name than that of Christ. The Scriptures, on the contrary, teach that when the sinner is cast into prison "he shall in no wise come out thence till he has paid the uttermost farthing;" while as to his ability, it is declared he has "nothing" wherewith "to pay." Those who hold this theory forget that sin is a self-perpetuating evil, and that man cannot escape its curse unless sin itself is destroyed. Let it be steadily kept in mind that punishment cannot destroy sin; that only divine grace can do that; and the sinner who passes unsaved into the spiritworld goes where he has no promise that grace can ever reach him. If the penalty of sin could be exhausted by suffering, punishment would cease to be retribution; it would then become a means of grace. But of this no hint is given in the teachings of the word of God. The punishment of the future is "the wages of sin," and not a moral force by which a lapsed soul can be restored to holiness and the favor of God.

If, however, we assume the possibility of restoration, how, in the nature of things, is it to be brought about? Shall it be by the mere fiat of Omnipotence? "The divine government," a distinguished author wisely remarks, "is not a series of isolated arbitrary acts, but a vast net-work of correlated principles, wide and lasting as the universe, in which sin and punishment stand to each other as cause and effect. It is in the nature of sin to tend to perpetuate itself, and to produce misery. This process is a matter of natural and moral law. To cut off by the sheer force of omnipotence the proper effect of sin, and cause it to be followed by eternal joy, would not only be an abrupt break in the course of natural law, but a violent wrench of moral relations, forcibly making sin the precursor of happiness, which would not be less violent than to make piety the precursor of wretchedness. If a simple fiat of divine authority might empty the bottomless pit, why not a similar fiat have obviated the necessity for the humiliation of the divine Son in the redemption of mankind? And why might not such a fiat have prevented all the agonies and inconveniences ever incurred by sin?"

Still more difficult is it to conceive that any thing in the circumstances or surroundings of a fallen spirit can effect its restoration. Suffering and misery are the results of sin, and while the sin continues the suffering must endure. If the sin

ning were to cease the moment the soul entered the spirit-world, the idea of exhausting sin's penalty, though still unwarranted, might not appear so hopeless; but if sin perpetuates itself in this life, despite all remedial influences, much more will it do so when all those influences are withdrawn; and thus unending sin carries with it unending suffering as its inevitable corollary. The impenitent sinner goes into "outer darkness," to the

worm that "dieth not," and to the "fire" that "shall not be quenched." Though we grant that these are but figures of speech, they are not suggestive of any thing that could produce in the sufferers "repentance unto salvation," or create one solitary aspiration after a better life. It may be accepted as an axiom that a thing cannot communicate what it does not possess; and surely in the surroundings of a lost soul there is nothing that can purify the conscience or deliver from the guilt

of sin.

Nor yet-taking the New Testament for our guide—are we permitted to suppose that a lost soul can, in the other world, be restored through the mediation of Jesus Christ. The inestimable value of that mediation here and now is pressed upon our attention in a thousand ways; but no hint is given that it will avail any thing in the world to come. The very urgency of the Gospel message indicates that this life is the crisis-hour of human existence, into whose brief compass are crowded opportunities that can never be elsewhere enjoyed. If this were not so-if beyond this life there were even remote possibilities of salvation the intensely earnest invitations, warnings, and entreaties of the Gospel would sound like solemn mockeries. When the one talent was taken from the unprofitable servant it was not to be restored; when the hopeless debtor, who owed "ten thousand talents," was "delivered to the tormentors," it was a sentence of perpetual imprisonment; when the foolish virgins came with the despairing cry, "Lord, Lord, open to us," the door stubbornly refused to open, while from within came the death-knell of departing hope, "Verily I say unto you, I know you not."

IT SHALL BE PUNISHMENT.

The Scriptures teach "that there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust" (Acts xxiv, 15);

that following the resurrection there shall be a judgment, when "every one" shall "receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad." This teaching commends itself to every enlightened conscience. That goodness should be rewarded and wickedness punished harmonizes with the eternal fitness of things. In every man good or evil predominates; but as all men are free agents, good or evil must be voluntary. Goodness merits reward; badness deserves punishment. And if goodness has a reward beyond the grave, shall not wickedness also receive punishment hereafter? There is a future state of reward for the righteous: ought there not to be a future state of punishment for the wicked?

That the punishment of the lost soul shall be exceedingly terrible we infer, not from poetic images and dramatic pictures in hymns and epics, but from the clear and solemn statements of the word of God. The most terrible utterances in the New Testament concerning the punishment of the lost came from the lips of Him whose pitying tenderness brought him from heaven to earth to die for the sins of mankind. Such words from his lips are not mere rhetoric, but sober statements of solemn realities. If it is claimed that Christ's words are figurative, and should not be interpreted literally, it must be remembered that figures imply realities, and in a case like this, because the spiritual transcends the natural, it is reasonable to presume that the reality is far more dreadful than the figure by which it is set forth. It is idle to speculate as to whether the punishment shall be corporeal or wholly spiritual; it is enough to know that something unspeakably dreadful must be intended when it can be best represented by the gnawing of a worm that never dies, and the burning of a fire that shall not be quenched.

But the eternity of this punishment is the aspect of the doctrine most frequently controverted. It seems to some a terrible thing that for the sins of the present life man should suffer through all the ages of the unending future. But it must be remembered that the sufferings of the lost are a result as well as a penalty, and that these sufferings largely grow out of the character which the sinner forms in this life, and with which he enters the future life. This is in perfect accord with the principle, "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap;" he

shall reap that not something else instead of that; and "the harvest is the end of the world." There is a terrible inexorableness in what are called the "laws of nature," which is but another name for the laws of God, the expression of the divine character. Those laws are in their purpose beneficent, and with the obedient they invariably work for beneficent ends; but when resisted, disobeyed, defied, they must, because they are righteous, remorselessly punish whatsoever or whosoever stands in the way. If a man puts himself in deliberate antagonism to God and his laws he must suffer the consequences, and if in this life he forms a character which puts him in such eternal antagonism he must suffer eternal consequences.

The words of Christ on this awful theme are distinct and unequivocal: "these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal." Some have tried, by reckless verbal criticism, to neutralize the force of the declaration, and assert that the words translated "eternal" and "everlasting" do not signify duration without end; but every competent scholar knows that in the Scriptures they always have that meaning unless limited by other words, or by the circumstances of the case. The eternity of God, and the duration of the blessedness of the righteous, are expressed by these words. If, therefore, the punishment of the wicked is not to be eternal, then God himself is not eternal, and the reward of the righteous must terminate, and the heaven of heavens shall pass away. Sometimes the doctrine is opposed by arguments drawn, or supposed to be drawn, from the nature and attributes of God. It is said, "God is love," and it is declared to be incredible that he will consign millions of beings to endless torment for the sins of the present life; that such punishment would imply vindictiveness, which is utterly foreign to his nature. But is the law that dooms the assassin unjust? and are they who execute its sentence vindictive, in the bad sense of that word? The penalties of the law are its vindication, and without that iniquity, and not righteousness, would hold sway. The idea of banishment from God is the most dreadful element in the punishment of the lost. Because they choose to be without God in this world, they are in the future world banished from God. "This is the second death.”

ART. IV. -SOUTH-WESTERN CHINA AND PROSPECTIVE TRADE ROUTES.

[FIRST PAPER.]

LOUIS DE CARNÉ, who was connected, as political representative, with the French exploring expedition of 1866-68, in reporting concerning its results, wrote: "Perspectives full of the deepest interest and attraction open from Saigon beyond the mountains of Tonquin, over the fertile and healthy countries of Western China and Thibet. Fortune, which has so often made us pay for her favors of a day by lasting betrayal, appears to have become less cruel." This passage sufficiently indicates the ulterior motive which has guided France in establishing herself in Tonquin and in the consequent prolonged military operations, it being none other than possession of the commerce and supposed great mineral wealth of South-western and Western China. The direct origin and development of the "Tonquin affair," the conflict with Annam, and the larger conflict with China itself, have been well sketched by the animated pen of Dr. Wentworth in the March number of this Review, and we are thus spared the space required for a detailed reference to that subject, which, in part at least, is legitimately connected with our theme.

By a recent diplomatic arrangement with native Burmah, but vaguely known to the world at date of the present writing, France has acquired a pretended claim upon a portion of the northern Shan States, which were indeed formerly tributary to Burmah, but have of late years been substantially independent. This territory nearly borders upon Tonquin. Such an advance into the interior, from the colony on the south, is foreshadowed in another passage from De Carné: "Now that we are finally settled in Indo-China, our honor demands that the people of the interior should learn to know our name as those of the coast have already, and that England should be no longer imagined by these ignorant races to be the only western power.' M. Blanscubé, the French delegate from the province of Cochin China, who moved the bill in favor of the recent Tonquin expedition, has also with great plainness of speech announced at Paris what may be readily supposed to be an