of Independence, the Constitution of the United States, and Washington's Farewell Address, and from these grand documents learn the views of the fathers of the republic, by whose wisdom and courage the government was founded.

Political parties.-There were great differences of opinion among the founders of the government upon many questions of public policy; and as the years rolled on, new questions arose on many subjects to divide the sentiments of the people. These differences of opinion are the origin of political parties. No person should blindly accept the policy of any party without thoroughly understanding its principles. Every intelligent man will think for himself, and not be controlled by mere party names.

To enable him to form a correct judgment of public affairs, he should seek to learn the views of statesmen of all parties. A decent respect for the opinions of our opponents requires that we give them a hearing, and while we desire due credit for honesty and patriotism, we should not fail to accord the same to them. No man should vote who has not a clear understanding of the prominent questions which divide the public attention.

National morality.—It is written in the moral law that, "Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people." As the nation is composed of individuals, the moral condition of these individuals will determine the character of the nation. There are often moral questions involved in the actions of nations, upon the decision of which their character for righteousness or unrighteousness depends. "Our country, right or wrong," is a motto often used by bad men to hide their evil designs, under a pretense of

Why the Constitution? Why the Farewell Address? What is the origin of political parties? Before joining a party, what should a man do? How shall he know the truth? Are there honest, truthful men in all parties? Why, then, do men differ? What should men do before they vote? What exalts a nation? Repeat the text.

patriotism. No such miserable doctrine can be tolerated by good men. Rather let it be, “Our country, always right.” The citizen who loves justice, mercy, and truth will never consent that his voice and vote shall sanction a public wrong. Every community will be agitated by discussions of moral questions, which must be settled by the moral sense of the people. The standard of right should be as high when the people act collectively as when they act as individuals. No man can be trusted as a public officer who is dishonest or untrue in private life; so no one should be considered trustworthy in private life who has proved himself politically dishonest. Integrity is not a virtue to be put on and off like a coat at the convenience of the wearer. A good man will advocate what he thinks is right, in public or private affairs, whether it concerns his party or his purse. "Honesty is the best policy" for nations as for individuals.

A moral hero and patriot.—It is pleasant to reflect upon the integrity of a man like General Joseph Reed, of Pennsylvania, who was prominent in the war for independence. He was an influential citizen, and intensely devoted to the interests of his country. It was very desirable that the agents of George III should bribe him to be a traitor to the cause of liberty, so Governor Johnston, one of the three commissioners of the king, secretly offered him £10,000, or $50,000, and a public office, if he would engage to promote the British interests. To this impudent offer he nobly replied: “I am not worth purchasing; but such as I am, the king of Great Britain is not rich enough to buy me.” What a contrast there is between this man of strict integrity and true patriotism, who is always remembered with pride and

On which side of moral questions should good men be found? Is the motto a good one? Why? What should always be the motto? Has a man a right to vote to support a wrong? Why? Name some moral questions upon which the people are called on to vote. Can a bad man be trusted as a public officer? Why is "honesty the best policy?" Repeat the story of General Reed. What made him worthy of admiration?

admiration, and that other general, Benedict Arnold, who was despised as a traitor, even among those by whom he was bribed.

Bribery.-There are many ways of bribing and of being bribed. He is not less a traitor who sells his vote for a reward than he who surrenders an army to gain some personal advantage. All good men detest the person who offers a bribe as well as him who receives one. The purity of the ballot should be preserved, if we wish our country's laws to be just and our public officers to be good.

The freeman's vote.-The exercise of the right to vote is a grand privilege to a freeman who has intelligence to know and honesty to do what he thinks is right. True patriotism makes it not only a right but a duty to vote, and to use all proper means of persuasion to secure a wise and honest public policy. Not only should the vote be cast for good measures, but the greatest care should be taken to elect good men as public officers. It is sad to think that in some cases drunkards, gamblers, and dishonest men have been elected to the highest positions of honor and trust in our country, thus bringing shame and disgrace upon us as a people. Two questions should always be asked concerning a candidate for office. These are, “Is he honest?" and "Is he capable?" If these can be satisfactorily answered, he may be worthy of election, but not otherwise.

Who was Benedict Arnold? In what estimation is he held everywhere? Why? Whether would it be preferable to be poor General Reed or rich General Arnold? Why is it a great privilege for a freeman to vote? Is it a duty? Why? What should we vote for? Why is it a disgrace to elect unworthy men to office? What two questions should be asked of every candidate? What should be the answer to them?

CHAPTER XXVIII.

"He who maintains his country's laws,

Alone is great; or he who dies in the good cause."

DUTIES OF CITIZENSHIP. (Continued.)

It is the duty of every good citizen to obey the law, for disobedience is a breach of fidelity to the state. It is fair to suppose that the supreme power, composed of representatives elected by the people, will enact wise statutes, but whether we think they are the best that could be made, or otherwise, it is our duty to comply with their requirements. It is not for any individual to be the judge of the wrongfulness of a law, and refuse submission and compliance because it does not meet his approval; for, if it were left to each person's convenience or judgment to determine his obedience, good citizens alone would obey, while the evil disposed would neglect or refuse to do their duty. If the good do right, the bad will have less excuse for disobedience. When a law proves to be unwise, inexpedient, or unjust, there is a legal and proper way to change it, for ours is a government of the people, and when they are convinced that a change is desirable, it will be legally effected.

Conscientious opposition to certain laws.-If the lawmaking power shall enact a statute which is clearly contrary to the moral law, it is the duty of the citizen to protest strongly against its execution, or refuse obedience, for it is

Why should every citizen obey the law? Are representatives bound to obey the laws they make? Are the laws likely to be unwise? Is it our duty to obey all laws? Why? Can it be left to every man's choice whether he will obey the laws? Why? When a law proves to be unwise or unjust, how may it be changed? If a law should be made clearly contrary to the moral law, what is our duty?

written, "We ought to obey God rather than man." Before coming to the conclusion that a refusal is preferable to obedience, it would be wise to deliberate very coolly upon the question of right, in order to be satisfied of the justice of our opposition. But the same conscience that leads us to violate the law should enable us to suffer the penalty for conscience, sake.

A notable instance of conscientious opposition has been witnessed in the Friends, who, believing it to be wrong to engage in war, have willingly suffered personal injury and pecuniary loss rather than enter the army as soldiers. No one can fail to admire that courage, and respect that devotion, which lead a man to suffer injury rather than violate his conscience. It requires a strong exercise of moral power to enable us to do what we think is right, when we know we shall suffer evil consequences as the result of our action. Such conduct is heroic.

The power of the government.-There are thousands of citizens in this land, who have grown to advanced age without seeing a single company of United States soldiers. One may travel thousands of miles and never see any evidence of the power of our government to enforce its laws. The true strength of the republic is discovered in the general willingness of the people to render obedience to authority. The people are the power, and the prosperity and safety of every community depend upon their willingness to execute the law. Popular sentiment is the lever that moves the whole political machinery, and every good citizen is interested not only in obeying the statutes himself, but also in compelling the obedience of others.

Repeat the text. Should we be careful about opposing the execution of the law? Why? Name an instance of conscientious opposition to law. How should we view a man who is willing to suffer, rather than do what he thinks is wrong? Why does our government have so few soldiers? What enables the officers to execute the laws so easily? In what does the strength of our government consist? Upon what does the safety of every citizen depend?