“That the spirits of the dead might and did appear, was a doctrine held by the greatest and holiest of men that ever existed; and a doctrine which the cavilers, free-thinkers and bound-thinkers of different ages have never been able to disprove.” Clarke on Matt. xiv, 26. Well, then, we inquire, if this be so, when an agency manifests itself, and claims to be the spirit of some departed friend, have we any reason to deny the claim? Has any one who believes the above testimony any ground for denying that the manifestations of modern Spiritualism are produced by the spirits of the dead? Not an inch. We appeal then to the followers of Clarke to know what they will do. Will they admit the truthfulness of Spiritualism, the legitimate conclusion of their own teaching, or will they reform their theology? The only alternative before professed christendom, we still contend as we have contended, is to renounce their belief in regard to dead men, or become open Spiritualists. If our advice would be good for any thing with those of whom the Apostle speaks in 2 Tim. iii & iv, we would advise them not to become Spiritualists. Do we then advise them to remain where they are, and as they are, doggedly resisting a work for which their own teaching has laid a broad foundation? No. This would be more absurd in them still. What then? We say let them retrace the steps they have taken in error, go back to the Bible, acknowledge that a dead man is dead, and knows no more than the Bible says he does. Eccl. ix, 5. Because a man has taken one step in error which makes necessary another, we do not say that on this account he should take that second step, but let him retrace the first. In this way only can the wrong move be remedied.