privileges as that country had never known. All was peace and prosperity. School was crowded, and everybody was happy. But suddenly the whole heavens were overcast. From horizon to horizon a deathly pall enshrouded the entire sky—and the cloud large enough to do all this was only the size of a black child's face! Whosoever will may come, we had said. Did we mean it? Oh, yes, but it is hardly right to sacrifice the feelings of that whole school merely to gratify the wish of—a nigger. Did we mean it? Oh, yes, but it is hardly right to imperil the very existence of the school merely to take in that one poor, despised and uninfluential colored child! Did we mean it? Oh, yes, but is it right, is it wise, to receive one when you know that by so doing you will lose twenty—perhaps more—to receive one whom you will have to help, and lose twenty—or perhaps more—who can help you? Did we mean it? Oh, yes, certainly, but would it not be better to reason with the applicant and show her that while we ourselves have no objection, yet things being as they are, she would really do more for her people by staying away than by insisting that she should be received? Why not take some such position as that? We will have peace and harmony and prosperity. We shall be able to tell our friends in the distance we are getting along swimmingly. We are true to our principles. Whosoever will may come. We have no trouble with the negro question. We simply let it alone. Our dear brethren down South are perfectly delighted to receive us. We have no trouble with them whatever, and the cause is going forward triumphantly.

Is that the way to meet the responsibility? Imagine the Lord Jesus Christ at the door of that school when that black child came asking admission. What would have been His answer? Say, reader, imagine what would have been His answer. Put on your thinking cap. Summon to your aid all the help that quibbling and dodging and sophistry can give, and after you have gone through it all, what do you think would have been His answer? Well, here is the answer the American Missionary Association sent as quickly as the telegraph could carry it: Admit all applicants irrespective of color. And then what followed? Nearly half the scholars picked up their things and left! This happened a few weeks ago. We had about a hundred students. We have now about fifty, and we may lose even those. Letter writing is easy. Talk is cheap. Even Buncombe is not a lost art. But actions speak louder than words. Let us know what follows when the test is applied, and then we shall know just what profession of loyalty to principle signifies. Berea stood by its guns, and it has steadily grown in favor with God and man ever since. And it will win in the end. Then what a glorious triumph! No regrets for having played the hypocrite, no regrets for having played the part of a time server, no regrets for having played the part of a trimmer, no regrets for having played the part of a special pleader, no regrets for having concealed its colors behind its back in shameful silence as to its past history, no regrets for having turned away one of Christ's little ones for whom He died, no regrets for having counseled it, while professing friendship, to go elsewhere. What a glorious triumph!

And we, too, shall win—and our triumph shall be glorious. Let us go forward preaching the Word, and when the time comes let there be no attempt to postpone its issue—but let the test be applied. Better go down standing on our principles than live with our principles denied and dishonored.

RELIGIOUS CULTURE OF THE SLAVES BEFORE THE WAR.

The Independent of Feb. 5 has an exceedingly interesting article on the above subject from the pen of Rev. Dr. J. E. Edwards, Danville, Virginia.

He says that at an early period in this century Southern Methodists sent missionaries to labor with the slaves on the rice and cotton plantations. In 1845 Southern Methodism had in church fellowship 124,000 slaves. At one time the Methodist membership in Charleston, S. C., was in the proportion of five colored to one white. Blacks and whites worshiped in the same house and were ministered to by the same pastor.

One of the early reports of the South Carolina Board has the following: "We claim it best, as a general rule, to include the colored people in the same pastoral charge with the whites, and to preach to both classes in one congregation, as our practice has been. The gospel is the same for all men, and to enjoy its privileges in common, promotes good will."

We read so far and stopped. That language has the marks of the gospel of Jesus Christ all over it. "All ye are brethren." So says the gospel, and this report says the same. But how would it do to take the language above quoted into a Southern white Methodist Conference now! Just let the above report, without comment and without explanation, be introduced to-day into such a Conference, and what an explosion would follow!

It is too bad to quote the rest of the report, because it mars somewhat the beauty of what goes before; but here it is: "That when the galleries or other sittings are insufficient, we consider it the duty of our brethren and friends to provide the necessary accommodations that none may make such a neglect a plea for absenting themselves from public worship." "Galleries or other sittings." There is the fly in the ointment. Of course, at communion, the master class was served first and the slave class afterward.

The Church of Christ is His body. But does Christ allow His followers to decide that distinctions shall be made at His table on account of the hue of the skin? When a Temple is erected in which Christ's disciples are to meet for worship, is there anything in the gospel that warrants a division of seats so that here superiors shall sit and there inferiors? Where is the word that warrants it? and what is the analysis that will find it in the spirit of the gospel? All honor to the slave-holders who furnished the means of the gospel to the slaves. All honor to the men and women who pointed the sin-burdened negroes to the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world. We have no doubt but that as Dr. Edwards says, "Multiplied thousands upon thousands of the sons of Ham will rise up in judgment to bless the faithful men of the South for their long-continued labors in teaching the benighted negro the way of life." We have no doubt of it; but in the resurrection will the whites put in an appearance first and the blacks second? In the day of judgment will the whites lead and the blacks follow? Will there be galleries with hard seats in Heaven for negroes and ground floors easy of access with soft seats for Caucasians? Will the great chorus of Heaven be divided into two parts, a white division and a black division? And will the Hallelujah Chorus as sung by the white choir be more acceptable to God than that sung by the black choir?

Yes, the slave-holders did a great deal for the religious training and the spiritual welfare of the slaves, and in consequence of what they did, with God's blessing, the colored people of our country are almost immeasurably lifted above their benighted heathen brethren in Africa. Yes, that is all so. Does Dr. Edwards ask us to praise them for it? We do. But, brethren, we must also add, "These ought ye to have done and not to leave the other undone."

A TEACHER'S APPEAL.

We publish the following from F. A. Chase, Professor of Natural Science in Fisk University. He pleads, of course, for Fisk, yet his plea holds good for all our higher institutions. We commend it to our friends. The American Missionary Association could make good use, say, of a "One Hundred Thousand Dollar Fund"