It

rotten, and any daily paper could have done the same. was the will, not the way, that was wanting. In this country professional rivalry-what we know as "enterprise "—would have furnished an ample motive. Why was it so weak in the newspapers of Paris? One reason is that the French are not readers of news in the sense that Americans and Englishmen are. They seek in their journals amusement and a certain excitement, for the most part political; but the detailed reports of happenings, great and small, from any and all sources, such as our papers furnish, do not please them— would, in fact, be left unread. This has made it easier for the papers to make of financial news a matter of business wholly, very rarely discussed or reported in detail. To this add the fact that there are no journals of importance in France outside of Paris, and the "conspiracy of silence," as M. Cavaignac termed it, becomes less unaccountable.-Harper's Weekly, March 18.

QUESTIONS TO SPECIALISTS.

REPLY BY THE REV. WILLIAM BUTLER, D. D., BOSTON, AUTHOR OF THE LAND OF THe vedas.

132. What is to be said of the recent refusal of the Decennial Conference in India to condemn the opium traffic?

case.

I am very sorry that the Decennial Conference acted as it did in this But some of the English and Scotch brethren are too often lukewarm on the question of temperance. Their ale and brandy are very much to them still, and our stricter American views make slow progress with such parties. Had the opium question been presented as a separate issue I think there would have been united action on that matter, though many of them deprecate pushing the government too hard in view of the large revenue derived from its sale, and the great difficulty of finding some other source from which to draw those millions. They shrink from the idea of laying these eight or ten millions sterling upon the already overtaxed people of India and the serious dissatisfaction it would be sure to arouse among them. Then the native employés of the government (of whom there are thousands) fear if it were done one of the first effects would be a reduction of salaries all round on them, while the higher classes deprecate the burden being laid on themselves by an income tax. Were it only two or three millions sterling it could be handled, but the iniquity has grown so great all parties, from the government down, fear to touch it lest it crush them by its weight. The good men of all classes in India earnestly desire its removal, but how to be accomplished now they do not see. Our hope is that, God, in mercy, will open some way to meet the difficulty and lift off the load that has been thus laid on poor India.

In regard to the schools I do not think that question entered into the merits of the case at the Conference, nor is parallel to the condition of our own land. There is no other power to educate in India if the gov ernment should withhold its help, but there is here, and I am persuaded that no part of the taxation is more cheerfully borne by the nation than this is, and that the distribution of this money by the government is satisfactory to all classes who desire the education of their children. The supervision of that education also is regarded as just and fair, as

the government attempts no dictation in religious matters, but leaves all parties free in that respect to do what they think best.

Our own Methodist Mission in India has 896 day schools under 1,090 teachers, with 22,535 scholars on the rolls. A full half of the expense, under the title of "Grants in Aid," aggregating 43,919 napas per annum is given us for the educational results which are verified by the Inspector's annual report, while we are left absolutely free to teach religion, read the Bible, sing hymns and offer prayer as much as we like. Were these "grants in aid" withdrawn from us these schools must close, and as the government alone could not find the necessary teaching staffs nor afford the increased expense involved in the change, the children of the nation would have to go without education and the great uplift now being realized would in great measure come to an end; all classes of the native population would hold up both hands to deprecate such a calamity as this would be to them and to their country. The school question is no way involved in the other items that came before Decennial Conference.

REPLY BY THE REV. J. M. FOSTER, BOSTON, SECRETARY OF THE NATIONAL REFORM ASSOCIATION.

133. Shall we recognize God and His Law in the United States Constitution?

The National Reform Association proposes that the Preamble shall read: "We, the people, recognizing Almighty God as the Source of all authority, the Bible as the foundation of all law, and the Lord Jesus Christ as the king of nations, do ordain, etc." This amendment is proposed:

I. To bring that instrument into harmony with the history, character and life of the nation.

A writer in the Bibliotheca Sacra has said: “All the lines of history point to America as the place, and the present age as the time, when the true relations between the human and the divine in civil affairs shall be exemplified." This country was settled by Christian men, with Christian ends in view. The Pilgrim Fathers, before landing on Plymouth Rock, while in the cabin of the Mayflower, drafted a constitution. That instrument is engrossed in a tablet of stone at Plymouth, and reads: "In the name of God, Amen. For the glory of God and the maintenance of the Christian faith, etc." All the colonial charters and compacts contained the principle embodied in the ordinance of 1787, which gave rise to the settlement of the Territory of the Northwest; "Religion, morality and knowledge are essential to good government." The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in 1824 declared that Christianity is the common law of this land. In February, 1892, the Supreme Court of the United States declared that this is a Christian nation. The fact that all our VOL. XI.--NO. 64.

22

Presidents have recognized a superintending Providence in national affairs in their Inaugural Addresses, that forty-two out of forty-four State Constitutions recognize God's law, that there are Sabbath laws in every State save two, that there are chaplains in our army and navy, in congressional and legislative halls, that the oath is administered in all our courts of justice, and that blasphemy and profanity are punishable, all confirm the decree of the Supreme Judicature of our land.

Writers distinguish between the nation and its government. The nation is the creature of God, born in His Providence, maintained by His bounty, and responsible to Him for its character and conduct. The government is the agent set up by the nation to carry out its will. The constitution is the letter of instruction from the nation to its government. That "letter" should reflect the moral principles and purposes of our Christian nation.

II. A secular constitution secularizes the nation.

The character of the nation is ultimately determined by the character of the government. If the nation be morally above its government, either the nation must bring the government up to its level at the first, or else the government will bring the nation down to its level at the last. Twenty-three times it is stated in the book of Kings that "Jeroboam the son of Nebat made Israel to sin "in worshiping idols. The nation was confirmed in idolatry. And in the days of the later Kings they were so steeped in idol worship that God caused them to be carried to Babylon and kept in the furnace of slavery for seventy years, until the dross of idolatry was taken away, and they never fell into that sin to this day. Philip II. of Spain was a rauk Papist. In 1588 he built the Invincible Annada to destroy Protestantism in England and make the Papal Tiara supreme in Europe, Spain has been a Papal nation for three centuries. In 1534 Henry VIII. repudiated the authority of the Pope and made himself the head of the Church of England. Queen Victoria, with all her excellencies, enjoys that bad eminence. In 1789 our Christian nation adopted a constitution which does not contain the name of God. It is silent as the grave respecting the higher law. This came partly from a desire to avoid the evils of the establishments of Europe, and partly from the dominance of French infidelity in the convention that framed it, for, as Franklin says, that convention, with three or four exceptions, thought prayers unnecessary. Being the supreme law in the land the constitution determines the character of the government. And now for more than a century it has been exerting its secularizing influence upon our Christian nation. And what with intemperance, Sabbath breaking and political corruption we are rapidly becoming a secularized nation. In adopting this constitution our nation inoculated the political body with the virus of secularism, and the result is a case of national blood-poisoning. Why does this Christian nation tolerate the liquor traffic, that costs her directly and consequentially $2,000,000

annually, maintains a standing army of 600,000 drunkards, and sends 100,000 to a drunkard's grave every year? The national conscience has been stupefied by the drug of secularism. Why does this Christian nation allow 328,964 divorces in the past twenty years, and twice as many adulterous marriages by the guilty parties? The moral sense of the nation has been paralyzed by secularism. Why does this Christian nation permit 2,000,000 employes to work on Sabbath, and their employers to compel them to do it on pain of losing their position? The sense of national responsibility to God has been deadened by secularism, so that there is no public demand for the cessation of the United States mail service and the railroad traffic on Sabbath. Why is there no righteous indignation against the unhallowed use of money in political elections? Public opinion has been debauched by secularism. Why were thirteen negroes burned alive during President Harrison's administration and over five hundred shockingly tortured and murdered by mobs in the South, and no national protest? The Nation has lost its sense of accountability to God through the opiate of secularism. Why does the Nation remain indifferent when Bismarck points to the Falk laws, Gladstone to Vaticanism, and our own Ulysses of thinkers and speakers, Joseph Cook, LL.D., to the Pope's ultimatum by Satolli, and solemnly warn her of the dangerous intrigues of the Roman hierarchy? She has been judicially blinded by secularism. No President ever recognized Christ in his Thanksgiving proclamation. Why? Because the constitution does not. The Republican, Democratic, Prohibition and People's Parties refused, in their last national conventions, to recognize Christ in their platforms. The fact is this nation has been educated away from Christ, the King of nations, by our secular constitution. It is time for us to return to the God of Nations.

III. To provide a basis in our fundamental law for moral legislation. The treaty made with Tripoli eight years after the constitution was adopted and never called in question as to its constitutionality, declares : "The Government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquillity of the Mussulman." This treaty, according to the constitution, is common law, and paramount to the instrument itself. We want an antidote for this. In 1808 President Jefferson was petitioned by New England ministers to proclaim a fast. He replied: "I consider the Government of the United States as interdicted by the constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline or exercise." We want that interdiction removed. In 1852 Seward declared in the United States Senate: "There is a law higher than the constitution," and slave-holding senators and their friends from all parts of the Chamber demanded, "Take it back." Seward was like a sword of the finest temper, that can be thrust into a twisted scabbard and when drawn out is straight as before. He used