for them to be held in that condition. Christianity found Nero exercising the most cruel tyranny at Rome; and it says to the Christians of that city: "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God." Did this prove that the government of Nero was right, and no sin ?

Man. But Christianity gives precepts to masters also; and thus recognizes that relation.

Th. It gives precepts for the treatment of servants. But I do not admit that it therefore recognizes slave-holding as no sin. It says, indeed, "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal; knowing that ye also have a master in heaven." Just and equal; what is that, but a fair equivalent for their service? Can it be just and equal to compel them to labor without wages, and refuse to pay them for their work?

Man. I consider the case of Onesimus as good proof. When Paul sent him back to Philemon, he practically recognized the right of taking up runaway slaves, and sending them back to their masters.

Th. This case seems to be strangely misunderstood. Philemon had embraced the Gospel. His servant Onesimus had run away, apparently in his debt. By the preaching of Paul, Onesimus was converted to Christianity. Paul speaks as if he might have retained him for the service of the Gospel; but he chose to have Philemon do his duty in discharging him, of his own accord, and not by compulsion. He sends him therefore, and exhorts Philemon to receive him, "not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, especially to me; but how much more unto thee." Was that to receive him as a slave? He said, "If thou count me, therefore, a partner, receive him as myself," that is, receive him as a partner, a companion, not as a slave. And he expresses the greatest confidence that he would do his duty in the case: "Having confidence in thy obedience, I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say." If all men, now held as slaves, were treated as Paul asks Onesimus might be, the reproach of slavery would no longer rest upon our country.

Ard. How do you pretend to reconcile slave-holding with our Saviour's golden rule, "Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them; for this is the law and the prophets?"

Man. That means, I suppose, that we should do what is best for others, considering their situation, character, and circumstances. And it is clearly best for most slaves to be kept in that condition; for they cannot take care of themselves.

Ard. They prove that they can, by taking care of themselves and their masters too, in many cases. But that would acknowledge that all who would be better off in freedom should be set free.

Man. I doubt whether any would be better off.

Ard. Suppose you test the sincerity of your principles by changing places with them. Would you be willing to be shut up for a season, and then be sold to the highest bidder? Would you be willing to be chained in a company, and be driven with a whip to the sugar plantations, and there be worked, as those you sell are worked, till they are exhausted, and die? Just put the case to yourself; and put yourself in their place, and see what you ought to do.

Man. 66

fice."

Slavery is the corner-stone of our republican edi

Ard. Out upon such republicanism. The republican edifice erected by our revolutionary fathers, has the contrary as its foundation. They say: "We hold these truths to be selfevident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If these truths are self-evident, in the light of nature, they are equally clear according to the word of God. That affirms that God "hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth." Here, then, we take our stand, with the Bible in one hand, and the declaration of our fathers in the other; and we fearlessly affirm, that every pretended grant of the right of property in human beings, is self-evidently null and void; and every assertion of such a right is usurpation and robbery.

Man. Such declarations are mere rhetorical flourishes. Nobody believed them at the time.

Th. I am not willing to think that it was so. I believe them to be true, according to the natural import of their language, and I honor the patriots who put forth such a declaration before the world; and I think it eminently disgraceful for their posterity to maintain the contrary now.

Man. We must have slaves in our warm regions to perform the labor necessary to support human life. If they were free, they could not be hired to do it, and the land would become desolate.

66

Th. Better so, than live in the continual violation of the laws of God and man. 'Woe unto him that buildeth his house by unrighteousness, and his chambers by wrong; that useth his neighbor's service without wages, and giveth him not for his work." "Rob not the poor because he is poor; neither op

press the afflicted in the gate; for the Lord will plead their cause, and spoil the soul of those that spoiled them." I should suppose you would sometimes think, as Mr. Jefferson, himself a slaveholder, said: I tremble for my country, when I reflect that God is just, and that his justice cannot sleep forever. The Almighty has no attribute which can take sides with us."

CHAPTER LXV.

WHEN the pilgrims had gone a little further, they came opposite a building, over the door of which was the name theatre; and a man came out and invited them to purchase tickets for the evening's performances, which he assured them would be very interesting and amusing.

Ardent. We are travellers, and intend to go on our journey. And besides, we do not attend such places of amusement as the theatre.

Man. Why not? They are very amusing, I can assure you. And a large part of our villagers think so.

Th. What is the object of attending?
Man. The chief object is amusement.

But those who at

tend think it has a tendency to polish the manners, and refine the taste; and that, when well regulated, the stage is a school of good morals.

Th. When well regulated! Is it ever well regulated?

Man. Yes, I hope so. [But the pilgrims observed that he blushed a little, when he said that.]

Th. I cannot speak from experience, for I never witnessed the performances of a theatre. But I have heard about them, and have looked into a few of the plays, enough to satisfy me that I could spend my time better.

Ard. Why are they not always well regulated?

Man. You know we must please our patrons, or we cannot obtain their support. And if we have one sober play which teaches a good lesson, we must have an after-piece which will afford some fun; or else a large part of those who come would not be attracted there.

Th. That is just as I have always understood. There is now and then a play which appears to be intended to inculcate something useful; but seldom does it without such an intermixture of what is bad, that it could scarcely be read in a

So

family circle. And then the after-piece is chosen to suit the taste of those who would not be interested in the other. that, on the whole, the passions are excited, vice is pampered, and mischief is done to the morals of all who attend.

Man. But young people must have some amusement, and what can you find that is better?

Th. Reading useful books-rational conversation-scientific lectures a great variety of things may be mentioned, which would be suited to the capacity of rational beings, and not be a criminal waste of time and money.

Man. Theatrical entertainments are of great antiquity.

Th. Yes; but they have never sustained a good character. They were popular in Greece, but were strongly opposed by her wisest men, as dangerous to morality. They were popular also at Rome; but play-acting was not held in good repute as a profession.

Man. Does not Cicero speak in very high terms of Roscius? Th. He does. And some others also were highly extolled as individuals. But these were the exceptions. The class were reckoned infamous, and were not allowed the rights of citizenship. Even Rousseau, the infidel philosopher, opposed the introduction of the theatre at Geneva, lest it should corrupt the morals of the people.

too.

Man. Your church-going people sometimes go to the theatre

Th. Yes, sometimes; but all suffer in their morals by it; and sometimes lose their character entirely. Indeed I think they must always lose it entirely, if they do not forsake so dangerous a place. The early Christians condemned such entertainments altogether; and the reformed churches of France, Holland, England and Scotland, adopted rules for censuring any of their members who should attend them. Instead of being a school of good morals, the theatre is deservedly reckoned a school of vice, and cannot be rendered otherwise by all the attempts you may make to regulate it.

So the pilgrims went on, and came to buildings which had a sign of horses and carriages to let at all times. As from other places, a man came out from this, and invited them to patronize his establishment.

Ard. Does that clause at all times mean the Sabbath, as well as other days?

Man. Certainly; we keep our shop open on the Sabbath; for we have double the business on that day, that we do on any other.

Ard. The divine law says, "In it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man servant

nor thy maid servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates."

Man. But people need to ride out for their health. Those who are confined by their business all the week, need to ride out into the country on the Sabbath, to breathe the fresh air, and keep from becoming sick by remaining in the confined air of the town all the time.

Th. The blessing of God is necessary to the means of preserving health. And it is not the way to get his blessing, to rob him of what he claims as peculiarly his own, the Sabbath day. You pursue your business on the Sabbath, because you gain more on that day. Another pursues his pleasure on that day because he finds it convenient, and not interfering with his ordinary labors. But I believe you both lose, rather than gain, in the long run, by encroaching on the Sabbath day. Judge Hale, when near the close of a long and busy life, stated it as his deliberate opinion, founded on his experience and observation, that the proper observance of the Sabbath was the best way to secure the success of our worldly business during the week. He says: Always the more closely I applied myself to the duties of the Lord's day, the more happy and successful were my business and employments of the week following. So that I could, from the loose or strict observance of that day, take a just prospect and true calculation of my temporal successes in the ensuing week. Though my hands and mind have been as full of secular business, both before and since I was a judge, as it may be any man's in England, yet I never wanted time in my six days to ripen and fit myself for the business and employments I had to do, though I borrowed not one minute from the Lord's day to prepare for it, by study or otherwise. But on the other hand, if I had at any time borrowed from this day any time for my secular employments, I found it did further me less than if I had let it alone; and therefore when some years experience, after a most attentive and vigilant observation, had given me this instruction, I grew peremptorily resolved never in this kind to make a breach upon the Lord's day."

Man. That is just the contrary to our experience: for our business is the most successful and prosperous on that day.

Th. You have not yet reached the end. God may give you some present success in order to make your future fall more signal. That it will come, sooner or later, if you persevere in violating the Sabbath, there cannot be any doubt; since God has always expressed himself so decidedly opposed to the sin. When he names other sins in general terms, he names this in particular as the great reason why he sent his ancient people