those who have really gazed upon such a scene, no words of mine could fill their minds with pictures so fair or so sweet as those which the mere mention of an English lane will conjure up for them, if their hearts be open and warm and true. But I am loth to believe even a conceit so delightful, embellished by fancy and adorned by the fondness which time casts over all that is fair and past, could recall one-half the tender details on which my eyes rested that brief but pleasant autumn day.

"Underwood," and well and literally is it named, is but a few minutes walk from the far famed Cystral Palace at Sydenham, and a few moments soon found me at my destination, after the train from London had reached the Palace. It was very unusual, too, but I had formed no mental picture of him I had come to see, and was neither disappointed nor surprised when ushered into the presence of a venerable old gentleman, who extended a cordial greeting and from whose countenance beamed, and whose whole bearing bespoke, habitual benevolence and humane consideration. It was in a quiet little parlor, warm and cozy, and apparently used by the poet as his study that he received me, while a few moments later one of his daughters, who acts as his amanuensis, entered the room. A man of rather less than average height, he is somewhat heavily built, and this it is, in all probability, that inclines one to the belief that in less ripened years he may have appeared to be considerably taller. He wears a full beard, like his hair, silvery white, and while the former covers a face that is full and fleshy, the latter is the glory of a head well shaped, and such as phrenologists would deem, betokened a largely developed and naturally predominating humanitarian attribute or quality. A kindly eye, full and intelligent, evidencing the capacity of its possessor for sustained and elevated thought; a broad forehead and high, almost unmarked by lines and above which the silvery hair is a trifle thin. Such is the author of "Proverbial Philosophy," a book that is known and loved by all civilized nations. This the man whose

hymns are sung by conflicting congregations and whose religious poems are found in all lands and encountered in all works that pretend to give examples of lofty poetical thought, from among the productions of modern writers.

If his looks are kindly and frank his manner is doubly so. A man, I found him, more free from the prejudice of age than I had hoped to see in one of his years, and certainly in one who had seen and experienced so much. Not that larger experience should not and does not oftentimes widen a man's sympathies, giving breadth to, and begetting tolerance in his views, but that there does seem to come with ripening age a conservatism which oftens leans decidedly towards, if it does not actually encroach on the domain of dogmatism. He is a most profound believer in the Scriptures, and worshiper of God, and for that reason must necessarily have strong religious convictions. This his writings make plain in almost every line. I speak of this as giving emphasis to the liberality of views I have already mentioned, as I hold it to be a fact, which few will be disposed to challenge, that we find in such cases even less of tolerance in old age for the opinions of youth, than where such pronounced religious inclinations are wanting-and even in such cases the dogmatism is truly severe enough. His great desire seemed to be to hear truthfully and honestly, and without bias to present that which he had learned as true. His conversation was fresh yet pregnant with vital inquiries and with conclusions that had been reached after prolonged reflection and extensive experience, but so expressed as to win by their gentleness where they might otherwise have provoked opposition. He has no fear that you will learn something from him or about him; and even at an age when most people are more ambitious for rest than sustained labor, he prosecutes his work, and points with just pride to the volumes which a life of industry and that congenial labor which "doth physic pain" have enabled him to give to the world-and they make no mean library

in themselves, though they yet fail to satisfy his noble aspirations. An egotism that would be contemptible in one of meaner talents and less commendable results, may be condoned, or rather justified in Mr. Tupper. And I could not repress an exclamation of surprise when he showed me twenty-seven large books literally filled with references to himself, either clippings from newspapers (which were criticisms on his various works and more particularly on his last production, "My Autobiography") or letters from persons the world over. Among others, one from the Queen signed by Lord Iddesleigh, expressive of the pleasure "My Autobiography” had given Her Majesty; and then later the note from myself asking for the interview. I could not, I say, repress a slight exclamation of surprise when, pointing to the others and then to mine, he quietly remarked: "You see, I have immortalized you. In these volumes I keep all that is written to me or about me, and when you write me again, I shall put the letter in another book of the same kind." And a wonderful collection it is! Newspaper articles, letters in various languages and from persons of great distinction, because of intellectual endowments and cultivation, as well as those great for the reason that they are nobly born; while intermingling these are printed titles of books, scraps, circulars, envelopes, and even photographs. These are the result of many years patient and careful collection; and I am sure many are the curious, painful, happy, and entertaining histories associated with the fragments that go to comprise 'this library of life-if only those histories were revealed.

Mr. Tupper has visited America. He was here in 1867, and was, at the time of my visit, negotiating with a New York publisher for a description of a journey through several counties in Ireland made by him as early as 1851. When I called on him again in October of the same year, 1886, he was then writing or had just written an ode on the jubilee year of the reign of Victoria. marked while speaking on this

He re

subject,

that he had read considerably, and so far as he could ascertain, her's was the only good reign of fifty years, of which either sacred or profane history gave any record. He also referred to the reign of Manasseh which covered a period of fifty-five years; and the Scriptures record the deplorable fact that he was anything but what a king of Israel should have been. It seemed to please Mr. Tupper, not that there had been no good jubilee reigns save that of Queen Victoria, but that he should be alive to write an ode for one so good as he held her to be, and on such an occasion. "Moreover," he remarked, "it was I who wrote her coronation ode fifty years ago, and who, therefore, fitter to write that which is to commemorate her unparalleled jubilee year."

I remember also in the first interview having mentioned that I had often found breathing throughout that which he wrote, the same tender and elevating spirit that was the fragrance, the very soul of the writings of our own Longfellow, whose name I can hardly mention without a sigh of gratitude, for I never read his shorter poems without feeling new inspirations and better resolves firing my heart and coursing through my veins with each pulsation. He smiled a pleasant smile and said he himself had noticed a marked resemblance. "I am more like Longfellow than any of the poets. In some things I resemble Tennyson somewhat, but I am very unlike Robert Browning." At first blush there is also a resemblance between the features of Mr. Tupper and Longfellow. Both venerable, both silvered of head and with full and silvery beards, both full of face, lighted with a smile of benevolence, easy of access, considerate, humane, pleasant. I do not know that the resemblance goes farther.

Though Mr. Tupper has written much, though his poems are more particularly those of a religious nature and of worldwide admiration, yet I feel justified in stating that his earlier and more lasting reputation is due to that masterpiece of its kind, "Proverbial Philosophy," and I can hardly think of a time when it will

not be as pleasant as it is fresh, and as full of thoughts potential for good, as it is based upon a work and subjects most ennobling to the human race. Of his other works, I care to say little, even were I competent to give a fair judgment, nor to make reference to his life. With the former all should be somewhat acquainted, and could find profit in a greater familiarity. As for the latter, I can only say that his fine preservation, clear mind, his unfurrowed brow, which nevertheless has known of thoughts long and deep on life problems, the sweet and gentle and truthful spirit of his writings, and his known purity of life, record for him his worth as a man and poet,

with greater fidelity than even the pen of the friendliest, biographer. I have rejoiced for the time spent in his company, and have ever felt the better for it. I could wish that the lives of many I know and esteem of young men in Utahwhen as near the close as that of Martin Farquhar Tupper, might exercise an influence for good, that has been as long and as widely felt among mankind, which, as his is destined too, will linger after death, still working for good and shedding happiness in life, as the fragrance of flowers doth linger, even when their freshness hath faded and their petals gone down into the ashes of death.

R. W. Sloan.

I. THE ETERNITY OF MATTER.

EXCEPTING the body of worshipers commonly known as Mormons, there is no professedly Christian society that maintains the doctrine of the eternity of all substances.

Indeed, so intense is the general religious antipathy to the idea, that the few of modern times who have dared to entertain it, have been regarded as moral lepers, polluted with the odor of atheism, if not actually suffering from the blight and curse of the thing itself. Though the general reputation of the doctrine is odious, we submit that it is entitled to the most impartial consideration, because it savors strongly of rational philosophy; and we all have learned by bitter experience that “humanum est errare et neseire.”

To demonstrate the rationality of the doctrine it is but necessary to cite the fact that the human mind, expressing its natural faculties and endowments in a natural way, and when uninfluenced by ecclesiastical dictation, formulated anciently that grand concensus of universal conviction-innate and intelligent-which is expressed in the maxim "ex nihilo nihil fit."

That is the handwriting on the wall to which a free and intelligent humanity has affixed its seal, and from it there

can be no appeal upon purely rational grounds. This point would be debatable were there in existence an opposing maxim that all things were created out of nothing; but no such proposition was ever defended as a self-evident truth. It owes its origin to religious influences-not to human reasoning powers or innate ideas, and these facts incontrovertibly sustain the rationality of the maxim, "ex nihilo nihil fit.”

It must be apparent to all that an attempt to appeal from the rationality of this principle amounts simply to a question of the reliability of the rational faculties of mankind in forming rational judgments. It denies the correctness of intuitive convictions-casts out the race upon the troubled sea of life, without mental rudder or compass, and demolishes all criteria for judging between the right and the wrong. Any system of religion or of philosophy which requires this to command our faith or acceptance bears prima facie evidence of an unhallowed origin. The idea that God can purpose to crush out of existence any natural endowments, or to trammel the use of our reasoning powers in his effort to make us religious, is foul with the slime of the serpent-it is the moloch of pious resolutions—the tomb of genuine religion.

But we have digressed from our purpose, for it is not designed specially to treat the subject from a purely rational or philosophical standpoint, but from a Biblical one; and those of our readers who desire to make themselves familiar with the system of rational arguments, by which the doctrine of the eternity of matter is sustained, are referred to Prof. Orson Pratt's treatise, entitled the "Great First Cause."

An examination of the writings just referred to will show us that the faith of the Saints is fortified by every principle of sound philosophy; and without further preliminaries we will proceed to ascertain what men, who spake as they were moved upon by the Holy Ghost, have taught respecting the matter. In the course of our investigation we shall find that the doctrine is invested with a divine authority which infidels only presume to assail. If, however, no imposing array of Scriptural texts can be produced to prove this truth, the reason is simply because the Bible nowhere treats extensively on the materials of creation. The first passage suggested for consideration is found in the writings of the scholarly and philosophical apostle, Paul. In the common English version the text is as follows: "Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made out of things that do appear." Heb. xi, 3.

This language is always quoted by our opponents with the strongest assurance, in their attempts to prove from Bibical sources that God created all things out of nothing, and it may, therefore, be regarded as the tower of their strength. Particular attention will be invited while we endeavor to ascertain what Paul meant when he wrote that Scripture. General Christian opinion respecting the teachings of the text is vigorously expressed by the learned Dr. Adam Clarke, as follows:

"By worlds, Tong auvas, we are to understand the material fabric of the universe; for a can have no reference here to age or any measurement of time, for he speaks of the things which are

seen, not being made out of the things which do appear; this therefore must refer to the material creation: and as the word is used in the plural number, it may comprehend not only the earth and the visible heavens, but the whole planetary system; the different worlds which, in our system at least, revolve round the sun. The apostle states that these things were not made out of a preexistent matter; for if they were, that matter, however extended or modified must appear in that thing into which it is compounded and modified, consequently it could not be said that the things which are seen are not made out of the things that appear. *

*

*

According to Moses and the apostle we believe that God made all things out of nothing."

Though entertaining the highest respect for the piety and learning of the justly celebrated author of this quotation, it is denied that he can find any warrant whatever in the apostle's language for his anti-scriptural idea, that all things were created out of nothing. Neither Moses nor Paul ever taught such a doctrine. If we admit, for the sake of argument, that God did create all things out of nothing, the position will involve conclusions and inferences which are sadly at variance with the faith, teachings and practice of the Saints.

Paul states in the most precise manner, that God "framed the worlds by faith; so that things which are seen were not made out of things that do appear," or according to popular theology, the things that are seen were made out of nothing. Having doctored the apostle's rather peculiar expression with a modern interpretation, special attention is now directed to the two little words, "so that." It is needless to state that as Paul used them they express a conse quence; and his language may be paraphrased thus: God made the worlds by faith, consequently, they were made out of nothing; or to note the variations of the absurd theology; since the worlds were made out of nothing, they were made by faith-by the faith of God. In pointing out the significance of the