Newspaper Page Text
4
©he ©hrifitian in flex
Published Every Thursday at b~’,i 8. Broad
Street, Atlanta. Ga.
TAMPERING WITH THE MAIL.
We were informed, by our repre
sentative Rev. James F. Edens, just
as we went to press last week that
he spent Saturday before, at Jones
boro, in the interest of the Index.
On arriving there he found our sub
scribers nearly, or all quite indig
nant, that, their Inekx of November
3rd. had a large two page political
circular, folded inside their Index-
The circular, was full of reading
matter intended to reflect upon Con
gressman, L. F. Livingston, with a
view to causing the readers of the
Index, at Jonesboro to vote against
him, for reelection to Congress. Bro
her Edens very properly assured,
our subscribers that we certainly
knew nothing of the circular being
folded in the Index.
We promptly wrote the Postmas
ter at Jonesboro, giving him the
facts as given us by Brother Edens-
He has not deigned to answer.
We will say that no such circular
was folded in the Index, when it
left this office as it was mailed by
the nephew of the proprietor, and
by him delivered to the postoffice
in Atlanta. There are two bundles
of Indexcs mailed to Jonesboro.
These bundles were opened either
in the postofficc in Atlanta or Jones
boro, or in transit from Atlanta to
Jonesboro. The Index force knew
nothing of the circular till informed
by Brother Edens. It was a dastard
ly piece of work, but accomplished
nothing to the perpetrators. If we
can find out who did it, the penalty
of the law will be asked.
One of our Baptist papers refers,
to a certain minister as “coming
down” when he consented to become
the governor of his State. Never
theless he was rewarded for so com
ing down with the honor of the vice
presidency of the Southern Baptist
Convention.
Really, is it not time to seriously
consider whether we do the best
thing in airing denominational pride
in electing men to ecclesiastical
positions because of their civil or
political prominence? Just here we
turn in disgust from the following
statement in the Standard:
“Dr. P. S. Henson and Hon. John
Wanamaker became friends about
thirty years ago in Philadelphia ami
this friendship has been growing
unto the present time. JXIr. Wana
maker attended the First church
last Sunday morning and assisted
Dr. Henson in the services, and
many were those who were pleased
to welcome him at the close of the
service.”
If Mr. Wanamaker had not been
the Postmaster General, does any one
believe this would have occurred ?
It was the Sunday before the elec
tion !
Referring to special collection for
die centennial fund in a certain
church, the Baptist and Reflector
says:
“Whatever may be said about this
church, it can not be said it is not
generous when it comes to giving to
the Lord.”
The sum realized was about 87,-
000, given after addresses and ap
peals by several of the ablest minis
ters in the denomination. We believe
the church in question has the largest
membership of any church in the
Southern Convention, and we are
informed that several millionaires
arc on its roll. The aggregate
wealth of the membership must bo
at least 810,000,000. Seven thous
and dollars is less than one-four
teenth of one per centum on that
sum ! The large amounts given by
large and rich churches are not in
proportion to the less-heralded con
tributions of their smaller and poor
er sisters. We know a town church,
the aggregate posessions of whose
members will not reach 8250,000,
that will give proportionately five
times as much as the rich church
referred to.
Here is one editorial paragraph
from the Western Recorder, to
which we can heartily say amen :
“It seems strange to see much in
dignation expressed that at the “Con
vocation of Canterbury,” a sort of
Episcopal General Assembly, in Ixm
don all the “service” was in Latin.
To be sure, that has always been a
great point with Protestants against
Catholics. But Protestant churches
which allow choirs or soloists to give
performances in their worship in
which the words cannot be beard
are just as certainly violating the
command against using an unknown
tongue in worship. A sense of
shame should keep them from say
ing a thing against the use of the
Latin.”
THE THEATRE.
A troubled correspon dent desire 8
the opinion of The Index on this
question : “Is not a Baptist pastor
and his church acting with inconsis
tency when they spend their even
ings at theatres?” Our correspon
dent adds:
“I hope God will give you power
to answer the above question so that
it will reach the heart of every
reader of the Index, who is at fault
in this matter.”
We give our answer in the editor
ial columns, rather than in the de
partment of “Asked and Answered.”
We know very little about the thea
tre and theatre-going, and what we
do know is not favorable to the insti
tion. It has always been condemn
ed as immoral in its tendencies by
the great mass of earnest pious
Christians, and our experience sanc
tions the condemnation. We have
never found those church members
who habitually attended the theatre,
the ball room, and like places, among
real religious forces of the congre
gations to which we have ministered
as pastor. They have not been the
prayer-meeting members of the
churches.
Those who know most of the
theatre do not urge that it is a mor
al institution. Indeed the apologists
for it are not usually noted for their
interest in the moral welfare of the
community. Before us lies an arti
cle from the pen of the late distin
guished Rev. J. B. Jeter, D. D., per
haps the most judicious and wisest
of our Baptist leaders fifteen or
twenty years ago, in which he says;
“I was acquainted with the late Mrs.
W. F. Richie, previously Mrs.
Mowatt, herself an actress of high
character and of no mean abilities.
She informed me that when she was
in England, she spent some weeks in
the family of McCready, the most
celebrated tragedian of his age, and
among the most gifted of any age.
He had a large family of daughters,
beautifnl, cultivated, refined and in
teresting. She stated, all uncon
scious of the bearing of her testi
mony on the moral influence of the
theatre, that he would not allow his
daughters to attend it. He permitt
ed each one, as she attained a cer
tain age, to go once to it, that she
might have some knowledge of its
mysteries; but she must never go
again.”
The testimony is conclusive. If
any man understood the influence of
the theatre McCready did. He pos
sessed eminent abilities, and had am
ple opportunities to learn all the se
crets and tendencies of theatrical
entertainments. His opinion was
formed under no bias against thea
tres. He was indebted to them for
his wealth, his reputation, his influ
ence. Ho was the prince of the stage,
admired and honored wherever he
appeared. Yet this eminent trage
dian forbade his daughters to attend
the theatre, even when he was the
star actor. Why did he do it? Sure
ly because he knew it was no fit
place for refined and modest ladies.
There they are liable to hear jests
and innuendoes, and to see sights,
from which maiden eyes should be
averted. The case is clear that Mc-
Cready considered that the instruc
tion and amusement afforded by the
drama would not compensate for the
evil influences of attendance on the
threatre. If that was true of the
attendance on the theatres where
McCready was the presiding genius,
how much more obviously must it be
true of theatres designed tc minister
to the tastes and satisfy the demands
of the vulgar and the vicious?
Similar testimony has been borne
by the Rev. Dr. Lorimer, once an ac
tor, but for many years now an emi
nent Baptist minister. We have
heard him say that from his personal
knowledge of the theatre he consid
ered it no place for Christians. And
Mary Anderson, one of the best and
purest of the later actresses, in bid
ding farewell to the stage, declared
that its morals were such as to make
her turn from it in disgust. It is
common for the theatre apologist to
say that ministers and others who de
nounce the theatre know nothing of
that they condemn. But the testi
mony we have given is that of those
who do know. Indeced is it not
possible to know considerable about
the influence of the stage without
frequent attendance ? Is it necessa
ry to read many French novels to
know their stain upon the heart? Is
it not more probable that Christians
of a high standard of thought and
life, who avoid the theatre, may be
able to discover its effects upon its
votaries more speedily than the vic
tims themselves? A deterioration
of mind and heart creates a moral
blindness in the man himself.
A well known novelist makes one
THE CHRISTIAN INDEX: THURSDAY. NOVEMBER 17. 1892.
of his characters say: “I doubt if
the theatre is a factor in civilization
among us. I dare say it does not
deprave a great deal, but from what
I have seen of it, I should say that
it was intellectually degrading!” Can
a Baptist pastor and his church—can
any Christian—consistently patronize
an amusement so characterized by
one who was himself a distinguished
actor? A certain magazine editor
who has been persistent in his efforts
to popularize the theatre, says: “The
fact is the modern stage is probably
a little worse, and certainly no bet
ter, than its condemnors have any
idea of.” How charming is the inno
cence of the apologist who charges
the opposition to the theatre to the
lack of knowledge! A converted
actor once said to Dr. Cuyler, as he
was passing a theatre in which he
had often performed: “Behind these
curtains lies Sodom.” We do not
affirm that every popular play is im
moral, or that every performer is
impure, or that every theatre-goer is
on the scent for sensual excitement
But the stage is to be estimated as a
totality ; and the whole trend of the
American stage is hostile to heart
purity. The claimed exceptions on
ly confirm the rule. Even the most
honest attempts to bring the stage up
to a high standard of moral purity
have utterly failed. The chief ob
ject of the manager is to make
money; and if he can spice his even
ing’s entertainment with a plot that
turns on a seduction, or a scene of
sensual passion, or with a salacious
exposure of physical beauty, the
temptation is too strong to be often
resisted. You must take the aver
age theatre as it is, and not as you
would like to have it. It is an insti
tution which, if you patronize, you
become morally responsible for, as
much as if you patronize a public
library or a public drinking saloon.
As an institution it habitually un
sexes woman by parading her before
a mixed assembly in man’s attire.
'Too often it exposes her in such a
pitiable scantiness of any attire at all
that, if you saw your own sister in
such a plight, you would turn your
eyes away in horror. Yet some pro
fessing Christians pay their money to
somebody else’s sisters and daugh
ters to violate womanly delicacy for
their entertainment! They who
habitually attend the theatre cannot
evade, in the sight of God, their ac
countability for its immoral influence!
We are responsible for all the en
couragement we give to an institu
tion which, confessedly, robs hearts
of their {purity and degrades the
soul,
Wo have space barely to allude to
the influence of the stage upon the
actors themselve. The editor of the
London Punch, a man thoroughly
familiar with his subject, says that
“life behind the scenes is well-nigh
fatal [to modesty, purity, and all
nobler life.” Every generous, espe
cially every Christian, heart should
put aside a pleasure which begets
such evils as those who know declare
almost necessarily follow the pro
fession. How can one who feels any
touch of Christ’s spirit, advocate or
encourage an amusement which so
invariably defiles its employes ? Does
one say “reform the stage?” Im
possible. He who so hopes or at
tempts shall be like Locke's rustic
waiting on the bank till the river has
run past.
The Western Recorder has this
paragraph in its issue of last week;
“The Brittish Baptists have se
cured $460,000 of the proposed
$500,000 they were to raise during
the Centennial year. Baptists in the
South are far more numerous and
have much more money than Bap
tists in Great Brittain. There ought,
therefore, to bo no serious difficulty
in securing our Centennial Fund.”
It was only a little while ago that
our Louisville brother was energeti
cally denouncing those same British
Baptists as too “unsound” to be
worthy of being called Baptists!
The Baptist and Reflector thinks
that “baptized for the dead” refers
to the “baptism of a live person in
the behalf of one dying unbaptized!”
Though this interpretation is held
by many eminent exegetes, in our
opinion it is really too absurd to be
entertained for a moment. The
Greek “htipcr” does not necessarily
mean “in behalf of.” See John 11
4 ; Rom. 9 :27 ; 16 :9 ; 2 Cor. 1 ;
8 ; 8 :28 ; 2 Thes. 2 :1 ; Philemon
16, 3nd elsewhere.
In his verses on “Providence,”
George Herbert speaks of “appoint
ment” and permission” as “the right
hand and left hand” of God, and
argues, since “nothing escapes them
both,” that, by the one or the other,
God “lays hands on all things.” The
imago is not without poetry and not
without truth.
PEACE AND THE MINISTRY.
The apostle taught believers at
Philippi that a spirit of love with a
consequent life of peace, that free
dom from murmurings and disput.
ings as the issue of sincere mutual
affection, was necessary to their use
fulness as Christians and to their
growth as a church. He taught
them this truth in a very emphatic
way. He dragged his own ministry
into it. He told them that even this
ministry among them would be of
no avail, if they indulged the unlov
ing and unlovely spirit of conten
tion. He was an apostle; he was
endowed with inspiration; he was
chief of the apostles; his inspiration
was of the foremost type and degree;
and yet if they lived at variance
among themselves, his service in
their midst would go for nothing;
he could not rejoiee in the day of
Christ that when he came to them
he had not run in vain and while he
tarried with them he had not labor
ed in vain. No. By reason of
their strife, vain would the running,
his running, prove to be, and vain
the laboring, his laboring ? How
much less, then, could inferior men
hope to run and labor with ef
fect ?
We are thus presented with a
truth of momentous significance.
While a church suffers divisions and
disputesto mark the course of events
in her history,she can derive no profit
from ail the gifts and all the toils of
God’s servants in the ministry. So
long as strifes spring up within her
pale, as rank weeds overgrowing a
neglected garden, just so long elo
quence, energy, zeal, learning, tact
patience, Godliness, prayer, expend
ed in her service, are as water spill
ed upon the ground. One minister
may be dismissed and another in
stalled but the same blight and bar
renness will hang darkly around the
efforts of both. It is not in accor
dance with the purpose of God that
a people should prosper while this
spirit rules, and they will not, can
not. If their breaches are not heal
ed, if the voice of strife cease not
from their midst, if they come not
together again after all their divi
sions, a Hall, a Fuller, a Wayland,
a Spurgeon, nay a Peter, a John, a
Paul, cannot suflice to stay the dead
ly tide that sweeps their strength
and prosperity from them. Pauls
says so asregards himself,and therein
says so as regards the rest.
And this is the fruit of their own
doings. It is they themselves that
take the blessings out of the minis
try as a means of grace. Theirs is the
guilt of rendering [the ministrations
of the pulpit ineffectual, of deplet
ing or dispersing a congregation, of
estranging or embittering a com
munion, of changing a garden of the
Lord into a waste or a desert. It is
through their own agency that they
are weakened, and humbled, and
shamed, and brought down into the
dust, and trodden under. The Spir
it of God and the spirit of Belial can
not possess and cultivate the same
vineyard ; the dove and the vulture
cannot nestle on the same bosom;
and those who throw open their
doors to the lovelessness of murmur
ings and disputings, must see love
going forth with all fruits of good to
the souls of men and all power of
the truth which come only through
love.
What a strange reversal of all
church functions this want of love
and peace draws after it! She dis
misses a pastor-—dismisses him in
bitter mood ; but it may be that
even her highest kindliness and
grace could not do him a more kind
ly and gracious act, so far as re
gards its results ; she may be dis
missing him from a barren to a fruit
ful field—from a people whose
strife must make his ministry unsuc
cessful, to a loving people where it
shall never lack sheaves of joyous in
gathering, so she may install another
pastor, and smiles and songs may
mark the installation; but it may
prove the worst thing that she
could do toward him. Call that
minister unfortunate who has been
denied the advantage of a libera]
education. Call that minister unfor
tunate whose pecuniary embarrass
ments weigh down to the dust. Call
that minister unfortunate whose en
ergies are crippled, whose labors in
terrupted by disease. Call that min
ister unfortunate the partner of
whose bosom is to him (as Adam
Clarke phrases it) “a mainspring of
discouragement.” These are unfor
tunate, miserably so; but trebly un
fortunate is this minister who has
consented to the service of a divid
ed people. He goes where there
shall be appointed to him “daily
heart-sore sighs and nightly tears.”
He goes where he shall see slight
fruit of his labor and enjoy but faint
hope of his reward. He goes where
faults not his own shall rise up
against him; where his own heart
may cease for a season to be his
chief bane, but there shall be huge
mischief for him in the hearts of
others ; where no one may be his
enemy in intention, and yet no one
his friend in the effect of character
and conduct. He goes to what may
be the keenest disappointment and
the greatest trouble of his life. Alas,
that a church of the loving Savior
should by its unlovingness prove
such an instrument of hurt and
wounding where it means not so!
Oh, let us all everywhere bring back
love and peace to the pews, that we
may bring back to the pulpit the
power that saves and comforts—that
power of Christ’s truth which is the
power of Christ.
Dr. Hale, in his Atlantic articles
on “A mew England Boyhood,” says
that in his boyhood a Sunday-school
was a very different thing from wnat
it is now. “Then you were expect
ed to learn something and you did.”
He adds that much of his knowl
edge of the scriptural history
was acquired in the Brattle
Street Sunday-school before he was
thirteen years old. The writer is a
much younger man than Dr. Hale,
but he is old enough to have recol
lections of a time when the average
boy acquired in the Sunday-school
much more abundant and accurate
knowledge of the Scripture than to
day. It is high time that the meth
ods of Sunday-school instruction
were changed so as to secure better
results.—The Morning Star, Bos
ton.
True. This scribe adds his testi
mony to the truth of the foregoing
statements, both as to his observa
tion of the results of much Sunday
school work of the present day, and
as to personal experience.
Causes.
1. Too many lesson papers, and
too little Bible.
2. Want of real earnesthearted
ness among superintendents and
teachers.
Too much levity, too little serious
ness.
3. Parents have, in too many
cases, turned their home obligations
over to the Sunday-school.
There is very little down-right
Bible study done at home under the
guidance of mothers and fathers,
specially fathers.
It is, indeed, high time for a
change.
The Presbyterian has the follow
ing admirable paragraph about Mrs.
Spurgeon. Let those who have
been bereaved learn from its perus
al how to make good use of afflic
tion also how best to honor the dead
and to perpetuate their influence on
the world. All we can do for our
dead is to bury them. When that
is done, let us give our time and at
tention to the living.
By so doing we may benefit them
and mitigate our own sorrows.
Mrs Spurgeon is no recluse. She
does not selfishly nurse her grief,
nor make a luxury of her affliction.
She finds that she best honors her
husband, as well as her Master, by
carrying on the work to which Mr.
Spurgeon so heartily and fully de
voted himself. She puts her soul
and prayer into the doctrines which
he preached and into the enterprises
which he started and fostered. She
is especially interested in helping
preachers of slender means, and
finds ways and means of placing
in their hands serviceable books.
She does what she can to perpetuate
Mr. Spurgeon's influence by circulat
ing his addresses. Thirty-five thou
sand of the most important of them
she has recently distributed through
the generosity of a friend. Thus
she obtains cheer and comfort under
her bereavement, as well as does
good. Those who brood over their
troubles and shut themselves out
from Christian activity, not only
fail in duty, but miss much joy and
consolation. Bereavement is best
sustained by getting out of self into
others, by laboring for Christ as Ho
indicates, and by carrying sunshine
into society through Gospel minis
tries.”
*‘A MADMAN'S ORIME.”
This is the flaring headline, with
which a prominent Georgia daily
calls attention to the act of a gentle
man, who “lost his mind” and in
that state attempted to kill several
members of his family. We wonder
what kind of a treatise on Ethics
that paper would write, if its hand
were turned to work in this line.
“Crime” is a violation of law human
or divine; but neither God nor man
has a law holding the “madman” to
moral responsibility, seeing the mad
man has no power to recognize the
distinction between right and wrong
in morals ; and therefore, since there
is no law for the “madman,” there
can be ny “crime” in him. But the
headline in question directly contra
dicts this position, and to preserve
its own consistency, that paper must
teach the monstrous doctrine that
divine and human law bind and
should bind those who have lost the
light of reason with the obligation of
their precepts and to the endurance
of their penalties!
A QUESTION IN MORALS.
In the issues of the Forum for the
past two months, Prof. J. J. McCook,
deals statistically with the number
of “venol voters” in Connecticut,
that is, of voters who accept money
or other valuable consideration eith
er to turn out for their own side or
cast their ballot for the o'!her.” He
reaebes the conclusion that of th
166,000 voters in that state 25,334, of
one in six, are liable to be bought and
sold at every election; and tells us
that as a presidentai campaign comes
round, this buying and selling costs
each of the parties the sum of
$400,000. This is a grave and omin
ous showing, but we leave it to tell
its own story.
It is another feature of his statis
tics that surprises us more, and pro
vokes a word or two of comment.
He says that out of every thousand
“intemperate” voters 778 are venal,
and out of every thousand “temper
ate” voters only 45, while out of
every thousand “total abstainers’
341 are. We are inclined to thin k
that these figures sin, in the first in
stances by excess, and in the second
by defect; but let that point pass. It
is the third instance that disappoints
our expectation and tries our faith.
Can it be possible that taking moral
principle, (which surely may be done
fairly,) by its relation to so gross a
crime as intrigue, bribery and corrup
tion,” by the selling of a vote which
is the selling of a man’s own self
and a selling of his country, “to
tal abstainers” lack only a little less
than fifty per cent, of being as bad
as the drunkard class and are more
than seven hundred per cent, worse
than the class of moderate drinkers?
It seems to us a thing incredible;
we do not believe it for the simple
reason that we cannot. The figures
must have a chance to prove that
they have not lied, and must prove
it too, before they can win our assent.
Prof. McCook avows frankly that
“he is not a total abstainer either
theoritically or practically, and has
always voted in favor of license.’’
Without impeaching his candor, we
may reasonably suspoct some uncon
scious bias in his judgment, and we
are not only free, we are bound, to
sift it out if there is any. For, if
general statistics throughout our
country support his present finding,
he has brought to light the strongest
of all arguments against total ab
stinence, the presumption that in the
type of mind embracing it there
lurks some weakness of the moral
sense to prompt that embrace and
account for it.
Dr. Lorimer, in his late address at
Philadelphia, specifies some of The
Drifts of the Hour, in methods of
Church woi;k. Among them he
mentions the drift from the clergy
to the laity, from the men to the
women, from the old to the young.
On the last “drift” he asks this per
tinent question.
“If things continue as they are,
and if societies multiply within the
limits of the local church, will we
not be obliged to meet in solemn
supplication, that God, through His
gracious interposition, may avert
disintegration and destruction ? We
are in danger of being organized to
death, and of having so many wheels
within wheels ns to leave no place
for the living Spirit to move there
in.”
Churches and church members,
young and old will do well to pause
and, ponder it and to heed the warn
ing contained in the last sentence.
A reasonable division of labor,
accompanied by a judicious classifi
cation of laborers, may enlarge and
facilitate results. But when details
are so multiplied as to exceed the
power of one mind to comprehend
of one eye to supervise, and of one
hand to guide, inefficiency, waste,
and failure inevitably follow. The
local church, proper, affords the or
ganization and the opportunity for
the use of all the time, talents, and
money of its members.
Will the “Biblical Recorder” hunt
up the recent issue in “the John s
Hopkins University Studies in His
torical and Political Science,” a
monograph on “the Religious Devel
opment in the Province of North
Carolina," by Prof. Stephen IJ.
Weeks of Trinity College in that
State? The author attempts the
desproof of the current belief that
North Carolina was settled chiefly
by religious refugees, alleging that
the motives of the settlers were
economic; ami also of the current bej
lief that it had always maintained
full religious liberty, alleging that
for three quarters of a century there
was an establishment of the Episco
pal Church there, and at times posi
tive persecution. These are things
with which the history of our Bap
tist fathers was in some measure
intertwined, and we want the assur
ance of our brother of the “Recorder’’
that the wish of Prof. Weeks is such
as to inflict no detriment on their
memory, whether by oversight or
inaccurate statement. And if the
Prof, has brought to light some
worthy deed of theirs heretofore lost
from view, we desire that our brother
may help us, that we may help our
readers, to a knowledge of it.
The Pittsburg Christian Advocate,
speaking of Joseph Horne, a promi
nent layman of the Methodist
Church who recently died in that
city says :
“He was first a Christian and then
a man of business. While managing
an immense business, and holding
the details of it in his own hands, he
still found time for religious de
votions and duties, and to keep him
self thoroughly informed concerning
his own church and the movements
of the cause of God in the w'orld.”
That was as it should have been,
first a Christian, then a man of bus
iness.” “Seek ye first the kingdom
of God and His righteousness.’’
Many business men do not find time
for religious devotions. They are
first business men and then Chris
tians. So absorbed with their world
ly concerns and so wearied by the
work of the week, that on Sunday
they have no strength nor heart for
the services of that holy day. They
have no time during the week to
read a religious paper, not even their
own denominational paper. There
fore they know little of what their
own people are doing and less of
what is being done in the world out
side their own church. Consequent
ly, they feel comparatively indiffer
ent to Christian work. The injunc
tion is, be “diligent in business,
serving the Lord.”
Prosperity in business is unsafe
unless soul prosperity moves at even
pace with it. John’s prayer for “the
beloved Gains” shows the propor
tion, or ratio, that one should bear to
the other. “Beloved, I pray that
thou mayest prosper and be in
health, as thy soul prospers.”
Business, prosperity and wealth
acquired thereby, sanctified by reli.
gion, will be a blessing both to the
world and to the owner.
Os late, much has been said of
pastoral changes. Here is the best
sample of a short pastorate that has
come under our observation. It em
braced just eight days. It must
have been a case of mutual disgust at
first sight, else, it was too sweet to
last.
The Northern observes :
“Some of our flying stars have
short pastorates. Perhaps the brief
est on record is that of Rev. J. Z.
Armstrong, D. D., at First Church,
Auburn. He was appointed on
Monday, welcomed by his people on
Saturday, preached to them on Sun
day, and on Monday started for a
new field of labor in Kansas City.”
The Central Church, Memphis
Tenn., has extended a unanimous
call to Rev. G. A. Nunnally, Presi
dent of Mercer University, Macon,
Ga.
A L
Illi®
Hr. David M. Jordan
of Edmeston, N. Y.
Colorless, Emaciated, Helpless
A. Complete Cure by ROOD'S
SARSAPARILLA.
_ Tills is from Mr. D. M. Jordan, a re
tired farmer, and one of the most re
spected citizens of Otsego Co., N. Y.
*' Fourteen years ago I had an attack ot the
cravel, and have since been troubled with my
Livor and Kidneys
gradually growing worse. Three years ago I
got down so low that I could scarcely walk-
I looked more like a corpse than a living being.
I he.| no appetite and for five weeks I as®
nothing but gruel. I was badly emaciated
and hid no more color than n marble stntne.
Hood's Sarsaparilla was recommended and 1
thought I would try It. Before I had finished
the first bi ttlo I noticed that I felt better, suf
fered lets, (he inUnmtnntion of the blad
der had the color began to return to
mv face, and I began to feel hungry. After
I had taken three bottles I could eat anything
without hurting ni". Why. 1 got so hungry
that I had to eat r> times a day. I have uow
lully recovered, thank, to
. Hood’s Sarsaparilla
I fori well and am well. All who know
me marvel to see me so well." D. M. Jonnajr.
HOOD'S PILLB are ths best after-dinner PUMs
Malat -I’.tbi ,-urv !,<>ndarli(iMAMMNMlb
A b/m T h ” AfV-lrun Liola Vlnnt
jrloTlll ■1 lA difCQVtroii In Como. Weil
s»«. < “ rr “uarantrod or No
i. . r "IPSE!,otbee, list Hruodway, New York.
luiLaWß’, fuses: by Mail. address
wotA utroaixna co., ua vu-at.,'tauusu.oaia.