are little heard of, till some newly-imported Africans or some itinerant impostor revives them. It is greatly to be regretted, that at the abolition of slavery, some public provision was not made for the education of the peasantry. The various churches of Jamaica have had comparatively little means of supplying education, and yet they have done much for the literary and spiritual improvement of the people. That the slaves were morally prepared for freedom, by the influence of Christianity, is most fully attested by their conduct as freemen; and if they or their children had been educationally prepared for liberty, a most important contribution would have been made towards the permanent prosperity of the island. To educate and elevate a country, it is necessary not only to establish good schools throughout it, but also to secure the attendance of the children; and to secure this attendance, education must either be appreciated by the parents, or made compulsory for a time, by the State. Compulsory education can be vindicated only as a special and temporary measure, in order to the general introduction and appreciation of tuition, and as rendered necessary by parental ignorance and apathy. Usually, we may safely confide the sustenance of children to parental affection; but should such affection be found wanting or inadequate, the State may appropriately interfere for a compulsory maintenance. Exactly parallel to this is such a state of parental illiteracy and indifference as entirely overlooks the education of children, and plainly justifies the State in compelling the instruction of the young. But such compulsory instruction must be duly limited,—as purely secular, in accordance with the purely secular functions of civil rulers,—as of the shortest duration consistent, but with efficiency,-and as strictly conformed to constitutional principles and practices. If the State may compel parents to feed their children, it may also compel them to educate their children, by either accepting the secular education which the nation supplies, or by providing themselves some adequate substitute. But though no public provision was made in Jamaica, for either compulsory or optional common-school education, in the time most favourable for it, the time of the apprenticeship, or of the first years of full freedom, it is gratifying to know that something is now being done by the Government of Jamaica, and still more by voluntary benevolence, for the education of the Jamaica people. For some years there has been a Government Normal seminary at Spanish-town for training teachers, open to qualified youths of all denominations; and the public Board of Education, by which it has been instituted and directed, makes also annual allotements of money to several denominational and other schools. The Church of England, the Presbyterians, Moravians, Baptists, Methodists, and Independents, have several schools in the island, which are contributing very considerably to the intellectual elevation and advancement of the people. There are also several educational institutions, created and permanently endowed by private benevolence, most of which under a better system might very greatly benefit the island, and are even now of material service. First of all may be mentioned the Mico Institution in Kingston, comprising an infant-school, a boys'-school, and a girls'-school, and a school for training teachers. There are also, in Spanish-town, Beckford's free-school, established 1744; a freeschool in the parish of Vere; in St. Anne, the Walton free-school; Woolmer's free-school, in Kingston; Titchfield free-school, in the parish of Portland; Manning's free-school, in Westmoreland; a free-school supported by the parish of St. James; Ruseau's school, in the parish of Hanover; and besides these there have been several bequests for education which have not been made available. There are many things in Jamaica, as elsewhere, to sadden the real philanthropist, but there is nothing to discourage the future exertions of benevolence, or to occasion regret for the past. Much has been done for the island by the missionary institutions of England; much good has been achieved, and a noble foundation has been laid for future skill and toil. So noble a country, so much cultivated and improved, and possessing the Anglo-Saxon language and institutions, is not destined to relapse into barbarism, but out of every eclipse and every cloud, will yet emerge into the sunshine of prosperity, and reward the exertions of its adherents and friends. JEPHTHAH'S VOW. Scripture Cabinet. DID HE SACRIFICE HIS DAUGHTER? WHAT was Jephthah's vow? And in fulfilling that vow did he sacrifice his daughter, or offer her for a burnt-offering? Before attempting to answer these questions, I wish to premise that it is a safe and correct principle of interpretation, that when we can give to the original text -whether Hebrew or Greek-a rendering that conforms to the structure of the language, and to the meaning of the words, and at the same time harmonizes with the character of an actor whom the Scriptures represent as devotedly pious, we should do so. I. What was Jephthah's vow? Did "he vow that whatever came forth from the door of his house to meet him he would offer as a burnt-offering to the Lord?" Our English Bible gives his vow thus: "And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands, then it shall be that whatsoever cometh forth of the doors of my house to meet me when I return in peace shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer it up for a burntoffering." Judges xi. 30, 31. 1. Any one capable of deciphering the original text will see, as Dr. Clarke has stated at length, and as the margin gives it, that the word "and" connecting the two clauses of the vow may be, and as some think should be, rendered or. Then the vow runs thus: "Whatsoever cometh forth to meet me shall surely be the Lord's, or I will offer it for a burnt-offering." That is, if the object that meet me be suitable for a burnt-offering I will sacrifice it; if not I will consecrate it to the service of the Lord. 2. This vow is capable of still another interpretation, which I like better. The word rendered "it" may as well be him, referring to the Lord. There is no word in the original answering to "for" in the text. When a writer intends to say for a burntoffering, the preposition lambda (our 1) is prefixed. But it is not here, and therefore not to be expressed in our version. Should we therefore insert him instead of "it," and drop "for," which does not belong in the text, we have the vow in this form: "That which cometh forth...... to meet me shall surely be the Lord's, and I will offer him (the Lord) a burnt-offering." Such a vow Jephthah could literally per form without barbarously and inhumanly slaying his daughter, and thus wickedly violate his own religious sense, and insult with a heathen abomination the Lord to whom he had religiously made a solemn vow. The vow was made under the influences of the Holy Spirit. See verse 29. II. The second question. In fulfilling his vow did Jephthah offer his daughter for a burnt-sacrifice? Taking the interpretation of the text as I have given it, it is evident he did not commit this outrage. 1. Let us look at the sequel as given in the historic narrative: "And Jephthah came to Mizpeh unto his house, and behold, his daughter came out to meet him." Now if we render the Hebrew word that connects the two parts of his vow or instead of "and," the vow might have been literally fulfilled by consecrating his daughter to the service of the Lord, according to a custom existing at that time. It was wholly unlawful to offer human sacrifices to God; but it was lawful to set apart a daughter in perpetual virginity for the service of the temple. But, adopting the second mode of interpretation, if we retain the copulative "and," and insert him in the stead of "it," and leave out "for," as we certainly may, then the vow could also have been literally fulfilled without the inhumanity of slaying his own child. He both gave his daughter to the Lord, agreeably to the first part of the vow, and offered unto him a burntoffering according to the second branch of the vow, in token of gratitude for his success in battle against the Ammonites. 2. Though Jephthah literally fulfilled his vow (see verse 39), yet the context seems to indicate clearly that he did not slay his child in sacrifice. She asked an interim of two months before the vow should be fulfilled, that she might bewail-not her death in sacrifice to God; she herself did not so understand the matter, but-her virginity. Her request was granted. She, with her companions, did accordingly bewail her virginity upon the mountains. Now, what must we understand by bewailing her virginity? She and her associates could not bewail that she was at that time a virgin. The fact of her virginity had nothing to do with her meeting her father from the door of his house; had nothing to do with any supposed death in sacrifice. It was not a lamentable misfortune in Israel to be a virgin-as in some heathen countries to be a female-though it was to remain one through life, as she must have done under the vow of her father. Why, then, bewail her virginity? This is easily answered, and the answer throws a flood of light upon this entire vexed question. A custom prevailed in Israel of setting apart unmarried females to the service of the Lord in the temple.-See Numbers xxxi. 35-40. These "thirty-two" were to remain unmarried. The daughter of Jephthah and her companions bewailed, therefore, her future continued virginity, to which she had been devoted in the haste of her earnest father, zealous for victory. Why her prospective and perpetual virginity should be an occasion of such general and extreme lamentation will appear in a subsequent part of this article. 66 3. That Jephthah's daughter was not slain, but devoted in perpetual virginity to the temple-service, seems evident, again, from the facts stated in verses 39 and 40: "She knew no man," that is, remained a virgin. It was a custom in Israel that the daughters of Israel went yearly to comfort, or talk with (not to lament) the daughter of Jephthah four days in a year." This they could not have done had she been sacrificed. From this hasty and brief view of the vow and its fulfiment, it certainly seems strongly probable that Jephthah did not sacrifice his daughter. 4. There is also strong presumptive evidences of this view of the subject from his character and his knowledge of the law of God against such inhuman barbarities. He was a judge in Israel, and a captain of her armies, by the consent of the people, and by Divine appointment. The narrative everywhere sets forth his devotion to God. "The Spirit of the Lord came upon him," and under his hallowing influence he vowed unto the Lord. That vow-not a rash one --he religiously observed. More yet; even the Apostle Paul, in his Epistle to the Hebrew Christians, reckons Jephthah among the faithful servants of God, which he could not have done had he been so far under the influence of heathen customs as to offer his child a burnt-sacrifice to a heathen god,much less to the Lord God of Israel. III. Such objections to the above interpretation as seem of weight I will now attempt to meet. 1. It has been asked, "Why Jephthah was so sad in view of his vow, if it did not, under the circumstances, involve the slaying of his child?" I answer, because it was his only child, and her perpetual virgi nity, to which she had been devoted, cut off all hope of the Messiah being in the line of his descendants. This was an all-absorbing desire with the pious Jews. Abraham and the whole line of patriarchs were blessed in this regard. David was honoured in that the Messiah was to proceed through him. This hope, in the case of Jephthah and his family being cut off, was enough to elicit the sorrowful cry, 'Alas, my daughter thou hast brought me very low," &c. In fulfilment of his vow, his only child was to remain during life in servile, though honourable, separation from the father. On the demise of Jephthah the family became extinct, and in this he was "brought very low." 2. The objection that the phrase "haalah olah" can only mean to offer a burnt-offering, has no force against the second and more plausible interpretation. For, I admit that Jephthah did literally perform his vow by making a burnt-offering to the Lord. CHRISTIAN WATCHFULNESS. "What I say unto you, I say unto all,-watch!' JESUS. These are the words of Jesus Christ, addressed to every one of his professed disciples, and yet how few of them seem to have any realizing sense of their deeply solemn import. Encompassed, as the Christian continually is, by the strongest and most formidable adversaries, how allimportant that he ever be on his guard, ready, at a moment's warning, to meet the enemy of his soul at any point he may begin the attack, and, nerved by power Divine, and sustained by heavenly grace, come off more than conqueror through "Him that hath loved us and given himself for us." It is the Christian's high and blood-bought privilege, in all his contests with Satan, all his conflicts with the flesh, and all his battles with the world, to be a moral hero, and to retire from the fierce scene of combat with the laurels of a glorious triumph upon his spiritual brow: "Thy saints, in all this glorious war, Let us notice, and barely notice I. SOME THINGS WHICH DEMAND CHRISTIAN WATCHFULNESS. 1. We should watch against self-deception. -Not a few there are in all our churches who are self-deceived, and vainly imagine they are on their way to heaven. They have never evangelically repented of their sins, and believed on the Lord Jesus Christ to the saving of their souls. The light that is in them is darkness, and therefore how great is that darkness! There is no correspondence, but direct disagreement, between their professions and their practice. Failing to produce in their lives the fruits which are the scriptural test-virtues of a life of godliness, they must be regarded as self-deceived, trusting for salvation in "a refuge of lies." Fearful to such characters are these solemn words of Holy writ:-"Be not deceived; God is not mocked for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting." Gal. vi. 7, 8. 2. We should watch against unbelief.Unbelief is a most fearful sin, and has proved the ruin of hundreds and thousands who once enjoyed the religion of Jesus, and tasted of the good word of life. With many Christians, perhaps most of them, unbelief is "the well-circumstanced sin," or "the sin which doth so easily beset them." Let us, kind reader, watch against this enemy of our peace and comfort, and never be satisfied till the least and last remains of it are expelled from our hearts. So dishonouring is this sin to God and his glorious perfections, and so chilling to the life of God in the soul, that the apostle Paul exhorted his Hebrew brethren to take heed, lest there might be in any of them "an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God." Heb. iii. 12. 3. We should watch against formality.Unless we pray much and fervently, and have the sacred fire of love burning warmly and brightly upon the altar of the heart, there is a great tendency to a dull and lifeless formality, even in our most solemn devotions. We should watch this point: "This people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me." 4. We should watch against pride.—Pride seems to be nearly the last principle which yields before the triumphant march of grace in the human soul. It is so interwoven into the very texture of our being, that its existence in the heart, in some degree, is not incompatible with even a state of acceptance with God. Sanctification, or "holiness perfected in the fear of God," can alone destroy its root in the heart. How many have made "shipwreck of faith and of a good conscience" by a failure to observe Christian watchfulness in regard to pride, as to its manifestations in their persons, gifts, accomplishments, dress, style of living, &c. Watch against this foe of your happiness, Christian reader, and mortify the deeds of the body. 5. We should watch against anger.-This is the besetting sin of thousands of even those who profess to enjoy the Christian religion, and will be the cause of the ruin of multitudes of professors at the last day. Sinful tempers and true religion can never exist together, -they are eternally opposite; all anger must be given up, before the mild and lamblike spirit of Christianity can dwell permanently in the heart. Reader, it may be, that unholy temper of yours has planted many a thorn in your happiness, and cast many a stain on your conscience. Heed the word of God, for it speaks to you pointedly, "Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in anywise to do evil," Psa. xxxvii. 8. Watch, then, this adversary of your soul. 6. We should watch against evil-speaking. -Evil-speaking is one of the leading characteristic sins of the Church. It claims an alarming universality. In fearful results and moral enormity, this sin is scarcely equalled by any of the prominent evils which darken and stain the Christian character. How many of this type of professing Christians there are in every branch of Christ's Church, who are the source of endless strifes and divisions among their brethren; men with smooth tongues: Latural Bistory and Philosophy. PROPERTIES OF MATTER. PHYSICS, or Natural Philosophy, is, to use the language of Bacon, "the root of the sciences and arts," and as such, it is of growing importance that our rising youth become acquainted with its general principles, and most interesting phenomena, in order that the operations of Nature, and the inventions of human ingenuity, may be well understood. The visible universe is made up of matter, consisting of extremely minute and indestructible atoms. The smallest fragment of any substance, though scarcely perceptible by the unaided eye, is a mass of innumerable particles or atoms, so called from the Greek, and signifying that these particles cannot be further divided, though they may be separated from each other, or thrown into a new arrangement or combination. They are, however, indestructible, except by the will of Him who created them, and whose Omnipotence alone can destroy one of the infinite multitudes of atoms of which the universe consists. It therefore is very unlikely that, amid the innumerable changes that have taken place since creation, a single atom of the universe has been destroyed. In this respect "all things remain as they were from the beginning," before "the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy." The property by which the particles of matter in all bodies are capable of separation from each other is called Divisibility. A minute fragment of marble, hardly visible to the naked eye, under the microscope appears a block, capable of indefinite divi sion. If it then be subdivided until even, by the aid of this instrument, the separate particles are hardly discernible, these may be further divided by dissolving them in an acid, until the whole becomes absolutely invisible from the extreme minuteness to which they have been reduced. If a pound of silver, or 5,760 grains, and one grain of gold be melted together, the gold will be so equally diffused through the other metal, that if a grain of the mass be dissolved in nitric acid, the gold will fall to the bottom, showing that the grain of gold is thereby readily and evidently divisible into 5,761 portions. Gold-beaters spread a grain of that metal into a leaf of fifty square inches, readily divisible into 500,000 parts, visible to the naked eye. By the microscope, the 100th part of each of these minute masses becomes visible. A single grain of gold can, therefore, be divided into 50,000,000 (fifty million) visible portions. The leaf is beaten so thin, that 282,000 leaves will be only an inch in thickness, and yet will be so perfect, and so free from holes, that when used in gilding they will have the appearance of solid gold. They are so thin, that if formed into a book 1,500 of them would occupy no more space than a single leaf of common paper; while an octavo volume of an inch thick would have about as many pages as a library consisting of 1,500 volumes averaging each 400 pages. More surprising still is this divisibility of gold in covering silver wire for making gold-lace, where it is calculated that one grain of gold covers a space of thirty square yards! When dissolved in acid, or dissipated by intense heat into vapour, the particles into which the gold is divided must be much more, though incalculably, numerous still. The natural divisions of matter far exceed even these. Odoriferous bodies, as camphor, assafoetida, ammonia, are perpetually sending forth their scent, and yet lose but an extremely small portion of their weight in a great length of time. A grain of musk will perfume a room for twenty years together without a perceptible diminution of quantity; and as these diffused particles are sufficiently numerous to affect the organ of smell in every part of the room, each must be of inconceivable minuteness. A lighted candle placed in an open plain will be visible for about two miles round. Were it placed two miles above the surface of the earth, its luminous particles would fill a sphere four miles in diameter, and this before it had sensibly lost any part of its weight. Leuwenhoek calculated that there are more animals in the milt of a cod-fish than there are human beings in the world. Ehrenberg, and other microscopists, have shown that in water in which certain vegetables have been infused, there are animalcules so very small, that a grain of sand will cover thousands, and even millions of them! Minute as these animals are, they have structures which, though inconceivably infinitesimal, are wondrous and complex as those of the elephant, the whale, the condor, or the boa constrictor : "In thousand species of the insect kind, Lost to the naked eye,-so wondrous small, A heart, which drives the torrent through its |