itself. It is written, "All that a man hath will he give for his life," and yet many a man gladly dies to escape

the horrors of such an existence.

CHAPTER VIII.

"Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer."

HATRED.

Love and hate are the opposites of each other. The precepts of the moral law are contrary to the natural inclinations of mankind, which are quick to indulge in retaliation for injuries received. Savage tribes cherish hatred and resentment toward their enemies, and transmit them as legacies to their children, but the moral law teaches a very different doctrine. It is written, "Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.” There is no doctrine that is taught in the moral code that is so difficult to reduce to practice as the forgiveness of injuries. It is hard to overcome our natural inclination to retaliate, especially when we have received the impression that it is creditable and noble to indulge our resentments.

and

Manliness.—A young man once received an insult from a companion, and was determined upon revenge.

His

Why are so many murderers detected? Why do men frequently surrender themselves to justice?

What is the text? To what are the preWhat does the moral law say we shall do even Why is it difficult to forgive an enemy? Give

What is the subject of Chapter VIII? cepts of the moral law contrary? to our enemies? Repeat the text. the anecdote.

father tried to soothe his feelings and dissuade him from doing wrong, when he exclaimed, "Why, father, it is unmanly not to resent it.” "Ah, my son," the father replied, "it may be manly to resent it, but it would be godlike to forgive it."

Self-control.-If hatred is murder, if the moral quality of the action may be found in the intention, then it is our duty to study the moral character of our intentions before we carry them into practice. If we acquire the habit of coolly reflecting upon the moral qualities of our feelings and desires, our conscience will not disturb us with vain regrets for wrongs, committed, when it is too late to remedy them.

Indications of hatred.-There are certain indications of character, upon which the young should reflect, before they become fixed habits of life. Those who would avoid the feeling, and finally the habits, of hate, should cultivate the language of gentleness and kindness. It is written, "A soft answer turneth away wrath: but grievous words stir up anger." This proverb is confirmed by the experience and observation of every one. It is only necessary to brood over our annoyances and talk about them, until we work ourselves into an ungovernable anger. Oftentimes our intense feeling is manifested by the loud tone and the high key in which we express our thoughts. An angry, passionate man almost always speaks in a noisy, boisterous manner, and the character, of his tone serves to increase his excitement.

Under such circumstances, persons have the greatest need to watch themselves, as it is written, "Whoso keepeth his mouth and his tongue, keepeth his soul from troubles."

What did the father mean by saying it would be godlike to forgive? If hatred is murder, what is our duty? What habit should we acquire in this connection? What is one of the indications of hatred? What is the effect of a soft answer? What of grievous words? How do we know these effects? How are the feelings indicated? What does the text say will keep a man from troubles?

If we would learn to control our passions, we must commence with bridling our tongue. It is a "little member,” but is capable both of inflaming our own hearts, and stirring up strife in the hearts of our enemies.

Weapons. Next to the evil influence of an unruly tongue in stimulating murderous designs is the habit of carrying deadly weapons and practicing with them. It is not an uncommon thing for young men and boys to carry knives, pistols, slung-shots, and other death-dealing instruments. What a fearful account must they render who cherish hatred, who encourage strife and coolly deliberate upon the taking of life by practicing for the consummation of the mischief.

It is not strange that a savage, who does not recognize and is not governed by high moral obligations, should continually practice with his weapons, in order to preserve his life and punish his enemy. Nor is it surprising that a soldier, whose trade is to kill, should be so employed; but for a citizen in an enlightened land, under ordinary circumstances, to carry concealed weapons, is a confession of weakness and cowardice of which no truly brave person can be guilty. It leads also to the violation of the civil law, for when a person has prepared himself for a deadly conflict, when his heart is set on it, when the murderous intent is in his words and actions, it is but a short step to the taking of life.

A murderer's testimony.-There is a fearful warning in the following, from the confession of Jeremiah Bailey, who was executed in New Jersey. He said, "To the men,

What is an important step toward the control of our passions? What is the meaning of "bridling the tongue?" Name another indication of hatred. What is the difference between a savage and a man in civil society carrying weapons? Why is the carrying of weapons a sign of cowardice? What does the carrying of weapons often result in? Give the experience of Jeremiah Bailey. If a man's life or property is threatened, may he carry arms for his protection?

and particularly the young men and boys, I would say a few farewell words. I am on the scaffold, about to be launched into the other world. What has brought me to this? Let me tell you, and let these words ring forever in your ears. It was whisky and the carrying of fire-arms. Whisky and the bearing of pistols have ruined me. If you do not want them to ruin you, if you do not want to be imprisoned, and in the end brought to the scaffold, don't drink liquor, do n't carry fire-arms. Boys do n't keep bad company." The moral law says, "Wisdom is better than weapons of war." "Her ways are ways of pleasantness, and all her paths are peace."

The duel.-Several hundred years ago, it was the law in many countries of Europe, that under certain conditions, one of the parties in a controversy should challenge the other to deadly combat, in order to ascertain which was right. It was an age of bigotry and barbarism, when it was supposed that God would give the victory in a battle to the one whose cause He approved. If one of the parties was a woman, a priest, or a cripple, he or she had a right to select a champion who could fill the place.

This appeal to God to defend the cause of innocence and truth was found to be an impious mockery of justice. God does not defend the right in any such way, and good men began to doubt the wisdom of settling controversies in so barbarous a fashion. But it was the custom of the age to carry weapons, and men, heated by passion and stimulated by false ideas of honor, were unwilling to relinquish this method of settling their quarrels, although the church had declared it wrong, and the courts had decided against its permission.

At first, the "Code of Honor," as it was called, required the strictest observance of fairness between the parties to

What were the causes that ruined Jeremiah Bailey? What does the moral law teach? What is a duel? Give the brief history of dueling. What is meant by the "Code of Honor "?

the fight, but men soon lost sight of this and became professed duelists, who would give insults without cause, and then, by their superior skill, kill their adversaries without compunction. This misnamed "Code of Honor" is one of the "relics of barbarism" which all wise and good men condemn. It is contrary to the moral law and the laws of our land, and should always be mentioned with abhor

rence.

The apology and satisfaction.-—But what amends shall we make to our brother, when by accident or design we violate his rights? Do precisely as we would that he should do to us. A story is told of General Washington which illustrates the duty suggested by the above question.

Anecdote.-A company of gentlemen was assembled, among whom were General Washington and Colonel Payne. Some subject arose which caused considerable discussion. The difference of opinion was so decided, that in the warmth of the debate, the General, departing from his usual manner, applied some offensive epithet to Colonel Payne. This so incensed him that he sprang to his feet in an instant, and struck the General so violently as to knock him down. At this, the others interfered and prevented further difficulty. It was the custom at that time among gentlemen, that when an offense was taken, the party offended sent a challenge to the offender to fight a duel. As the General had received a blow, it was supposed by his friends that he would challenge Colonel Payne to meet him with deadly weapons and wipe out the insult in blood.

He disappointed them. Meeting Colonel Payne shortly after, he advanced toward him with extended hand and said, "Colonel Payne, I used language to you that was un

Why did men become professed duelists? Why was this code misnamed? Why should good men condemn dueling? What shall we do when we violate the rights of our neighbor? What is the anecdote of General Washington? Did Colonel Payne do right? In what did he do wrong? In what did Washington do right? In what did he do wrong? Is it manly to make acknowledgments?

M. M.-4