be no need for my going beyond the sacred oracles of God; but since my book may possibly fall into the hands of those who ignore, or profess to ignore, the Scriptures, I may be pardoned for branching out a little in another direction, to meet the demands of such readers. It would be absurd in the extreme to argue with people from the contents of a book in which they do not believe. It is better to meet them upon their own grounds.

CHAPTER II.

Mode of conducting the inquiry into Hades-Six different opinions respecting death and its consequences-Death not the extinction of man -Human beings not descended from apes, monkeys, or gorillas-A line of noble ancestry highly esteemed by most men-Such discussions futile-God not exalted by them-Every nature in the universe under law-Transformation of a gorilla into a man an impossibility-No radical change in the nature of an animal-Various senses of the word soul in the Bible.

Now, in order that the reader may thoroughly understand the subject under consideration, and that justice may be done to all parties concerned, I deem it necessary to investigate the opinions held by the religious world. touching death, and the consequences thence arising to us all. My proceeding will be conducted after this manner, because I am most anxious to act candidly and honorably toward those who have their own opinions, and who differ from the doctrine taught by our Church. Since there are no fewer than six different opinions respecting the state of man after death, and since all possess distinctive characteristics, I shall examine each view in its proper order, taking every precaution to state it fairly; and if I find in Scripture any text or texts which seem, even in the slightest degree, to countenance the opinion under investigation, I shall not fail to bring it forward for no other purpose than that of giving to it full weight in the course of the argument. I now invite the careful attention of the reader to the first of the six prevailing opinions, by which it is believed that death is the extinction of body and soul.

I need scarcely apprise those who peruse these pages how much the minds of many people have been distressed and struck with the greatest apprehension, lest argument

ative evidence should be advanced to show that man descended from some inferior kind of animals, the names of which, except one or two, there can scarcely be any necessity for my mentioning in this place. It is curious and important to notice the amazing length of time required by these learned professors for this wonderful transformation,-a transformation, indeed, which, viewed from any point we please, is a stupendous miracle. To my mind the best way of dealing with a subject of this character is, to ascertain from the supporters of such a doctrine what they really mean by the word transformation. And, secondly, what length of time they consider requisite for this mighty achievement. After this has

been fully ascertained, it would not be out of place to inquire whether they could furnish a solitary instance of one animal having been changed into another of a different nature. The previous questions are almost certain to receive either no reply, or if they do elicit a reply, it will be one of an unsatisfactory character. It is undoubtedly one of the most extraordinary events recorded in the history of man, that there should be found, especially in the nineteenth century, a human being whose philosophical researches could possibly lead him to believe that he descended either from an ape or a gorilla. Most, if not all people, are proud to acknowledge a line of noble ancestry; but in this case we find the very reverse to be the truth. Is this a mental delusion, or does it arise from a wish to ignore the word of God? No doubt, some will say that the desire of those who hold such views is to arrive at the truth; to which we cannot but reply that the method adopted for gaining this point is, to say the least of it, most unaccountable, and may well excite the wonder of any one possessing an ordinary share of common sense. Did I for one moment imagine that my ancestors, how remote soever, had been connected either with the ape or gorilla tribe, I most assuredly would keep the matter a profound secret; it should never escape from my lips. Supposing, however, that it could be shown with some appearance of probability that mankind have sprung from such a low origin as that of

monkeys, what advantage would arise from a knowledge of the fact? In what respect could the supposed truth benefit us? Would the Creator be exalted in our estimation? Should we be induced to think more highly of the Bible? Is not information of this description calculated to make skeptics, and infidels, and even atheists? In my judgment, such uncertain and unprofitable studies proceed upon a disbelief in the Bible, or from a wish to be thought wise above what is written; and they only leave those who pursue them in a world of labyrinths and perpetual doubt. The best way, however, to deal with the subject is to put it upon its own basis, and to discuss it with every care and attention. By these means we shall have an opportunity of ascertaining the merits and demerits of this singular theory. Let us proceed, then, in the following manner, to investigate the subject philosophically, and then it is to be hoped that we shall be able to draw correct conclusions.

Every nature in the universe has in its very essence a special law operating upon it and in it every moment of its existence, and this special law continues its operation in the same manner at the beginning, the middle, and the end of that nature's existence. We admit that there may be a possibility of frustrating this law to some small extent; but then the result will always be a change for the worse, and consequently the effect will be manifest by the degeneration of the animal which may happen to be the subject of experiment. So long as this natural law is not frustrated by experiments or otherwise, the nature will advance in regular and proper order till it arrive at that particular point or limit which is the boundary allotted to it by the Creator Himself. Had this nature inherent power to convert itself into anything it pleased, we might in all truth say that it would be under no law except such as its own whimsical and capricious fancy thought proper to invent and then establish. And, indeed, supposing one of the inferior animals should entertain a notion-and it must be admitted that such a notion would be ambitious -of becoming a man, the question is, could such an idea be realized in his lifetime, or must some generations pass

་

away before his original intention of improving his species could be accomplished? If, for instance, a gorilla were on some sudden occasion struck with an idea that he would like to be a man, or, in more simple words, should feel a strong desire to change his nature into human nature, how must he proceed to obtain his object? He must either possess the inherent power to effect what he wished, or else he will be necessitated to remain as he is, with the wish unaccomplished. Perhaps it may said the change would be slow, and in that case effected by degrees. We would then ask, How many generations are required for the gradual change to reach perfection, that is, for the gorilla to be transformed into the man? As we are aware that a very long time is necessary, we have no objection to allow a million years, and in all conscience this ought to be considered time enough. What then is wanting for the effecting of this natural miracle? If a million years are requisite for the gorilla to become a man, and that so great a change cannot be brought about in less time, we reasonably conclude that there cannot be the proper amount of power in the original himself for his transformation into one of the human species. Seeing, then, that this animal has not the requisite force to transform his own nature into that of another character, the accomplishment of the object, or the carrying out of the original gorilla's design, must depend upon the inclination of his posterity, some of which would be certain to differ from their great ancestor; or we should have in this particular instance such a specimen of unity and concord as must forever remain without a parallel in the existence of man. Further, whence did the gorilla derive his first ambitious notion? Did he derive it from another animal? and, if so, from what kind? Or shall we say that the idea first sprang up in his own mind? The notion must be original, and in such a case it would be the result of deliberate choice, which implies the discursive faculty, or the power of reasoning, and in that case he would be human; so that, while he was actually a gorilla, and ambitious to be a man, he would in reality be a man, and still unconscious of it, or, in other words, he would be a