result can follow. They who are thus restricted must fall back into the condition of savages, and, in many senses, their state will be more deplorable. They will be compelled to toil and suffer more. The pain of that hungry man is greater who sees food but cannot obtain it, than is that endured by him who not even sees the provisions of which he stands in need. He who walks about, seeing on every hand the proud results of scientific and intellectual progress, and desires to obtain knowledge and culture, but is debarred through poverty from gratifying his healthy wishes, is in a far more deplorable condition than the Bosjesman, who neither knows nor cares for intellectual and scientific progress. If we do not pause in our career it is evident that darkness will come again, and we shall be debased and ruined through our prodigality. But in what way are we to reduce our outgoings? On one hand it is advised that a searching inquiry shall be instituted, so that they who eat so largely of the national bread, without rendering any equivalent service, sball be immediately dismissed. Their number is large, and their friends in the Commons are by far too numerous, to permit of such a clearance being easily and speedily made. The House of Commons is, in one sense, essentially corrupt; not that its members condescend to take bribes into their hands, but they secure comfortable places for their relatives, and manage to foist upon the nation a number of useless receivers of public money. All the incompetent sons are thrust into government situations. They who could not enter into partnership with any firm without breeding ruin, are put into government offices without compunction. They must live, and if they damage the public it is not considered to be of any moment. Search the ranks of official life and it will be discovered that a more intolerable set of cripples were never before gathered into one regiment; and, as a rule, the least competent receive the best pay. A real man who has a heart for his work, and who desires to give his country the benefit of his genius and experience finds it difficult to get on in the service, and impossible to rise. It is his daily misfortune to render palpable the incompetent character of his fellow officials, and consequently they hate and oppose him; and should he venture upon suggesting any improved method of performing the duties of his department, he is made a victim and, "sent to Coventry," as one of the heretical reformers who would import honesty and common sense into the public service. We may succeed in our plans so far as to blot out a few, perhaps even a twentieth part, of these incompetent ones, but only at the expense of more labour and pains, anxiety and excitement, than it would cost to get rid of the existing system. We may succeed in destroying the power of patronage quite as easily as we should in securing a partial reform. To do anything of practical value, we must abandon all petty plans, aim at some greater success, and be ready to apply all the forces at our disposal to effect a deeper change. That greater change involves a reconsideration of our Foreign Relations, and the danger to which we are exposed through the action of France. The enormous annual increase in our outgoings depends entirely upon certain ideas which have been planted and fostered in our minds, in relation to the aims and intentions of the French Emperor, which are supposed to be inimical to the peace and progress of Europe. If those ideas are unsound, if they' depend upon a misconception of his motives and intentions, then are we burdening ourselves uselessly, and instead of doing anything whereby the peace of the world is to be promoted we are to be justly charged with dealing unjustly with our own poor at home, while exciting undue alarm abroad, For being, as we are, at the head of the modern nations, it is impossible for us to manifest fear without creating a sense of danger in the breasts of others; if we declare ourselves menaced, then all the other nations will consider there is cause of fear, and where peace and progress would have been possible, Conservatism and a large expenditure will become supreme. No reduction can be effected in our national expenditure until this matter be finally settled. All our peddling alterations are but as drops in the ocean compared with the measure of what is annually wasted through the theory we entertain about the intentions of Louis Napoleon. That theory is the body and soul, the animating spirit, of the giant that oppresses us, and we cannot be free until the head of it be stricken off. Let every man ask himself the question whether there be any cause to view France with suspicion, and if he answer, as guided by facts, he will soon shout loudly enough for immediate and immense reductions in our expenditure. If he should answer that our neighbour is to be feared-is dangerous, and is aiming at our ruin, then let him hold his peace about the finances, except it be to cry alike for increase of taxation and increase of war expenditure. Under such circumstances it is not worth while to agitate against the drones who receive pay and do nothing; it will only increase the national loss without largely decreasing the outgoings. We must pay more for the agitation than would be saved by a victory; and when it were gained we should still be in the power of the same harpies, who are always present when the abundance of national spoil is to be shared. They would only be driven from one office, but like rats they would enter another; for while the existing system lasts they who have influence will not permit their incompetent relatives to lack provender when so much can be obtained at the cost of the public. Destroy the offices, and there can then be no call for employés, and to do this, we must make sure of our position in relation to whether Louis Napoleon be the enemy which Conservatism declares, or the friend he is said to be by many who know him more intimately than we do. It has been urged by many distinguished Englishmen, who are thoroughly acquainted with France, and who appear to speak as honestly as they do authoritatively, that England has nothing of evil to anticipate from the actions of Louis Napoleon. This may be believed without much direct evidence, because it is supported by common sense, for unless we can conceive of him as being the greatest fool in Europe, it is impossible to believe he would interfere with England, in any warlike manner. Such a course would lead to his ruin. All the interests of his family are indissolubly bound up with peaceable English relations. The union is accidental, we grant, but it is none the less real. Were he at war with Great Britain, he would be at war with Europe, for although the German rulers have no great liking for English principles, and would gladly destroy them, it is quite certain they would unite with us against him, because while he continues in power their despotisms are rendered insecure. The supremacy of France threatens kingly despotism all over Europe. While the beneficial results of Universal Suffrage are made so manifest those surrounding nations cannot avoid desiring to share similar advantages. Their rulers are aware of this, and hence the desire to blot out so grave a danger to the security of their own thrones. He represents a new principle-the sovereignty of the national will, and through his interference that principle is triumphant in Italy; while they represent Divine Right to rule wrongly and to ignore the free action of the people they govern. His continuance in authority is thus fatal to their policy, and hence the readiness with which they would unite with us if we were engaged in war against France, for then they would achieve their object in putting down the universal suffrage principle so hateful in their eyes. And they who can believe him ignorant of a fact so palpable to others, are hardly to be listened to as authorities. There is not a statesman in Europe who is more thoroughly conversant with the policy of its courts than he is; and being a man of the new school, the members of which accept facts irrespective of received theories, he is the least likely of men to engage in a conflict so threatening to his own position and prospects. It follows, then, that as a question of personal and national policy, Louis Napoleon must labour his utmost to avoid a collision with England. Whatever he may wish as a man, he must, as a politician, endeavour to keep free from a struggle so fatal to his best and dearest interests. And if thus much be conceded we cannot perceive why, abstractedly considered, this English nation should anticipate danger from his policy. And when we turn from the world of ideas, surmises, and suspicion to that of actual facts, there is not a single action to be cited, which, when candidly viewed, will bear the warlike construction. All that we have hitherto held by is a fanciful construction of his aims; we could not know what was in his mind, but only imagined ourselves to know, and our action has been taken upon the assumption that what we fancied was real fact. Yet when attention is turned to the things actually done, no man can say they indicate any other than an anxious desire to preserve the peace. There never was a French ruler who took so much abuse from us without retaliating. Neither has there been one who so readily submitted to our manifest predilections. We know, indeed, that this is all explained upon the assumption that his conduct is dictated by low and interested motives, and consequently that no praise is to be awarded to him for it. It is easy to find bad motives by which to explain the actions of men, if we allow our imagination to create them, but it is neither just nor generous to do so, especially when good ones are as easily and honestly conceived. And, moreover, it is competent for the French to inquire if our motives are always innocent, pure and disinterested? And even if they be so, whether they are not as liable to be represented as being selfish and dishonourable as those of their Emperor? They must be so, or the writers upon the Continent strangely belie us. fact is, that we can only infer motives from conduct, and if the latter be good, we should assume the motives were so. Occasionally we shall be deceived, especially when we have to judge from isolated actions; but scarcely ever when there happens to be a course of good conduct, for that, as a rule, must be based upon good motives. The Yet, even if his motives be utterly and coarsely selfish, our security is the same, because his selfishness must prompt him to pursue the path of peace with England. And in seeking, selfishly seeking if men will have it so, to develope the resources of France he is pursuing that course which the best man in the world would pursue. For why should a king have power if it be not to do the best for his nation? And who are the monarchs whose names are to be honoured if not those whose best energies have been devoted towards promoting the growth of the nations over which they held authority? Why, then, should we find so much to suspect and to blame in a course of conduct which is admitted by all intelligent men to be the best adapted for promoting the growth of France and the prosperity of Frenchmen? P. W. P. SOUTH PLACE CHAPEL. SUNDAY EVENING LECTURES. BY P. W. PERFITT, PH. D. THE 'SONG OF SOLOMON." (Continued from page 256.) It is impossible to do justice to the symbolical system of interpretation to which the "Song of Songs" has been subjected, without quoting a few illustrations from the writings of those who, in celebrated works, have so elaborately developed their views. To do this is now an easy task, for Christian D. Ginsburg has collected specimens of them into the introduction prefixed to his fine translation of the Song itself. They who desire to pursue the subject farther must consult his volume, I shall rest content with citing a few illustrations. And first from the commentary of R. Saaidias who proceeds thus from the seventh verse: "The vine"yard of the Lord of Hosts is the house of Israel. Solomon relates in this book "the history of the Jews, commencing with their Exodus from Egypt until after "the coming of the Messiah, and compares the position of Israel to God, to that "of a bride to a bridegroom, because she (Israel) is dear to him, and he to her. "When he first takes her from her father's house he calls her my friend, when he brings her to his house he calls her my bride, when she finds favour in his eyes "he calls her my sister, and praises her from head to foot; then he is angry with "her, and she returns and praises him from head to foot; then he praises her a "second time. And, because it is unlawful for a bridegroom and bride to come together without a marriage-contract and witnesses, therefore Solomon begins "with the words, 'Let him give me kisses of his mouth; that is, the command"ments and the statutes, comprising both the written and the oral law which the "Lord gave to Israel through the pious Moses, Aaron, and Miriam, so that Israel's "fame went forth into the world in consequence of their wisdom, as it is written, "And thy renown went forth among the heathen for thy beauty,' &c.,* so much so that many of the nations desired to be gathered under the wings of the "Shechinah and become Jews; and these are the mixed multitudes, Jethro and "others, and therefore it is said, "Thy perfumes are good in odour,' that is, the "Lord tried them from the departure out of Egypt till their entrance into Caanan "whether they would walk in his ways." Proceeding upon this principle of interpretation, Rashi says: "My opinion is, "that Solomon foresaw, by the aid of the Holy Spirit, that Israel would be carried "into sundry captivities, and undergo sundry dissolutions; that they would lament "in their captivity over their former glory, and recall the former love, which God "manifested for them above all other nations; that they would say, 'I will go and "return to my first husband, for then was it better with me than now;' that "they would acknowledge His kindness and their own rebellion, and the good things which He promised to give them in the latter days, i. e., at the coming of "the Messiah. "This book is written by inspiration, and represents a wife forsaken by her "husband, and shut up, longing after him, recalling to her mind her love in youth "to her beloved, and confessing her guilt; her beloved sympathising with her affection, and remembering the kindness of her youth, the charms of her beauty, "and her good works, which had tied him to her with an everlasting love. "The design of this book is to show to Israel that God has not afflicted her, "i. e. Israel, willingly; that though He did send her away, He has not cast her "off; that she is still His wife, and He her husband, and that He will again be "united to her." The following is a specimen of Rashi's commentary: "1. The Song of Songs, &c.-Our Rabbins state, that whenever Solomon is mentioned in this Song, it signifies the Holy One, the King of Peace. This is confirmed by the fact that the name of Solomon's father is not here given, as in * Ezek. xvi. 14. + Hos. ii, 9, Prov. i. 1, and Eccl. i. 1. This most excellent Song was addressed to God by his people, the congregation of Israel. Rabbi Akiba says, that the world was not worthy of the day in which the Song of Songs was given to Israel; for all the Scriptures are holy, but the Song of Songs is most holy. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says, it is like to a king who took a measure of wheat, and gave it to the baker, saying, Produce from it so much flour, so much bran, and so much chaff, and make me a refined and excellent cake of the flour; so all Scriptures are holy, but this Song is most holy; for the whole of this book teaches the fear of God and submission to his kingdom. "2. Let him kiss me, &c.-This Song Israel utters in her captivity and widowhood. Oh that King Solomon would give me kisses of His mouth, as in the time of yore! Some kiss the hand, and others the shoulders; but I desire that He should behave to me as in former days, viz., kiss my mouth as a bridegroom kisses his bride; for Thy caresses are better than all the banquets of wine, and all joys and pleasures. It is a Hebrew idiom to call every banquet of pleasure and joy by the name of wine.* This is the literal sense; but, according to the allegory, this refers to the giving of the Law, and God's speaking with Israel face to face. These favours still continue to be more precious to them than any delights; and as they are assured by God that He will appear again to reveal the secrets and mysteries of the Law, Israel prays to Him for the fulfilment of His promises. This is the meaning of 'Let him kiss me!' "3. Thy perfumes, &c.-A good name is called good oil. The fragrance of Thy name is so excellent that the ends of the earth have smelt it when they heard of Thy fame and of Thy great wonders in Egypt. Thou art oil, and art constantly poured forth, so that Thy sweet odour might be widely diffused. This is the nature of good oil. As long as it is sealed in a bottle, it does not emit any smell; but when the bottle is opened, and the oil poured into a vessel, the smell is diffused. The maidens love thee. Jethro, hearing of the wonderful doings of God in Egypt, confessed the God of Israel; so Rahab, when she heard that the Lord had dried up the waters of the Red Sea, became a proselyte. By the maidens are meant the Gentiles; they are so called because God is represented as a youth. "5. I am swarthy, &c.-You, my companions, let me not be lightly esteemed in your eyes, although my Husband forsook me because of my swarthiness; for I am swarthy because of the tanning sun, yet I am comely because of the symmetry of my beautiful limbs. If I am swarthy, like the tents of Kedar, which are discoloured by the rain, in consequence of their being constantly spread out in the wilderness, I shall easily be washed, and be as beautiful as the curtains of Solomon. The allegorical meaning is, the congregation of Israel speaks this to the Gentiles, I am swarthy in my own works, but I am comely in the works of my fathers; and some of my own works even are good. And though I am tainted with the sin of the calf, I have, to counterbalance this, the merit of accepting the Law. Israel calls the Gentiles 'daughters of Jerusalem,' because Jerusalem is to be the metropolis of all nations, as it is predicted, And I will give them to thee for daughters' and again, 'Ekron and her daughters."" || Comment upon these puerilities is unnecessary, and yet it must be confessed that there is a class of persons who are taken captive by it. They esteem all such "expla"nations" as being profound, and hence it is that even in modern pulpits men are found who plunder these old books, dress up what they have stolen, and win the applause of their hearers. It is not, however, of much consequence, for as the weak companion the weak, little good could be achieved by giving them a stronger diet. They love spiritual exegesis, and this attenuated folly is what they call Spiritualism. The pity is, that they should pay so much for what could be obtained purer and cheaper from the works of the Rabbis, Some of them But the Rabbis are not unanimous in their interpretation. maintain that it is to be viewed as an allegory of the intellectual character. Ibn + Exodus xviii. * Comp. Esth. vii. 2; Isaiah xxiv. 9; v. 12. Josh. XV. 44. |