Newspaper Page Text
#nr dEnrrespntonfs.
Forthe Index and Baotistl
Visitors to Onr Pulpits—-The Rev. L. It. Gwalt
ney, of Koine, Georgia.
NO. 111.
The above named brother, honored
and beloved as a model pastor, a de
vout Christian and the tender shepherd
of a faithful flock, spent Sunday, April
9th, in Atlanta. Perhaps, the reverend
gentleman never stood before so large a
congregation as greeted him at the
Second Baptist church on Sabbath
night. The spacious building was
filled completely, and extra'seats pro
vided in the aisles. The sermon was
profoundly interesting.
“If by any means I might attain to
the resurrection of the dead.” Phil,
iii: 11, was the solemn and suggestive
text. “ Will there be a resurrection of
the dead?” These momentous words
were the first of the sermon. Said the
speaker: “ The bare possibility of such
an eveut, is enough to engage the seri
ous attention of every thoughtful man.
The question is often confounded with
another —‘Is the soul immortal ?’ Com
paratively few have doubted this ; all
the reasoning nations of earth testify
to it; and the mighty Cicero, states
man, orator and philosopher, adds his
weighty words to strengthen this be
lief. But, if a man die, shall he live
again ? If the body die—what then ?
Shall it bo reanimated after the long
night of the tomb?” These were the
questions which Mr. Gwaltney seernod
desirous of answering. Our brother
was not unmindful at this point of the
many who doubt the idea of a purified
body rising from the tomb. The au
thorities cited in support of this en
trancing theory of actual resurrection,
were aptly selected. “All that are in
their graves, shall hear the voice of the
Son of Man, and they that hear shall
come forth.” Paul, in speaking of the
judgment by Jesus Christ says, “where
of he hath given assurance unto all
men, in that He hath raised him from
the dead.” “ Why should it be thought
a thing incredible with you, that God
should raise the dead ?”
“ Whence these clear conceptions,
these distinct utterances of tho Bible?
The wiso men of old, while they believed
in the immortality of the soul, had no
correct idea of tlie resurrection of the
body. Whence, then, did the simple
.writers of the Bible, get these views of
the resurrection so distinct, so un
mistakable? There can be but one
answer—they were taught of God, in
spired to reveal this glorious truth.
With Him nothing is impossible. All
arguments, however plausible, against
tho resurrection, are fully answered by
the fact that God has all matter, all force
at His command.”
Probably Mr. Gwaltney supported
the theory of tho resurrection more
strongly from nature’s examples than
in any others. The bursting of morn
ing out of darkness, the joyous sprit%-
time throwing aside the withered em
blems of decay ; tho insect world, many
of whose species are wrapped iu their
tiny charnel houses before emerging,
the beautiful chrysalis that floats in the
summer air—all these striking exam
ples were beautifully portrayed. In
deed, one had but to listen, to feel that
Nature was the grandest proof of
Paul’s doctrine of the corruptible be
coming incorruptible. “ Paul himself
argues from the grain of wheat, ‘ not
quickened except| it dio.’ With God
there is no more difficulty with the
bodies of men, than with the seeds of
the vegetable kingdom. In eaeh, and
by tho same Divine appointment, then
is death and quickening a glorious
transformation.”
The theology of Mr. Gwaltney, as
advanced in this sermon, we deem
strictly orthodox. His views on some
points, may have impressed some as
advanced and startling, possibly, but
those who noticed how closely he clung
to the B'ble as the basis of resurrec
tion doctrine, will sec on what a solid
pillar the wondrous doot.rino is sup
ported. The sermon was comforting.
The promise that these vile bodies shall
be clad in immortality, that our en
raptured souls shall find everlasting
abode in spiritual bodies, fashioned
after Christ himself, was so unfolded to
us that all must have felt now incent
ives to holy life hero below.
So far, we have but briefly hinted at
the leading thoughts of Mr. Gwaltney’s
premises. It was in the latter parts of
the sermon that resurrection was even
more fully shown up in its glorious at
tractiveness. We regret our inability
to lay the sermon complete before the
readers of The Index. These fervent
themes of our holy religion are, perhaps,
not often enough expounded. A re
ligion like ours, that so plainly prom
ises everlasting felicity of soul, and
finally a spiritual body, made radiant
by the touch of Almighty God, should
be so preached that these glorious cli
maxes of Heaven, resurrection and
spiritual bodies, should constantly re
mind us of the reward ahead.
Mr. Gwaltney is an attractive pulpit
speaker; his mauner is easy, yet mod
est and reverential; his ianguago is
chaste, yet easily understood and
strictly English. When we recall this
eloquent and exhaustive sermon, so full
of Christ, and Heaven and resurrec
tion, we do not wonder that the Rome
church love their pastor. Some of Mr.
Gwaltnev’s illustrati >ns were graph,
ic and beautiful. Perhaps we may
THE CHRISTIAN INDEX' AND SOUTHEASTERN BAPTIST.
fittingly close this criticism by the
lines of a gifted poetess quoted in this
sermon. An English nobleman travel
ing in Egypt, found in the closed palm
of a mummy a seed two thousand
yeaft old, this he brought home to
England and planted, and the result
was a beautiful flower peculiar to
Egyptian soil :
“ And will He not who watched the seed,
And kept the life within the shell;
When those He loves are laid to rest,
Watch o’er their buried dust as well.
“ And will He not, from ’neath the sod,
Cause something glorious to arise;
Aye, though it sleep two thousand years,
Yet ail that buried dust shall rise.
“ Just such a face as greets you now,
Just such a form as here we wear;
Only more glorious far will rise,
To meet the Saviour in the air.”
Atlanta, April, 1876. J. B. K.
For the Index and Baptist.!
DRY ROT IN THE CHURCH.
NO. 11.
Decay in a stick of timber begins
ordinarily at the surface, but the pecu
liarity of dry rot is, that the exterior—
all that is visible—looks fair and sound.
Not until the bodily life and substance
is almost, or quite destroyed, is the
mischief apparent to the casual eye.
So, in the church it is sometimes the
case, that while all looks fair, and no
danger is suspected, causes are work
ing secretly which will, if not arrested,
utterly eat out its life, and bring it to
the condition of the church in Sardis —
having a name to live while practically
dead.
One of the indications of dry rot was
pointed out in a former article. Since that
was written, there has appeared in one
of the leading religious journals a con
tribution from the pen of a minister,who
evidently sees danger, and calls atten
tion to it in such forcible style that it
would bo well could the entire article be
reprinted until it had reached every
church in the land whore the described
condition exists. A few sentences
quoted will not be inappropriate here.
“ The controlling idea of a church
does not always appear in its covenant
or manual. In fact there is usually in
a church an unwritten law, and an un
written constitution that are far more
potent than anything formally adopted
and pnblishtd to the world. The cov
enant may say one thing and the whole
temper of the church say another.
Thousands of Christians regard the
church as they do a club
When strangers come among them the
first question is whether they are of the
kind wanted in their circle. If not,
they are left out; not by any rule, or
any church action, but by something
moro potent than either; . . i of
course they can join the church, but
they will not be received into its circle.
The old deacon, who told an unwelcome
applicant that ‘ there was no vacancy
in their church just then,’ was only a
little more frank than usual, and ex
pressed in words what others only feel,
and express in deeds. Of course there
can be no rule excluding undesirable
applicants. Kules of such a nature
would not look well on the bcolc. But
there are more ways than one to Lon
don, and there can be coldness that
shall be harder to lace than the lions in
the Pilgrim’s path. Strangers are
sometimes received into such a circle
after proper probation. After being
kept in the vestibule, and sitting on
back seats, and being looked at through
opera glasses sufficiently long, they are
sometimes gradually taken into social
fellowship. Christian fellowship is not
of much account in such a church. . . .
Such a spirit as this, curses aud blights
many a church. We may call it the
club house theory of church organiza
tion. . . . The members seem to
feet that the church is their own, and
that they have a perfect right to shape
it to their own tastes and use it for
their own advantage
“ But the church is Christ’s, if it be
a church at all. His law is its consti
tution. It exisls by His authority
and for His work. It forfeits its char
te: when it fails to meet its design.- It
is not an organization for mutual ad
miration, or even for mutual comfort
and help alone. Its members have put
themselves under Christ’s law, and
pledged themselves to live for His
kingdom. Then must all God’s chil
dren be welcome as to their Father’s
house, and then all who wish to return
to God, must liud an open door and a
ready welcome.”
The pen of the satirist has often
found employment in showing up the
absurdity and hollowness of the pre
tensions of the would-be exclusives
who assume to rule and lay down the
laws in the reaim of “society.” But
the narrower field of church organiza
tion furnishes many instances not less
deserving of censure, even were they
not (as they undoubtedly are) much
more offensive, and more pernicious in
their effects. How often has it hap
pened that commmercial bankruptcy
hasdisclosed the fact that some haughty
family, who have assumed a patronizing
demeanor toward the supposed poorer
members, have been for yoars living a
life of dishonesty and false pretences,
or perhaps the death of the head of
the family and consequent settling up
of his estate, in like manner tears away
the veil aud lots iu the pitiless light of
day upon many things *hat have been
carefully kept in the dark, lest the as
serted right to hold the keys of the
kingdom of Heaven—to bind aud to
loose—should be contested. Perhaps
it that such examples should
now and then be made, so that attri
tion may be turned to the evil
erating such assumptions iu ca®any
of professed followers of Him w* has
declared that “ one is your Master,
even Christ, and all ye a>-e brethr en.”
For the Index and Baptist.)
WOMAN NOT WANTED AS AN EVANGELIST
IN 01'R CHURCHES.
ni.
When our Lord entered upon His
glorious mission, He found woman
moving in certain spheres and sustain
ing certain relations. Whether He
approved of her situation or not we
have never been informed, but this one
thing we have learned, He left her just
where He found her. He never, in a
solitary instance, summoned her from
one of those spheres, however humble
or exhalted, to work in the boundless
field of missionary enterprise. He
never for a single moment difliurbed
her in the least, or the most important
of the relations she sustained to others,
that she might bear her part efren in
the interest of human salvation. If
He saw her grinding at the mill, work
ing in the field or in the vineyard, or
“plying her evening care” at home,
like a true and “busy housewife,” He
never said to her “Follow Me,” in the
same sense in which He addressed those
words to the sons of Zebedee, when He
wished to “make them fishers of men.”
Why did He thus seemingly ignore her
in the great work of the world’s evan
gelization? Was it because among all
His female disciples there was not one
who had the qualifications that the
calling of the evangelist demanded ?
Was there not at least one who might
have preached the Gospel as successful
ly and acceptably, as any of the women
of our day,who are amongst the noisiest
occupants of the pulpit and the ros
trum ?
In some respects, the literal fol
lower of Jesus, he who sat at His feet,
who looked into His very eyes, who
heard the words that “proceeded from
His gracious lips,” that walked by His
side from place to place, had greatly
the advantage of these who follow Him
altogether Dy faith. Prophets and
kings longed to enjoy the elevating, re
fining, inspiring privilege of diriect,
personal communication with the com
ing Messiah, which was especially re
served for those whose lot was caßt “in
the fullness of time.” Although,* then,
“he is blessed who having not seen yet
believes he who saw as well as be
lieved because he saw, was still more
blessed.
For one to be a successful evangelist
three things are absolutely rguisite :
Knowledge of Ji'SiiS (i faith in
for Him. So it was in the earlLsft JSys"
of Christianity, and so it will be until
“Jesus shall come the second time
without sin unto salvation.” He who
has these grand essentials with’* him,
can go forth and so preach “the un
searchable riches of Christ” that “the
wilderness and the solitary places shall
bo glad thereof, and the desert shall re
joice and blossom as the rose.” Now,
of all our Lord’s female disciples, was
there not one who possessed these ele
ments ? How was it with His mother?
It seems to us that, if ever the church,
amongst all its female members, had
one who was pre-eminently qualified to
preach the Gospel, she was that one.
Look at her unique history. An angel
saluted her as woman had never been
saluted before aud has never been sa
luted since. “Hail thou that art high
ly favored among women,” etc. She
rwas peculiarly honored in giving birth
to the long expected Messiah, Imman
uel, God with us. That wonderful child
instead of being borne away immedi
ately after His birth to His Father’s
court to be reared under the tutilage
of the most exalted intelligences, aud
in constant association with the only
being worthy of His companionship,
was left to the care of a noble but
eaithly, human mother. Under that
mother's care He, like other children,
advanced from infancy to childhood,
from childhood to youth, from youth
to manhood. For thirty years, through
one long generation, He dwelt under
the same roof, partook of the satne
fare, and mingled iu constant, daily in
tercourse with His mother, sisters aud
brethren. Can we suppose, can we
believe, that she who was His compan
ion for so long a time, knew no more
of Him than others ? Did tho apostles
themselves know more of Him than
Mary knew ? Some may think so, be
cause they were inspired men, and we
have their writings, sayings and do
ings, while we have not a solitary letter
from the pen of Mary, aud only a few
sentences from her lips. But in whose
name and by whose authority were they
inspired? The name and authority of
Jesus. What the Holy Spirit commu
nicated to them by the direction of
Christ, they cquimunicated to others.
But in the case of Mary He taught
through His own lips all that He in
tended her to know.
Or must we believe that during all
those years that preceded “His showing
to Israel,” He never taught the loved
ones in that home circle at Nazareth
what He had been, what He was, and
what He would be ? Did He who as
tonished His mother, when twelve years
of age by asking’“Wist ye not that I
must be about my Father’s business,”
ignore that Father’s business, except
in the publicity of the Temple aud in
the midst of the Jewish doctors ? We
cannot believe it; on the contrary, we
are not only inclined but forced to con-
clude that He revealed Him e'f to
His divinely appointed moth rt s He
did not unto the world.” He, like
the other citizens of N- ..th, spend
most of His working . s in the dis
cussion only of the o* nary occurren
ces of His quiet home life ? Were the
weightiest themes that were ever
pressed upon human consideration al
most if not altogether ignored ? Did
He who said “Seek first the Kingdom
of God” seldom if ever speak of that
Kingdom amongst His faimlv and His
friends ? Is it likely that He would
have acted so strangelj of whom it
was said “The zeal of thy house
hath eaten one up? By no means.
We can imagine with how much delight
He explained to the listening family
“the name above every name, that was
given to Him before His wondrous
birth,” with what a beaming counte
nance, and in what inspiring language
He spoke of His pre-existent state, its
happiness, its duration, its glory, when
He thought it not robbery to be equal
with God. We find it too hard to be
lieve that He dwelt for years with those
He came to redeem, and never unfolded
to them the great plan of redemption.
Is it at all probable that He suffered a
thousand opportunities for explaining
to His mother and His brethren the
way by which they, with all other sin
ners, were to be saved, to pass by un
improved ? Is it likely that He never
alluded to the fall of man in the first
and his recovery in the second Adam ?
Must not the all absorbing thought, the
one grand intention of His soul, have
been, at least now and then, the theme
of conversation ? How could a silence
be kept unbroken by such persons,
sustaining such relations to each other,
under such circumstances, for so many
years ? Such a silence would be al
most as mysterious as the incarnation
itself. Now, although we are not in
formed as to what he said and did du
ring the thirty years that He lived at
Nazareth, yet we can readily conceive
in the case of such a being, coming on
such an errand, and living in the midst
of thoso who were to partake of the
blessings He came to bestow, what
would be some of the subjects upon
which He would “speak as man never
spake.” But if He decjjned to con
verse upon some themes that our too
curious minds might select; if He de
clined to expatiate upon His Divinity,
its inconceivable perfections,
to dnve away that impenetrable cloud
of mystery that shrouds its union with
humanity, and to irradiate the thick
darkness that gathers about the inter
mediate state, it was, no doubt, because
a knowledge of these things is not es
sential to salvation. There was one
subject, however, that towered in im
portance rftrraV above all others, that,
we venture to affirm that He never ig
nored —the justification of fallen man.
The question, “How can man be just
with God,” He answered, as neither
priest, nor prophet, nor patriarch, had
ever done. He shed so much light up
on the long hidden path of the prodi
gal’s return to his father’s house that
from that hour ever onward to the end
of time, the wildest prodigal “need not
err therein.” A knowledge of this
path is essential. He who posseses it,
is wiser than all the sages of the
heathen world. Without it who could
proclaim “tho great salvation” to men?
Taught then by a teacher, in whom
even “all the treasures of wisdom aud
knowledge," the mother of Jesus must
have been eminently qualified to preach
the gospel to others. How many in
every age of the church have envied
her the priceless privilege she enjoyed
of learning all that “pertains to life
and salvation from the lips of Him
who was the giver of that life and the
author of that salvation !”
Again, is it required that an evange
list should have strong faith in Christ ?
Who could have had a faith so stroug
as Mary's ? Who has ever had a strong
er faith than hers ? Others might
have doubted if Jesus of Nazareth
really was the Son of God. They saw
so much of the human about Him; they
found Him so much “in fashion like a
man” that they might not have been
altogether satisfied that He was a God.
Mary could not doubt; as well might
she doubt her own existence. For her
to doubt was to utterly ignore her own
consciousness. Was it possible for her
to forget the astounding annunciation,
the mysterious conception and the con
sequent birth of Immanuel? Never,
Nwvre, NEVER! She could, she would
have forgotten anything, everything
else, her name, her tribe, her race, her
lineage, her home, the temple, Jerusa
lem itself—but not these. But be
side these grounds of faith that she
alone had, there were others that she
had in common with J,he rest of the
disciples and with the apostles them
selves. Did they see Him change
the water into wine, heal the sick,
cleanse the leper, cast out devils,
raise the dead? So did she. Did the
the apostles see Him after His resur
rection, and were thus peculiarly quali
fied to preach salvation through a cru
cified, and buried but risen Redeemer ?
So did she. Did these men, “of whom
the world was not worthy,” derive so
strong a faith from what they had seen
and heard that they went forth and
met with unequalled fortitude,Jpersecu
tion and famine, and nakedness, and
perils, and sword,” for tho name of
that Redeemer ? Why, then, did she
whose faith was equal to theirs, not go
forth to the same suffering for the
same name ? Simply because she was
not commissioned to go. They obeyed
their Lord, preaching the gospel and
“turning many from darkness to light.”
She equally obeyed her Son, living
with the beloved disciples, to whose
care that Son had committed her when
dying on the cross.
Must an evangelist love Christ? To
ask this question is to answer it. Ani
mated by this feeling, Stephen, Peter,
Paul, and thousands more have laid
down their lives for Him who laid down
His life for them. But not oue of the
glorious army of martyrs ever loved
like Mary. Her’s was—if I might say
so—a double love: two loves in o"e.
She had the love that all the other dis
ciples felt, and she had her own beside.
John, highly-favored as he was —ner-
mitted to lean upon his Saviour’s
breast, entrusted with that Saviour’s
mother, chosen of all the Apostles to
see in vision “those wonderful things
which must shortly come to pass”—
even John himself did not, could not
love as Mary loved. All that endeared
Him to others endeared Him to her ;
but there was that which endeared Him
to her which endeared Him to no other
—He was her son; she was HU moth
er. Possessed, then, as she must have
been, of knowledge, faith and love, not
only unsurpassed, but unequalled by
those of all the confessors, Apostles
and martyrs of Jesus, who was better
qualified than she to goforth and evan
gelize the world? *Tell us not that she
had no learning, no eloquence, no spe
cial preparation for that work, such as
the Apostles and others had. Knowl
edge, faith and love such as she had
will supply any and every deficiency.
They will loose the tongaeof the dumb
and make it as eloquent as the lips of
Apollos. An evangelist, fully possessed
of these, be he who he may, man, wo
man or child, can accomplish wonders
in the boundless field, “ white already
to harvest.” Had Mary, woman as she
was, merely related what she had seen
and heard, from the visit of Gabriel to
the ascension of Jesus, in the simple
language of the street, the shop, and
the field, “the common people would
have heard her gladly,” and would have
believed in her son as the Saviour of
the world. Aud had she appeared on
some great occasion before the assem
bled wisdom of the Jewish nation, be
fore Scribes, Pharisees and Sadduces,
and related the same story in the sub
lime language of the “magnificat” she
would have “taken with ravishment the
thronging audience,” and woul?l have
achieved one of the crowning victories
of the Cross. But this was not her
work. Mary was not an evangelist.
S.
For tht Index and Baptist |
AN APOLOGY FOB BID SPELLERS.
In The IndRX of the 2Sd of Maych,
I find an editorial headed “ Unweleome
Intelligence.” It stated that one of
the editorial corps recently received a
letter from a young minister, which
clearly evinced his having paid little
attention to Webster, while pursuing
his classical studies. That editor than,
as usual with good spellers, ridicules
the unfortunate blunderer. To this I
enter a solemn protest, though I do
not admit that I wrote the letter in
question; I will admit this, I would
feel guilty if I had recently written to
any of the corps besides that one who
has known my defects in this regard
longer than any man living, and who
has labored more faithfully and more
fruitlessly td correct the errors thau
teacher ever did; I know he has Dot
complained to any of you about the
bad spelliug in my letter.
There is a real philosophy that under
lies this subject, and because I have
suffered so keenly on account of iny
acknowledged defects, I have taken
great pains to learn the source of the
evil, that I might make the correction
there. But when I reached the source
I found that the cause lies beyond the
reach of Webster, and the teacher; and
the rod, cannot make the agencies ef
fective. The disease is not curable, it
is a natural deformity, and can by the
most careful training and patient study
be at best but slightly modified, and
for that purpose, Webster, as a text —
book, fails utterly —as a book of refer
ence alone is it at all valuable.
In this article I desire to set forth as
succinctly as I can the metaphysics of
spelling, so that good speliers mav
learn from it to be charitable, aud bad
spellers may take at least some small
comfort, in the midst of their deep
mortification.
Words are spelled either by sight or
sound. Good spellers spell by sight,
and do so as the result of a native fac
ulty of their minds, which is lacking in
the mind of bad spellers. The good
spellers have the faculty of forming
distinct conceptions of the “ look” of a
word. They see a word that is spelled
wrong, their eyes detect at once that
there is something unusual about it,
and they say “It does not look right,”
they mean, that they have a mental
picture of that word as it is spelled
correctly; they easily and promptly
correct the error. Those less fortu
nately endowed, have no conception of
the look of a word, they remember
only the sounds, and in English spelling
tho sound is a very unsafe guide.
Such unfortunate people are, hence,
compelled to ltarn the order in which
the letters come in the word, by rote,
and that not the sound of the letters
(for that won and be confusion itself,) but
their alphabetical names. This is a
task ten times more difficult than that
of merely fixing the form of the word
itself on the mind; such people
do well to study comparative philol
ogy and the rules for spelling. A
knowledge of these subjects enable
the student to make the spelling when
he does not know it; but, even here,
he finds but an imperfect remedy, be
cause of the great number of exeptions.
These exceptions must be laboriously
learned one by one, and if he spell them
wrong good spellers must be charitable.
My own experience in learning to read
English, Latin, Greek and French, t o nts
directly to the position I here assume.
I have never seen an attempt to explain
this subject. The educated world gen
erally condemn, utterly, bad spelling,
but is it fair for those who have eyes
to laugh at the blind ? No more is it
for those who have learned to spell,
without trouble, to deride those who
have labored twice as hard, and yet
have acquired less. Be charitable, 0,
ye good spellers to your bad spellers,
for I am One of Them.
For the Index and Baptist.]
Sunday-School Work iu the Georgia and Wash
ington Associations.
It would consume entirely too much
space in The Index, to give a detailed
account of the work done at twenty
churches, but I cannot refrain from
giving an outline of the tour recently
made by brother Fish and myself,
through the above-named Associa
tions :
We commenced at Greensboro’,
where I always love to go, and where
I always receive a cordial welcome
from pastor, Superintendent and
friends, Thursday night, March
9th, and closed at Sandersville. on Sun
day night, the 26th.
The churches visited, besides those
mentioned, were Union Point, Penfield,
Bairdstown, Carter’s Grove, Sardis,
Washington, Rehoboth, Hephzibah,
Lincolnton, Greenwood, Flint Hill,
Thomson, Warrenton, Elim, Pow°lton,
Jewell’s Mills, Mineral Springs and
Union.
In connection with this trip, I desire
to say the following things :
1. An earnest and increasing inter
est in the Sunday-school work was
manifested almost everywhere, as was
evident from the large congregations,
and the readiness with which names
were enrolled as teachers and scholars.
At eleven churches, three hundred and
sixty-nine .new teachers and scholars
have been enlisted in the cause, and
have promised to attend unless provi
dentially prevented.
2. Of the schools organized by me
a year ago, only one went into “winter
quarters,” and that, only, for a short
time. In these churches a revival
spirit has been felt nearly all the time,
and the zeal of the members greatly in
creased. ' - . ~‘
3. Nearly every one of the twenty
churches visited, on this trip, cheer
fully made contributions to the Sun
day-School work, and some of them
gave liberally. One brother com
plained that an opportunity was not
given to his church to contribute.
4. The conventions and mass-meet
ings at Penfield, Thomson and Sanders
ville, were peculiarly interesting. From
the first named place, a number of let
ters have been received, of the most
gratifying character. Brother San
tord, the worthy Superintendent, will
be delighted when he hears that one
little girl, at least, dates her convic
tion and conversion from our meeting
then. We have heard of conversions
at other places. We have surely had
a more delightful institute than that
at Sandersville, and we seldom find
more earnest brethren than Duggan
and Medlock, the officer's of this Sun
day-school. The largest contribution
was made at Sandersville. A precious
meeting was eujoyed at Thompson,
but I regret to say that no letter has
been received from there.
5. The largest numbers organized
into any one school was at Union,
where ninety were enrolled. A letter
from brother Pounds informs us that
since we left, the school has run up to
over a hundred.
If time and space would permit, I
would be glad to speak of all the
churches visited, and of the manv
pleasant scenes witnessed, and of the
many acts of kindness received at the
hands of the dear brethren. Brother
Fish and I agree that we have seldom,
if ever, accomplished more in the same
length of time.
Before closing, I feel that I ought
to call special attention to the work
done by brother J. A. Shank, at Flint
Hill and other places. For a year he
has devoted all the time he could
spare, from other duties, to the Sunday
school work, and his labors have been
crowned with great success. Flint
Hill stands as a monument to his
Christian zeal and fidelity.
Nor can I refrain from giving a
public expression of gratitude to broth
er Fish, for the invaluable service ren
dered by him, and which was so high
ly appreciated by the brethren every
where.
I desire to say to my correspondents,
old and young, that their letters shall
be answered as soon as possible.
T. C. B.
Ex-Pkesident Jefferson Davis
will sail for Europeon the Ist of May;
He will pass some six or eight months
in London and on the Continent, to
promote the establishment of a direct
trade with the cities of the Mississippi
Valley. <