The woman stands on a similar plane, but just the reverse of the man she stands two-thirds of the diameter from the upper extremity. The lines from her extend back to her grandfather, but not down to her grandson. Enough of this; so long as we have the Bible, we shall not try to teach people their duty by a pair of compasses.

The tremendous discipline which the author would inflict on some good Christians, ought to be vindicated by very strong arguments. Now let it be observed that a conclusion may be supported either by a number of independent arguments, or by a number so united as to form one chain: and whether a chain be formed of argument, or of steel, its whole strength is exactly the strength of its weakest link. If we suspend a body of a thousand pounds weight upon four separate links, each of them of strength sufficient to support two hundred and fifty pounds, the whole mass is supported but if we suspend the whole on one chain, the weakest link must either be of strength sufficient to support a thousand pounds weight, or, whatever the number and strength of the other links, the whole body must fall. The arguments used by the author and his fellow labourers to justify the church in giving over to Satan all those who have entered into the marriage relations which he objects to, form only one chain, and suspended from the 18th of Leviticus. The first link in it is, that the statutes in that chapter are laws to the Christian world; the second, that the subject of them is incestuous marriage; the third, that they are to be applied constructively to cases which they do not specify; and the fourth, that by fair construction they forbid a man to marry the sister or niece of his deceased wife. We have no confidence in the strength of any link in this chain; but though there were three of them of the greatest strength imaginable, yet if there is one of them too weak, the whole argument fails, and the supposed offenders have a right to remain in the church, or to enter into it, if otherwise worthy. We have endeavoured to try the strength of all these arguments in the course of this review, and are convinced that every one of them fails.

In addition to the principal arguments employed by the author, he has a few remarks which claim a passing notice. He tells us that Herod was reproved by John the Baptist for having his brother Philip's wife; but he forgets to tell us, that Philip was then alive, that consequently Herod was

living in open violation of the seventh commandment. He notices the case of the Corinthian who had his father's wife, but does not tell us, that his was another case of adultery. The apostle mentions him that suffered the wrong, as well as him that did the wrong; hence it seems the father was a living sufferer from the wicked conduct of his son. It is granted that adultery is aggravated by relationship, and by various other circumstances, even when there is no relationship,

To reconcile the public to his views, the author remarks, that there is no scarcity of females. In most parts of the world this holds true. But does this justify us, in casting people out of the church for acts that are not contrary to any law of God, nor to the peace and order of society. It was not ungracious in God to forbid the use of one tree in paradise, but it would not have been well for a fellow creature, even though an angel, to forbid the use of a few more, and say to our first parents, "Ye have enough without them." Our author's reasoning here is the same which is often used by the aged miser, when from pecuniary considerations alone, he crosses the affections of his children.

In page 51, Mr. Dwight asserts that the law of incest had remained unaltered under the care of the Jewish church for fifteen centuries, and under that of the Christian church for more than seventeen centuries. On the other hand, the learned Selden, who flourished about two hundred years ago, affirms that marriage with one's wife's sister was practised among the Jews. Only one sect (the Karats) condemned such alliances, and their other rules on the subject of marriage are such that they cannot be regarded as any authority. They even forbade marriage between two whose parents had married together. It would seem that the first instance of opposition to marriage with a sister-in-law was in the reign of Constantine, when marriage came to be in a measure discouraged, as it ever since has been in the church of Rome.

If the incest law which Mr. Dwight contends for had been acted on by the apostles, they would have had immense trouble with their converts previously married according to the customs of the countries where they had lived. But we cannot find that they or the primitive Christians ever had any difficulty with that subject. It would seem that

they respected as valid the marriages contracted according to the different laws of the countries whither they went. If Mr. Dwight were to go out as a foreign missionary we believe that his views of the marriage question would bring him into some difficulties which the apostles never encountered, and difficulties which would impede the progress of the gospel.

The desire of confining this review within moderate bounds has led us to pass over in silence several parts of this volume, in which the author successfully replies to some of the more absurd arguments of his opponents, or laughs them down as they deserve. Though generally speaking we agree not with his views, and are not convinced by his arguments, we can freely recommend his volume for good suggestions to all who wish to investigate the subject. We applaud his zeal for moral purity, according to his own views of it. We return him our thanks for his labour in the cause; and though differing widely from his principles of interpretation, we think we have profited by his learned and laboured researches.

ART. VI. MOURNING APPAREL.

No usage prevails more widely, than that of employing rites in the deploration and commemoration of the dead. These rites, indeed, take different forms according to national character. In the East, they, in common with all things else, are marked by passion and excess; and hence, as would be anticipated, occupy a briefer period of time. Among occidental nations, they continue longer, and have more of sobriety and moderation. Those of savage tribes often embody much that is gross, and much that is foreign to their design; while those of civilized nations participate in the general purity and delicacy of cultured feeling. But there is, nevertheless, in the midst of this diversity, unity

and sameness. The usage is fundamentally one, and in some shape or other, it is found in all parts of the world. True, the old and the infantile, where they owe their death to intentional neglect or actual violence-as is the case in China, and extensively in the rest of the realm of heathenism-go to the grave unhonoured and unwept, or are thrown as carrion to the vulture and the kite. It is not so, however, even there, with the dead generally. For others there are honourable burial and impassioned lamentation. If, perchance, there be on the face of the globe, a people which has no funeral or commemorative rites relative to the departed, it may be safely presumed, on the analogy of the fact just mentioned, that such people must be sunk in the very lowest depths of barbarism.

The usage, moreover, has obtained in all ages. Notices of its observance are found on the first pages of the most ancient books. In Genesis they are abundant. In the Iliad they are no less so. And the history and poetry of all later times, concur in testimony to its unceasing and universal continuance.

Thus time-hallowed and universal, the usage can owe its existence to nothing local, transient, or circumstantial. The polite world may cherish it, and engraft her arbitrary and artificial fashions on it, but is by no means its native soil. It must have its root in something common to all mankind, and spring up spontaneously in the human heart. Nor is the rationalé of its origin at all abstruse. The custom is by no means isolated and singular, and unlike every thing else. It is rather one of a sisterhood of usages, all having the same parentage, and playing a like constant and conspicuous part on the stage of life.

Emotion loves symbolical manifestation. Language, oral and written, is doubtless the more important mode of revealing the inward man. But yet, though well adapted to its end, and of priceless worth, it is not entirely sufficient. Accordingly the other medium is largely employed in the expression of feeling. The orator, for instance, however well stocked his magazine of burning words, were there no eye through which the fire of his soul could flash forth, and no arm which could be wielded in varied and vehement gesticulation, would deem himself shorn of half his strength. The excited feelings of friends meeting find their readiest and fullest manifestation in the grasp of the hand, the kindVOL. IV.

28

ling of the eye, and the smile of the lips. Woman, greeting the returned husband or child, pours forth the full tide of her joy and love, not mainly in words, but in the fond and lingering embrace. Respect inclines the head; devotion. lifts the hand, and bends the knee. And the deeper and more enduring the emotion, the bolder and more frequent the manifestation. Thus the. Orientals, whose inward life concentrates itself in feeling, pre-eminently and characteristically delight in the symbolic.

The same impulse which prompts the soul to employ, besides the voice, the body generally, in the revelation of herself, induces also the use, subserviently to the same purpose, of those garments which man puts on chiefly to screen his shame and secure his comfort. Nothing can be more natural: for so constantly do they invest him, and so indispensable are they in respect both to beauty and utility, that they seem to constitute a part of himself. One is not indeed always, or perhaps often conscious, that his inward character is at all indicated by his apparel. Yet, trivial as the mode of indication may appear, so it is. Mirthfulness has her light and fantastic drapery; while melancholy assumes dark and sombre vestments. Vanity delights in the rich and gorgeous; modesty, in the chaste and unostentatious. Apparel images the dignified sobriety and humility of the clergyman, and the quaint saintliness of the Quaker. Regal pride glories in its diadem, its sceptre, and its robes. The characteristic peculiarities of national feeling even, have each its appropriate outward costume.

It were then to be anticipated, that the emotions of the bereaved should find an exteriour and symbolic manifestation, and that its chief and prominent form should be what it is. Indeed Mourning Apparel constitutes a singularly befitting expression of those emotions.

The heart is in sorrow. Death hath removed a loved one from the circle of its communings. It feels itself blighted and desolate. At first, it solitarily pours forth its anguish in weeping. Afterwards, it whispers its griefs in the ear, and seeks the sympathy of friendship. But these outlets by no means exhaust it. It is not a momentary or ephemeral thing. A few outbursts of weeping may calm its turbulence, and sympathy may do much toward restoring serenity. But there is a still sadness which will not thus die away, but endures many a week, perchance many a month.