the statue of Venus de Medici. This wonderful production of art, about two thousand years old, was originally regarded as a perfect model of female proportions. And yet, so decided has been the change in such matters, from that time to this, it has been stated by a recent writer that while in nearly every respect it would answer the demands of modern taste, so great is the size of the waist as compared with the rest of the form, that a critic of our time would be shocked at the departure, in this particular, from what to him would seem to represent a perfect model. Once more: Not only is it true that men look upon these things in different lights, but it is also a fact which many will recognize, that the same person at different periods in his own life, finds his likes and dislikes materially changed, and not unfrequently entirely reversed from what they formerly were. To-day, a gentleman appears in society for the first time with a fashionable, but unusually long-skirted, dress-coat. At first, we are not favorably impressed with its appearance. In process of time, however, the style is uniformly adopted, and the eye, as a consequence becoming accustomed to it, we wonder that we could have ever admired the old fashion, now gone into disuse, and when occasionally seen, regarded as decidedly unbecoming. Again: A lady purchases that which is determined by her friends to be in every way a neat and becoming hat, which from its ample size covers and protects the whole head, and upper portion of the face. But three months pass, and it gives way to another, constructed upon an entirely different model, and which, while not attaining to half the size of the former, is pronounced by all beholders a perfect paragon of beauty. As the result of facts of this character, some have decided that the line of taste is purely an imaginary one, which each is at liberty to locate for himself. Without adopting this view, however, we think that we shall be safe in concluding that, whenever found, it will establish the proposition that, in matters of dress, conformity to the outlines of the human form, as given to man originally—and, as a consequence of its divine origin, necessarily perfect in beauty and symmetry—will furnish the rule in these matters, which should be strictly followed, except when limited by the necessities and proprieties of our fallen condition. But we have already seen that these harmonize perfectly with the one which is presented by the dress reform. And, as it has the additional advantage of approximating more nearly in the outline which it presents, to that of the individual, we must also conclude that it is really, at one and the same time, the style of dress which—while answering all the demands of comfort, health, and ease in locomotion—is also the most nearly in accordance with a just standard of taste. In view of these facts, it seems to us that it is worthy of universal adoption. That this can be brought about in a brief space of time, would be too much to expect. But we shall confidently look for progress in this direction so long as those females who are thoroughly convinced of the soundness of the views advanced in this article, shall continue to put them in practice in their respective communities, until they shall have either lived down, or shamed into silence, an unreasoning opposition. W. H. LITTLEJOHN, in Health Reformer. LIGHT moves at the rate of twelve thousand miles a minute. Men have long been puzzled to understand its nature and origin. Is it an original creation of God, or does it emanate from heavenly bodies created by his power? Does the sun send forth rays of light, or do a combination of circumstances among the works of God develop it. Philosophers will continue to theorize on the subject, yet will be compelled to receive the simple words of revelation, “God said, Let there be light, and there was light”. Light is universally expanded through space; it is the source of vision; without it, all would be darkness and gloom. Why light continually flows from the sun and moon and stars, is another mystery; we only know it is an inexhaustible blessing to man. Light vivifies all nature, and gives beauty and loveliness to every object; mankind and all animal life love its presence. The flowers and plants and leaves turn their faces to its first dawn, and follow the sun to his evening retreat. Light decks the earth in beauty; it shades the grass and foliage of trees in living green; it gives the varied tints to the flora of earth; it perfumes the rose; it makes the gardens and fields and deserts fragrant with richest odor. The plumage of birds, the down of the butterfly, the scales of fishes, are but the reflections of light. But while God surrounds us with so many beauties and charms from light, he has revealed a light of transcending beauty and glory. It is called the “True Light,” the “Light of the world,” the “Light unapproachable,” the “Light that shines in darkness,” a “Light for those who sit in darkness.” The King of Israel said of this light: “The Lord is my light;” “Thy word is a light to my path.” God’s people are promised that “Christ will give them this light;” that “God’s saints shall partake of this light;” that Christians are the “children of this light;” that in Heaven there will be “no night, no need of a candle, or of the sun, or moon, for God himself will be the light.” Men receive and believe the truths of natural light without fully understanding them, and at the same time will not believe in God and his revelation, because they cannot comprehend the great truths connected therewith. Men see the flowers and leaves turning their faces to the sun and basking in his earliest and latest rays, and without comprehending the truths, believe them; yet when they see the sinful soul turning to Christ and rejoicing in the glorious light of God’s countenance, because they cannot tell whence it comes they will not believe. Men will believe any truths relating to science, or governments, or money, quicker than they will believe anything relating to their salvation. They stubbornly reject the offers of this light when they know it can change the sinful heart to one of peace and joy and hope; that it has caused the burdened soul to cast all its sins and cares on Jesus Christ; that thousands of those who were bowed down beneath a weight of sin have been enabled to rejoice in the triumphs of pardon, and the prospects of a glorious resurrection. As the light of the sun is inexhaustible, so is the mercy of God inexhaustible to the chiefest of sinners. As light is expanded through all space, so do offers of salvation extend to all the world. As light inexhaustibly flows from the sun, and moon, and stars, so is the mercy of God inexhaustible to sinners. When pilgrims have no home nor abiding place, this light leads to one. When days and nights of sorrow come, this light brings joy and hope; in poverty, it brings wealth; to the oppressed, relief; to the sick, health; to the friendless, a friend; to the blind, light; to the deaf, words of comfort; to the people of God, the prospect of a glorious immortality.—Am. Messenger. The Sincere Seeker After Perfection
It is not required that a man shall always be perfect in order to be a true Christian. But it is required that he should be a sincere seeker after perfection. It is required that he should be moving forward, and advancing up the straight and narrow way of life. Godliness Makes the Gray Hairs of Age Beautiful.
By J. Jackson Wray
“THE hoary head is a crown of glory, if it be found in the way of righteousness.” Age invests many things with peculiar attractiveness. An aged oak, gnarled, wide-spreading, lichen-covered; an ancient castle, weather-worn and storm-swept, moss-grown and ivy-clad—both are beautiful exceedingly; but of all the attractive pictures old time can draw, no sight is so beautiful as the silver locks and radiant features of godly and joyous old age—an aged sire, a venerable mother seated in “the old arm-chair,” looking placidly back along the line of trodden years, looking hopefully forward across the bright borders of the Beulah-land, to catch a glimpse of the jasper walls which belt the city of the saints!—J. Jackson Wray. Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth. DIED, at Waterloo, Grant Co., Wis., Dec. 7, 1871, sister Mary Ann Robinson, wife of Winthrop Robinson, aged thirty-five years, eleven months, and thirteen days. She leaves a husband and eight children. She embraced the third message about three years ago through the labors of Eld. I. Sanborn, and was beloved by all who knew her. Remarks by the writer from Rev. 14:13. C. W. OLDS. DIED, in Canaan, Maine, Dec. 14. 1871, of consumption, sister Mary G. Salisbury, wife of Nathaniel K. Salisbury, aged twenty-eight years, and nine months. Sister S. embraced the Sabbath, in the light of the third angel's message, about four years since, and lived from that time the life of the righteous. Discourse by the writer to a large and candid congregation from Ps. 23:4. ABRAM BARNES. DIED, in Berkshire, Vt., Jan. 17, 1872, of consumption, Alida I. Kellogg, aged twenty-one years and eight months. Sister Kellogg had entertained religious impressions from childhood until about two years ago when she publicly embraced Christ as her Saviour, was baptized, joined the church, and from that time gave strong evidence that she was a sincere and devoted Christian. During her entire sickness she was perfectly resigned to the will of the Lord, and in her last moments entertained a submissive spirit, and expressed that all was well with her. All her relatives and friends present could but say, “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints.” Funeral services were held the next Sunday at the new Methodist meeting-house in Richford. About five hundred were in attendance. Text, 1 Cor. 15:21. A. C. BOURDEAU. European Opinion of American Morality.
Correspondence of the Cincinnati Gazette. LONDON, January 11, 1872. Another opinion which is just now freely expressed concerning us in Europe is that of our national immorality. The New York scandal overspread the Republic like a dark and baleful cloud, and now the murder of Fisk, fitting end to such a career, has heightened the interest and deepened the concern which prevails with reference to the moral aspects of American society. “In the great cities of the United States,” we are told, “the web of human life is woven in colors so glaring and diversified as to strike with painful effect on eyes accustomed to the more subdued tints and graduated shades of European existence.” Nowhere is luxury more boasted of or believed in. “The thin crust of epicurean wantonness and florid prosperity covers a chaos of bad passions, lawlessness, and restless vice, which now and then breaks through to startle the world from its stupor.” Only in the city where the Tammany ring so long ruled with unresisted sway was such a career as that of Fisk possible—“a career so marvelous in its successful defiance of law, and order, and honor, that although in this country it is not only impossible, but inconceivable, it deserves to be estimated as a diseased product of modern civilization.” Our papers bristle daily with telegrams and paragraphs illustrative of our bankruptcy in morals and our decadence in virtue and sobriety. The marriage of Minister Sickles, at Madrid, is the text of a sermon on his unsavory antecedents, rewarded by his being made a representative of his country at a foreign court. The dishonesty of a member of the Chicago Relief Committee leads to the inquiry whether any official in America can be depended on for common honesty. Telegrams from America read thus:— PHILADELPHIA, Sunday Night. This afternoon, in New York, James Fisk, of Erie fame, was assassinated in the corridor of the Grand Central Hotel. Edward Stokes, who opposed Fisk in the Mansfield case, and superseded him in that lady’s affections, fired three pistol shots at Fisk, one of which inflicted a mortal wound in the abdomen. Fisk died to-day. A party riot in the Louisiana Legislature has resulted in the violent death of one of the members, who was endeavoring to prevent another’s arrest by his opponents. Another regiment has been ordered to this city. In the present, or rather the now subsiding discussion of the question of Republicanism vs. Monarchy, the public scandals which fill the American papers are made the most of, I can assure you, with prodigious effect. “What would we gain,” says one Conservative, “in two important particulars—the burden of taxation and the honesty of public men? As to the first, the New York Taxation Commissioners are quoted as saying, ‘There is a larger per capita taxation in America than any modern nation has ever before been subjected to in time of peace.’ As to the honesty of public men, look at the recent revelations in New York, in the Pension Bureau, in the Indian Department, in the custom-houses, etc., and look at this resolution, passed at a meeting at Boston, ‘that the recent developments in the municipal affairs in New York have demonstrated that the republican form of government is a failure.’” A Virginia paper is brought upon the stand to testify that “the North is ripe for military government. Its capitalists feel insecure, and will welcome any change which will secure their pockets. If Grant could raise an army of 200,000, he could reign for life.” In an adjoining column, and immediately alongside of this, we have Mrs. Woodhull on the platform, proclaiming herself ready to love and unlove any man, at any time and for any time that suits her, followed by a “shudder over the future of American society.” Curiously enough, here come, all in a batch, beside the Miaowar republic of France dripping with putrescence, a defalcation by a high official of the Swiss Republic, another by the President of the Republic of Liberia, a civil war in the Mexican Republic, ditto, as always, in the republics of South America, and all the huge pile of blacknesses and darknesses from our great and model Republic. American defalcations, frauds, venalities, vices, and licentious audacities, are served up in the most palatable sauce in the way of monarchical English. We hear of committees in Chicago to see whether the drunkenness of the firemen was not the cause of the fire, and to see whether the English funds had not gone to the wrong “sufferers,” and committees in the Senate to detect frauds in the Revenue Department , and committees in the House to uncover the defalcations in the Treasury Department, and committees in South Carolina to look up the overissue of bonds by the State government. North Carolina and Arkansas are quoted as similarly deficient in honesty and sorrow over the deficiency. The Ku Klux deviltries alternate among the American items with the “frenzy of delight of Yankee Democrats over the younger son of a mighty autocrat.” A drunken speech of the Governor of Virginia follows a tit-bit from Massachusetts, where “a number of daring burglaries were traced to a member of a school committee, who held other offices of trust.” The homicides in the United States for 1872 are quoted from American papers at 2,060, as a side remark to the tragedies at Los Angeles and the tragedy of the Westfield ferry-boat explosion, for which Jacob Vanderbilt was incarcerated in the Tombs. Now you must remember that all these items, with a multitude more of the same sort, are taken from American papers. I leave you to imagine, for I can give you no idea of their effect upon the estimation in which we are held in Europe. The estimation was never lower. In a word, all our officials are believed here to be utterly venal, and everybody here has made up his mind that our love of money has ruined us, and that we are going straight to the devil. Meetings in Hillsdale, Michigan
W. H. Littlejohn will commence a series of meetings in Hillsdale, Mich., Feb. 20, 1872, commencing at 7 P. M. Correction to Wisconsin Conference Figures
In the last General Conference report, the figures, representing the standing of the Wisconsin Conference, belong to Iowa. The Wis. Conference, according to the report submitted by the secretary of that Conference, stands as follows: Ministers 3; Licentiates 5; Number of churches 19; Number of members 335; Amount of S. B. Funds $2113.86; Pledges to General Conference $300.00; Funds on hand $250.00. Address Change for the Lindseys
The P. O. address of John Lindsey and S. A. H. Lindsey, is changed from Ulysses, Pa., to Beaver Dams, Schuyler Co., N. Y. A Request.
By D. T. Bourdeau
WILL Elds. A. C. Bourdeau, I. D. Van Horn, R. F. Andrews, and D. M. Camright please send me at once to Elizabethtown, Ky., each twenty-five or fifty copies of Eld. Andrews’ tract on the Two Covenants, as this work is out of print and I need it very much to hand out in meeting opposition. Will return the money immediately. D. T. Bourdeau. “Can ye not discern the signs of the times?” The relations of our government with England seem to be assuming a serious phase. There are grave apprehensions of trouble on both sides, as the following dispatches will show: LONDON, Feb. 3.—Chief Justice Cockburn has officially counseled the Cabinet that England must recede immediately from the treaty of Washington, leaving America to decide between a new treaty or war. The council is now discussing the terms in which this resolution shall appear in the Queen’s speech at the opening of Parliament. NEW YORK, Feb. 5.—The Herald’s Washington special says that the excitement among high officials in that city, in consequence of our relations with England, is very great, and there has been constant conferences between the representatives of the American Government and the English Embassy. The situation in England, as represented by the English legation at Washington, is of the gravest character. The Tory party, although represented by Stafford Northcote in the Joint High Commission, is desirous of forcing the Alabama question upon Parliament, and compelling such a vote as would declare its want of confidence in the Gladstone Ministry, and, in consequence, is seeking a reconsideration of the Alabama case to parry the assaults of the Tories. Dispatches have been received at Washington urging the Administration to withdraw its claims for consequential damages, but the President is firm in his determination that the case, as presented by our Government, shall not be amended or withdrawn. He regards the Geneva Commission as a court, and feels that America has a right to go before that court like any other party to an action, and leave the question to its decision; and if our case shows any surprising features the fault will be with the English, who permitted themselves, for their own gain, to become parties to acts of war upon the United States. The President also feels that the necessities of any English Cabinet must not be permitted to force this Administration into a false position. The Cabinet to-day discussed in an informal manner the recent reports from England with reference to the treaty of Washington. There was an unanimity of sentiment to adhere to the position assumed by our Government relative to the so-called Alabama claims. At that time the reference to the subject in the Queen’s speech was not known. There was, through the day, many inquiries in all circles as to the tone of the speech toward the United States, and general satisfaction was expressed when it was ascertained to be friendly. There is no disposition, however, in any quarter, to consent to a modification of the position the Government has taken. A dispatch has been received from Minister Schenck to the effect that the excitement in London is intense, but no recommendations are made. Secretary Fish does not see how any claim can be withdrawn, but if, in his judgment, Sir Alexander Cockburn, should withdraw, there would be no hope of an amicable settlement. The Herald editorially says the fact that the British representative at Washington has been instructed to make proposals of accommodation and compromise of the Alabama claims with our Government is an insult to our Nation. If Great Britain is liable for the loss to our commerce, and the prolongation of our civil war, the damages awarded must be paid peaceably, or will be collected at the point of the bayonet. The Times says the action of the British government will be a matter of surprise to the Americans. The Tribune says if the popular clamor in England should compel a withdrawal from the Treaty of Washington, it is not the United States that will be the heaviest loser by such a course. The World says it looks as if the Administration has overshot the mark in trying to make party capital out of this controversy, and if the treaty is repudiated the public verdict will be that the President and his advisers have bungled the great question instead of settling it. HALIFAX, N. S., Feb. 5.—The intimation by the English press of the intention of the British government to repudiate the Treaty of Washington excites much comment. It is believed that such a violent course would be almost a certain signal for war, and the English government, it is thought, will not follow public opinion so far as to take so decisive a step. The merchants of Halifax are deeply interested in the treaty. PARIS, Feb. 5.—Great interest is felt here in the discussion of the Alabama claims, now going on in England, and the result is awaited with much anxiety. It is reported that the American Government has ordered a large number of sea-torpedoes of English manufacturers. It is reported that the Navy Department intends to ask Congress for authority to build ten 13-gun sloops-of-war and seven steam propellers. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of Heaven is at hand
And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of Heaven is at hand
Quarterly Meetings in Minn.
At Concord, Feb. 17, 18.
Greenwood Prairie, “ 24, 25.
Pleasant Grove, March 2, 3.
Maiden Rock, “ 9, 10.
Saint Cloud, “ 16, 17. We hope to see the brethren and sisters of Pine Island at the Concord meeting. One of us expect to be at Maiden Rock at their quarterly meeting.
Wm. S. Ingraham.
Harrison Grant. The Lord willing, I will hold a two weeks' meeting in Ithaca, Gratiot Co., Mich., commencing Friday evening, Feb. 16, 1872. Hope for a general attendance of the brethren in the county.
I. D. Van-Horn. I DESIGN to hold meetings at Brighton, Iowa, commencing Thursday evening, Feb. 29, and continuing over Sabbath and Sunday, and longer if the interests of the cause demand it. I expect Eld. Canright will be with me. I desire a general attendance of all the church Thursday evening. We hope these meetings will be largely attended by all the brethren and sisters who can come from abroad, as it is the last meeting I shall be permitted to enjoy with them probably till camp-meeting, as I expect soon to go East.
Geo. I. Butler. SIGOURNEY, Iowa, Feb. 17, 18.
Osceola, “ 24, 25.
Knoxville, March 2, 3. This last will be our regular quarterly meeting for that district. The Tract Society is expected to meet and report at this meeting. Let every member have something to report, and have the report ready. We expect Eld. Butler to be there with us.
D. M. Canright. Annexed to each receipt in the following list, is the Volume and Number of the REVIEW & HERALD TO which the money is paid—which should correspond with the Numbers on the Pastors. If money to the paper is not in due time acknowledged, immediate notice of the omission should then be given. $1.00 EACH. James E Lilley 40-9, M S Lathrop 41-3, E A Nutting 40-3, L B Hoyt 40-1, John Cole 40-1, J Ralston 40-9, D R Seely 40-1, A Zellers 41-1, P Miller 39-1, J C Morehouse 40-9, Wm Morehouse 40-9, Mrs Lucy Decker 39-1, S Burdick 39-1, W Jeffrey 40-9. $1.50 EACH. Thomas Lett 41-9, J L Westover 41-9, R Curtis 41-1, Willard Carter 41-9, C Brotherton 41-9, Mrs M Allen 41-9, F Kittle 40-23, Mary J Rees 39-20, M E Chamberlain 41-9, E Lane 40-1, Mary E Jamison 41-9, Mrs W E Dawson 41-9, M Johnson 39-7, Alden Brigham 41-9. $2.00 EACH. John Town 41-1, L E Warren 41-1, Wm H Graham 41-1, D W Rice 41-1, Charles S Rice 41-9, Mrs D Lackey 41-9, Horace Bowen 41-7, Nason Hoyt 41-8, A Hazeltine 41-1, E W Farnsworth 41-9, Charles Goodrich 41-9, W P Andrews 41-1, H Grant 41-1, J G Lamson 41-9, P W & A J Saxby 41-9, George Stone 41-1, Amelia Nellie 41-1, J B Scoville 41-18, John A Hardy 38-1, Elliott Van Syoc 41-2, J Sutton 41-1, A Coryell 41-1, M Dow 40-1, C P Buckland 41-7, J S Farnsworth 41-17, John Hurd 41-1, S N Mead 41-1, Mrs T Terry 41-9, W J Wilson 41-1, A Noyes 41-1, Geo Brown 41-1, J Barrows 41-12, S D Rogers 41-1, R F Phippeny 41-7, D Gorton 41-1, Wm Hill 38-18, J Dorcas 41-6, R L Ainsworth 41-9, S Cummings 41-1, W W Parrott 41-1, C Clay 41-12, J J Parrott 41-1, Joseph Henser 41-21, C Schamp 41-1. R Bartlett $2.25 39-1, J Boyd 4.00 39-9, Mrs I G Soule 2.62 40-15, C E Miller 1.32 39-9, Nancy Davis 1.32 39-9, E Tarbox 9.00 40-1, Maria M Rencher 4.00 41-1, J F Goodrich 3.00 38-1, J M St John 2.50 40-1, P Southwick 50c 40-1, Mrs C Tosh 50c 40-24, E Howard 25c 39-16, M A Hayward 3.75 43-1, S J Twing 43-1, Mrs S Perkins 2.50 41-18, M B Doud 50c 40-1, Wm French 6.00 38-1, Mary Parmenter 2.50 41-14, Ann Adams 75c 40-1. J R Brown $1.00, G S Honeywell 2.84, R Hutchins 50c, C Clay 1.00, E D Waters 10c, G Hussey 15c, A Marshall 10c, A H Stevens 25c, M M Stowell 50c, C Gibb 1.09, M D Merrill 1.05, A W Carpenter 10c, R C Sykes 10c, C E Peter 20c, E M Prentiss 1.00, H Bowen 25c, L Stedman 10c, Mrs E Sanborn 10c, A Gren 10c, A N Spaulding 30c, Wm Livingston 1.30, J C Thorpe 4.40, C A Eckert 2.90, V Null 1.15, A N Hobson 80c, Geo B Utter 1.50, J Nielson 10c, B P Chase 10c, J W Blake 75c, H S Guilford 3.00, C Schamp 50c, B F Belieu 25c, Wm Cottrell 2.10, M A Stiles 45c, Wm Lawton 1.10, E Capman 1.00, D A Smith 25c, O P Bird 10c, Chas Ashley 75c. S N Haskell, So. Lancaster, Mass., $29.25, S B Whitney, No. Creek, Warren Co., N. Y. 12.00, James M Palmer, Worth, Tuscola Co., Mich., 20.00. Michigan Conference Fund.
Church in Jackson $60.00, Oakland per R J Lawrence 38.00, Greenville 50.00, Tuscola 20.00, Orleans 50.00. Church in Greenville, Mich. $50.00. Shares in the Health Institute.
Donations to S. D. A. P. Association.
M J Eastman $5.00, Asa Lockwood (thank-offering) 5.00. Shares in S. D. A. P. Association.
A J Nelson $5.00, Lane 10.00, R J Lawrence 30.00, Geo Lowree 10.00.