religion and morals, yet they are by no means excluded from the morals of legislation nor from the religious features of government. One of the grand aims of Christianity is to educate, enlighten, and reform the masses of the people, directly, in their personal character as an inspiration to thought and good morals, and indirectly, in the modification of governments, in the utilizing of commerce and manufactures, in the social relations and national comities for the greater good of the whole.

The realms of political empire and Christian authority are not so widely separate, nor so unlike, but that they have some elements in common, some border influences, some relationships and sympathies. On this subject there is a morbid delicacy lest the Church shall crowd unduly on the State, and lest the pulpit shall be perverted to political harangues. We claim that as the Bible gives its weight of teachings and influences on the side of morals and religion in all the realms of citizenship, so may the pulpit throw its power of instruction on the side of intelligence and virtue, whether in popular education, in national commerce, in business, or in politics. It should, of course, be well and wisely done.

Christianity has something to do with all the relations of men. It has an original rather than a conventional claim, that holds firmly in every thing which concerns the peace and order of society, and which concerns life, liberty, and the legitimate pursuit of happiness. It strikes at all injustice, whether relating to the rights and privileges of a person, of a state, of a country, or of society. It supervises social morals. It is involved in all reforms that look after the purity, order, and peace of society. It fosters all purity and righteousness, while it stands opposed to all inordinate legislation and to intemperance and corruption.

But because of chicanery and corruption among professional politicians, office-seekers, and wire-pullers; because of wild and rabid partisanship; and because of unprincipled measures advocated by some aspirants for positions of trust-the word politics has unfortunately come to mean and to designate something quite unsuited to the pulpit, and foreign to what is thought to be the legitimate province of Christianity. But in its proper sense this word denotes both the science and the art of government, embracing the legislation and the execution of law.

In its widest sense it embraces national and international law; those great principles of equity which, by common consent, govern nations in their relations to each other, and which bind countries and States into a federal union, and the people into a brotherhood for the safety of each and the good of all. Has Christianity, then, no concern in politics, no responsibility for their purity and efficiency?. There are personal wrongs that Christianity rebukes and would rectify. Are there no national sins which it would antagonize? National sins existing, righteousness in government as certainly exalts a nation as sin is a reproach to any people. "The work of righteousness shall be peace; and the effect of righteousness, quietness and assurance forever."

Are politics and Christianity so widely different and separate as to have little or nothing to do with each other? Is he a good Christian who is a bad politician? Any strange repugnance to a looking at these facts arises either from ignorance of what constitutes politics and their relations to Christianity, or from political corruption and a false standard in religion. A knowledge of the true relations of men as fellow-citizens is closely allied to a knowledge of the religion which is suited to, and designed for, all men. What the word religion expresses in the relations of man to God, the word politics expresses in the civil relations of man to man. Mr. Ruskin says:

Politics are the essential laws of social and civil life, out of which grow the great principles that healthfully agitate and firmly bind society together. Our Saviour has expressed the true idea in words never surpassed for beauty and power: "Whatsoever ye would that others should do unto you, do you even the same unto them; for this is the law and the prophets," a law that stands opposite to all unrighteousness.

Politics are, then, nothing less than the relations and duties of men to each other, in which are involved the fact and influence of truth and righteousness, and the power and danger of vice.

With this understanding of things, we see that a political system and creed, a political party and its platform, are that by which a state or nation is governed, its subjects are protected, and their rights are secured. Just as certainly as Christianity enters into and supervises the domestic relations, or the ecclesiastical, so surely does it enter and supervise the

relations of social and civil life. And as wrong may be found in domestic and ecclesiastical affairs, so may it be found in social and civil matters. And it is, we think, because of the corruption of many party leaders, and of the ignorance of some persons, that the whole system of politics has to any extent become estranged from Christian ideas. We do not mean Christianity as distinct from the ground-morals of Judaism, for they are one and the same; but those great and distinctive truths which run through the Bible. Neither politics nor politicians need be corrupt. And Christian ideas and forces are the only and sure purifying elements and powers.

The principles thus far stated and defended strongly characterized the first fifty years of our Republic. Before political parties were definitely organized among the loyal citizens of the United States, before any existing differences of opinion as to the administration of government became strongly partisan, the public offices were filled by men because of their competency and fitness rather than because of any services they had rendered either to individuals or to a party. "When Washington was called to the Presidency, in 1789, there were no regularly organized parties," and there was, therefore, no room for partisan patronage. And when applications for of fices were made to Washington by personal friends or by political opponents, he gave the preference to the latter, if they were better qualified to perform the duties of the office, and on the principles advocated in this article. "As George Washington," said he, "I would do this man any kindness in my power; as President of the United States, I can do nothing." On the same righteous principle, and for the sake of keeping a proper balance of administrations, not only he, but his successors for nearly fifty years thereafter, acted on similarly equitable principles. Though Mr. Jefferson made more changes in the offices subject to presidential control than did Washington, the Adamses, Monroe, or Madison, yet his rule of action was "that deprivations of office must be as few as possible, be made gradually, and be based on some malversation, or inherent disqualification.* It was not until General Jackson entered upon the office of President that this wise and righteous poli*These and a few other facts are taken from "A Century of Civil Service," by L. M. Dorman, in "Scribner's Monthly."

FOURTH SERIES, Vol. XXXI.-31

cy was changed. "To the victors belong the spoils" then became the iniquitous principle according to which persons were dismissed for the sake of destroying the equilibrium of offices. This same policy was carried out by Mr. Van Buren, until it became a somewhat established political principle. But under General Harrison, Mr. Lincoln, and General Grant, efforts at reform in this regard, and looking to more honest and equitable principles of government, were begun and carried forward. Preparations were being made for the more positive efforts of the present pure-minded and honest incumbent of the presidential and executive chair. President Hayes seems to have adopted the sentiment of Daniel Webster, that

the power of giving office affects the fears of all who are in and the hopes of all who are out; that a competition ensues, not of patriotic labors nor of severe toils for the public good; not of manliness, independence, and public spirit; but of complaisance, of indiscriminate support of executive measures, of pliant subservience, and gross adulation.

It would be occasion of enduring gratitude if he, having the sympathy of the people, should be able to inaugurate a system of reform in administration and in policy that would bring back the government to its original simplicity, purity, and power. In support of his position, Mr. Hayes said :—

I want you to understand, that if at any time it is shown to your satisfaction that I have nominated an unfit man, you will do me a favor by helping to reject him. Do not hesitate for a moment to do so, and do not believe that I shall be offended, but the contrary.

When we come into the minutia of political dogmas, we may honestly differ as to what constitutes the best lines of action and what the best method of securing the ends of legislation in a country so large and diversified as is ours. The interests of the East may differ somewhat from those of the West, and those of the North from those of the South. The demands of manufacturing regions are different from the agricultural. The wants of the new States are somewhat dif ferent, as are their conditions, from those of the old.. And there are certain great principles of sacrifice and of gain that may be unified for the good of a diversified people. In finance there may be honest differences of opinion; so in refer

ence to protection and tariff. But there can be no difference of sentiment, and should be none of action, in reference to honesty, to equal justice and rights, nor in reference to the greater good of the whole country. But, strange to tell, just here it is that intriguing men make national politics sectional, and the beauteous system to be unworthy a free, enlightened, and Christian people. As before said, there are times when things in which noble and high-minded men, who are equally true to what they deem to be the best interests of government, may innocently differ as to the policies to be pursued. They may, and perhaps ought to, pursue their several lines of thought, without being false to truth and facts, and especially without being violently antagonistic to each other. Now, just here it is that Christianity becomes an active and conservative element in the struggle for the promotion of right and the defeat of wrong. This struggle is not in any respect designed to put the Church in a position superior nor antagonistic to the State, but rather to secure the integrity of government, and to conserve the rights and privileges of citizens. It is not to overawe the State, nor to succumb to its encroachments; but rather for the purpose of getting the protection of government, and of keeping its general policy in harmony with truth and righteousness, that Christianity speaks out.

This great nation is periodically swayed by political preferences and excitements. It is every four years deeply agitated by discussions and popular elections, in which debate, passion, bribery, and a catalogue of evils, are prominent. We are often in the midst of discussions, heated and rancorous, by which the passions of too many persons are aroused, as clouds are driven by transverse and opposing winds. And sometimes below as above, among men as among clouds, collisions and storms occur. But if Christian principles hold the ascendency, an enduring calm will come to a God-fearing people. As our Lord asserted his authority over the elements of nature in hushing the winds and calming the waves, so Christianity, in the exercise of its divine right, can calm human passions, hush popular storms, and purify the common air of thought, of feeling, and of sentiment. In the strife of party zeal and in the ferment of political commotion truth and right should prevail. And though Christianity has no organic connection with civil