Your ShelfYour Projects

Review and Herald, Vol. 24, No. 23.

LAW

Review and Herald

Nov 1, 1864

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Nov 1, 1864

LAW.

By Eld. E. Goodrich

ITS OBJECT—HOW FULFILLED.

BY ELD. E. GOODRICH.
THE term law signifies a rule of action. Generally it is used to signify some rule of action given by some one having authority to enforce obedience. And although the term may with propriety be applied to almost all the varied avocations of life, yet the use the Scriptures make of it, is to signify those religious, those Heaven-ordained rules, that God has given for the training and government of man.
And as the term, even in the Scriptures, does not and cannot always signify the same thing, no more and no less, we may observe that law, whether used in the divine or in human governments, may be divided into three classes.
In the first, we have commandment or precept law; in the second, we have ceremonial law; and in the third, we have penal law.
Before noticing the above-named divisions, it may be remarked that it is the nature of all law to be absolute and inflexible. A law that can, or could be turned one way or the other at the pleasure of the party expounding the same, is an absurdity. The object of all just law is to express, guard, and secure, the rights of all parties concerned. And what expression or security would there be in an indefinite, changeable law?
The office of precept law, is to define those rights and duties that grow out of the relations sustained in the case. It is to command what may, and forbid what may not, be done. As a marked instance of precept law, we may read Gen. ii, 16-17: "And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it."
The design of ceremonial law, is to define and witness to certain existing or designed relations. By this law kings are crowned, priests are ordained, the marriage relation is formed, and a thousand other different offices and relations are made known.
The object of penal law, is to restrain the would-be guilty, and to vindicate the majesty of an insulted and offended lawgiver.
The main and central, the all-absorbing object of law in all its different parts, whether considered separately or as a body, is order and harmony. The aggregate misery of this world is but the garnered fruits of discord, or law-breaking; while Heaven itself is but the harvest of holy harmony.
All that we need to labor or pray for is, "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in Heaven." And in turning to the Scriptures to learn what they teach concerning law as concerning any other subject, we should remember that much, if not every thing, depends on a right application of testimony.
Concerning the teachings of the Old-Testament Scriptures on this subject, there is little or no dispute. The burden of controversy is as to what is taught in the New. And here some teach one thing and some another. All cannot be right. And either the Scriptures do not agree in what they teach, (a thought we should not indulge) or else some who read are mistaken in their understanding of it.
One fact that impresses itself upon our minds as we read is, that the subject of law as a distinct question, either its claim upon us, its perpetuity, or its fallibility, is rarely stated in the New Testament. Most of the allusions are to be regarded as incidental: It is not so much taught itself, as used for teaching something else. It is generally used for enforcing something that is taught, or for settling some disputed question. There are, however, exceptions to this general rule, which will receive attention.
As there are different kinds of law referred to in the New Testament, and most of the references are merely incidental, in order to understand the kind or class of law referred to, we need to understand the subject upon which the writer or speaker is treating. And if we would understand the estimate the writer or speaker had of the law to which he referred, we must learn the use he makes of the same.
As an example embracing both sides of the above-mentioned points, both the kind of law referred to, and the estimate the speaker had of said law, we may read the language of John the Baptist to Herod, Mark vi, 18: "It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife." The law referred to in this case is manifestly that law that forbade just such conduct as Herod's. And that John believed in the authority of said law is evident, because he used the same to enforce the reproof; which he would not have done had he believed the law to be dead. Neither can we suppose that Jesus or any of the apostles would make use of a dead law, to give authority to what they taught. In this case the thing preached would be as worthless as the authority by which it was enforced.
As an instance in which different classes of law are understood and implied, we may refer to the case of the woman brought to the Saviour. John viii. As sin, in every case, is the transgression of precept law, and as the crime of which the woman was guilty was plainly stated, the kind of law and even the specific commandment transgressed, is easily understood. It was moral precept law. And as it is the work of penal law to inflict punishment, and we have the expression, verse 5, "Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned," we easily understand that penal law is meant. The manner in which Christ disposed of the question, "But what sayest thou?" shows the estimate that he had of each class of law. The answer to the woman, verse 11, "Go and sin no more," shows that he regarded the law transgressed as binding and sacred. The answer, "Neither do I condemn thee" (doom thee to be stoned), shows that he did not teach the penal law as a present truth.
It ought to be observed, however, at this point, as the above case may be used to illustrate New-Testament teaching, that death by stoning was never the full and final punishment of sin. It was only a temporary civil administration of the law of God, whereby he sought to preserve a pure people on the earth unto the coming of Christ. And undoubtedly it embraces the principal idea in the language of Paul. Gal. iii, 19. "Wherefore, then, serveth the law? It was added, because of transgression, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made." And it corresponds with "the ministration of death written and engraven in stones," the glory of which ministration was to be done away by the superabundant glory of the ministration of righteousness by faith. It iswell to have laws to provide for our present good, yet that the law of God has higher contemplations than mere temporal consequences, is a matter too obvious to every Bible reader to need comment. But how can a law exist without a penalty? It cannot. But the final punishment of sin is everlasting destruction from the presence of God and the glory of his power; it is the second death. And as the question is often asked, and apparently with triumph, How can a law exist without a penalty? it may be asked, How is it that all the New Testament writers and teachers preach the penalty for sin, if "the law of God is all abolished," "nailed to the cross," "done away?" A living penalty for a dead law is unaccountable. As well talk of a living law that has neither power nor disposition to punish offenders. To suppose that either could be a Bible doctrine would be a great error. Better teach that there is a living law, and a certain and fearful punishment awaiting the finally impenitent.
But whether there is a living or dead law, or no law at all, for this age, we will not now decide. One very important suggestion that ought to have been offered before, but may be made at this point is, that in searching the Scriptures to learn what they teach concerning any matter, the first and perhaps the most important thing is to ascertain the question presented before the mind for consideration. For generally, to mistake the question is to misapply the testimony used.
The necessity of the above caution is evident from several considerations: one is, that even the obvious import of plain language is hardly to be relied upon where the object for which it was originally used differs from the application that we seek to make of it.
Another is, that it is frequently taught that the prophets believed thus and so, and the apostles preached so and so, when the fact is that the question that we seek to have solved by their testimony, was never even stated, much less discussed, by them.
The subject of law, as above noticed, is rarely discussed in the New Testament. It is used as authority for teaching something else. But as we never use a doubtful rule to determine a disputed question, the bare fact that it is thus used is the strongest of arguments that its authority, both in the minds of those who used it, and those to whom it was addressed, was beyond dispute. The usual manner of introducing and referring to law, is that of pointing out what it says, what it does, or what it is, at the same time making a quotation of some language, without telling either where it is to be found, or the class to which it belongs. The style is the same as if one should say, "The poet hath said," then giving the language of some well-known author, without the name. And it corresponds with the manner in which we treat all scripture testimony when we say, "The prophet hath said," or "The apostle teaches;" at the same time quoting the language without the name of the prophet or apostle referred to. The name of the author is known by our familiarity with the language.
And as additional instances, showing that there are specific and different classes of laws referred to on different occasions, and for different purposes, also that we are to understand the kind or particular law referred to by the nature of the question discussed, we may read a few such scriptures as the following:
"And, behold, there was a man which had his hand withered. And they asked him, saying, Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days, that they might accuse him. And he said unto them, What man shall there be among you that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days." Matt. xii, 10-12.
The object for which law is referred to and used on this occasion is to settle a dispute. The question was not the perpetuity or sacredness of law, nor the sacredness of the Sabbath day; these were not disputed; but the question was concerning what might or might not be done on the Sabbath day. And there is no necessity for supposing that any more or that any other kind of law is referred to, than just that law by which the sacredness of the Sabbath was guarded.
Again, "For, the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually, make the comers thereunto perfect." Heb. x, 1. The above may be regarded as a general reference to that entire class of ceremonial law, including everything necessary to a typical system of worship; all of which, as the apostle in the entire epistle labored to show, ceased when the body which was of Christ, shadowed forth, was reached.
Again, "If ye fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, ye do well. But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. For whosoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he (the Law-giver) that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law." The apostle here refers to that class of moral precept law, that specifies our duties to our fellow-men. And as he uses this law to enforce what he taught, there can be no doubt that he believed it binding on all Christians.
But if we wish to investigate the claims of law fully, as presented in the New Testament, the proper place at which to begin is the language of the Saviour. "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For 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. Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven." Matt. v, 17, 18, 19. Here the question is plainly stated and discussed, both negatively and positively. And there is nothing lacking, either in time, place, occasion or form of expression, to place the subject in the strongest possible light, and to make it all that argument or interest could. And whether the Saviour wished to teach the supremacy and perpetuity of the law or not, it is certain that had this been his object, he could not have used language better calculated to serve such a purpose. But if it be true, as some modern reformers (?) teach, that the law of God, of which the ten commandments formed the most considerable part, deceased with John, the language of Christ was sadly out of time and place; and it would have been a great deal nearer the truth, if he had said, Think not that I am come to teach the law or the prophets, I came not to teach, but to release men from the teachings of the law and the prophets. For verily I say unto you, the law has "deceased," and the prophets were only until John. Whosoever, therefore, shall follow the letter, though it be of the greatest of these commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be shut up and cursed.
(To be Continued.)

In the Morning.

By Editor

THERE is sweet consolation in the following lines for all those who are waiting and watching for the morning. Then we shall know, not those merely from whom we have been painfully parted here, but all the good of all ages, even as we are known.—ED.
I shall know thee in the morning, When Jesus calls his own; In the resurrection morning, When our heavenly joys are won; On the right hand where they gather; Who are fitted for the prize; I shall know thee in the morning, When all the saints arise.
I shall meet thee in the morning, Where the stream of life runs fair, Where the sunlight gilds the highlands, And music fills the air; Where the flower-decked arbors lavish Their odors fresh and free, I shall meet thee in the morning Of a bright eternity.
I shall see thee in the morning Of Heaven's eternal light, Where the saints of every nation Are robed in changeless white; With Jesus and his angels, The glad hosts of the skies, I shall see thee in the morning, When all the saints arise.
I shall join thee in the morning Where partings never come, Where those we've loved in Jesus Forever are at home. We'll range the plains together, And joy in bliss untold, I shall join thee in the morning, Where the streets are paved with gold.
I shall greet thee in the morning, Where sainted ones all meet; Within those walls of jasper We'll bow at Jesus' feet. Where every singing seraph His harp of glory tries,— I shall greet thee in the morning, When all the saints arise.
I shall know thee in the morning, With the waking sainted dead, Cheered by the gladsome presence Of Christ our living Head; Arrayed in robes of brightness, Exultant for the prize; I shall know thee in the morning, When all the saints arise.

A Good Illustration

A GOOD ILLUSTRATION.—Industry on our part is not superseded by the greatness and freeness of God's grace. As, when a schoolmaster teaches a boy gratis, the youth can not attain to learning, without some application of his own; and yet it doth not therefore cease to be free, on the teacher's part, because attention is required from the learner; so it is here.

How to Use Graham Flour.

By M. D. Amadon

A SISTER in Michigan wishing some knowledge in the use of Graham flour, or wheat meal, has asked me for information. Thinking perhaps others might derive some little light on this subject, from what I may say, I venture to give it through the Review. I do not profess much skill in this branch of cookery, and therefore may not impart a very perfect knowledge of it, but simply give some suggestions which are useful and good. The old adage, ‑Practice makes perfect,‑ will apply well here if any where; so any one who has never used Graham flour need not despair at a failure on the first attempt.
We have used it in our family for several years, and can safely recommend it as healthful, economical, and palatable.
Perhaps some who read this may not know what is meant by the term, Graham flour. It is simply this: Wheat ground without bolting, and is used, bran and all, without sifting. Mr. Sylvester Graham, some years since, originated this healthful article of diet. It should not be ground fine, as in that case bread cannot be made as light. This flour is converted into puddings, crackers, biscuits, cakes, leavened and unleavened bread, or may be cooked in every way as fine flour. Pancakes are nice raised with yeast like buckwheat.
The most common mode of use with us is leavened and unleavened bread, and puddings; and I will say here, that to be without some one of these articles on our table is an uncommon occurrence; in fact, nothing could fill their place as articles of diet. With us, Graham flour is the rule, and fine flour the exception. Leavened Graham bread is also very nice, though not considered so healthy as unleavened. It is made the same as with fine flour yeast bread, excepting to be stirred instead of kneaded. I add molasses or sugar, which improves it. It should rise the third time, and not be stirred too stiff, or it will be dry. When light, bake about an hour. This kind of bread we use as common as some do fine-flour bread.
Perhaps some would think of this somewhat as the man did the first time he tasted of a Rye and Indian loaf, that it was mixed with gravel stones; but when made good and light, a healthy appetite will relish it. And here comes to mind the couplet so common to all,
‑If at first you do not succeed, Try, try, again.‑
Do not give up and condemn your flour if you do not succeed so well at first. It is certainly more healthy, and often adds much to variety on the table.
To make unleavened bread, or cakes, I offer a recipe given in the "Laws of Life," which is my mode exactly. To make these, requires more skill than any other part of cookery I know of.
A woman who can make nice, light, brown cakes, from Graham flour and cold water, any one would call a good cook. Doubtless many will think and say, this cannot be done, but hundreds will testify that it has been done, and they are good enough for a king.
To do this, stir into cold water your wheat meal till a batter is formed a little stiffer than pancakes; I add a little salt, though this is not in the original recipe. This batter is put into baking-irons, holding as much as a large pastry spoon. These irons may be had at the Review Office; or patty tins will do, though not so good. Heat the irons hot upon the top of the stove, and fill them full of batter. Have your oven heated very hot, though not so hot as to immediately burn your cakes. They will bear a strong heat, and their lightness depends upon the heat of the oven when they are first placed in it. In baking cakes on two sets of the irons at a time, I place one upon the top slide and one upon the bottom slide, unless the top slide will hold both. Let them remain till they are brown, or from five to ten minutes, then change them and let the others brown, then place both on the bottom slide and bake about twenty minutes longer, and they are ready for the table. They should rise as high again as the iron, while baking. These are much nicer than any cakes made of cream, and considered by far the healthiest. Many people, it is true, have been so accustomed to fine flour bread, rich cakes, and pastry, that they call such bread insipid. See Num. xxi, 5. We can only think that such have depraved appetites, which with a little discipline might in time be brought to relish unleavened bread.
Our appetites have, no doubt, by an intemperate course of diet, become unnatural, and crave unhealthy food, but in this time, when sickness and death are so common, do we not do well to take care of our health, even at the sacrifice of what may taste nice?
To make Graham flour puddings, you have only to substitute wheat meal in place of Indian meal, as for Indian pudding, and you have it. I do not make it as thick, however, and boil it about half an hour, or more. This is nice with fruit stirred in after cooking, such as dried cherries, plums, raisins, or dates, then moulded into cups and eaten with cream. It excels corn starch pudding.
Those who look with doubt upon the virtues of Graham flour, need only to try it thoroughly to be persuaded of its healthfulness and palatability. I know some who have commenced its use for health's sake, although they had no relish for it at first. I can here speak from experience. But soon the appetite changes and it is eaten with fondness. I also can vouch for its healthfulness, having been troubled with scrofulous humor from childhood. But since adopting a Graham regimen, and the disuse of animal food, it has entirely disappeared, and I enjoy better health than for years.
There are other ways for using Graham flour, and I would here refer any who wish for information to Dr.Trall's and Jackson's Cook Books found at the Review Office.
It is certainly for our interest to heed the Heaven-sent admonitions we have received upon points of health, and our diet is one very essential item. We are taught in Scripture to do everything to the glory of God. Then should we not seek for understanding to do this, that the temple of God may be holy, which temple ye are.
M. D. AMADON.

Jottings.

By J. M. Griggs

ThE pleasant days spent in conference, with the friends at Adams' Centre, N. Y., soon passed away, and Tuesday morning, Oct. 4th, found us waiting at the depot for the “chariots” which were to bear us from their sight. Our hearts were heavy, but as we parted from relatives and friends, we felt a hope that we should meet again. Arrived in Rochester, about 4 o'clock P. M., where we were kindly welcomed at the house of Bro. and Sr. Lamson. Visited some of the places of interest, while in the city. Wednesday spent several hours rambling through the beautiful grounds of Mount Hope Cemetery. Oh city of the dead! how soon will thy quiet graves be disturbed by the trump of God, calling forth the righteous sleepers to immortality and eternal life. Lying near my writing is a little flower, plucked from the grave of Anna White, which has been nicely pressed, a little memento to highly prized. As I gazed upon the mound beneath which “Nathaniel” and “Anna” so sweetly sleep, and thought how safe they were, I could but exclaim, “Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord!” They rest in hope, and when the angels are sent forth to gather the saints, Mount Hope will not be forgotten. I did not envy the sleepers, although I could but contrast their condition with mine. Still I am upon the ocean of life, and know not but my bark will be dashed upon the shoals or rocks that lie hidden beneath the waves.
Friday, in company with the brethren and sisters from the city, we went to the Quarterly Meeting in Western N. Y. The same evening we listened to a discourse from Bro. N. Fuller, founded upon John xiv, commencing with the words, “Let not your hearts be troubled, ye believe in God believe also in me.” We felt comforted and encouraged, as we were pointed to the true source of the Christian's peace in these troublous times. Appointments were made for social meeting Sabbath morning, and preaching at half-past 10 o'clock. A goodly number of Sabbath-keepers assembled at the appointed hour, and as their united petition ascended to Heaven, the Lord was pleased to hear and answer. He graciously manifested himself in our midst. Our hearts were lifted above this dark world. We seemed to get a glimpse of the joys awaiting the overcomer in the city of God, the New Jerusalem.
“I love to think of the heavenly land, That promised land so fair, Oh how my weary spirit longs To be forever there!”
The hour for preaching arrived, but still we lingered, and Bro. Fuller thought best that the brethren and sisters should occupy the time. I think this precious season will long be remembered by all who were present. The subject chosen for remarks Sabbath afternoon, is found in 2 Tim. i, 7; and in the evening 2 Kings x, 15, “Is thine heart right?” This was a searching discourse; we felt the necessity of examining our hearts. We must indeed be pure and holy, if we would see Jesus and the good of all ages when they are called forth from their graves to meet the Lord revealed in his glory.
Sunday morning we again listened to the word of life. From this meeting we repaired to the water, where four sisters followed their Lord in baptism. In the evening Bro. Fuller addressed us from the following words: “Except your righteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of Heaven.” We noticed unbelievers present who were deeply interested, some wept much, and at the close of the discourse when an opportunity was given for all who wished to go with the people of God, or desired an interest in their prayers, if any such were present, to manifest it by rising, we fear the Spirit was grieved by some of those weeping ones. It was then requested that all the commandment keepers, who would endeavor to draw nearer to God, set a good example before the world, and try to live a life of purity and holiness, should rise. With what fear and trembling did we comply, and take upon us the solemn vow.
Dear brethren and sisters, do we who thus pledged ourselves realize from whence must come our strength to perform what we have vowed unto the Lord? Let us not forget our good resolutions, but look to God for grace to overcome.
And thus our meeting closed. The Lord was with us. We believe the angel of the Lord stood by his servant who proclaimed to us the word of truth, and we doubt not while we received instruction from him, his own soul was refreshed with the dew from Heaven. We shall ever feel a deep interest in the prosperity of the little church at Lancaster. May they all remain steadfast until Jesus comes to take them home.
From Lancaster I came to this place, expecting to meet a friend from the southern part of the State, but was disappointed. Wednesday evening met with a few members of the Allegany church in prayer meeting. The Lord bestowed a blessing while we endeavored to draw near the throne. We find a pleasant home during our stay here with Bro. and sister Bellamy.
And now after five weeks' stay in N. Y., we turn our thoughts once more toward our Michigan home. We shall not forget friendships formed in this State, when we return to the happy home circle. Long will the sweet remembrance of these days linger around my heart. J. M. GRIGGS. Wellsville, N. Y., Oct. 14, 1864.

Extravagance in New York.

FAR away the dull boom of cannon, the shrill, sharp report of musketry, the shrieks and groans of the dying, may be heard. There the brave soldiers of the North are battling to preserve our glorious Union. We hear none of those direful sounds here—take no heed of them in this gay and crowded metropolis. Here fashion and pleasure, not grim war, reign supreme. Here music and festivity are the order of the day, not carnage and strife. Never was New York so brilliant, so captivating. We never before made such active preparations for a season of enjoyment and gayety. Our elite, our aristocracy of money, our shoddy people, have run their mad race of extravagance and show at the fashionable watering places, and are returning to commence in the city a season of unparalleled display.
All classes are taking advantage of the recklessness and extravagance of the day. Now that pleasure, fashion and expenditure rule our people, those who cater to this spirit of extravagance have become as daring and reckless as the crowds they serve, and are playing a game of follow the leader which would have driven the past generation wild with dismay. Our theaters and other places of amusement have increased their price fifty per cent; but this has had no effect upon the masses. On the contrary, it is a noticeable fact, a sign of the times, that since the increase of prices, the audiences have increased in number. In short, increase is the order of the day. Once upon a time people were content to drive two horses, and even one, before their carriages. This summer nothing short of a four in hand, was considered the ton at Newport and such places where some of the extra refined shoddy gentlemen drove as many as ten or twelve magnificent horses at a time. The ladies, in a spirit of emulation, got up pony teams, but were not content to drive a pair. They harnessed three and then five, together, and had postillions and outriders, and made a show which grew greater as the season lasted. The mind becomes bewildered when reflecting upon what would have occurred had the season not drawn to a close.
Taking its cue from the extravagance of the summer season, the city is preparing to outshine itself during the fall and winter. The theaters have brightened up and refitted, and have as we have said above, raised their prices. The negro minstrels have been seized by this contagious spirit of increase, and their prices have been raised. Our fashionable shops—milliner, and such like—have given themselves up to the mania of high prices with an abandonment which is fearfully admirable. A lady's bonnet—a little piece of velvet and a flower—to cap the climax, now costs one hundred dollars, and cannot be manufactured fast enough to supply the demand. Silks, satins and laces now cost their weight in green backs. Gloves are worth what was formerly considered a week's salary for many people, while other styles of dress have increased in like ratio. The wonder of it all is that, spite of these high prices, the consumption is greater than ever. But never before was the general expenditure of the citizens of this metropolis so liberal, so extravagant.—N. Y. Herald.

Eating Economically.

HALL'S Journal of Health furnishes us the following information:
What kind of food has the most nourishment and costs the least? is a question of great practical importance. The following tables may be studied with considerable interest by every family. They will show the mode of preparation, the amount of nutriment, the time required for the digestion of the most common articles of food placed upon our tables. A dollar's worth of meat, at twenty-five cents a pound, goes as far as fifty cents' worth of butter, at half a dollar a pound. Three pounds of flour at eight cents a pound, is said to contain as much nutriment as nine pounds of roast beef, which, at twenty-five cents, is $2.25; that is, twenty-five cents' worth of flour, goes as far as nine times that much money spent for roast beef, as weighed at the butcher's stall. A pint of white beans weighing one pound, and costing seven cents, contains as much nutriment as three pounds and a half of roast beef, costing eighty-seven and a half cents. Of all the articles that can be eaten, the cheapest are bread, butter, molasses, beans, and rice. A pound of corn meal (Indian) goes as far as a pound of flour; so that fine family flour at sixteen dollars a barrel, and corn meal at four cents, the latter is just one-half less expensive. If corn and wheat were ground, and the whole product, bran and all, were made into bread, fifteen per cent. of nutriment would be saved, with much greater healthfulness. These are standard tables:
Kind of Food. Mode of Preparation. Amount of Nutriment. Time of Digestion.
Cucumbers, Raw, 2 per cent., H. M.
Turnips, Boiled, 4 " 2 30
Milk, Fresh, 7 " 2 15
Cabbage, Boiled, 7 " 4 30
Apples, Raw, 10 " 1 50
Potatoes, Boiled, 13 " 2 30
Fish, Boiled, 20 " 2 00
Venison, Boiled, 22 " 1 30
Pork, Roasted, 24 " 5 15
Veal, Roasted, 25 " 4 00
Beef, Roasted, 26 " 3 30
Poultry, Roasted, 27 " 2 45
Mutton, Roasted, 30 " 3 15
Bread, (wheat) Baked, 80 " 3 30
Bread, Baked, 80 " 3 30
Beans, Boiled, 87 " 2 30
Rice, Boiled, 88 " 1 00
Butter and oils, 96 " 3 30
Sugars and syrups, 96 " 3 30

Profanity in the Cars

PROFANITY IN THE CARS.—A writer in one of our exchanges has the following to say about what has been observed by many persons, viz., the rapid increase of profanity and vulgarity on the cars: “Ears polite have often been shocked by profanity in the cars running on different railroads. To so great an extent has this come, that ladies having respect for themselves have been compelled to change cars because of the shocking and lamentable want of common decency, as exhibited by some of the passengers. If a gentleman, out of polite deference to the ladies, should happen to even gently reprimand the uncouth and vulgar fellows, instead of having a desirable effect, it seems to make them worse.

Repentance After Disobedience

That must be sought with repentance which has been so long lost by disobedience.
Continue reading: The Sanctuary---An Objection Considered