Review and Herald, Vol. 50, No. 5. (7/26/1877)

Review and Herald

Jul 26, 1877

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Jul 26, 1877

DOCTRINAL TRUTHS OF THE BIBLE.

By A. S. Hutchins

BY ELD. A. S. HUTCHINS.

TEXT: “Till I come, give attention to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine.” 1 Tim. 4:13.

The apostle here enjoins upon Timothy some very important duties. His success as a gospel minister depended much upon his knowledge of the Scriptures, upon a right understanding of the prophecies, and an ability to apply them correctly, to show how they had been, and were being, fulfilled before the eyes of those who heard him. Hence the importance of reading. He would, too, have him faithfully exhort, advise, caution, warn, his hearers.

But this is not all. He would have this minister of God give attention to “doctrine.” We cannot for a moment conclude that Paul thought it would make no difference what Timothy should believe and teach, however honest he might be in his convictions. No; for he solemnly warns him, “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them; for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.”

Was it necessary that this minister, chosen and sent forth of God to save souls, should watch well his own heart, his influence, and his life, that he might be an example to the flock? It was of equal importance that he should guard with sacred care the doctrine it was his duty to proclaim. One writer has truthfully remarked: “As the doctrines of the Bible are the first principles and foundation of religion, they should be carefully examined and well understood. Every Christian, the divine especially, should make this his study, because all the various doctrines should be insisted on in public, and explained to the people.”

Of Timothy, it is affirmed: “From a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” 2 Tim. 3:15. And right here the first thing which the apostle declares the Scriptures to be profitable for, is “doctrine.”

Of the preaching of Christ the record is: “The people were astonished at his doctrine; for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.” The Son of God, filled with knowledge and divine wisdom, testifies of his teaching: “My doctrine is not mine, but His that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.” John 7:16, 17.

The adorable Son acts in harmony with the Father in the salvation of perishing souls. He honors the Father in the declaration, “My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me.” And we may know of this doctrine if we will do the will of its Author. The love which the Son bore to the will of the Father, and the connection of the law of the Most High with his heart, are beautifully expressed in the following words: “I delight to do thy will, O my God: yea, thy law is within my heart.” Ps. 40:8.

How marked the contrast here with the feelings and practices of some preachers at the present time respecting the law of God, which reveals his will. Take the fourth precept of the decalogue. What a jargon, what a jangle, with men who oppose the word of God! Each man has a theory of his own. So he may say, “My doctrine is mine,” unless he be compelled to exclaim, as was said of the ax lost in the days of Elisha: “Alas, master! for it was borrowed.”

Says Paul to Titus, “But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine.” Who can discover the soundness of such reasoning as the following, in favor of the first-day Sabbath?

There are a few small bodies of Sabbatarians who contend for the very day sanctified at creation. But the Sabbath institution did not have reference to any particular day, it was any day of rest after six days of labor.
There is no proof that the day kept by the Jews was the one sanctified at creation.
The seventh day cannot be kept, because it does not come at the same time all over the world.
It is a fact that in traveling around the world we have to throw out a day. (Whether we drop a day or add one depends on whether we go east or west, around the world. And when the needful alteration is made, we know our reckoning as well as if we had remained at home.)
The Sabbath has been changed from the seventh to the first day, and we should keep Sunday; we have no definite proof for this change in the Bible, but history sustains this view.

With these antagonistic, self-devouring propositions before an intelligent audience, what do they know more for Sunday-keeping than before they heard them? And yet some will be satisfied with any reasoning or assertion, which “sews pillows to all armholes.”

If, like a sick man with pillows at his elbows, that he may better rest, men can be made to believe, or are even told they are safe in their religious faith, they are quiet, and many will sleep on till it is too late, too late. Upon the minister rests a responsibility of no small magnitude to teach the doctrines of the Bible, to teach sound doctrine, without reference to the traditions of the age, or the prejudices of the people. To Timothy Paul has much to say on this point.

In the opening of his first letter to him, in setting forth the right use and end of the law, he distinctly shows that those who walk contrary to the law, do not conform to sound doctrine. Adam Clarke, in commenting on 1 Tim. 1:10, says, “Every species of vice and immorality, all must be necessarily included that is contrary to sound doctrine—to the immutable moral law of God, as well as to the pure precepts of Christianity where the law is incorporated, explained, and rendered, if possible, more and more binding.”

The gospel ministry was established that men might, through the reception of Bible truth, through “repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ,” receive remission of their sins, be justified, and sanctified, and made partakers of the entertainments of the heavenly kingdom, when life and immortality are given.

The great commission to the apostles was, “Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.” Luke’s record is, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”

Now, could we infer from words thus solemn that it is a matter of small moment what we believe or what we teach? Precept and example should go hand in hand. The doctrinal truths of the Bible may be represented by the frame-work of a magnificent mansion, wisely planned, and securely built upon a sound foundation. The finishing of such a building by wise master builders, may represent the practical truths of God’s word when applied to the heart. And unless this mansion could have been furnished and made fit for us before the erection of the super-structure, I cannot conceive how one can be a well developed Christian, a bright and shining light, who is not well instructed from the word of God in those doctrines which lie at the very foundation of the Christian religion.

We find Peter’s short sermon to the Gentiles, Acts 10:34–43, full of doctrine. The great principles of the plan of salvation through Jesus Christ were clearly presented, and with most gratifying success. We further learn the object for which Paul was made a minister to the Gentiles—“To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they might receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified.”

“Great God! with wonder and with praise, On all thy works I look; But still thy wisdom, power, and grace, Shine brightest in thy book.”

A DIVIDED HOUSE.

By J. O. Corliss

Said the Saviour, “If a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.” Neither can a church holding conflicting opinions,—at least on a Bible foundation. It is, however, surpassingly strange that such wide differences occur in the instructions of religious teachers, members of the same church, and pretending to teach the same truth. Especially is it the case when the Sabbath question comes up for discussion. This was well expressed by Clark Braden in the Christian Standard (Disciple), of Sept. 26, 1874:—

“Our preachers are by no means agreed in their teaching. They have no well-defined views on the subject, and are defeated when they attempt a defense of our practice of observing the first day, or a review of the arguments of the advocates of the seventh day. Nor are we alone in this. There is no clear, tenable teaching on this subject in our theological works and commentaries, or by our religious press. Advocates of the observance of the first day who stultify themselves by taking contradictory and inconsistent positions.”

This is certainly a frank confession, and might be considered with profit by those of other denominations.

Our Church Paper (Lutheran), published at New Market, Va., in an article on the Sabbath, took the position that it was not ordained in Eden, but at Mt. Sinai, and was abolished at the cross. No distinction was made between the law of God, the ten commandments, and the Mosaic code of ceremonies; but they were classed together and all abolished at the death of Christ, etc.

In short, it was but a rehearsal of the common antinomian arguments.

Nearly simultaneously with the above-mentioned article, one appeared in the Lutheran Visitor, of Charleston, S. C., on the perpetuity of the fourth commandment, in which the writer condemned all no-Sabbath advocates by an able argument on the establishment of the Sabbath in Eden, and then by a careful survey of its history, proved it obligatory upon the entire human family. We give a lengthy extract from it, which will be found interesting. The italics are ours.

“The first law ever given to man was the command to refrain from work on the seventh day. This seventh day was not only a day on which God commanded man to refrain from work, but a day of honor and worship of God—to keep man mindful of his Creator. This whole duty is based upon the authority of God. The Sabbath was instituted by God himself at the creation of the world. ‘And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.’

“All the days of creation were good,—none were unholy; for it is said, ‘And God saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very good.’ It is plainly inferred that God blessed and sanctified the seventh day for man, not on account of its possessing any pre-eminence over the the other days. The first day that our first parents ever spent on earth was the Sabbath day in the Garden of Eden. If God regarded it necessary that the primogenitor of our race should observe the seventh day when he was holy and without sin, he most assuredly requires the same thing of his posterity.

“We leave revelation for a moment and turn toward the works of nature. It has been found out that the lives of both man and beast are prolonged by the observance of the Sabbath. I apprehend that no one will deny this fact in the face of all reason. Now, if we gradually kill ourselves by the non-observance of the Sabbath, are we not then violating the sixth commandment? Seeing the blessings accruing to man for observing the seventh day, and the evil results that follow its violation, it appears almost absolutely necessary. It is founded upon the goodness and mercy of God. The seventh day is the day of rest to fatigued nature, when man and beast, in accordance with the law of God, rest from all daily employment.

“Since the curse, ‘In the sweat of thy face thou shalt eat bread,’ has been pronounced upon man for his disobedience, the Sabbath has an additional blessing to the one first enjoined (that of paying due reverence to God); it now affords man a day of rest, a cessation from labor.

“It has been considered by a worthy statesman as being productive of social blessings in advancing civilization. When God gave the commandment to our first parents, he gave them his own example in refraining from work. He certainly intended this commandment should be handed down from one generation to another as obligatory. No inference can be justly drawn to show that this was either a local or a temporary command.

“We have an account of time being reckoned by sevens at the time of the deluge, when Noah sent out the dove; and after seven other days, he sent it out the second time. And when Jacob served seven years for Rachel, and received Leah instead, Laban said, ‘Fulfill her week.’

“There was also another clear manifestation of the will of God concerning the observance of the Sabbath during the forty years that the children of Israel were in the wilderness, and were fed by manna rained down from heaven. A double portion fell on the sixth day, and they were commanded by God, through his servant Moses, to gather twice as much on the sixth day; for to-morrow is the Sabbath of the Lord, and it was miraculously preserved. On other days it would not keep; but now it remained good until after the Sabbath. ‘Then said the Lord unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you, and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them whether they will walk in my law or no.’ Here is a clear intimation that the law referred to was the fourth commandment; and not only so, but the very fact of their not asking any questions concerning the reason why they should not gather manna on the seventh day proves that it was an institution with which they were acquainted. God himself provided the bread and commanded them to gather it on the sixth day.

“And Moses said, ‘Eat that to-day; for to-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord; to-day ye shall not find it in the field.’ This clearly shows that God required them to devote one-seventh of their time to his service. The Lord showed by his power that he intended to preserve the Sabbath from desecration—first, by giving a double quantity of manna on the sixth day; secondly, by giving none on the Sabbath; and thirdly, by its preservation.

“The decalogue was promulgated by the voice of God in the most manifest tokens of his majesty. These laws were written by the finger of God on two tables of stone, while the Mosaic ritual, or the ceremonial law, was written by Moses in a book, and had no existence after the desired end was accomplished. The former were written on two tables of stone to show their perpetuity.

“While those men would gladly make us believe that they are ministering a soothing balm to our already awakened convictions, and would thereby cast a shadow of doubt over our benighted minds, why will they not on the same ground, and by the same authority, to be consistent, abrogate any one of the others, and reduce the decalogue to nine? Will those men who insist on the abrogation of the fourth commandment insist on the abrogation of the sixth or any one of the others? Now, if they annul the fourth commandment as teaching a Jewish Sabbath, they will have to invalidate the whole decalogue; for there is not a single word in this commandment that is peculiar to the Jews.

“This commandment is introduced with the word ‘remember,’ to show that it was something of which they had some previous knowledge. It may also be used to show its superiority over the others, or may have been used to enforce the obligation of this commandment, which doubtless had been partially disregarded by the children of Israel during their captivity on account of their taskmasters. ‘Ye shall make you no idols nor graven images, neither rear you up a standing image, neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it; for I am the Lord your God. Ye shall keep my Sabbaths and reverence my sanctuary.’ ‘Walk ye not in the statutes of your fathers, neither observe their judgments, nor defile yourselves with their idols; I am the Lord your God; walk in my statutes, and keep my judgments, and do them, and hallow my Sabbath.’

“We see in both these quotations the reason assigned why they should obey these injunctions—‘for I am the Lord your God.’ Is the eternal and all-wise God the God of Israel alone? If our opponents take this position, we will not enter into a controversy with them. If he is our God, as he was the God of Israel, we will have to acknowledge the force of this commandment. Instead of this being a Jewish institution, we find that it is the oldest of God’s commandments given to our representatives.

“We find that our Saviour honored the Sabbath by attending the public institutions of worship, and when he was charged with violating the Sabbath day he did not justify his conduct by saying the Sabbath was a temporary observance, or that it would either be abolished or modified. Henry says in his comments on the passage in Matt. 24:20, ‘We never read of Christ expressing any care about any of the ordinances of the Jewish Church, which were purely ceremonial; but how often did he show a concern for the Sabbath.

“Jesus elsewhere says, ‘Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.’ Christ shows by his deference to the law, that it will ever be the same. Could the law of Him ‘with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning,’ be otherwise? Our opponents would make us believe that the passage in Matt. 5:27, ‘Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time,’ referred to Moses. This phrase, ‘of old time,’ has reference to days not so ancient as the time of Moses. It was said by their Jewish ancestors and also by their contemporary elders.

“Our Lord said, ‘The Sabbath was made for man.’ Was it for Jewish men only that the Sabbath was made? If the Sabbath was made for man, it must be admitted that the Lord of the Sabbath had some object in view.”

One would suppose, from such reasoning as the above, that the writer must certainly be an observer of the seventh-day Sabbath. But without giving Scripture evidence he goes on to say that the Saviour changed the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day of the week, notwithstanding he has asserted so strongly that the commandment cannot be changed. He knows, too, that the commandment enjoins the seventh day just as strongly as it affirms the existence of the institution. He also knows that according to the New Testament writers, the Sabbath comes each week the day before the first day, commonly called Sunday. See Matt. 28:1; Mark 16:1–3; Luke 23:56; 24:1.

Here are two writers of the same denomination, differing widely in their views of fundamental truth, yet arriving at the same conclusion, namely, that the first day of the week is the proper day to be observed for religious rest and worship. One claims that the Sabbath was appointed in Eden; the other affirms that it originated at Sinai. One denies that the day has ever been changed; the other affirms the change. One declares that the Sabbath command has been abolished; the other contends for its perpetuity. We would suggest that these domestic differences be settled by the respective parties in some satisfactory manner, by debate or otherwise; and when a Bible foundation is secured, let each plant his feet firmly upon it, and fearlessly defend the right. J. O. CORLISS.

PARADISE

O EXILED Paradise, Oh, how we long for thee! When wilt thou robe the earth, When plant life's healing tree? Oh, for thy smiling hills, With gush of clear cascade,— Forever-flowing rills, By living waters made! Thou hast fresh blooming vales, Where glitt'ring fountains play, And sweet sequestered dales, Hid in thy groves away.

Oh, for thy fragrant flowers, That bloom through all the year! Oh, for thy rosy bowers, The wilderness to cheer! To thee we shall “return, And to Mount Zion come!” With songs sing joyfully, “And shout the harvest home.” Awake the harp and lute In praises to the King Who reigns on David's throne; To him hosannas bring.

Jesus shall ever reign. When his bright kingdom comes, The sun shall be ashamed Before his dazzling throne; The moon, confounded, then Shall hide her silver ray, And saints of every age Rejoice in glorious day. O exiled Paradise! Oh, how we long for thee! Robe thou anew the earth, Bring back life's healing tree.

—Sel.

THE WORD.

By F. C. Ross

Said the psalmist, “Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.” “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.” We also read that God has magnified his word above his name, and that “that people that heareth not the law shall perish.” If we neglect the word of God, shall we be guiltless, and can we expect His aid?

In these last days, Satan works with all deceivableness of unrighteousness. He has “great wrath, because he knoweth he hath but a short time.” Ah! how should we fear who have fallen upon this evil time! We should heed the injunction of the apostle: “Wherefore take unto you the whole armor of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.” The first piece of this armor is truth. “Let your loins be girt about with truth.” “Thy law is the truth.”

The law of God stands the same as when spoken by his voice from Mt. Sinai. Christ said, “Verily I say unto you, ‘Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law till all be fulfilled.” The man of sin thought to change this law; but the Lord said, “Thus far shalt thou go and no farther.” It was given into his hand for 1260 years. But his dominion has been taken away, to be consumed and destroyed unto the end. And now the Lord has set his hand to restore—to bind up the testimony and seal the law among his disciples. This work is now being done. The closing message to the world is now going forth in the spirit and power of Elijah; and a company is being brought out that can say, “Lord, how love I thy law.”

F. C. Ross.

SUBMISSION

By C. M. S.

Submission is a common word, and is not supposed to be a mysterious one, yet in some cases much experience and learning are necessary for one to fully know its meaning. When a mere child, I heard the voice of my Saviour bidding me follow him. I tried to yield my heart wholly to him, yet at times I felt a drawing back, a fear of something indefinite. When overcome by such feelings, I was invariably taken in some snare.

Many times in deep trials the language of my heart has been like Jacob’s, “All these things are against me;” and I have wept and prayed to God to remove my troubles, and then had to wait and wait, until hope prolonged made my heart sick. But as soon as I quietly submitted my will to Jesus, caring above everything for his glory, the bitter cup was taken from me. Then it was evident that my Father had been dealing with me in love, and giving me lessons more valuable than fine gold.

But after all the assurances that God has given of his love and care for us, how apt we are to say, “Oh! I could bear any kind of trouble but this, the injustice and unkindness of friends.” We fail to see the hand of God in it, and allow ourselves to murmur. Jesus bore as much and much more, and was submissive. Can we not follow him? We do not know all the evil of our hearts as God knows it, and he will not permit us to have more affliction than is for our own

good; for he overrules all the powers of earth and hell. “When a man’s ways please the Lord, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.”

Let us rejoice that we have the privilege of being in close relationship to the great Creator, also that we have the privilege of suffering with Christ and learning the sweet lessons of submission. C. M. S.

SELFISHNESS

By Wm. Covert

I am led to think that selfishness besets every transgressor. Falsehoods are told through a selfish desire to mislead. Covetousness takes hold of the heart, and we try to get the advantage of our neighbor. Murder is committed for the sole purpose of gratifying the murderer, or perchance, to hide some crime. Theft is a sin that is committed in order to benefit the thief. Adultery is committed entirely through selfishness. Disrespect and disobedience to parents grow out of a disposition to have one's own way, which is a species of selfishness. Sabbath-breaking comes of selfishness; the transgressor wants to use the time which belongs to God for his own selfish ends. Profanity is a sign of an empty head more than of anything else, unless it be a depraved heart; but when we listen to the swearer for a while, we hear him asking God to curse some one, that he may be advantaged at the other's expense; or if he curses himself it is for the purpose of selfishly carrying some point that he is making. Peter says of those who are not afraid to speak evil of dignities that they are self-willed.

In image-worship and idolatry homage is paid to a false god that is generally supposed to grant indulgences for very gross sins, which are pleasing to the supremely selfish. Indeed, we cannot think of a sin that does not have its origin, either directly or indirectly, in this selfish disposition which seems to be so natural to the depraved heart. All the persecution that has ever been inflicted on the saints of God, all the evil treatment that has ever been endured by innocent ones, has only been the outcropping of the selfishness of their tormentors.

As with the great sins, so with the petty ones,—selfishness is at the bottom. When we hear a peevish person fretting, we know that the trouble is that he wants his own way, and he is fretting because his whims are not gratified. When we see a sour temper manifested, we know that the person has not had his own way.

Oh! how important it is that we do not think of ourselves more highly than we ought to think! How earnestly we should strive, through divine aid, to overcome our selfishness. Until we do overcome this disposition, we can never obey the Golden Rule. Wm. COVERT.

“JOHN MARK’S CHILDREN.”

By C. A. Washburn

I was much interested in an article under this heading by Eld. D. M. Canright, in Review, Vol. 50, No. 2. I have often thought of this “sharp contention” between Paul and Barnabas recorded in Acts 15: 36-40, and have heard people refer to it for proof that good folks, even, could not expect to get along without contentions and divisions. But it is evident, as shown in the article above mentioned, that this record was made to teach quite a different lesson, namely, that we should not be easily driven from the work of God, but should endure hardness as good soldiers of Jesus Christ. 2 Tim. 2: 3.

But shall we not hope that those who have been in fault (as John Mark was) may reform? Bro. C. says Paul “would have nothing more to do with him.” But some years after this, Paul said to Timothy, “Take Mark, and bring him with thee; for he is profitable to me for the ministry.” 2 Tim. 4: 11. Now, if John Mark did so reform as to be profitable to the ministry, may we not hope that his children will follow this part of their ancestor’s example, and reform also. C. A. Washburn.

OUR SUCCESS.

By George C. Tenney

The want of apparent success often causes us to feel discouraged in the cause of God. This should lead us to consider what constitutes success in our work.

The third angel’s message is one of warning. It points out the dangers, and defines the duties, of the present time. Like the messages of Noah and John the Baptist, the truths we bear to the world are distasteful to most people. As it was then, so now,—the truth for this time cuts directly across many of their practices, and condemns them. This makes it unpopular. But in the order of God, it must be proclaimed, whether men will hear or forbear.

Those who accept the truth in the love of it, and carry it out in their lives, will be sanctified by it and saved. While the scoffing, careless world will by it be condemned.

Sometimes our hearts are pained at the spirit manifested toward the truth of God. Many oppose it with all the bitterness of a wicked heart full of bigotry and hatred. Many others confess its clearness and obligations, but popularity and the cares and pride of life choke the word and make it unfruitful. Perhaps a few, a very few, embrace it; and in their hearts, like seed sown in good soil, it produces fruit to the glory of God. This is our experience nearly everywhere we go.

Shall we then measure the progress of our work by the small number who embrace it? If we do, we may well be discouraged. If popularity is the criterion of our success, we may well despair. Our work is faithfully to warn the world. Some of the labor which seems ineffectual now will no doubt be blessed to the good of those who hear, and none of it will return void unto Him who hath sent it. It will prove a savor of life or of death.

The best indication of our success, under the hand of God, is the faithful proclamation of this message in different parts of the world. How to do the work faithfully, thoroughly, is a proper subject of thought and prayer. The work is ours to do; the result lies with God and the people.

GEO. C. TENNEY.

POLISH

By Frank Starr

IMPORTANT lessons are sometimes learned from the common pursuits of life. Some years ago, a gentleman talked to me of the advantages to be gained by attending the Battle Creek College, advising me to try it. He referred to a young man who had been benefited by so doing, and said he, “it has put a little polish on him.”

I was one of the class that consider polish a non-essential. I thought that if ever I had any higher vocation than using farming implements, I could remain, as did John the Baptist of old, “in the deserts” till that time should come. So I said to myself, “Polish! I want to acquire what polish I get by actual contact with life’s realities; that will be polish enough.”

Not long after this, as I was going to work, my thoughts were on the conversation alluded to. I had with me a new plowshare. As every farmer knows, a rough plowshare, just from the mold, does not work very well, and this one scoured uncommonly hard. The soil stuck to it very tenaciously. I was continually stopping to clean it. I progressed slowly; the team worked hard, yet I could but poorly do the work. I wished my plowshare had been polished before I began to use it, much regretting that it left the foundry with its roughness unremoved.

Thus passed the entire afternoon. When night came, my plowshare was nearly scoured. But, to look back on the ill-accomplished work—to see the half-turned furrows! What poor policy to wait for actual use to do the work of polishing! Then I compared the afternoon’s experience with my views on the subject of polish. What if, at the close life’s labors, I should look back on a work half done, made doubly hard for lack of polish?

We need polishing. Read Ps. 144:12. And what is equal to a good school for removing roughness and disagreeable oddities, and making one agreeable, adapted to the various elements of society, even though we may be subjected to strict discipline?

FRANK STARR.

Distinguished Drunkards.

THE following facts preach a more impressive sermon against strong drink than can be drawn from the most powerful reasoning. When men fall and the waves go over them, the world rushes on, and they are soon forgotten. But let these cases be held up to view; let the terrible gulf be seen which intemperance has opened between their former position of honor and prosperity, and their present degradation and poverty, and a more startling warning is given than can be expressed in words. There they see intemperance in its true incarnation.

The Hartford Times publishes a suggestive letter headed, “Distinguished Drunkards,” from its Washington correspondent “Mac,” who obtained the material for it during a ramble through the Washington poor-house. One of the first men he met there had been at one time Attorney General of Virginia. In his office a number of now distinguished lawyers were students, and they owe much to his advice. His father had been Attorney General of the United States, and left his son wealth. But he drank and sacrificed distinction, fortune, and everything to his love of drink.

Another distinguished pauper was an ex-Judge of the Supreme Court of California, and had been esteemed one of the most eloquent men of his time. He came to Washington expecting to get an office, was disappointed, took to drink, and drank himself out of pocket, mind, and friends, and into the poor-house. In his company, the correspondent found a once wealthy newspaper editor and proprietor of New York—a man of great ability and political influence. This man also sank all he possessed in whisky, and has been for three years in the almshouse. Sometimes his friends take him out, but, says the correspondent, “he drinks so much that he lies about the streets, and is returned by the police.”

A fourth pauper had been only a few years ago a political power, special agent of the Post Office Department, and owner of much property in Washington and Arkansas. At one time he was a United States detective, but while drunk he “gave away” the details of a case that would have resulted in the capture of two or three hundred thousand dollars in counterfeit money, presses, plates, etc. For this he was ruined. When sober he was capable of doing remarkable work. In fact, fortune and fame were his if he had not allowed the taste for liquor to grow on him.

In another branch of the institution the correspondent found an ex-Attorney General of North Carolina. He made many friends, drank much whisky, neglected his business and everything else, and drifted to the poor-house. Says the correspondent, “The principal reason for his being put where he now is, is that he stole a friend’s vest, and sold it for whisky.” To such depths of degradation will whisky bring the strongest and ablest of us.

A man who was Stephen A. Douglass’ intimate friend, and who used to speak from the same platforms with him, is also a Washington pauper. When fortune smiled on him he used liquor as a relish, and when her smiles turned to frowns, he took it as an antidote for sorrow. It brought him temporary relief and permanent ruin.

Coming into the almshouse in the “Black Maria,” as the correspondent left it, was an old, white-haired man, “who was at one time one of the leading men of the Michigan bar. He is the man who backed Zach Chandler, and made him, politically speaking, what he is to-day. And this man of great legal ability, political influence sufficient to make and unmake men, and much wealth, is now a pauper. Why? Because he allowed whisky to obtain the mastery over him, as did all the others herein referred to. Do not you, young man, find this record very suggestive?”

Continue reading: POPULAR FALLACIES