human soul recognizes as akin to its own essence; sometimes subduing the soul to sadness like the remembered tones of the loved and lost, or thrilling the heart like the sound of one's native tongue falling upon the ear of the traveller in a distant land, or wakening to juster conceptions of the possible power and greatness in reserve for the redeemed soul.

Thus we may lay down the general principle in reference to individual authors, that of all the writers of a given period, whatever the subject of which they treat, and however great their abilities, only those will have an abiding place in the respect and the regards of men, who recognize and in some degree illustrate and enforce those moral ideas on which the welfare of society as of individuals depends. We have already indirectly called attention to this fact in referring to some of the leading names of literary history. It will not now be necessary to cite more than a few, and such as belong to literature in its narrower sense. By general consent, Washington Irving has been assigned the first place in our American literature, as, on the whole, the most thoroughly accomplished literary man our country has produced. Yet he never loses sight of a moral purpose. "You laugh," said he to his nephew, who on reading to him a flattering review of his works, smiled as he came to this sentence: "His most comical pieces have always a serious end in view"; "you laugh, but it is true. I have kept that to myself hitherto, but that man has found me out."*

Irving knew full undertone in order

well that the humorous must have a serious to its greatest power over the human heart. If another author were to be named at once popular, and one that at first thought would seem to be opposed to the principle here asserted, that author would probably be Robert Burns, and yet it is more than probable that if his greatest admirers were asked to name the poem for which they value and love him most, they would name first of all the "Cottar's Saturday Night," and that without thinking, because of its truthfulness as one of the fairest pictures of humble Christian life. And if they were to quote some of the passages that first come to their memories, they would cite such as are expressive of the moral sentiments of his better hours, and which he often intersperses in his lighter verse.

*Life and Letters, Vol, 2, p. 57.

Where shall we find truer conceptions of manhood than in the song, "For a' that and a' that"; or of worldly pleasure than when compared to

"the snow falls in the river,

A moment white, then melts forever";

or, again, in some of those sad dirges in which he gave utterance to his deep sense of the insufficiency of all earthly good to satisfy the cravings of our immortal nature?

In fact this element of sadness enters largely into the popular poetry of the misses. It meets a response as none else can. It is true to the actual experience of men; it is a confession to the fact of sin and sorrow as a great fundamental fact of human experience. So Byron utters one long wail of disappointed hope with its manifold changes from highest to lowest, yet often wonderfully true to the minor notes of the human soul, because the truthful confessions a brilliant, highly gifted, abandoned worldling. And the same sad sympathy is the occasion of much of our interest in the greatest poem of an American poet in some aspects similar to Byron, the "Raven" of Edgar A. Poe.

On the other hand, but meeting the wants of the soul on another side, see what a hold, what a tenacity of life is possessed by the sacred lyrics of the church, sung in all lands, by believers of every age and name; and because true to the deepest experiences of our spiritual being. Thus Watts, and Wesley, and Steele, and Newton, and Bonar, have won for themselves undying names. Thus the recent productions beginning, "Just as I am," and "Nearer my God, to thee," strike a chord in the popular heart, and became at once favorite expressions of faith, spiritual communion and joyful confidence.

The literature of the world then, in different ages, heathen and Christian, in its different branches, and as the product of individual minds, pays its homage to the moral order of the universe; and finds the law of its life and real power to be at one with those great moral ideas which divine providence is employing for the renovation and sanctification of the race. The words, "I came not to destroy but to fulfil," find their application in literature as in other fields of human activity. Humanity is for Christ. All that is truly noble in it, all that is worthy of it, finds its perfection in Christ as the centre of di

vine truth; and so literature is made to serve the ends of his government, and his purposes of grace to a fallen world.

Is it too much to say, then, that literature has its law, its determining principle, its scientific basis? May it not be reduced to a science? May not its different branches, so far as they are properly distinct, or so far as they exhibit some characteristic quality, though more or less blended with others, be classified, and distributed according to the degree in which they minister to the popular wants; with perhaps a reference at the same time to the faculties more immediately concerned and addressed in their production? The classification would range all the way from that which addresses our proper spiritual being, down through that which presents truth to us under the form of beauty, to the strictly scientific or philosophic statement, from the most universal to the least so, from that which, independent of time or circumstance, belongs to man as man, to the highest forms of æsthetic or philosophic description.

No account is here made of the form in which the truth is expressed, because the form is not independent of the truth. The best, most adequate form is the one that most adequately expresses the truth. The story of Lear had been told by scores of chroniclers, and with not a little power by Layamon, enlarging upon his French original, but its entire truth, its moral power, still waited for Shakespeare. In this view it matters little how many authors discuss the same theme, he who utters the truth in the best way, in all its fulness, records his immortality with the truth. Some men have the power to set forth a truth full-orbed, with that "rich economy of expression" that leaves nothing to be desired. It is so much like creation, that we at once and without question give them the name of genius, and count them among the world's benefactors. And yet it is not the beautiful form but the truth that lives and throbs beneath the form, that wakens our highest admiration.

Finally, we find in the principle discussed the determining grounds of literary criticism. Back of local associations, back of the accidents of time or circumstances as the peculiar spirit of an age or people, lies the question, whether a given production shall live in the minds and hearts of men, as a living power for good, with its divine mission in the moral and social eleva

tion of mankind. Is it true? Is it the whole truth in consequence of a fitting form? Does it minister to the common needs of men, with power to quicken and strengthen whatever is best and worthiest in our nature? If so it will live, live among the

"Truths that wake

To perish never."

ARTICLE V.

THE UNJUST STEWARD: AN EXPOSITION OF LUKE xvi. 1-12, IN A NEW VIEW.

MOST readers of this parable have felt great difficulty in discovering in what respect the conduct of the steward, here referred to, is called wise; or how it could with propriety be set forth as an example for Christians. We may infer this from the almost innumerable explanations which have been offered by interpreters.

The Saviour is here admonishing his disciples to act justly, wisely, and to use their property, talents and opportunities of doing good in such a manner, that when they shall be removed from their employments in this world, they may give up their accounts with joy, and be received into everlasting habitations as good and faithful stewards.

But how such conduct is taught and illustrated by the example of a man who seems, at first view, to have acted neither justly, wisely, nor charitably, who first wasted his lord's goods, and then endeavored to deceive and defraud him, is somewhat hard to be made out by the common interpretation of the parable.

We can not suppose that our Saviour meant to justify dishonesty, however cunningly practiced, and to exhort his disciples to imitate the conduct of a man who was turned out of his office for scandalous breach of trust, and made provision for

his future support by joining with fraudulent debtors to cheat

his employer.

And yet the passage declares that the lord of the unjust steward commended him because he had done wisely; while our Saviour urges the children of light to adopt the same principle of action.

The parable is, doubtless, capable of an explanation which will set the conduct of the steward in a better light, and show that he was commended, not for a low and dishonest cunning, which is never in the Bible called wisdom, but for strict justice, and a wise forecast.

If it can be made to appear that, in making up his accounts, and in his arrangement with these debtors, he acted faithfully and wisely both toward his employer and those with whom he transacted his business, we shall see in the Saviour's address a just and necessary inference from the parable, and an essential doctrine of Christianity. Let us then examine this parable.

A certain rich man had a steward, to whom he had committed the management of his estate. Upon a charge of having, in some way, wasted or injured the property, he was called to account, and threatened with expulsion from his office. In order to silence his accusers, to satisfy his employer, and to retain his place, he sent for those who were indebted to the estate, and reduced their debts, some one half, others one fifth, from the original amount, thus giving up a large amount as the price of safety. This proceeding merited the approbation of the employer, of the debtors, and of our Lord.

Now in order to understand the ground upon which this proceeding is commended, we must ascertain the relation in which this man stood to his master on the one side, and to the debtors on the other.

It was common in the East, as it is in many parts of the world now, for the owner of a very large estate, which he was either indisposed or unable to manage himself, to put it into the hands of an agent who had skill and experience, who managed it according to his own discretion, and, so far as others were concerned, stood in the place of the owner.

The agent, or steward, was bound to pay the owner a round sum annually; and so long as this was paid punctually, the pro