Earlier text: Bible Answers to Bible Questions.—No. 6.The Commentary.
By Ellen G. White
NOTES ON THE INTERNATIONAL LESSON.
CAIN and Abel, the sons of Adam, were unlike in character. Cain cherished feelings of rebellion and murmuring against God because of the curse pronounced upon the ground and upon the human race for Adam's sin; while Abel had a spirit of meekness and of submission to the authority of God. THESE brothers were tested, as Adam had been tested before them, to see if they would be obedient to God's requirements. They had both been instructed in regard to the provision made for the salvation of man. Through the system of sacrificial offerings, God designed to impress upon the minds of men the offensive character of sin, and to make known to them its sure penalty, death. The offerings were to be a constant reminder that it was only through the promised Redeemer that man could come into the presence of God. Cain and Abel understood the system of offerings which they were required to carry out. They knew that in presenting these offerings they showed humble and reverential obedience to the will of God, and acknowledged faith in, and dependence upon, the Saviour whom these offerings typified. CAIN and Abel erected their altars alike, and each brought an offering. Cain thought it unnecessary to be particular about fulfilling all the requirements of God; he therefore brought an offering without the shedding of blood. He brought of the fruits of the ground, and presented his offering before the Lord; but there was no token from Heaven to show that it was accepted. Abel entreated his brother to come into the presence of God only in the divinely prescribed way. But his remonstrances made Cain all the more determined to carry out his own purpose. As the eldest, he felt above being advised by his brother, and despised his counsel. ABEL brought of the firstlings of the flock, the very best, as God had commanded him. In the slain lamb he sees by faith the Son of God, appointed to death because of the transgression of his Father's law. God has respect to Abel's offering. Fire flashes from heaven, and consumes the sacrifice of the penitent sinner. CAIN now has an opportunity to see and acknowledge his mistake. He may change his course of action, and testify his obedience by presenting an offering precisely in accordance with the divine specification; and He who is no respecter of persons will have respect to the offering of faith and obedience. After the disrespect shown to his commands, God does not leave Cain to himself; but he condescends to reason with the man that has shown himself so unreasonable. "And the Lord said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?" THE Lord was not ignorant of the feelings of resentment cherished by Cain; but he would have Cain reflect upon his course, and, becoming convinced of his sin, repent, and set his feet in the path of obedience. There was no cause for his wrathful feelings toward either his brother or his God; it was his own disregard of the plainly expressed will of God that had led to the rejection of his offering. Through his angel messenger, God said to this rebellious, stubborn man: "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door." "If thou doest well"—not having your own way, but obeying God's commandments, coming to him with the blood of the slain victim, thus showing faith in the promised Redeemer, who, in the fullness of time, would make an atonement for guilty man, that he might not perish, but have eternal life. "AND unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." Abel's offering had been accepted; but this was because Abel had done in every particular as God required him to do. This would not rob Cain of his birthright. Abel would love him as his brother, and as the younger, be subject to him. SOME time had elapsed since the death of Abel. "And the Lord said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not. Am I my brother's keeper?" How true it is that one sin leads to another; and how forcibly is this truth illustrated in the case of Cain. He seemed surprised at the question, "Where is Abel thy brother?" He had gone so far in sin, had so far yielded himself to the influence of Satan, that he had lost a sense of the presence of God, and of his greatness and knowledge. So he lied to the Lord to cover up his guilt. Cain knew very well where his brother was; and God knew where he was, for there was a witness to the bloody deed. THE spirit of Satan had entered into Cain. Satan was an accuser, and Cain began his evil course by accusing God of partiality and injustice. Satan was a deceiver, and Cain deceived Abel by inviting him into the field when murder was in his heart, that he might do the dark deed in secret. Satan "was a murderer from the beginning;" and he instigated Cain to do the same cruel work. "He is a liar, and the father of it;" and here, too, Cain showed himself an apt and proficient pupil. AGAIN the Lord said to Cain, "What hast thou done? The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground." God had given Cain an opportunity to confess his sin before sentence should be pronounced against him. He had had time to reflect. He knew the enormity of the deed he had done, and of the falsehood he had told to conceal it. But he was rebellious still. The hand that had been stretched out against his brother was stretched out against God; and had the power been his, he would have silenced the accusing voice of God, as he had that of his brother. CAIN has proved himself incorrigible, and sentence is no longer deferred. The divine voice that has been heard in entreaty and expostulation pronounces the terrible words: "And now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened her mouth to receive thy brother's blood from thy hand. When thou tillest the ground, it shall not henceforth yield unto thee her strength; a fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth." In remorse and anguish, but not in repentance, Cain exclaims, as many who have rejected the word of the Lord have done, and will do again, "My punishment is greater than I can bear."795 THESE two brothers, Cain and Abel, represent the whole human family. They were both tested on the point of obedience, and all will be tested as they were. Abel bore the proving of God. He revealed the gold of a righteous character, the principles of true godliness. But Cain's religion had not a good foundation; it rested on human merit. He brought to God something in which he had a personal interest,—the fruits of the ground, which had been cultivated by his toil; and he presented his offering as a favor done to God, through which he expected to secure the divine approval. He obeyed in building an altar, obeyed in bringing a sacrifice; but it was only a partial obedience. The essential part, the recognition of the need of a Redeemer, was left out. AS FAR as birth and religious instruction were concerned, these brothers were equal, though Cain, being the first-born, was in some respects the favored one. Both were sinners, and both acknowledged the claims of God as an object of worship. To all outward appearance, their religion was the same up to a certain point of time; but the Bible history shows us that there was a time when the difference between the two became very great. This difference lay in the obedience of one and the disobedience of the other. THE apostle says that Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Abel grasped the great principles of redemption. He saw himself a sinner; and he saw sin, and its penalty, death, standing between his soul and communion with God. He brought the slain victim, the sacrificed life, thus acknowledging the claims of the law which had been transgressed. Through the shed blood he looked to the future Sacrifice, Christ dying on the cross of Calvary; and, trusting in the atonement that was there to be made, he had the witness that he was righteous and his offering accepted. MRS. E. G. WHITE. Progress of the Cause in Indiana.
By William Covert
DURING the year 1886 we have been quite busy in getting Bible truth before the people of this State. We labor among the churches when the weather will not permit work in tents. Six tents were in the field from about June 1 till September 20. These tents were pitched in thirteen different places. Thirty signed the covenant at Delphi, twenty-five at Logansport, eighteen at South Milford, six at Brimfield, twelve at Kempton, sixteen at Terhune, twenty-five at Barber's Mills, twenty-five at Homer, thirty at Waldron, three at Wadesville, and six at Worthington. A company of twenty or more have also embraced the truth at Wabash, where our State camp-meeting and conference were held. Our Bible workers have also seen some fruit of their labor at Indianapolis and Richmond, besides what they have accomplished in connection with other laborers. We now have good prospects of twelve churches being added to the Conference next year. Six church buildings are up that are not dedicated. The increase in tithe amounts to $1,700. There is a large margin for improvement yet in this item. One hundred and ninety-eight members were added to the Tract and Missionary Society. We do not expect that all who have signed the covenant will become church members, but if one-half of them should be added to the Conference it will make a larger increase than any previous year. We hope to be able to keep as large a number of workers in the field during the year 1887, as we were favored with the past year. We trust that prosperity in the Lord's cause will not cause us to be less active or less vigilant. We never saw more openings for labor or less promise of rest than at the present. Lesson XV.—The Marriage Feast.
1. WHEN our Lord again spoke to the people in parables, to what did he compare the kingdom of heaven? "And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said, The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son." Matt. 22: 1, 2. 2. In what sense does the Saviour mean to compare the kingdom of heaven to this king?—As this king did in furnishing the feast with guests, so will the King of Heaven do with those that receive the sweet invitations of the gospel. 3. What did the king send forth his servants to do? "And sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding; and they would not come." Verse 3. 4. What had been previously done?—The guests had been bidden. See same verse. 5. How had the guests been bidden?—By the word of God, as given by the prophets. 6. How were they called to the wedding?—By the preaching of John the Baptist, and by the apostles. 7. When the first call had been refused, with what emphasis was the call repeated? "Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready; come unto the marriage." Verse 4. 8. How did they treat this call? "But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise." Verse 5. 9. What enormous cruelty did some of them practice? "And the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them." Verse 6. 10. Mention some of the disciples that were so treated. 11. How did the king punish the ungrateful people that rejected his call, and slew his servants? "But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth; and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city." Verse 7. 12. To what people does this verse refer?—To the Jews. 14. How did he foretell the overthrow of their city? "And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." Matt. 24: 2. 15. How was Jerusalem taken and the temple burned?—By the Roman army under Titus, in A. D. 70. 16. What did the king then say to his servants? "Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage." Matt. 22: 8, 9. 18. According to the parable, what did the king discover when the guests had assembled? "And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment." Matt. 22: 11. 19. What did the king say to this man? "And he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless." Verse 12. 20. How did the man plainly show that he had no good cause for appearing in the presence of the king clad in an unsuitable garb? Last part of the same verse. 21. What does this wedding garment represent?—The righteousness of Christ. 22. Why had the careless guest no excuse for not clothing himself in a wedding garment?—Because such a garment was furnished by the king, free of cost, to every guest. 23. How is it with the righteousness of Christ?—It is offered free to all who will repent, believe in Christ, and strive with all the heart to obey him. 24. What doom was pronounced upon the man who ventured into the king's presence without putting on a wedding garment? "Then said the king to the servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Matt. 22: 13. 25. What statement does our Lord make in conclusion? "For many are called, but few are chosen." Verse 14. 26. What do we understand by this?—That the gospel call is to the whole world, but those alone will be chosen who have met its requirements. Lesson XVI.—The Marriage Supper.
1. WHAT is the wedding feast called that is described in Matt. 22? See verse 4. 3. Since supper comes at the close of the day, what would it naturally represent in the parable?—Something that is to take place at the close of the world's history. "Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honor to him; for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready." 5. What is said about those that are called to this supper? "And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God." Verse 9. 6. On what occasion did Jesus give the parable about the marriage supper? "And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the Sabbath day, that they watched him." Luke 14: 1. 7. What caution did he give in reference to those who might be invited to a wedding feast? "When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not down in the highest room; lest a more honorable man than thou be bidden of him." Verse 8. 8. How might one be humbled who should neglect this caution? "And he that bade thee and him come and say to thee, Give this man place; and thou begin with shame to take the lowest room." Verse 9. 9. What did he recommend as a proper course? "But when thou art bidden, go and sit down in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher; then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee." Verse 10. 10. What principle did he then lay down? "For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted." Verse 11. 11. What caution did he give to those who make feasts? "Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbors; lest they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee." Verse 12. 12. Why is it more blessed to feast the poor and afflicted rather than the wealthy? "But when thou makest a feast, call the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind; and thou shalt be blessed; for they cannot recompense thee; for thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just." Verses 13, 14. 13. When will those who thus show mercy to the poor, receive their reward? 14. What remark was then made by one who sat at meat with him? "And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things, he said unto him, Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God." Verse 15. 15. How did Jesus then introduce another parable? "Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many." Verse 16. 16. With what message did the lord of the feast send out his servant at supper time? "And sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready." Verse 17. 17. How was this call received? "And they all with one consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it; I pray thee have me excused." Verse 18. 18. Why could not the first obey the call? Same verse.12 19. What excuse did the second make? "And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I go to prove them; I pray thee have me excused." Verse 19. 20. Why was it impossible for the third to heed the summons? 21. What are these excuses meant to represent?—The worldly-mindedness of those who slight the gospel call. 22. How was the master affected when his servants told him how his call had been received? "So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things. Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and the blind." Verse 21. 23. What order did he give? Same verse. 24. After fulfilling this order, what did the servants report? "And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast commanded, and yet there is room." Verse 22. 25. How was the house finally filled? "And the Lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled." Verse 23. 26. What resolution was expressed by the master of the feast? "For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper." Verse 24. 27. Where are these three calls represented in prophecy? Rev. 14: 6-9. 28. To whom was the first of these messages chiefly addressed?—To the churches. 29. Since the churches mainly refused the first message, to whom was the second addressed?—To those outside the churches, and to those who were tired of the corruptions found within them. 30. What is the third message sometimes called?—The compelling message, or call. 31. Why is the term appropriate?—Because its appeals are so clear and forcible as to compel the honest in heart to obey. 32. How may this parable be regarded?—As a continuation of the one in Matt. 22: 1-14, or at least as supplementary to it. 33. How does it supplement that parable?—By setting forth the three special calls to be given at the close of the dispensation. Switzerland.
By J. K. McLean
CONSIDERED geographically, Switzerland is not a great country. It could be set down bodily inside the State of Pennsylvania, and leave an ample margin on every one of the four sides. In point of population it is scarcely to be ranked as a giant among the nations. The census of 1880 gave it but 2,846,102, which is less by some hundreds of thousands than the population of Ohio. All the same, however, Switzerland is and will remain to the end of time the most attractive, most picturesque, and most sought-out land in all the world. With her green robes, her ermine mantle, her lake jewels of opal and emerald, and her glistening diadem of ice, she stands queen of all lands. She is the chief shrine to which all lovers of beauty, of romance, and adventure will continually and unwearily resort. Two-thirds of the surface of Switzerland is occupied by rocks, lakes, glaciers, and eternal snow. A full sixth of what remains is covered by forest. At the same time she possesses some of the loveliest and most fertile valleys, some of the richest meadows and most productive hill-sides in all Europe. Politically, Switzerland is the paradox of peoples. She is a republic of twenty-two separate and sovereign States, or cantons. These are so effectually separated from one another by high mountain ranges that one-half of the people are as strange to the other half as Australians are to Americans. Her people speak three different tongues—in Western Switzerland, the French; in Northern, the German; in Eastern and Southern, the Italian. Certainly not more than one Swiss in five, probably not more than one in ten, can converse with and be understood by all of his countrymen. There are many in every canton who have never so much as seen a man from half the other cantons. Thousands and thousands of the people have never looked outside of the mountain inclosure in which they were born. The other side of the steep incline on which they live is to them as thoroughly a terra incognita as is Patagonia or Alaska. More than this, the people are of different and antagonistic religions. Somewhat more than half are Protestants, the balance Romanists of the densest, darkest type. Among the latter are multitudes who can neither read nor write. All the conditions of national unity and coherence are therefore most signally wanting. Specially lacking are the conditions commonly regarded as essential to the perpetuity of a republican form of government. Yet Switzerland is the oldest and most stable republic in history. She has just celebrated the five hundredth anniversary of the battle of Sempach, virtually the birth date of republicanism in modern history. How this little country, so situated, with such natural barriers of mountain, language, religion, and local interest existing between her several sections, has managed to hold together as against internal dissensions on one side, and on the other to keep from being swallowed up by the great powers which surround her, is the standing marvel of political history.—Rev. J. K. McLean, in Oakland Tribune. Moscow's Great Cathedral.
WHAT must, without doubt, be conceded as the most magnificent church edifice in the world is the great cathedral at Moscow, "The Church of St. Saviour," recently completed there. The foundations of the church are of Finnish granite, and the whole edifice is faced with marble, the door being of bronze, ornamented with biblical subjects, and lined with oak. The principal entrance measures 30 feet high by 18 feet broad, and the two doors weigh 13 tons, the total cost of the doors being $350,000. The building is erected in the form of a Greek cross, three of the broad ends of which form the corridors, lower and upper, surrounding three sides of, and open to, the central square, or temple proper, while the fourth end is occupied by the altar and its appurtenances. The total cost of all the marble in the building exceeds $2,000,000. Lifting one's eyes, the galleries are seen to contain 36 windows, and the cupola 16, all of which are double, with frames of bronze. Round the cupola is one row of 640 candelabra, placed there at a cost of $120,000, with a second row of 600, costing an additional $60,000. There are 4 lusters weighing 4 tons each, and the total number of candles to be lighted throughout the building is upward of 3,000. At the top of the cupola is a painting by Professor Markoff, representing in colossal proportions the first person of the blessed Trinity as an old man with the infant Jesus. The height of the figure is 49 feet, the length of the face 7 feet, and the height of the infant 21 feet. Also, below the cupola are a number of figures of apostles and fathers, each 21 feet high. Great expense has, of course, been lavished on the eastern end of the church. The cost of the materials and workmanship for the altar amounted to $150,000. In this part of the church are some of its most remarkable paintings, most, if not all, by Russian artists. The structure of the altar screen is a departure from the traditional Russian type, for instead of a tall, ugly blank partition, half or two-thirds of the height of the church, hiding the eastern end, the screen of St. Saviour's is low and elegant, and throws open, except for a few feet above the floor, the whole of the sanctuary. This princely cathedral was erected at a cost of $12,000,000 and is said to be capable of accommodating 10,000 worshipers, and which, from its conception, has been built in a single life-time.—Brooklyn Magazine. The Home Circle.
By Alice Cary
How are we living?
Like herbs in the garden that stand in a row,
And have nothing to do but to stand there and grow?
Our powers of perceiving
So dull and so dead,
They simply extend to the objects about us,—
The moth, having all his dark pleasure without us,—
The worm in his bed! If thus we are living,
And fading, and falling, and rotting, alas!—
Like the grass, or the flowers that grow in the grass,—
Is life worth our having?
The insect a-humming,—
The wild bird is better, that sings as it flies,—
The ox, that turns up his great face to the skies
When the thunder is coming. Where are we living?
In passion, and pain, and remorse do we dwell,—
Creating, yet terribly hating, our hell?
No triumph achieving?
No grossness refining?
The wild tree does more; for his coat of rough barks
He trims with green mosses, and checks with the marks
Of the long summer shining. We're dying, not living:
Our senses shut up, and our hearts faint and cold;
Upholding old things just because they are old;
Our good spirits grieving,
We suffer our springs
Of promise to pass without sowing the land,
And hungry and sad in the harvest-time stand,
Expecting good things! THE antlers of a deer are occasionally, though very erroneously, called horns, from which they differ essentially in every respect except that of growing from the head of the animal which produces them. True horns, as seen on oxen, are never shed; they are formed of horny or animal material capable of being softened by heat, and usually semi-transparent. Antlers, on the contrary, are but temporary; they grow annually, being shed every year. In place of consisting of horn, they are formed of most solid bone, which grows from the forehead. Their rapid growth, which only takes a few weeks in the year, is due to the blood-vessels in the velvety skin covering the budding antlers, bringing the bony material and depositing it in the form of an antler. When this is fully formed, the velvety skin dries up, and the hard, firm, solid antler, with which the stag can attack others or defend itself, is left, the dried skins coming off in long strips, which may often be seen on the deer in the Zoological Gardens. At the end of the season the base of the antler, where it springs from the bone of the forehead, is absorbed and the antler falls, leaving a raw place, which quickly skins over, and in due time another pair of antlers—larger and with more points than those of the preceding year—take their place. With the exception of the reindeer, the females are destitute of antlers. There are many distinct families of deer, some, like the red deer, having cylindrical horns, with sharp points, capable of inflicting the most fatal injuries; others, like the fallow deer, have the antlers flattened out into broad plates.—London Queen. It is not clear whether wolves are simply wild dogs or not. There exist among them the same close resemblance and the same varieties as in the different kinds of dogs. Some naturalists hold that the wolf is the parent of the dog, and some characteristics seem pretty well to establish this fact. They readily intermix and raise puppies half wolf and half dog; and if these are born in a kennel at home, as has been known, and raised in a domestic state, they become quite gentle, though partaking largely of the lank form and vicious look of the wolf. It is reasonable to suppose, also, that if these puppies are born in a wild state that they receive their education from the mother, and are, when grown, very good wolves. The wolf is a swift runner, and hunts deer and other animals, large packs of them associating together for this purpose. We once spent ten days hunting buffalo on the Platte River, and we found wolves constantly hovering round the herd for the purpose of catching, if they might, a wounded or sick animal, which they would soon dispatch by cutting his ham-strings with their sharp teeth, when the poor buffalo would let down behind and become an easy prey to the hungry horde. I chased on horseback one old gray wolf of immense size for miles, but finally abandoned the race as fruitless. One, however, was taken in at long range while feeding on the offal of a buffalo we had shot and dressed an hour before. Accounts are given of wolves attacking man when hard pressed by hunger, but in general they are cowardly and stealthy. They defend themselves, however, with great vigor when compelled to do so. They are not easily trapped, being extremely cautious, and appearing to understand a trap and its purpose almost as well as those who set it. At Emmetsburg, Iowa, not long since, an old hunter set a trap in the snow for a wolf that passed a certain way daily, and then watched from an up-stairs window to see him get into it. In a little while the wolf came jogging along in the path, and although great care had been taken to cover everything up in the snow, the wolf detected instantly the work of an enemy and stopped as still as a post, moving not a single toe, but looking carefully all about on the ground for a moment, and then backed slowly out and away, stepping in the same tracks he had made coming in. When a rod or two back, he sprang to one side and ran as for life.—Sel. Passover Wine.
By Cynosure
ONLY a few weeks ago a London Jewish Rabbi said to the editor of the Methodist Times of that city: "Jews never use fermented wine in their synagogue services, and must not use it on the Passover, either for synagogue or home purposes. Fermented liquor of any kind comes under the category of 'leaven,' which is proscribed in so many passages in the Old Testament. I have read recently the passage in Matthew in which the Paschal Supper is described. There can be no doubt whatever that the wine used on that occasion was unfermented. Jesus, as an observant Jew, would not only not have drunk fermented wine on the Passover, but would not have celebrated the Passover in any house from which everything fermented had not been removed. You will allow me, perhaps, to express my surprise that Christians, who profess to be followers of Jesus of Nazareth, can take what he could not possibly have taken as a Jew—intoxicating wine—at so sacred a service as the sacrament of the Lord's Supper." Does such testimony count for nothing as to what kind of wine should be used at the Lord's table? Does it throw no light whatever on the kind of wine made by our Lord for the wedding feast at Cana? Animals, Plants, Etc., of Madagascar.
No PART OF the world has proved so interesting to the zoologist, or such a paradise to the botanist as Madagascar. The bed of the Indian Ocean is of extreme depth, except round the islands. Evidence warrants the belief that Madagascar was connected with Africa. One fact, which strikes every traveler in Madagascar is the lack of animal life. It is the home of some species of reptile. There are between fifty and sixty species of chameleons and a great variety of snakes, even pythons nine or ten feet in length, and as thick as a man's leg. One species is looked upon with great superstitious reverence, as the impersonation of their dead ancestors, whose souls upon the death of the body have passed into these creatures. When one is discovered, the chiefs assemble near it and proceed to ascertain whose ancestor is here embodied. This is done by a series of questions that can be answered by yes or no. The animal is attentively watched, and when the motion of its head is supposed to indicate the affirmative to the question, Are you the ancestor to such a chief? it then becomes the duty of the chief to conduct the proper ceremonies. A bullock is killed and blood given to propitiate the creature and secure its good offices. Gigantic tortoises are found, some six feet broad, weighing nearly eight hundred pounds. There are a hundred species of land birds, not more than half a dozen being known elsewhere. Many small streams in the forest seem to be literally alive with butterfly and moth life. One of the spiders is the largest known. So strong are some of the hunting spiders that they can throw out any substance twice or thrice their own weight to a distance twelve times their own length. The number of flowering plants, it is thought, will yet be found to reach four or five thousand.—Madagascar and France. CASSIN mentions a remarkable circumstance relating to the character of the California road-runner. This bird seems to have a mortal hatred of rattlesnakes, and no sooner sees one of these reptiles than it sets about in what, to the snake, might well seem a most diabolical way of compassing its death. Finding the snake asleep, it at once seeks out the spiniest of the small cacti, the prickly pear, and with infinite pains and quietness, carries the leaves, after breaking them off, and puts them in a circle around the slumbering snake. When it has made a sufficient wall about the object of all this care, it rouses its victim with a sudden peck of its sharp beak, and then quickly retires to let the snake work out its own destruction—a thing it eventually does in a way that ought to gratify the road-runner if it have any sense of humor. Any one watching it would say it was expressing the liveliest emotion with its constantly and grotesquely moving tail. The first impulse and act of the assaulted snake is to coil for a dart; its next, to move away. It quickly realizes that it is hemmed in in a circle, and finally makes a rash attempt to glide over the obstruction. The myriad of tiny needles prick it and drive it back. The angry snake, with small wisdom, attempts to retaliate by fastening its fangs into the offending cactus. The spines fill its mouth. More angry still, it again and again assaults the prickly wall, until, quite beside itself with rage, it seems to lose its wits completely, and, writhing and twisting horribly, buries its envenomed fangs into its own body, dying finally from its self-inflicted wounds. After the catastrophe, the road-runner indulges in a few gratified flirts of its long tail, and goes off, perchance, to find its reward in being run down by hounds set on by men.—Good Health. SOME people, “as much opposed to intemperance as anybody,” advocate the wine-cure as a remedy for drunkenness. They eulogize the wine countries. Paris is the capital of a wine country, yet the pauperism in that city has doubled in the last twenty-five years. The London Standard notes the fact that “official statistics just published show an alarming increase of pauperism at Paris during the last twenty-five years. In 1861, when the suburbs were incorporated with Paris proper, the number of families requiring relief was 36,713, comprising 90,287 persons. The majority of them had been punished either as vagabonds, for thieving, or other crimes. Sixteen years later, in 1877, when the republic had taken the place of the empire, the number of pauper families had increased to 39,866. The growth of pauperism was even more marked during the following three years, the statistics showing that in 1880 no fewer than 46,815 families, comprising 125,735 members, were depending upon relief. At the beginning of the present year 180,000 persons were known to be in want of assistance. From 1861 to 1886, consequently, the number of paupers has been doubled.” An abundance of wines has not brought the millennium to Paris, nor would it do anything but impoverish and pauperize the people of our own country.—Temperance Advocate. "The Weaker Vessel."
By Hastings
WOMAN is no doubt "the weaker vessel"—we understand that—she cannot carry as much whisky or lager beer as her liege lord. He imbibes old Bourbon, while she gets on with weak tea. . . . He goes to the saloon, she to the prayer-meeting. He strikes for eight hours a day, she works fifteen. . . . Finally he wearies of his hard lot and kills himself, while she tugs on and raises her children, and does about as well without him as she did with him. "The Hebrew woman is exceptionally long lived," and so would other women be, and men also, if they would prate less about "the mistakes of Moses," and live more in accordance with that wonderful law of God which was given on Mount Sinai; and there would be none of the present alarming excess of females in civilized populations if people obeyed that law; for in Jewish families there are 112 boys born to each 100 girls, or about seven per cent. more than in Gentile families; and hence, under Jewish law there would be no surplus million of helpless unmarried women, as in Great Britain, left to be the prey of poverty, crime, and lust; but womanhood would be precious and manhood pure, and society would be blessed by the great and beneficent change.—Hastings.