Getting at the Bottom of Mexico’s Troubles

(Part Two)

WHICHEVER way we turn in consideration . of Mexico’s difficulties, we are confronted anew with the problems arising out of the possession of almost all of her soil by a few families. So great are these estates that the average size of the Mexican hacienda is eighty times as great as that of Cuba and four thousand times as great as in Porto Rico. Three of these vast estates, taken together, are as large as the whole of France.

The owners of these great estates have peons working for them for wages that are contrived to be always a little less than the peon can live upon. He must borrow money to live; he can borrow only from the haciendado, and sometimes must pay as high as 90% for the use of the money. If he cannot pay the money when it falls due he cannot legally leave the hacienda; and there are peons in Mexico today who are toiling their lives away trying to pay back money thus borrowed by their great grandfathers a hundred years ago.

Moreover, the owners of these great estates pay next to nothing in the way of taxes and are so powerful that taxes cannot he collected even when levied. It frequently happens that a hacienda covering, literally, million* of acres pays less taxes than an adjoining estate of very limited acreage. The owners of these estates were the ones who brought about the death of Madero and probably of Carranza; and their power and influence are such as to make it impossible under present conditions either to assess their estates properly or to collect the taxes assessed. The Mexican agrarian problem resembles the American corporation problem.

There are in Mexico 767,000 square miles, of which 500,000 square miles are tillable. The tillable area is therefore 330,000.000 acres. In 1914 the total appraisement of this acreage was_ $800,000,000, or less than $3 per acre. As some of this land is now changing hands at $1,000 per acre, one can see at a glance where much of the Mexican financial trouble comes from. In short, the people who are financially most interested in maintaining a good government in Mexico, are doing everything humanly (or inhumanly) possible to make it impossible to have such a government

Great Oil Discoveries ,

OIL was discovered in Mexico in 1904; the first shipments to the United States were

made in 1911. At present Mexico is producing 75,000,000 barrels annually. The flow is unusually steady, indicating vast quantities available. Long before oil was produced from drilled wells the seepages supplied asphalt, and the streets of Vera Cruz are paved with asphalt from nearby seepage. The Standard Oil Company put into operation the first large fleet of tank steamers in which to carry Mexican crude oil to other markets. The greatest Mexican oil wells are about 20 miles back from the ocean and are connected with the ocean by railways. The oil is pumped out to vessels a mile from shore.

Mexico is now second only to the United States among the oil-producing countries of the world. It is calculated that its production during 1920 will be between 130,000,000 and 135,000,000 barrels, one-fifth of the oil of the world, and more than that of all the rest of the world outside of the United States. Moreover, it is calculated that in eighteen years the oil deposits of the United States will be worked out, while those of Mexico seem almost inexhaustible.

The wells of Mexico have been wonderful producers. One of these wells, the Dos Bocas, which came in without being controlled, flowed thousands of barrels a day. It caught fire and burned for sixty days until it extinguished itself, the flow of oil having been replaced by a geyser of hot water. This well is now a saltwater volcano, the crater being half a mile in diameter, and producing about one million barrels of boiled salt water a day.

In 1917 the Mexican people adopted a new constitution containing two articles that bear upon the oil question. Article 27 (based upon the old constitution) declares the separation of the ownership of the land from ownership of mineral deposits, and provides that in the nation is vested the direct ownership of all minerals, solid, liquid or gaseous, and that royalties or rentals must be paid to the Mexican government for all mineral deposits taken from the land. In adopting this policy that Mexican oil resources shall be in the hands of the Mexican nation, Mexico has only been following the lead of the most enlightened nations of the earth.

Article 28 of the same constitution reads: “Only Mexicans by birth or naturalization and Mexican companies have any right to acquire ownership in land, waters, and their appurtenances, or to obtain concessions to develop

mines, waters or mineral fuels in the Republic of Mexico. The nation may grant the same right ^H to foreigners, provided they agree before the Department of Foreign Affairs to be considered — Mexicans in respect to such property, and ac- ,    1

cordingly not to invoke the protection of their

governments in respect to the same.” Stated in

other phrase this merely means that the Mexi-

can nation, acting through the Mexican govern-

meiit, has the absolute right to control the

resources of Mexico, without dictation or inter- -ference from outside sources.

It is these foreign oil owners, insisting upon operating Mexican oil wells under American laws, that have filled the newspapers with clamor against Mexico. The parties directly interested in trying to force American laws upon Mexico, if one may judge from their activities, are the National Bank of Commerce, Texas Company, Inter-Continental Rubber Company, Pan-American Petroleum and Transport Company, Montezuma Copper Company, Greene Cananea Copper Company, J. P. Morgan & Co., Guaranty Trust Company, Standard Oil Company of New Jersey and Yaqui Delta Land and Water Company, these being the interests composing the Association for the Protection of American Rights (!) in Mexico—whose acts are those of a combination lobby and propaganda bureau. These concerns appear to uphold the theory that if Mexico should be governed by the Mexicans they and their stockholders would suffer a wrong.

Since the death of Carranza these oil men of the United States, operating in Mexico, have issued an ultimatum to the Mexican Government, demanding the cancellation of all decrees promulgated by Carranza, and the new provi- _; sional president, de la Huerta, though declining ‘ to accede to all their presumptuous demands, has promised to do what he can toward reducing ⁷ the taxes of which they complain.

Mexico imposes an export tax of only 11 cents per barrel on oil. The shipments for the last three months of 1919 were as follows: October, 8,561.002 barrels: November, 7.020,729 barrels; December, 7,999,738 barrels. The Mexican government received last year from such taxes about $8,000,000, or 5% of its revenue. You who buy gasoline and other oils, do you consider 11 cents a barrel an exorbitant tax? It is less than 4% of thecost to consumers of $3 per barrel.

As far as the rentals and taxes for oil property in Mexico are concerned, they are only five pesos per hectare (50c per acre) and are lower than in either Texas or Oklahoma; and the payment of these taxes, which the American Association of Oil Producers in Mexico refuses to make, would have meant only $880,000 in 1919, or about one cent per barrel an the output. Is there anything in this for the American people to get excited about ? Let us admit, for the sake of argument, that Mexican oil laws are narrow and unwise. Has Mexico a monopoly of unwise laws! How about the wonderful Espionage Act of the United States?

Franklin K. Lane, former Secretary of the Interior, but now employed by one of America’s large oil companies, desires American intervention in Mexico, frankly giving as a reason, "We have got to get an outside supply of oil for development of the United States”. A statement widely published in Mexico, and credited to another American oil man doing business there, is: “If Mr. Carranza won’t give Us what we want, I’ll go down into Mexico City and set up a government that will”. With a view of possibly doing something of the kind, the oil men in and about Tampico employed the rebel chieftain, General Pelaez, at a monthly expense stated by Congressman La Guardia to be $190,-000, to stand between them and Carranza. It was one of General Pelaez’s lieutenants, General Herrera, that assassinated Carranza. The first pronunciamento of the new government in Mexico was distinctly soothing to the dil interests.

Before the death of Carranza an enthusiastic writer in the Manufacturer's Record gave an eloquent description of what he would like to have happen inMexico. He said: “How great a burden Latin America could lift by bringing the world’s production of metals back to normal! How tremendous would be the burden lifted if Latin America would develop her oil fields and supply the mercantile marine of the earth with fuel and the tractors with gasoline! What a great help it would be in these troubled days if Mexican railroads were paying good dividends and if other Mexican securities were at a premium on the world’s exchanges!” One can almost feel the great heart that is beating in sympathy for the poor landless, homeless Mexican peon—or somebody else, say Wall street!

Or is it the wail of the lost dollar, invested in Mexico when peon wages were 25 cents a day and dividends were 50% to 100% a year?

The same paper, under another date, says astutely: .

“A country possessed of exceptional resources in raw materials becomes subject to external pressures unless it facilitates the proper use and distribution of these products. Mexico is blessed, or cursed, according to one’s point of view, by one of the most extraordinary oil fields in the world.”

Much of the foreign protest against Carranza was against the legislation which put limits upon the exploitation of the peons. Before his presidency it was said that four-fifths of the natural resources of Mexico were in the hands of foreigners, and that except in the south, where wages on the large haciendas have been good and the conditions fairly comfortable, their lot was a hard one. The peon needs to be educated and lifted up. He needs to learn how to live. In many districts, back in the interior, the huts are of but one room, and for safety’s sake all of the livestock of the family is brought into the room at night—pig, hens, burro and dogs. Carranza wanted to rectify these conditions and to make it possible for the peon to occasionally have other food than the tortillas (corn cakes) and coffee, which usually make his meal.

Respecting the American oil interests in Mexico, Mexican citizens living in Los Angeles have issued a manifesto charging that the very men in the United States who were loudly demanding intervention last year, were the same men who helped Villa and Pelaez by arms, ammunition and money, and in the same breath urged an embargo on arms to Carranza. In other words they helped to maintain a condition of banditry, and blamed Mexico and the Mexican people for it. They wish “law and order”, but laws must be of their making and “order” on their approval.

Senator Capper said in the United States Senate that this country has become a den of robbers, and named scores of great financial interests in his statement. Well, if these great corporations have so defied and violated the letter and spirit of American laws which sought to curb them here, what could we expect them to do or be in Mexico? When Mexicans come to the United States they expect to obey American laws, and why should Americans who go to Mexico object to living up to the laws of Mexico ?

Senate's Mexican Committee

IC IS not customary for governments of one country to investigate governments of another: but the United States Senate has a Mexican committee, all of the sittings of which are held on this side of the line. This enables the committee to get one side of the story. Learning of these sittings Luis Cabrera, Minister of Finance of Mexico, invited the chairman, Senator Fall, to come over and take a trip through Mexico, so as to learn just what kind of country it is, stating with some force that “looking into the Mexican situation through the keyhole of the door, your official investigation is distorted by the lenses of the prejudice of specially interested parties. Come to Mexico to see how our country is living and fighting its way to reconstruction through all sorts of obstacles both internal and external.’’

Senator Fall did not accept this invitation, although it would have been better for his reputation had he done so. He has admitted that he has $75,000 invested in Mexican mining properties, and it is feared that this condition does not make for judicial calmness and fairness. Thus far 257 witnesses were heard by the Fall committee, and the so-called Association for the Protection of American “Rights” in Mexico has seen to it that everything that should be said against the Mexican government or the Mexican people came to the attention of the committee and was straightway sent out as propaganda to all American newspapers.

The way these reports affected the papers to which they were sent can be judged from a characteristic editorial from the reactionary Boston Transcript, which we quote:

“To put an end once and for all to the anarchy that has laid waste the land and ended the orderly life of the nation’s next door neighbor to the south is a duty that America owes first of all to her own self-protection and self-respect, to her injured living and her massacred dead; a duty that America owes to the peace and order of the western hemisphere, a duty that America owes to the peace and order of the world. In the discharge of that duty America neither needs nor should America accept a mandate from any international alliance. It is a duty to be discharged upon American initiative and under the compulsion of America’s conscience. For the pacification of Mexico is the next contribution that America must and will make to the peace of the world.”

Or take the following in the reactionary New York Times, accredited to Henry Lake Wilson, former ambassador to Mexico, and accused by the Mexicans as having been constantly plotting against the peace and happiness of the country and as in league with all the ecclesiastical and financial princes that have brought Mexico into its difficulties. He said of President Wilson’s Mexican policy:

“To date it has cost the people of the United States upwards of half a billion dollars. It has led to the violent death of 300,000 Mexicans and to the death by pestilence and famine of 500,000 more. It has caused up to this week, the murder of 665 American citizens within Mexico; it has kept 80,000 of our troops on the border; it has left in the Mexican Treasury a deficit of more than $300,000,000 to replace a surplus of $100,000,000 left by Diaz.”

Don't these statements have a grand sound! Don’t they make you feel like rushing right in and cleaning things up in Mexico T They do, and that is what they were intended to do. But wait until you get some of the real facts. Let us consider some of them.

Real Facts About Mexico

MAJOR Lynn Dinkins, president of the Interstate Bank of New Orleans, after six weeks’ tour of Mexico, stated in the New York Tribune of April 11,1920, that practically all the land which he saw in a trip which began at Vera Cruz and extended throughout the length and breadth of Mexico bore every evidence of close cultivation and great prosperity. He said:

“We did not see a single bandit or hear of any. We found conditions politically, financially and socially different from the impressions we entertained before our departure. We travelled more than two thousand miles-by railroad within the limits of the Mexican republic, and our trains were oZZ on time. The roadbeds of the Mexican railroads are better than those of the American lines.”

William H. Ellis, banker and broker of 63 Wall Street, New York, is authority for the statement,“Mexico without a doubt is the richest spot on the face of the earth and I have often thought that this is why there is so much trouble in that country”.

Joseph Guffey, of Pittsburgh, president of the Atlantic, Gulf and West Indies Corporation, after a seven weeks’ visit in Mexico ending in March, 1920, declared that at that time Mexico was more prosperous than at any other time in its history and that American investments were as safe as Mexican investments. He considered Carranza ‘‘an intelligent, high-type, constructive and honest statesman, a man who has a definite objective and who is making rapid and systematic progress toward its attainment”. He said: "Disorders are isolated and sporadic, and any one who says conditions in Mexico are chaotic talks without advantage of facts”.

E. Fred Eastman, director of the Educational Department of the Board of Home Missions of the Presbyterian Church, after an extensive trip along the Mexican border returned with the profound conviction “that at least as many Mexicans are killed on this side of the border as there are Americans on the other side; but that when a Mexican is killed on this side of the border the newspapers say little or nothing about it, whereas every murder or holdup on the Mexican side is magnified in the American press”.

The official list of Americans killed in Mexico in a period of eight years, made public by the American ambassador in July, 1919, totalled 217. This number included those killed in the various invasions by American military and naval forces, those who were members of Mexican rebel forces, Americans killed by Americans, Americans killed by bandits who were supported by American money, and Americans killed by bandits who had ceased to be thus supported and wished revenge. To offset this list is the statement that after the Villa raid 300 unoffending Mexican farmers on the American side of the line, unarmed and defenseless, were killed by Americans, to the slogan, “Amprina for Americans” I

Mexico has never offered to come into the United States and clean it up, despite the fact that in the eight years following the overthrow of Diaz, in which the 217 Americans were killed in Mexico, 469 American negroes were lynched’on this side of the line. The whole country has been stirred by the stories which have been told about these Mexican atrocities, some even going so far as to see a plot by the Bolsheviki or the I. W. W. or the pro-Germans or somebody else’ planning together to extend the Mexican reign of terror northward and overthrow the United States. Sounds like some story gotten up by the same parties that got up Mr. Pal moMay Day riots and for the same purpose.

Senator LaFollette says: “More American citizens have been killed in the past two years in this country in lynching bees and race riots than have been killed from all causes during eight years of revolution in Mexico”. One thing that has greatly deceived the American people in this regard is the fact that New York papers have even gone so far as to give detailed stories of a revolt in Mexico City at a time when the city was absolutely calm.

Mexicans could, if they would, point to America’s record of 3,889 men and women hanged, shot, roasted and otherwise brutally lynched in America during the thirty-three peaceful years from 1885 to 1918, and inquire why we should be so disturbed over their troubles. They might remind us of the old adage, “Physician, heal thyself”.

John Lind, ex-governor of Minnesota, and President Wilson’s personal representative in Mexico, says that anarchistic American business men in Mexico have attempted to evade payment of taxes in Mexico that were proper and right, and that they have caused annoyance and embarrassment by objecting to laws and taxes which the Mexican government imposed and attempted to enforce.

He states that many Americans have not treated the natives well, adding, “I saw American-owned plantations where peons were herded by guards armed with revolvers, sawed off shotguns and blacksnake whips. They were slaves to all intents and purposes. I came to the conclusion that it is impossible for Americans to operate tropical estates without these condr-tions, and that it was a very great misfortune that they ever became involved in them. It only begets strife, ill feeling and revolution.”

Mexicans claim that no honest, fair-minded Americans ever came to Mexico to go into business who did not succeed, but that they have noticed that Americans have always given support to every anti-governmental outbreak, and that it is not to be wondered at that such citizens are viewed with suspicion. There are thousands of Mexican laborers in Texas, New Mexico and Arizona, on the ranches, in stores, at work on the roads; and there are no more lawabiding or capable workers to be found. It is estimated that since the downfall of Madero 500,000 Mexicans, mostly pure Aztecs, have entered the Southwest, 100,000 of them since last Christmas. The arrival of these Mexicans has enabled Texas to surpass in agricultural products every other stata in the Union. Of the American soldiers in one of the regiments at El Paso 32% are of Mexican birth. This shows a friendliness by Mexicans for American institutions that ought to operate reversely.

That money can be made in Mexico is shown by the records of the recent past. The Aguila Company had an original investment of $30,000-000 American gold in Mexico and, utilizing entirely the resources of Mexico as a source of profit, reported net profits of $14,000,000 in 1918. The Dutch Shell Company paid a dividend of 48% on its preferred stock and 37% on its common stock in the same year, while the Pan-American Petroleum and Transport Company paid a dividend of 28% a quarter during the same period.

In the first nine months of 1919 Mexico purchased more automobiles from the United States tlum did France. During the last three years imports from Mexico gained 70% over the 1913 record, and exports to Mexico increased 110%. The leading newspaper of Mexico City, El Universal, claims that Mexico is now as safe for purposes of trade and development as the United States; and the St. Louis Chamber of Commerce declares that during the darkest days of the revolution the merchants of Mexico invariably discharged their St. Louis obligations.

If it be claimed that in Mexico there isantipathy to aliens, let us in the United States remember the treatment innocent Germans and Russians have received here within the past few years, and say nothing. In the past special privileges were given to foreigners in Mexico, but if now all foreigners will be treated the same as the Mexicans themselves, is that not just? Other nationalities can get along with the Mexicans. There are more than three thousand Japanese families on one ranch, and there are other thou-sandsof Japanese merchants,restaurant keepers and coffee house proprietors located all over the republic. In Xovember more than 3,400,000 acres were granted as concessions under a plan to bring 45,000 German colonists a year into the republic.

The relations between Mexico and America will be better when the people know one another better and when both nationalities try to learn the other’s good points. There are tens of thousands of Americans now in Mexico who manage to get along. It is to be feared that many peons have been killed by Americans in Mexico of whom we never hear. It is certain that along the border many Americans have been guilty of cattle stealing and of the murder of Mexican citizens, no account of which ever gets into the American press.

The fairness of the press toward Mexico may be judged from the fact that recently American employment agents went into Mexico to obtain help. So many responded that the Mexican government sent out circulars to all the Mexican governors warning them against unscrupulous agents and pointing out that many Mexicans in southern states were at that time unemployed. The way this was stated in the American papers was that a horde of Mexicans had fled across the border to escape the carnage which was then going on in Mexico!!

Those who have practiced or condoned plug-hat anarchy in the recent past should not shriek too loudly over the lawlessness of others; and an examination of history in America during the past few years leads any honest mind to inquire why those who have failed to provide security for either Mexican or American lives in America could hope to provide such security for either Mexican or American lives if they had charge of Mexico.

One of the things that nearly led the United States into war v»"ith Mexico last fall was the case of Jenkins, the American consul at Puebla. Jenkins was accused of conniving with bandits to discredit the Mexican government. Bail was fixed at $500 and friends paid it, but Jenkins insisted upon going to jail. Subsequently he made application for Mexican citizenship, and the case dropped from sight. Jenkins was accused by Carranza of being self-captured, but the American Department of State scouted the idea that he would go so far as to sustain indignities and maltreatment merely for the sake of bringing down the wrath of the American government upon Mexico.

The sum total of all the disorders in Mexico during the seven years of Carranza’s administration may be fairly judged by the following item in the Wall Street Journal for December 17,1919. The trivial size of the American claims shows just how much fire there has been back of all the smoke about Mexican disregard of American rights:

“Washington.—According to reports received here today, claims of approximately $30,226,235 have been made against the Mexican government by foreign interests owning property in Mexico, for damages sustained since the present government came into power. American claims against the government totaled 139,914 pesos (half-dollars). Spanish interests have presented claims totaling 14,764,453 pesos. The Turks, 3,530,467 pesos; Germans, 1,095,400 pesos; French, 282,841 pesos; Italians, 272,497 pesos; Swiss, 40,540 pesos; Chinese, 38,663 pesos; Guatemala, 20,000 pesos; English, 9,907 pesos; Holland, 7,770 pesos; Austria, 3,225 pesos, and Mexican 10,020,558 pesos.”

hi other words, the Mexicans did one hundred and five times as much damage to the Spanish, twenty-five times as much damage to the Turks, eight times as much damage to the Germans, twice as much damage to the French, twice as much damage to the Italians and seventy-one times as much damage to themselves as they did to the Americans.

President Wilson Correct

TF IT be judged from the foregoing study of A Mexican affairs that we believe President Wilson’s course with regard to Mexico has been the correct one, then that is just what we desire. Let no one think that The Golden Age favors either of the Wall Street parties. Thoughtful men are looking away from both of them. Nevertheless where a man has performed a real service for the cause of liberty and right, as President Wilson has done with respect to Mexico, he should not be deprived of the credit due him.

The executive council of the American Federation of Labor, in a statesmanlike manifesto, has said:

“We call upon our people to be of all possible assistance to the people of Mexico in working out most serious problems under most distressing circumstances. We conceive it to be our province to be of service to the people of Mexico, to make every effort to understand their difficulties and their problems and to work with them in harmony in the solution of problems common to both peoples. We are unalterably opposed to any exercise of force by the United States to satisfy the desires of those Americans whose sole interest in Mexico is the exploitation of its workers, its boundless wealth of oil and minerals. In spite of tremendous obstacles and in spite of difficulties of long standing, the Mexican people have continually striven toward the establishment of democracy, toward the elevation of their standard of living, and have never willingly consented to the imposition of autocratic power. We commend the course of President Wilson in his conduct of policies toward M^ex* ico and declare our approval and support of that policy of non-intervention and non-interference, not only in the past but for the future.”

The President’s policy of friendliness and forbearance regarding Mexico has been the right one. He said in 1915: “We shall triumph as Mexico’s friends sooner than we could triumph as her enemies, and how much more handsomely, with how much higher and finer satisfaction of conscience and honor”. We believe that the President's partial recovery of health was the only thing that kept this country out of war with Mexico in December, 1919, and that it was probably Lansing’s attitude toward Mexico that called for the latter’s resignation.

Prof. Frederick Starr of Chicago University was quoted as saying at Chicago on March 12, 1920, that “a war with Mexico was planned and fixed up at the peace conference in Paris”. The Golden Age is unwilling to believe that President Wilson had anything to do with such an arrangement, no matter what representations were made by the association of oil and mining interests, styled the National Association for the Protection of American “Rights” in Mexico, which has been working to bring about such a war. These interests are always very ready for war and very patriotic, though never without profit. An official of the National City Bank is quoted as saying, “The reestablishment of its [Mexico’s] government may be confidently expected when the European war no longer stays the hands of the other nations who have investments there".

Mr. George Agnew Chamberlain, former Consul General in Mexico, is authority for the statement that Mexican commercial and official life is “stained with graft from the lowest tally clerk to the highest cabinet officer”. We are glad that he refrained from mentioning anything about graft in America. This would be too sad a subject to have been so gently dismissed. It is confidently believed by millions of Americans that the loot and graft in America during and since the war would have made- Alaric or Attila or Ghenghis Khan look like a beggar. And before the war, who did not hear of New York, and Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh, and Chicago, and San Francisco? Name almost any city, and the story was the same.

Mr. Chamberlain wants a “benevolent” assimilation of Mexico, preferably after the manner in which Britain assimilated Persia. He says:

"We should offer a loan sufficient to put its finance m shape, bound up with a treaty which would give us direct supervision of its economic affairs. The second step should be to withdraw the present recognition unless that was accepted. Still failing acceptance, the third step should be embargo; the fourth, commercial blockade; the fifth, a naval demonstration; lastly, a military occupancy!"—simply a high-toned Mexican “hold-up”.

If such a program becomes “necessary” The Golden Age is of the opinion that there are numerous politicians, financiers and ecclesiastics that could better be spared for military hardships than the fine type of American boy that would ordinarily be selected.

The minute the United States undertakes to occupy Mexico, that moment and for good it loses the confidence and the trade of all Central and South America. Such a war would take three years, require 400,000 troops, and would cost every year more than the present total American investments in Mexico. The people of France and Britain do not desire the United States to intervene in Mexico; and in case of an invasion all the Americans now there would perish, and many more. Among the people that live on the border war is desired by no one.

It has been claimed that a treaty exists which guarantees to Mexico immediate Japanese assistance if Mexico should be attacked by another nation; and some color is lent to this claim by the enthusiastic reception in Mexico City early in January, 1920, extended to the Japanese crew of the vessel which brought eighteen carloads of arms and ammunition to Mexico by way of Pacific coast ports.

Millions of Americans would believe that a war against Mexico would be simply a war for loot. They would believe that it is folly to add 12,000,000 Indians to American population until America has solved the problem of how to treat the 10,000,000 Negroes already in her borders. And they do not forget that it is but a little time since 100,000 young Americans died to establish the principle of “self-determination of peoples”; and the Mexicans have it now and should keep it

The Obregon Revolution

THE latest Mexican revolution would not have occurred if Mr. Carranza had shown more confidence in the institutions of Mexico. The Mexican constitution forbids the president to run for reelection or to interfere in any way with the popular vote. The term of office is four years. Carranza’s term was to have expired in December. The elections of the country were to have been held July 4, but have been postponed to Sunday, September 5.           •

Three principal candidates were in the field, Generals Obregon and Gonzales and Senor Bonillas, referred to on page 647. General Obregon hails from the state of Sonora, on the American border. Within this state are located the richest copper deposits in the world, all owned by American capitalists.

The government of the state of Sonora has been exceptionally good. The civil governor, de la Huerta (not the Huerta who assassinated Madero), is an educated business man and a good administrator. The military head, General P. Elias Calles, formerly a schoolmaster, is also an exceptionally capable man, of high integrity and proven ability. He has always stood for decency and morality and has excluded both liquor and the danee hall from places under his command.

In Sonora the Ampriran dollar is the medium of exchange. Sonora is in fact an Americanized state. It is the most prosperous state in Mexico at this time, having enormous cattle interests as well as mining and agriculture.

Carranza rightly concluded that the state of Sonora would be strongly in favor of General Obregon, instead of the candidate Bonillas, upon whom he had set his heart. Perhaps he had no thought of attempting to overawe the elections; but it looked that way to the Sonorans when, in violation of the constitution, he attempted to send national troops into the state before they had been requested by the state government. The excuse made on his behalf is that he thought that the Yaqui Indians were about to revolt, and that he was afraid of Sonora’s loyalty to Mexico in such an event; for the Yaquis had but a little time before elected the civil governor of the state, de la Huerta, their Supreme Chief. The Yaquis are, so to speak, the nobility among Mexican Indians. They occupy high ground from which they have never been dislodged, are unconquered, unconquerable, well equipped and well armed. It is said they are able to do twice the work of an ordinary Indian.

Sonora was willing to stay in the union if given assurances that federal troops would be kept out, but when this assurance was denied the Sonorans declared their independence. This was a severe blow to Carranza; for the state had been contributing $1,000,000 per month to the central government and w^ras almost incapable of invasion except through Ampriran territory. Critics of Carranza claim that he had already forced his own candidates into office in Nuevo Leon, Tamaulipas, Guanajuato and other places where opposing candidates had been elected.

General Obregon of Sonora was Carranza’s minister of war, no doubt the ablest soldier in Mexico. He resigned as Minister of War on May 1, 1917. He is said to be part Yaqui and part Irish, surely a formidable fighting combination. He has the reputation of being the only Mexican General that never lost a battle. His thousand-mile march from Sonora, through Sinaloa, Tepic, Jalisco and Michoacan to the city of Mexico in 1914, which deposed Huerta and put Carranza-in power, was a remarkable military achievement. Obregon is less than forty years of age, a good horseman, deft with the machete, and has but one arm. He is a popular hero.

When Sonora declared her independence Carranza ordered Obregon to Mexico City, apparently to watch his movements, and then forbade him to leave. But he did leave, fleeing from the capital by automobile April 13, placed himself at the head of all the brands of discontent in Mexico, and in a few days returned with three armies. Then Carranza fled. The revolution was a bloodless one. The civil governor of Sonora, de la Huerta, was made provisional president, to remain in office until November. Meantime the presidential election will be held, and it is expected that General Obregon will be chosen president. Pessimists say his election wil mean the turning of Mexico over bodily to American oil, copper, and land interests. It is too early to determine this. Obregon's record in Sonora does not seem to justify such a gloomy view, but there is no doubt that in the death of Carranza the Mexican people lost a better champion than Obregon is likely to make.

The Los Angeles Times, referring to a visit of General Obregon to that city in September, 1917, intimates that it was at that time that ‘‘the seeds that grew into the overthrow of Carranza were implanted”. Julia Carranza, daughter of Carranza, has filed a statement with the American State Department claiming that she has documents to prove that General Obregon was guilty of Carranza’s death. ’

Obregon was trained for his prospective position in 1913 by being taken by American army officers from one end of the United States to the other. He was given-a clear idea of America’s strength as a fighting nation, so as to convey to his mind the hopelessness of Mexico if it came to a question of war between the two countries. He is reported to have said that he would rather teach the Mexicans to use the tooth-brush than the rifle, would rather see them in schools than on the battlefields, and prefers, any day, a good electrician, machinist, carpenter, or farmer to a soldier. In June, 1920,15,000 soldiers were demobilized, and 5,000 in July. Most of them have been set to work cultivating idle lands.

Mexico’s troubles will not be settled until the lands that were stolen from the common people 400 years ago are returned. They have some of their ejidos back, but they want them all. Those who hold the lands cry out in. “holy horror” that Carranza and his followers are wicked communists. And communism is such a dreadful thing that if you are a Russian, and came to this country when you were two years old, and if you believe in ejidos, or anything that looks like them, back you go to Russia; for this is theland of the free and we do not stand for anything like ejidos here. No, siree! In this country we believe in letting the wealth get into the hands of the few, the same as in Mexico, and doing everything possible to keep it there. That the people should not desire land, except plots large enough to hold them when they are ho longer able to work, seems to be the view of some.

The Bible does not teach communism. The experiment was tried in the early church and failed. The Scriptural proposition regarding restored humanity is, “They shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree” (Micah 4: 4), subject to neither landlords nor communal ownership. In the Golden Age, now at hand, this will be the arrangement in all the earth.

What Say the Scriptures About Hell?

[Continued)

world in the end of the Millennium, was typified in the earthly city, Jerusalem; and the defiling, the abominable, etc., the class unworthy of life everlasting, who do not enter in, were represented by the refuse and the filthy, lifeless carcasses cast into Gehenna outside the city, whose utter destruction was thus symbolized—the second death. Accordingly, we find it stated .that those not found worthy of life are to be cast into the “lake of fire” (Revelation 20:15)—fire here, as everywhere, being used as a symbol of destruction, and the symbol, lake of fire, being drawn from this same Gehenna, or Valley of Hinnom.

Therefore, while Gehenna served a useful purpose to the city of Jerusalem as a place for garbage burning it, like the city itself, was typical, and illustrated the future dealings of God in refusing and committing to destruction all the impure elements, thus preventing them from defiling the holy city, the New Jerusalem, after the trial of the Millennial age of judgment shall have fully proved them and separated with unerring accuracy the “sheep” from the “goats”.

So, then, Gehenna was a type or illustration of the second death—final and complete destruction, from which there can be no recovery; for after that, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins”, but only “fiery indignation which shall devour the adversaries”.—Hebrews 10: 26.

Let us remember that Israel, for the purpose of being used as types of God’s future dealing with the race, was typically treated as though the ransom had been given before they left Egypt, though only a typical lamb had been"’ slain. When Jerusalem was built, and the Temple, representative of the true temple, the church, and the true kingdom as it will be established by Christ in the Millennium—her people typified the world in the Millennial age. Their priests represented the glorified royal priesthood, and their law and its demands of perfect obedience represented the law and conditions under the New Covenant, to be brought into operation for the blessing of all the obedient, and for the condemnation of all who, when granted fullest opportunity, will not heartily submit to the righteous ruling and laws of the Great King.

Seeing then, that Israel’s polity, condition, etc., prefigured those of the world in the coming

age, how appropriate that we should find the valley or abyss, Gehenna, a figure of the second death, the utter destruction in-the coming age of all that is unworthy of preservation; and how aptly, too, is the symbol, “lake of fire burning with brimstone” (Revelation 19:20), drawn from this same Gehenna, or Valley of Hinnom, burning continually with brimstone. The expression, “burning with brimstone,” adds force to the symbol “fire”, to express the utter and irrevocable destructiveness of the second death; for burning brimstone is the most deadly agent known. How reasonable, too, to expect that Israel would have courts and judges resembling or prefiguring the judgments of the next age; and that the sentence of those (figurative) courts of that’ (figurative) people under those (figurative) laws to that (figurative) abyss, outside that (figurative) city, would largely correspond to the (real) sentences of the (real) court and judges in the next age. If these points are kept in mind, they will greatly assist us in understanding the words of our Lord in reference to Gehenna; for though the literal valley just at hand was named and referred to, yet His words carry with them lessons concerning the future age and the antitypical Gehenna—second death.

Shall be in Danger of Gehenna.—Matt. 5: 21,22

“Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be amenable to the judges; but I say unto you that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall [future—under the regulations of the real kingdom] be amenable to the judges; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Baca [villain], shall be in danger of the high council but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell [Gehenna] fire.”

To understand these references to council and judges and Gehenna, all should know something of Jewish regulations. The “Court of Judges” consisted of seven men (or twenty-three—the number is in dispute), who had power to judge some classes of crimes. The High Council, or Sanhedrin, consisted of seventy-one men of recognized learning and ability. This constituted the highest court of the Jews, and its supervision was over the gravest offenses. The most serious sentence was death; but certain very obnoxious criminals were subjected to an indignity after death, being refused burial and cast with the carcasses of dogs, the city refuse, etc., into Gehenna, there to be consumed. The object of this burning in Gehenna was to make the crime and the criminal detestable in the eyes of the people, and signified that the culprit was a hopeless case. It must be remembered that Israel hoped for a resurrection from the tomb, and hence they were particular in caring for the corpses of their dead. Not realizing fully God’s power, they apparently thought that He needed their assistance to that extent. (Exodus 13:19; Hebrews 11:22; Acts 7:15,16) Hence the destruction of the body in Gehenna after death (figuratively) implied the loss of hope of future life by a resurrection. Thus to such Gehenna represented the second death in the same figurative way that they as a people represented or illustrated a future order of things under the New Covenant.

Notice that our Lord, in the above words, pointed out to them that their construction of the law, severe though it was, was far below the real import of that law, as it shall be interpreted under the real kingdom and its judges, which theirs only typified. He shows that the command of their law, “Thou shalt not kill,” reached much farther than they supposed; that malicious anger and vituperation “shall be” considered a violation of God’s law, under the New Covenant; and that such as, under the favorable conditions of that new age, will not reform so thoroughly as to fully observe God’s law will be counted worthy of that which the Gehenna near them typified—the second death. However, the strict severity of that law will be enforced only in proportion as the discipline, advantages and_ assistance of that age, enabling each to comply with its laws, shall be disregarded.

The same thought is continued in

Matthew 5: 27 - 30

“Ye have heard ... But I say unto you ... It is better for thee to lose one of thy members, than that thy whole body should be cast into Gehenna.”

Here again the operation of God’s law under the New Covenant is contrasted with its operation under the Old or Jewish Covenant, and the lesson of self-control is urged by the statement that it is far more profitable that men should refuse to gratify depraved desires (though these be dear to them as a right eye, and apparently indispensable as a right hand) than that they should gratify these, and lose, in the second death, the future life provided through the atonement for all who will return to perfection, holiness and God.

These expressions of our Lord not only serve to show us the perfection (Rom. 7:12) of God’s law, and how fully it will be defined and enforced in the Millennium, but they served as a lesson to the Jews also, who previously saw through Moses’ commands only the crude exterior of the law of God. Since they found it difficult in their state to keep inviolate even the surface significance of the law, they must now see the impossibility of their keeping the finer meaning of the law revealed by Christ. Had they understood and received His teaching fully, they would have cried out, Alas! If God judges us thus, by the very thoughts and intents of the heart, we are all unclean, all undone, and can hope for naught but condemnation to Gehenna (to uttet destruction, as brute beasts). They would have cried, Show us a greater priesthood than that of Aaron, a high priest and teacher able fully to appreciate and sympathize with our fallen state and inherited weaknesses, and let him offer for us better sacrifices, and apply to us the needed greater forgiveness of sin, and let him as a great physician heal us and restore us, so that we can obey the perfect law of God from our hearts. Then they would have found Christ.

But this lesson they did not learn; for the ears of their understanding were “dull of hearing’. Hence they knew not that God had already prepared the very priest and sacrifice and teacher and physician they needed, who in due time redeemed those under the typical Law Covenant, as Well as all not under it, and who also in due time, shortly, will begin His restoring work— restoring sight to the blind eyes of their understanding, and hearing to their deaf ears. Then the “vail shall be taken away”—the vail of ignorance, pride and human wisdom which Satan now uses to blind the world to God's true law and true plan of salvation in Christ.

And not only did our Lord’s teaching here show the law of the New Covenant, and teach the Jew a lesson, but it is of benefit to the gospel church also. In proportion as we learn the exactness of God’s law, and what would constitute perfection under its requirements, we see that our Redeemer was perfect, and that we, totally unable to commend ourselves to God as keepers of that law, can find acceptance with the Father only in the merit of our Redeemer, while none can be of that “body”, covered by the robe of His righteousness, except the consecrated who endeavor to do only those things well pleasing to God, which includes the avoidance of sin to the extent of ability. Yet their acceptability with God rests not in their perfection, but upon the perfection of Christ, so long as they abide in Him. These, nevertheless, are benefited by a clear insight into the perfect law of God, even though they are not dependent on the perfect keeping of it. They delight to do God’s will to the extent of their ability, and the better they know His perfect law, the better they are able to rule themselves and to conform to it. So, then, to us the Lord’s words have a lesson of value.

The point/ however, to be specially noticed here is that Gehenna, which the Jews knew, and of which our Lord spoke to them, was not a lake of fire to be kept burning to all eternity, into which all would be cast who get “angry with a brother” and call him a “fool”. No; the Jews gathered no such extreme idea from the Lord’s words. The eternal torment theory was unknown to them. It had no place in their theology, as will be seen. It is a comparatively modem invention, coming down, as we have shown, from apostasies of the dark ages. The point is that Gehenna symbolizes the second death—utter, complete and everlasting destruction. This is clearly shown by its being contrasted with life as its opposite. “It is better for thee to enter into life halt, or maimed, than otherwise to lie cast into Gehenna.” It is better that you should deny yourselves sinful gratifications than that you should lose all future life, and perish in the second death.

Able to Destroy both Soul and Body in Gehenna Mattheiv 10:28; Luke 12:5

“Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell [Gehenna].” See also another account of the same discourse by Luke—12:4, 5.     •

Here our Lord pointed out to His followers the great cause they had for courage and brav-

ery under the most trying circumstances. They were to expect persecution, and to have all manner of evil spoken against them falsely, for His sake, and for the sake of the ‘‘good tidings” of which He made them the ministers and heralds; yea, the time would come, that whosoever would kill them would think that he did God a service. Their consolation or reward for this was to be received, not in the present life, but in the life to come. They were assured, and they believed that He had come to give His life a ransom for many, and that all in their graves must in consequence, in due time, hear the Deliverers voice and come forth, either to reward (if their trial had been passed in this life successfully), or to future trial, or judgment, as must be the case with the great majority who do not, in this present life, come to the necessary knowledge and „ opportunity essential to a complete trial.

Under present conditions men are able to kill our bodies, but nothing that they can do will affect our future being (soul), which God has promised shall be revived or restored by His power in the resurrection day—the Millennial age. Our revived souls will have new bodies (spiritual or natural—“to each seed his own [kind of] body”),and these none will have liberty to kill. God alone has power to destroy utterly soul and body. He alone, therefore, should be feared; and the opposition of men even to the death is not to be feared,- if thereby we gain divine approval. Our Lord's bidding then is: ‘Fear not them which can terminate the present (dying) life in these poor, dying bodies. Care little for it, its food, its clothing, its pleasures, in comparison with that future existence or being which God has provided for you, and which, if secured, may be your portion forever. Fear not the threats, or looks, or acts of men, whose ( power can extend no farther than the present existence; who can harm and kill these bodies, but can do no more. Rather have respect and deference to God, with whom are the issues of life everlasting—fear Him who is able to destroy in Gehenna, the second death, both the present dying condition and all hope of future existence.’

"Undying Worms and Quenchless Fires Mattheiv 18:3, 9; Mark 9:43-48

Here it is conclusively shown that Gehenna as a figure represented the second death—the utter destruction which must ensue in the case of all who, after having fully received’the opportunities of a future being or existence through our Lord’s sacrifice, prove themselves unworthy of God’s gift, and refuse to accept it, by refusing obedience to His just requirements. For it does not say that God win preserve soul or body in Gehenna, but that in it He can and will “destroy" both. Thus we are taught that any who are condemned to the second death are hopelessly and forever blotted out of existence.

[Since these two passages refer to the same discourse, we quote from Mark—pointing out that verses 44 and 46, and part of 45, are not found in the oldest Greek MSS., though verse 48, which reads the same, is in all manuscripts. We quote the text as found in these ancient and reliable MSS.] “If thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into Gehenna, into the fire that never shall be quenched. And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into Gehenna. And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out: it is better for thee to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into Gehenna, where the worm dies not and the fire is not quenched.”

After reading the above, all must agree with the prophet that our Lord opened his mouth in figures and obscure sayings. (Psa. 78:2; Matt. 13:35) No one for a moment supposes that our Lord advised the people to mutilate their bodies by cutting off their limbs, or gouging out their eyes. Nor does He mean us to understand that the injuries and disfigurements of the present life will continue beyond the grave, when we shall “enter into life”. The Jews, whom our Lord addressed, having no conception of a place of everlasting torment, and who knew the word Gehenna to refer to the valley outside their city, which was not a place of torment, nor a place where any living thing was cast, but a place for the utter destruction of whatever might be cast into it, recognized the Lord’s expression regarding limbs and eyes to be figurative, and knew that Gehenna also was used in the same figurative sense, to symbolize utter destruction.

The Lord meant simply this: ‘The future life, which God has provided for redeemed man, is of inestimable value, and it will richly pay you to make any sacrifice to receive and enjoy that life.

Should it cost even an eye, a hand or a foot, so that to all eternity you would be obliged to endure the loss of these, yet life would be cheap at even such a cost. Thatwould be better farthan to retain your members and lose all in Gehenna.’ Doubtless, too, the hearers drew the lesson as applicable to all the affairs of life, and understood the Master to mean that it would richly repay them to deny themselves many comforts, pleasures and tastes, dear to them as a right hand, precious as an eye, and serviceable as a foot, rather than by gratification to forfeit the life to come and be utterly destroyed in Gehenna—the second death.

But what about the undying worms and the unquenchable fire ?

We answer, In the literal Gehenna, which is the basis of our Lord’s illustration, the bodies of animals, etc., frequently fell upon ledges of rocks and not into the fire kept burning below. Thus exposed, these would breed worms and be destroyed by them, as completely and as surely as those which burned. No one was allowed to disturb the contents of this valley; hence the worm and the fire together completed the work of destruction—the fire was not quenched and the w^Torms died not. This would not imply a never-ending fire nor everlasting worms. The thought is that the worms did not die off and leave the carcasses there, but continued and completed the work of destruction. So with the fire: it was not quenched, it burned on until all was consumed. Just so if a house were ablaze and the fire could not be controlled or quenched, but burned until the building was destroyed, we might properly call such an “unquenchable fire”.

Our Lord wished to impress the thought of the completeness and finality of the second death, symbolized in Gehenna. All who go into the second death will be thoroughly, complet-ly and forever destroyed. No ransom will ever again be given for any (Rom. 6:9): for none worthy of life will be cast into the second death, or lake of fire, but only those who lore unrighteousness after coming to the knowledge of the truth.

Not only in the above instances is the second death pointedly illustrated by Gehenna, but it is evident that the same Teacher used the same figure to represent the same thing in the symbols of Revelation, though there it is not called Gehenna, but a “lake of fire”.

The same valley was once before used as a basis of a discourse by the Prophet Isaiah. (Isa. 6G:24) Though he gives it no name, he describes it; and all should notice that he speaks, not afe some with false ideas might expect, of billions alive in flames and torture, but of the carcasses of those who transgressed against the Lord, who are thus represented as utterly destroyed in the second death. ’

The two preceding verses show the time when this prophecy will be fulfilled, and it is in perfect harmony with the symbols of Revelation; for it appertains to the new dispensation, the Millennium, the “new heavens and new earth” condition of things. Then all the righteous will see the justice as well as the wisdom of the utter destruction of the incorrigible, "wilful enemies of righteousness, as it is written: “They shall be an abhorring unto all flesh”.

Matthew 23:15, 33

The class here addressed were not the heathen who had no knowledge of the truth, nor the lowest and most ignorant of the Jewish nation, but the Scribes and Pharisees, outwardly the most religious, and the leaders and teachers of the people. To these our Lord said: “How can ye escape the judgment of Gehenna!” These men were hypocritical; they were not true to their convictions. Abundant testimony of the truth had been borne to them, but they refused to accept it, and endeavored to counteract its influence and to discourage the people from accepting it. And in thus resisting the holy spirit of light and truth, they were hardening their hearts against the very agency which God designed i'or their blessing. Hence they were wickedly resisting his grace, and such a course, if pursued, must eventually end in condemnation to the second death, Gehenna. Every step in the direction of wilful blindness and opposition to the truth makes return more difficult, and makes the wrongdoer more and' more of the character which God abhors, and which the second death is intended to utterly destroy. The Scribes and Pharisees were progressing rapidly in that course: hence the warning inquiry of our Lord, "How can ye escape!” etc. The sense is this: Although you boast of your piety, you will surely be destroyed in Gehenna, unless you change your course.

Set on Fire of Gehenna—James 3:6

"So [important] is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature, and [or when] it is set on fire of Gehenna.” ’

Here, in strong, symbolic language, the Apostle points out the great and bad influence of an evil tongue—a tongue set on fire (figuratively) by Gehenna (figuratively). For a tongue to be set on fire of Gehenna signifies that it is set going in evil by a perverse disposition, self-willed, selfish, hateful, malicious, the sort of disposition which, in spite of knowledge and opportunity, unless controlled and reformed, will be counted worthy to be destroyed—the class for whom the “second death,” the real ‘Hake of fire,” the real Gehenna, is intended. One in that attitude may by his tongue kindle a great fire, a destructive disturbance, which, wherever it has contact, will work evil in the entire course of nature. A few malicious words often arouse all the evil passions of the speaker, engender the same in others and react upon the first. And continuance in such an evil course finally corrupts the entire man, and brings him under sentence as utterly unworthy of life.

“Tartaroo" Rendered “Hell”

The Greek word tartaroo occurs but once in the Scriptures, and is translated hell. It is found in 2 Pet. 2:4, which reads thus:

“God spared not the angels who sinned, but cast [fAem] doivn to hell [tartaroo], and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.”

Having examined all other words rendered "hell” in the Bible, and all the texts in which they occur, we conclude the examination with this text, which is the only one in which the word tartaroo occurs. In the above quotation, all the words shown in Italic type are translated from the one Greek word tartaroo. Evidently the translators were at a loss to know how to translate the word, but concluded they knew where the evil angels ought to be, and so they made bold to put them into “hell”, though it took six words to twist the idea into the shape they had pre-determined it must take.

The word tartaroo, used by Peter, very closely resembles Tartarus, a word used in Grecian mythology as the name for a dark abyss or prison. But tartaroo seems to refer more to an act than to a place. The fall of the ansels who sinned was from honor and dignity into dishonor and condemnation, and the thought seems to be: “God spared not the angels who sinned, but degraded them, and, delivered them into chains of darkness.”

This certainly agrees with the facts known to us through other Scriptures for these fallen spirits frequented the earth in the days of our Lord and the apostles. Hence they were not cast down in some place, but “down” in the sense of being degraded from former honor and liberty, and restrained under darkness, as by a chain. Whenever these fallen spirits, in spiritualistic seances, manifest their powers through mediums, pretending to be certain dead human beings, they must always do their work in the dark, because darkness is the chain by which they are bound until the great Millennial day of judgment. Whether this implies that in the immediate future they will l?e able to materialize in daylight is difficult to determine. If so, it would greatly increase Satan’s power to blind and deceive for a short season—until the Sun of Righteousness has fully risen and Satan is fully bound.

Thus we close our investigation of the Bible use of the word "hell”. Thank God, we find no such place of everlasting torture as the creeds and hymn-books and many pulpits erroneously teach. Yet we have found a “hell,” Sheol, Hades, to which all our race were condemned-on account of Adam’s sin, and from which all are redeemed by our Lord’s death; and that “hell” is the tomb—the death condition. And we find another •'hell” (Gehenna—the second death— utter destruction) brought to our attention as the final penalty upon all who, after being redeemed and brought to the full knowledge of the truth, and to full ability to obey it, shall yet choose death by choosing a course of opposition to God and righteousness. And our hearts say, Amen! “True and righteous are thy ways, thou King of nations! Who shall not venerate thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name! For thou art entirely holy. And all nations shall come and worship before thee, because thy righteous dealings are made manifest”—Rev. 15:3,4.

JUVENILE BIBLE STUDY -

ONE question for each day is provided by this journal. The parent will find It Interesting and helpful to have the child take up a question each day and to aid It in finding the answer In the Scriptures, thus developing a knowledge of the Bible and learning where to find In it the information which is desired.

• 1. What did the unclean animals of Peters vision represent?

Answer: The Gentiles. See Acts 10:28.

• 2. Were the Jewish converts "astonished” because God had visited the Gentiles?

Answer: See Acts 10:45.

• 3. Were the other apostles astonished also?

Answer: See Acts 11:1 - 3.

• 4. What is meant by the expression "they of the circumcision”?

Answer: The Jews.

• 5. Has God been trying to convert the world?

Answer: No; for God is almighty and all wise, and does just what He plans to do. See Isa. 55:10, 11.

• 6. Then what has God been doing during the Gospel age?

Answer: See Acts 15:14.

• 7. When a young man takes out from a certain family a girl "for his name”, what does the phrase mean?

Answer: He takes her for his bride.

• 8. To "take out of them” a bride implies what?

Answer: That there werq others in the family whom he did not take as his bride.

• 9. Would this imply that he hated the others and had no favors for them?

Answer: No.                             ••

• -10. When Isaac took Rebecca did other members of her family receive gifts also? .

Answer: See Genesis 24: 53.

• 11. What does the word Christ mean?

Answer: Anointed.

• 12. Is the title Christ applied to Jesus alone or is it also applied to the true church?

Answer: See Romans 12: 5 ; 1 Corinthians 12: 12, 27.

• 13. In olden times were persons anointed to be kings?

Answer: See 1 Samuel 15:1.

• 14. David anointed to be king some time before he actually became king?

Answer: Yes; about seven years before. See 1 Samuel 16:13 t<>2 Samuel 2:4.

dflintalpii mystery”

The Great Bible Commentary—600 pages

Every Christian and order-loving person should read it

Exposes the duplicity of the clergy; explains the cause of the distress of nations; and foretells the blessing of the people in the near future.

For the publication and circulation of this book during the war many Christians suffered great persecution—being beaten, tarred and feathered, imprisoned, and killed.—Mark 13:9.

edition, cloth-bound $1.00 postpaid

("The Finished Mjjtery"and one year’s subscription to this journal, $3.33)

International Bible Students Association, 124 Columbia Heights, Brooklyn, N. Y., U. S. A.