And yet no complaint was made by Dr. Coke or his friends that he was wronged, or the fundamental law of the Discipline violated. These precedents completely cover the action of a recent General Conference in a similar exercise of its high authority; and perhaps no man contributed more largely to the influences that governed and saved the Church in 1844, than he who long before had laboured to diffuse the spirit of true liberty in the Church, and to maintain the authority of the presbytery over the episcopacy. The friends of real Christian liberty, as it is set forth and defended in the Methodist Discipline, owe a lasting debt of gratitude to the memory of Jesse Lee.

It is also gratifying to perceive, that the doctrines he taught and impressed on the minds of his cotemporaries are still cherished among his successors; and that the kinsman who has now the honour to be his biographer, is also the exponent and advocate of his enlightened and liberal views. We are decidedly pleased with Dr. Lee's statement, as qualified by himself, of the ecclesiastical constitution of Methodism :

"The General Conference, as the source of law and authority in the Church, is represented so entirely in every department of the ecclesiastical government, that it may be almost said to be everywhere. In the person and power of its representatives, the authority of the General Conference is felt in every ramification of official influence. The bishop is the first and highest executive officer of the Church. In the absence of the bishop, the presiding elder stands forth as his accredited representative; and he, in turn, is represented by the preacher in charge, who transmits to the class-leaders the authority to supply his place in carrying out the designs of the organization in spreading Scriptural holiness in the earth. Thus from the fountain of power [Croton] there is a regular transmission of official authority to the very extremities of the system."-P. 138.

This statement, though just, admits of an interpretation that would seem to imply an almost absolute executive power in the episcopacy; but such an interpretation is guarded against by our author. In a note at the bottom of the page, he inserts, with approbation, the following remark from the Life of Rev. W. Watters: "But while he [the bishop] superintends the whole work, he cannot interfere with the particular charge of any of the preachers in their stations. To see that the preachers fill their places with propriety, and to understand the state of every station or circuit, that he may the better make the appointments of the preachers, is, no doubt, no small part of his duty; but he has nothing to do with receiving, censuring, or excluding members; this belongs wholly to the sta tioned preacher and members." The authority of the General Conference is communicated to the presiding elders, or stationed preachers, through the bishops, only so far as their particular fields

of labour are concerned. The authority of all ministerial officers of the Church is derived directly from the General Conference, agreeable to the fundamental laws of the Church. An incumbent may be displaced or superseded, but the superior minister has no right to seize and appropriate to himself the functions of the office thus vacated.

We must pass over briefly, or wholly omit, several important passages in the history of Mr. Lee. His connexion with the episcopacy forms an interesting and rather curious chapter in our early history. It is a maxim among politicians, that a first-class civilian, who has been long and intimately connected with the issues of the times, does not make the most available candidate for the high places in the gift of the people. The very actions that render such a one illustrious, incur the displeasure of those who differ with him in opinion; whereas, were he less conspicuous, he would escape that odium. Such was Mr. Lee's case relative to the episcopacy. He had been a prominent actor in all the great questions that had risen in the Church since its organization; and in advocating his own opinions he had opposed many, who, on that account, would be less inclined to elevate him to the highest place in the Church. Still he had the fullest evidence possible, next to an election, that he shared, in an eminent degree, the confidence of his brethren.

Mr. Lee's relations to slavery possess a high degree of interest, which is rather increased than diminished by the lapse of time. Dr. Lee moves rather awkwardly about this subject, and his remarks and disquisitions, are curious and amusing. He is evidently an admirer of the subject of his narrative, and his better judgment, as to the "delicate question" of slavery, seems to be on the side espoused and advocated by his illustrious kinsman. But he is a Virginian, and has the misfortune to live among circumstances that render it a crime to speak against the "peculiar institution of the South." To commend the course of Jesse Lee relative to slavery, and not condemn slavery, would require more skill in hairsplitting than falls to the lots of most mere mortals. The book is a real mosaic,—now all southern, and now as wholly northern: now Virginian of 1780, and now Virginian of 1848. In South Carolina it would be an incendiary publication, suitable to be placed with the Methodist Discipline in the Index Expurgatorius; and at Baltimore it must appear as a very poor attempt to whitewash a rotten system. Still, it may be adapted to the transcendental geniuses of the Old Dominion.

From the beginning, Methodism has been hostile to slavery; and nowhere else has that feeling been more clearly manifest than in

Virginia. In 1780, the Virginia Conference acknowledged slavery to be "contrary to the laws of God, man, and nature, and hurtful to society,-contrary to the dictates of conscience and pure religion;" and they recommended to all their friends to emancipate their slaves. The prevailing sentiment of the Church at that period was openly and most decidedly averse to " African slavery." This was but the legitimate fruit of the character and action of the Church.. Opposition to slavery was an original element of Methodism, and "the extirpation of the great evil" was among its primary designs. But while there was entire unanimity thus far, there was always much difference of opinion among good antislavery men, as to the best method of accomplishing a purpose at once so necessary and so difficult; and, therefore, it is not wonderful that Mr. Lee differed with some of his brethren on this subject: nor does such a disagreement cast a shadow upon the good name of either party. But we esteem it alike unjust and cruel, to attempt to make Jesse Lee the prototype of modern pro-slavery Methodists. At such an imputation the spirit of the good man, it may be fancied, would be disturbed in the repose of Paradise; and his sons in the gospel, the Methodists of New-England, would be aroused to vindicate his fair reputation. It is now declared, on the fullest evidence, that he was both a non-slaveholder from principle, and an advocate of emancipation. In 1798, while travelling with Bishop Asbury through Virginia, he paid a visit of several days to the residence of his father. The object of this visit, says his biographer, "was to importune his now aged father to provide for the emancipation of his slaves." Mr. Lee himself, in the account given of this visit in his journal, remarked, "I wished him to make his will, for the peace of them that might live after him, and for the sake of his negroes, who are yet in slavery; but he was not determined about it." The pious and humane purpose of the son was not effected, the old man died, as he had lived, a slaveholder, "He left a will, and distributed his servants among his descendants." But the pious son was saved from the double sorrow that would have fallen upon him, had he survived his father. In that case, he would, perhaps, have become legally possessed of one or more slaves; but all the laws of the Commonwealth could not have made him a slaveholder in fact. His conscience, enlightened by the word of God, and quickened by the Holy Ghost, was his only law; and no civil institution could compel him to sin against his own soul. Had all his successors in the ministry been equally true to God and Methodism, a very different state of things, in relation to slavery, would have been

effected.

There are several other particulars in the history of our illustrious subject that we have marked for comment; but we must pass them by, and hasten to conclude our remarks. Mr. Lee left his favourite field in New-England in 1797, to accompany Bishop Asbury on his tours of episcopal visitation; and for three successive years he traversed the whole extent of the country from Georgia to Maine, assisting the bishop in all his duties, so far as compatible with his non-episcopal character. This was evidently designed by Bishop Asbury as an apprenticeship for the episcopacy, and doubtless Mr. Lee also so understood it; but the General Conference of 1800 thought differently, for, on the third balloting,-the second having resulted in a tie between Mr. Lee and Mr. Whatcoat,-the latter was declared duly elected. Suspicions of something unfair in the canvass were expressed at the time, and have never been entirely dissipated; but we will not stir the ashes that bury this unpleasant affair. All the parties to those transactions now sleep together in the grave, and we trust their spirits rest together in Paradise.

At the close of the General Conference Mr. Lee returned once more to the Virginia Conference, where, for sixteen successive years, he performed the duties of a travelling preacher with characteristic zeal and fidelity. During this period he was four times chosen chaplain to Congress, the duties of which office he performed faithfully and acceptably. In 1815 he was appointed to Fredericksburg, which was included in the Baltimore Conference, and the next year to Annapolis, in Maryland. While there engaged in his official duties, near the last of August, he passed over to the Eastern Shore, to attend a camp-meeting near Hillsborough. Here he preached his last sermon. Soon after preaching he was attacked by a violent fever, which terminated his active and useful life on the twelfth of September, in the fifty-ninth year of his age, and the thirty-fourth of his public ministry. As his life had been one of sacrifice and devotion to the cause of his divine Master, so his death was full of assurance and radiant with hopes of immortality.

As a Christian, Mr. Lee was distinguished for the soundness of his conversion, the steadiness and strength of his faith, the cheerfulness of his piety, and his rigid conscientiousness. As a minister of the Gospel, he professed to hold his commission directly from the Head of the Church, and his labours are the best evidence of his calling. He was a man of superior natural abilities, which were strengthened and improved by cultivation,-a good speaker, and an indefatigable labourer. In his intercourse with his brethren he was frank and familiar, though, by the silent power of his presence, he exercised a commanding influence among them. Few men

have done so much to give shape and character to Methodist polity; for though often defeated in the specific measures he advocated, the spirit of his policy nearly always prevailed. He lived in the heroic age of Methodism, and was himself a chief among the great men of his times. He was, emphatically, a man for his own times; and having faithfully and successfully served his generation, he rested from his labours, and his works follow him. His memory and his example remain, and will long be cherished by those who come after him.

ART. IV.-ON THE INTERPRETATION OF MARK 1x, 49, 50. [Modified from the German of Bähr, in the Theologische Studien und Kritiken for July, 1849.]

THIS passage is acknowledged by all commentators to be dark and difficult. Any new light that may be thrown upon it cannot fail to be acceptable; and we hazard the following views as a contribution to its interpretation. To us, at least, they are more satisfactory than any exposition of the passage we have met with.

The passage reads: Πᾶς γὰρ πυρὶ ἁλισθήσεται, καὶ πᾶσα θυσία ἁλὶ ἁλισθήσεται.

“ Καλὸν τὸ ἅλας· ἐὰν δὲ τὸ ἅλας αναλον γένηται, ἐν τίνι αὐτὸ ἀρτύσετε ; ἔχετε ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ἅλας, καὶ εἰρηνεύετε ἐν ἀλλήλοις.”

"For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall be salted with salt.

"Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another."

Nearly all interpreters refer the words, "salted with fire," to the punishment of the wicked in hell; and their main difficulty consists in connecting this predicate with the subject "every one," and also in making a clear sense for verse 50 in connexion with verse 49 thus understood. We hope to avoid the whole difficulty, and to show a clear and beautiful connexion in the whole passage, by explaining the salt of the sacrifice, and its spiritual import-a point which has not heretofore been adequately cleared up.

Before entering directly upon our exposition, we must call attention to the fact, that the passage before us is not an isolated one, but