{ title: 'The Herald of progress. (New York [N.Y.]) 1860-1864, May 28, 1864, Page 3, Image 3', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about NYS Historic Newspapers - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/sn83030531/1864-05-28/ed-1/seq-3/png/', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/sn83030531/1864-05-28/ed-1/seq-3.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/sn83030531/1864-05-28/ed-1/seq-3/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/sn83030531/1864-05-28/ed-1/seq-3/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
Image provided by: University of Rochester
No. 223 T madmen, the living and thinking creature evolved. h i . It may be that in some future nnd more glorious condition of being, the spirit will re gard the degree of pleasure possible to human relations, as an actually painful contrast to the exalted enjoymeuts of that more perfect life. Evil is to Good what shadow is to light. By the contrast of light and shadow we see. By the contrast of Good and Evil, Pleasure and Pain. Harmony and Discord, we feel and know. Every partial activity of spirit is a microcosm of its totality. In this all-pervading analogy lies the key to profounder comprehension of all special science. IV. Again, the long agitated question of free will or necessity may be tranquilly dispensed with. The system of the student shows that, volition is in truth destiny, and that each spirit shares the rule of all, as a counterbal ance to the share, all take in his governance. It also shows that the will of all is directed to one and the same object, and that absolute free will is, like all absolute ideas, an impossi ble and undesirable abstraction. Thirdly, this system, above all others, main tains the innate dignity and moral responsi bility of man, which all creeds, admitting a monarchial and exclusive government ot the world, entirely abrogate. And this applies equally to the conscious despot of the simple Moslem, or Christian, and to the blind princi ple or law of Nature of the materialist or quasi-materialist reasoner. That is, if they attach any meaning to their huge words, ca pable of being understood or explained by plain thinkers. “ Why not set down in the kennel and await. your inevitable destiny ?” may fairly say the fatalist of either order. “ Because I myself am Fate,” replies the more enlightened spirit. t l . This system eminently proclaims that great principle so amply developed in former pages, which is at the foundation of all morality— the essential unity of man's duty towards himself and others. His conscience , that is, the inherent, all-dom inating, unerring thirst of his spirit for sym pathetic happiness, is no longer an enigma to him. He understands its warning voice, and refrains from injuring others as he would from mutilating his own members in fear of the inevitable retribution which any provoca tion of evil must reflect upon his own sensa tions, though it traverse the cycles of astron omy before fully re-acting npon his individual | being. He is preparing and cultivating him- j self for other and loftier states. Nay, he is ' daily ascending in the scale of spiritual no- ! bility and power of enjoyment. It is no lottery • of heaven or hell, annihilation or mystery, to i which he looks forward. He knows that in exact proportion to his work to-day will be his advancement to-morrow. He is his own ' maker and his own judge—there he is sure of j justice. He has nothing to support him but 1 his own endeavor after improvement. He has no chance of a short and easy road to Paradise. It is useless to believe all the arti cles of religion ever invented. No set forms of prayer, common or uncommon, no mechan ical church-going devotion will help him one jot. There is no whole duty of man for him. His duty is infinite. His conscience must be satisfied, or peace is hopeless. He must do bis utmost to be happy himself, and to make his fellows happy, or he has done nothing. It is useless to set up a medium standard. Not to do his duty is stupidity and madness, and he knows it. It is useless to flatter himself that he does nothing actually injurious to any one. The sins of omission are virtually sins of commission. The crimes of others are no excuse to him for his want of charity. It is hi3 duty that is his interest—his earthly and eternal interest—to help them onwards. What are the vicious, the vagabonds, the criminals ? Spirits in a less perfect stage of progress than himself at worst. Gaping horror, disgust, and stern revenge (that is, punishment with any but the most loving motives) cannot enter into his calculations. They are foolishness and ignorance. Savage virtue is proud cruelty. It is useless to mur der a murderer without reforming his mind. He may rise again and murder, and be again hung. But once truly tamed and regenerate, and bis purified spirit, here or elsewhere, be ing essentially elevated, will represent so far a diminution of the aggregate evil and suffer ing ot the universe, and a good work will have been accomplished. The real philosopher has a love vast as his thought. No mountain of difficulty deters him from the prosecution of his enterprise. No failure discourages him. He knows that there are no failures in eternity. Sooner or later every seed bears its fruit. He never rails, he never laments. He is strong as he is gentle. All living creatures are his friends, and pain alone is his unconquerable yet ever- defeated foeman! VII. Neither does the wise man repent of sins once past. He will repair them, if possible, by good deeds; but he will not waste life in futile grief for temporary weakness. He knows he must suffer for his aberrations. He would not sin voluntarily. But he is not perfect and never can be, therefore he must sin. That is his nature. He suffers for it, but he regrets not; he hopes and strives. It is idle to grumble over human weakness. It is part of Nature. Man has strength, that is knowledge, enough for his present state, and no more. The spirit of the plant and the in sect have abo their portion. The soul of a planet or a sun-god have likewise their ne cessary potence. The outward form is regu lated by tbe internal force. When a man invents a machine, it is hia spirit that moves its gigantic wheels and levers. If it crush him, it is his thought that crushes him, just as the wild thought of the madman crushes his reasoning faculties with its fell power. Yet ein, and death, and madness, are but passing ideas. They exist, because they are felt to exist. There is space in eternity for unnum bered thoughts, both good and evil. The truly wise and virtuous man is he who takes the most extended view of his relations to other spiritual beings. The man who sim ply seeks his own immediate advantage is on he lowest step of the human ladder. The ^rue poet and philosopher, who has merged the patriot in the cosmopolite, who seeks even in pain itself for the source of joy, whose soul embraces the desire of infinite knowledge and infinite love, has reached apparently the last station upon the highway ol humanity, and capable of imagining, is not improbably upon the verge of becoming a something more than man. VIII. In political science the system of the stu dent enforces Republicanism, glorious and uncompromising Republicanism, as the inev itable result of increasing knowledge. What fleeting cobweb fancies are aristocracies ot birth, royal dynasties, old charters and con stitutions, to an eternal spirit, a pilgrim of the unmeasured vast, a citizen of Nature, a pri mary element of the illimitable existence ! The’lnfinite is itself a Republic 1 F o r t a e H e r a l d of P r o g r e s s . Inquiries Concerning Slave Labor. D es M oines , Iowa, April 9, 1864. A. J. D avis, D e a r S i r : Perhaps it may be truthfully said that observations and facts in political economy establish the assertion that slave labor is more expensive and less profita ble than what is known as free labor. The States of Ohio and Kentucky, lying on differ ent sides of the majestic Ohio river, have been contrasted even by a learned foreigner in his work entitled “ Democracy in America” as supporting this assertion, and we presume throughout the so-called free-labor States it will not be questioned. Taking this assertion as true, does it not inevitably follow that the condition of slave labor is much better for the laborers than tbat of so-called free labor ? By slave laborers we mean those owned, bought, and sold, as the negroes in the Slave States, and all others free laborers. The science of political economy teaches that labor is the real foundation of all wealth. He is the most wealthy who can secure the most of the products of labor. The slave- I owner secures the products of labor by pur chasing and owning his laborers and direct ing their capacities for labor, while in the j free-labor system such products are secured j from the necessities of the laborers to labor and support themselves and families, and from the interest of other laborers not necessitated to labor for support, &c. With the slavehold e r bis slaves constitute apart of his capital, and their increase and products of tbeir labor his profits thereon. Hence it is his direct in terest to secure tbe physical well-being of his slaves,in order to the greater profit iu their increase and production of their labor, and as the death of his slave is generally a loss of) capital, so he will provide against sickness, &c. It may be safely said that the general rule is that slaveholders are directly interested in the physical well-being of their slaves. In the free-labor system the whole field of labor ers may be divided into the two classes we have indicated, viz : lst, laborers from neces sity, aud 2 d, laborers from interest without necessity. The real and substantial products of the second class are small and limited, and the great ocean of wealth, whether held by individual States or otherwise, is the product of the labor of the first, and hence vastly most numerous class. In the free-labor system capitalists make their profits by employing laborers ; and the products of such labor, less the wages paid for it, constitute their profit. The sickness or death of thi3 class of laborers does not affect tbe capital of the capitalist, and hence he i 3 not interested in securing their physical well being as the slaveholder is with his slaves. The larger profits resulting from free labor prove that the free laborers perform more labor or consume less of its products, where fore in two substantial points of view the ad vantage of physical well-being is with the slave over the free laborer, viz: lst, in being better cared for as to his physical well-being, and 2 d, in not being worked so hard, or con suming for his own comfort more of the pro ducts of his labor. Now both these crying evils result from and on the legitimate fruit of the State govern ment, both the United States and the several j States, in upholding rights of property. Thus all property is owned and monopolized by in- ' dividuals and States, present and incoming; as for example, the owner of the land owns the tree growing upon it, and the fruit it produces for all coming time. Thus every child is born dependent as well as helpless, and before it can put forth its hand and partake of any of the bounties of Nature and supply any inborn want , it must be the subject of donation or must labor and earn at the fixed wages, or steal, or rob, no matter what the abundance | is of the article desired. Shall governments be upheld that make slavery preferable to the condition of free labor, uphold and compel both, and lock up Nature’s bounties and sup plies against her children ? Can these evils be cured 3ave by the overthrow of the gods and governments man instituted ? Can other than the laws of Nature, each being left free to judge of such laws without let, be relied upon for full justice to tbe children of men? Yours inquiringly, B. N. Kinyon. P. S. Can other than the laws of Nature, each being left free to judge of such laws without let, be relied upon for full justice to the children of men ? Of course reliance upon the laws of Nature, each being the judge of such laws, is inconsistent with civil govern ment, or the government of States, &c. But can man’s individuality be otherwise respect ed in its fullness ? Can his direct and unqual ified responsibility to his formator or laws of his formation be otherwise established, and the full fruition of his formed existence be obtained? Each appears to be a separate entity with capacities for sociability. Association, however, it seems to me, ought to be upon an equal footing, which cannot be obtained except by leaving each free to act upon his own judgment and im pulses, without hindrance. But it may be replied that, left thus, the strong would op press the weak, &c.; but it must be remem bered such would destroy the proposition itself. The intrinsic goodness of the proposi tion to leave each free, &c., is one thing, and whether it would be practicable or possible is another thing. But we insist that it is not only possible, but practicable. To deny either is to affirm that the formative power and or- dinative plan are imperfect aud the imper fect creature must improve the plan and sup ply its imperfections. To affirm the necessity of civil government or government of States is to affirm that the formative plan of man’s existence is imperfect, and the creature of such imperfection must improve it by super adding civil government. We think man’s end in being placed here upon earth will be best subserved by the strictest adherence to the plan or laws of Nature in his being. 6 F o r th e H e r a ld of P r o g r e s s . Our Foreign Correspondents. W a s h ington C ity , May 14, 1864. Mr. E d i t o r : Having spent some J'ears of my life abroad—ten of them 1 may say in France—I cannot help reading with some de gree of interest, the letters of ‘’ foreign cor respondents” which some of our papers oc casionally contain. Accustomed to view France as a country inhabited by human beings, who have like passions, interests, domestic associations and social ties wilh men anywhere aud every where, and having had personal experience that such is the case, and that the French family circle is one of the happiest, most cor rect and homelike with which I am acquainted, 1 always look with some astonishment at the complete ignorance of France andFrench peo ple, that characterizes nearly every one of these letters from correspondents. Of what do they write? Almost invariably of the demi-monde fas it is called); that is, of the unfortunate women of the French capital ; as if the whole population of the country was to be judged by a few hundred unhappy crea tures ! victims mostly, to, and supported chiefly by, the foreigners! This is no exag geration, as can be shown by the very minute returns made by the French authorities. 1 am aware that foreigners have great diffi culty in getting into French society, yet why disgust the American mind by the constant recital of the same stories of the same little, and (to the French population) almost un known class ? Can our domestic circles gain by such stories ? Would it not be more honest to say nothing about them ? Such letters only show what my own long observation taught me, that most American men make but little effort to see any other class; and thus, wrapped up in and infatuated about them, they see nothing else among the millions of working honest people, but a few dozen pros titutes ! It may be severe to speak thu 3 , but the in jury done by this false representation of a foreign social system, must have it3 immoral influence on the American or any other mind. A reflecting person will see at once the ab surdity of such views of any national life; because where men and women are, there must be found all tbe social ties, all tbe domes tic affections, exemplified in one country as much as in another, and that any difference as between nations of equal social condition can only be in proportions so small as to bave little effect upon statistical returns. Even su icide is governed by natural law, and is al most invariably the same year by year in equal amounts of populations. T 6 ascertain the amount of morality in dif- ereut nations, it is not enough to ask to what systems of religion they belong— the real mode of settling the point is to ascertain what i3 the material condition of the people , and what the nature of tlie laws governing and controlling that condition. Now if in two nations, one possessing a popu lation in a state of serfage or slavery, and tDQ other a population to whom the lind is open for occupation by all, the moral result will fol low, that the latter will possess the best, most independent and self-respecting people. De gradation and misery will stare the traveler in the face in every little village of the first, while prosperity and contentment will every where distinguish the other. Let us take two so-called “ prosperous ” countries and compare them for a moment. In England the land is owned by about 70,000 families, and consequently its pauperism and misery exceed anything an American can con ceive. London alone possesses 80,000 “ un fortunate women,” some authorities say even more! Its towns and its villages even, swarm with them. This arises, not from any innate wickedness in the people, but from their de graded, dependent condition to the “ chivalric ” 70,000. In France, on the other hand, there are 13,- 500,000 owners of land, and consequently, in accordance with law, scarcely any pauperism, no poor laws, and little misery. There is pov erty among old people and orphans; but it is even cheerful, while tbe poverty of England is misery most degraded and sullen. Paris possesses almost exclusively the class called “ unfortunate women,” numbering about 8 , 0 0 0 . London is not ten times larger than Paris ; it is not even twice as large; yet why this dif ference ? If a more liberal religious system could make England better, why is she not so? In France one frequently see3 two villages near together, the one Protestant and prosperous, the other Catholic and apparently asleep. But the same law, above spoken of, makes the same independent, self-respecting, moral people, in both villages. In a material sense, the Pro testant has the advantage, because the popu lation is left more to follow out its instincts of personal interest in whatever comes before it; while the Catholic is constantly embarrassed by the meddling of his “ spiritual adviser,” and is thus thwarted at every turn. For the rule holds good here too, that a fool’s instinct of what lie ought to do for self and family is more sure than the counsel of the wisest and best-intentioned of strangers. Might we not ask our “ foreign correspond ents ” not to expose the society in which they move abroad so openly to the world at home. Talking of “ home,” Mrs. Stowe—even Mrs. Stowe ! thinks that a people wbo have not the barbarous word “ ho-me!” cannot be domes tic! yet even to us, without its associations, what meaning have these four letters ! The French term for home is, really , more intimate; meaning, our own interior or family circle , at or within the house — chez-nous I Com pared with it, what do the letters h-o-m-e mean? This is the other view of the case— and a great deal more might be said. L. The Eight Sort of Religion. Some one whose head is unusually “ level,” has written out his ideas of religion as fol lows. It will do to read and think about: “ We want a religion that goes into a fam ily, and keeps the husband from being spiteful when the dinner is late; keeps the wife from being fretful when the husband tracks the newly-washed floor with his muddy boots, and makes the husband mindful of the scraper and the door-mat; amuses the children as wc- 1 ! ns instructs them; wius as well as gov erns them ; projects the honey-moon into the harvest moon, nnd makes the happy hours lik\ the eastern fig-tree, bearing in its bosom at once the beauty of the tender blossom and the glory of the ripened fruit. We want a re ligion that bears not only on the sinfulness of sin, but on the rascality of lying and steal ing ; a religion that banishes all small meas ures from the counters, small baskets from the stalls, pebbles from the cotton bags, clay from pepper, sand from sugar, chickory from coffee, beet root from vinegar, alum from bread, lard from butter, strychnine from wine, and water from milk cans. “ The religion that is to advance the world will not put all the big strawberries and peaches at the top, and all tbe bad ones at the bottom. It will not offer more baskets of for eign wine3 than the vineyards ever produced bottles. “ The religion that is to sanctify the world pays its debts. It does not consider forty cent3 returned for one hundred given, is ac cording to gospel, if it i 3 according to law. It looks on a man who has failed in trade, and who continues to live in luxury, as a thief, lt looks on a man who promises to pay fifty dollars on demand, with interest, and wbo neglects to pay it ou demand, with or without interest, as a liar.” F o r th e H e r a l d of P r o g r e s s . The Gender of th e H o ly Ghost. B r o t h e r D a v is : I observe in the H e r a l d of May 7th, which has just reached me, a brief criticism on a query which I submitted in Jan. 1868, to Mr Foster, involving an allusion to the sex of the third member of the Christian trinity—the Holy Ghost. The writer labors to show that the application of the masculine pronoun in John x v: 26 to this anoma lous being is ascribable to a mistranslation. If this be true, I suggest that, inasmuch as our most profound scholars have thus utterly fail ed to find or to disclose the real meaning or sense of “ the Holy Scriptures,” our “ Divine Revelations ” must be considered Revelations of darkness, and hence need revealing over again. On the other hand, if commentators and other critics have been gifted with a profund ity of knowledge, intellectual acumen, and moral sense, so far surpassing that of Omnipo tence, as to be able to discover the failure of “ Infinite wisdom ” to make himself under stood (even with the aid of the Holy Ghost) when imparting “ Divine truths essential to man’s salvation,” and have hence been suc cessful in improving upon and correcting the blunder, so as to make the “ Holy Word” more intelligible than he was able to do, then, as a logical necessity, bibles should be thrown aside a3 only calculated to mislead, and commentaries read and studied in their stead. But your correspondent utterly fails to re move the difficulty, and only attempts to take one step in that direction. Conceding to him all the advantages or benefit he can claim by improving upon the passage in question, (John xv’: 26) yet there are other texts in which the masculine sex of this imaginary being is too plainly disclosed to be set aside by any learned ingenuity. In Acts x x v in: 25, it is declared “ Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,” &c. Now here we observe the Holy Ghost possessing the faculty of speech, or if the declaration shall be interpreted as only meaning an elaboration of the prophet’s own inspirational or spiritual powers, then we will quote Acts x x i : 1 1 , “ Thus saith the Holy Ghost, so shall the Jews of Jerusalem bind tbe man,” &c. Now here we observe the Holy Ghost speaking direct, without employ ing any medium. It is a direct, individual, conscious act of a being possessing a mind— an act which no “ it,” no “ neuter gender,” no insensate object could perform—a display of vocal powers possessed only by intelligent beings, which must, necessarily, be either of tbe masculine, or feminine gender. And of course the former, inasmuch as the gods, though often subjugating woman to the pains of parturition in the process of their meta morphosis into the human form, yet seldom honored them by way of requital, by assum ing the peculiar characteristics of their sex. The gods were of the masculine gender. Hence the logical conclusion that the Holy Ghost in the above texts was one of the male sex. And Annanias (see Acts v : 3) is charged with “ lying to the Holy Ghost,” which im plies on the part of the latter the faculties both of hearing and comprehending. Hence there can be no “ it,” or “ neuter gender,” in the case. Other texts might be cited, but as I design soon to transmit for the columns of the H e r a l d a full exposition of tbe history, charac ter, sex, origin, and manifold exploits of this Ghostly member of the “ hypostatic union,” whose history i3 traceable to a very remote an tiquity, and to various oriental countries, I will close by reminding your initial corres pondent, R. G. P., tbat he is essaying to “ be come wise above what is written,” in attempt ing to unsex the Holy Ghost. Yours for the truth on all subjects, H a rv e y s b u r g , Ohio. K. G r a v e s . F o r the H e r a l d of P r o g r e s s . Eaneful Effects of False Doctrines. F r i e n d D a v is : In the early part of the present century there lived in the beautiful town of Chestervillo, Me., a puritanical divine, whose name was Rev. Jotham Sewell, fumiliarly known a3 old Father Sewell,” of whom the records say he preached more than a thousand sermons in said town. He was particularly noted for his eccentricities and soundness of faith in his creeds. Upon one occasion he was called upon, as was the custom, to preach the funeral sermon of an only son of a widow, who was well known for his kindly disposition, sobriety, truthfulness, and in fact, gentlemanly deport ment, moral and upright character, but yet vva3 not a member of his or any other church, nor was his mother, as far as I am aware. The mother felt her loss very severely, and naturally looked to the man of God to give her some consolation in the hour of her trial. In his discourse, they not being of bis church militant, and consequently not of the elect, he said there was not a shadow of a doubt, according to the teachings of the holy Bible, the express word of the living God, and he had not a doubt of it, but that this boy, who was yet bo young, and, as men count goodness, was so good, was eternally damned, into hcll- fire. The mother, upon hearing;iais—her last hope being destroyed—threw up her hands and exclaimed, “ O my God !” and became a ra v i n g m a n iac tbe re3 t of her day3. Providing the one thousand sermons were each, directly or indirectly a s fruitful as this, what will be the summiug up—what will be the record ? How many orthodox prayers did it or will it take to make amends for these long years of earthly bereavement aud anguish of this poor stricken mother? O. W. T r d b F a rm ington, Me. Wiiat if the Clothes take Fire? Perhaps three persons out of four would rush right up to the burning individual and begin to paw with their hands, without any definite aim. It i3 useless to tell the victim to do this or that, or to call for water. In fact, it is generally best to say not a word, but tear up the carpet, or seize a blanket from tbe bed, or a cloak, or any woolen fabric— if none is at hand, take any woolen material— hold the corners as far apart as you can, stretch them out higher than your head, ana running boldly to the person, make the motion of clasping in the arms most about the shoul ders ; this instantly smothers the fire and saves the face; the next instant throw the unfortunate on the floor; this is an additional safety to the face and breath, and any rem nant of flame can be put out more leisurely. The next instant immerse the burned part in cold water, and all pain will cease with tha rapidity of lightning. Next get some com mon flour, remove from the water and cover the burned parts with an inch thickness of the flour if possible. Put the patient to bed and do all that is possible to soothe, until the physician arrives. Let the flower remain until it falls off of itself, when a beautiful new skin will be found. Unless the burns are deep, no other applica tion is needed. The dry flour for burns is the most admirable remedy ever proposed, and the information ought to be imparted to all; the principle of its action is, relief from pain by totally excluding the air from the injured parts. Spanish whiting and cold water of si mushy consistence is preferred by some. Dredge on the flour until no more will stick, and cover with some cotton batting. In washing clothes, use one part of sulphate of ammonia with nine of water; one pouud of tungstate of soda to a gallon of water. Dress es to be starched should have one-third of tungstate and two-thirds of starch. [ H a ll’s Jou r n a l o f Health. On the Road 'to Siberia. The Narodowa Gazette publishes a letter from an Austrian subject who fell into the hands of the Russians, and was sentenced to transportation to Siberia. He states that he has been three months on his journey since he set out from Keiff. The political exiles are chained in batches of six, and are treated as ordinary malefactors. They are locked up at night, twelve together, in a small hue. where they fall asleep with fatigue. They are allowed only three copecks a day to feed themselves, and they would perish of hunger were it not for the Russian peasants, who throw them bread as they pas3 through the villages. The immense steppe 3 through which the prisoners pass are covered with snow, through which they find it difficult to make their way. Their destination is Tobolsk, the capital of Siberia, where they expect to arrive in August. They wade through the snow without the pro tection of strong boots, fur, or warm cloth, and deprived of every refreshing beverage. They still console themselves with the hope that they shall return to their native country. A number of them, nevertheless, drop off and perish in the snow, particularly those who are suffering from wounds. The English Schoolmaster Abroad. The ignorance of this enlightened age is somewhat astounding. Only the other day a zealous antiquary, looking for Dryden’s house, in Fetter Lane, made some inquiry of the po liceman. “Dryden, sir,” said the latter, “Dry- den ? Is he a man a little backward in his rent ?” Less excusable was the observation of an eminent silversmith to a customer, who, admiring some exquisite piece of silver cha- sery, remarked, “ How this would have de lighted C e l l in i !” “ We shall be happy to show it to Mr. Cellini any day he will look in,” was the polite observation, in reply. To ascend in the scale, we may remark that we have heard of a knight, who, on having Run- nymede pointed out to him, looked very un conscious that a landmark of history WAS before him ; but, on being told that it was tho spot where the Barons forced King John to sign Magna Charta, exclaimed, “ Forced His Majesty! did they, indeed ? how very im proper ! “ Let us go a step higher still, and take an illustration from that sprig of nobility, who, having failed in a competitive examina tion, was asked by a good-natured friend how it happened. “ Oh !” said the rejected candi date, “it was all through a fellow who asked me questions I didn’t expect.” _ “ What did he examine you in?” “ Oh! history!” an swered the young aristocrat. “ Ancient or modern ?” exclaimed the youth, with an air of the most intense disgust. “Oh, ever so long before either; time o f William the Conqueror /” [ London A th c n a u m . The Human Eye. The language of the eye is very hard to counterfeit. You can read in the eye of your companion while you talk, whether your ar gument hits him, though his tongue will not confess it. There is a look by which a man shows he is going to say a good thing, and a look when he has said it. Vain and forgotten aro all the fine offices of hospitality, if there be no holiday in the eye. How many furtive invitations are avowed by the eye, though dissembled by the lips. A man comes away from a company; he has heard no important remark, but, if in sympathy with the society he i 3 cognizant of such a stream of life as ha 3 been flowing to him through the eye. There are eyes that give no more admission into them than blue-berries ; others are deep wells that men fall into ; and others are oppressive and devouring, and take too much notice. There are asking and asserting eyes, and prowling eyes, and eyes full of faith—some of good and some of sinister omen.— E m e r s o n .
