are.

derful methods for our restoration. And I see no reason in the nature of superhuman sinful spirits, if such there are-the Bible says there are, and it is nothing strange there should be-why they should be excluded from the sphere of God's reclaiming love. He is the Father of their spirits as much as of ours. They are His children as much as we They must have been, like us, originally pure and good-for God made them, and higher and brighter, we are told, in order and endowment than our race. They fell from goodness and bliss in the same way as we did, in spite of the good and gracious spirit of God in them to help them keep right, -fell through abuse of their freedom, that awful endowment, without which there could be no moral universe."

66

But, husband, the Bible seems to say that in point of fact they will continue forever evil and wretched."

"It may be so; God cannot force them to become good any more than us; but we must believe in Him as doing all He can for their restoration. They may be forever evil and so forever wretched, because they can resist all God's love and grace drawing them to goodness. This is the only way we can reconcile such a sad fate with the idea of a

proper moral universe, the only way to have a good God and common sense in our theology.

"But the thought of Eternal Evil in the spiritual universe of the Infinite, Holy, Loving AllFather, is one I do not like to entertain. The thought that it will be so through defect of any thing He can do to prevent it is monstrous. The thought that it will be so through any eternal purpose or agency of His is abominable. It is not the 'enmity of the carnal heart,' as some folks say, that resists it; it is the voice of God in the universal reason and conscience revolting against the atrocious doctrine. I would rather be an Atheist than hold it.

"Is it not better, more congruous with every dictate of a good and benevolent heart, to hope that in some way, yet unknown to us, Evil will go down, vanquished, absorbed, extinguished and destroyed by the all-conquering power of Infinite Love? How great its resources may be, without doing violence to spiritual freedom, who can tell ?”

I have already, at the outset of this work, apprised the reader that the Doctor would be likely to say a good many things not perfectly acceptable to everybody, and some perhaps offensive to many

persons, including all the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herodians, who, as well as some of quite a different and better sort, are all likely to be displeased with this chapter.

I do not hold myself responsible for all the Doctor's utterances. My business is to record his talk. At the same time I would not set down any thing which I did not think would, on the whole, be approved by all courteous, candid, intelligent, discriminating, thoughtful and judicious readers, and such I take it are all who read, and certainly all who like this book.

CHAPTER XXII.

THE DOCTOR AT A WOMAN'S RIGHTS CONVENTION-WHAT HE DID NOT SAY THERE, BUT WOULD HAVE SAID IF HE HAD SAID ANY THING.

MRS. OLDHAM was sitting one evening listening in her placid way to something she did not take much interest in, which Professor Clare was reading to the Doctor out of a newspaper he had brought with him when he came in, employing herself the while with one of those elegant industries which оссиру the hands of women without absorbing their attention.

There is a fashion, I observe, in these things; and her work was of a sort I perceive to have become very fashionable of late-the netting of soft wools into various articles for women's heads and shoulders, and even into cloaks and large shawls or blankets-Afghans, Lilly says they call them-to be worn as a protection against dust in summer drives. Very beautiful fabrics, too, many of them

are, from their rich harmony of manifold bright colors, and so fleecy and light withal, that there is not the least feeling of weight in wearing them.

I have often heard it said it was a pity that gentlemen have not some nice occupation for their hands, too, during the hours they pass with the women in the family reunion, or in the small social gathering; for that it makes the men look so loutish to be sitting idly by, or only wagging their tongues, while the women's nimble fingers are producing such pretty and useful results, all the time their tongues are running on in the most agreeable

way.

But I could never agree with this opinion. It seems to me this occupation of the hands at such times is something exclusively feminine, and marking very fitly a distinction between men and women I lay the greatest stress upon the observance of. Of course I am not speaking in the spirit of an American savage, nor of the drudgeries of labor; and so, Miss Amanda Rose, your sweet earnest face need not flush with the sacred fire of holy displeasure. I intend nothing derogatory to your lovely sex. On the contrary, my opinion is grounded in a sentiment of genuine reverence for all that is most truly womanly, and therefore most to be reverenced