The law goes on to exact all its claims against the sinner, to the "very last mite." But, afterwards, if the sinner has repented, Christ steps in with the gratuity of eternal existence!

But in this view of the atonement and the doctrines related to it, why should there be any resurrection of the wicked? They die, that is the penalty of their sins; in the archives of eternal justice the account is balanced. Why not let them sleep forever and ever? Why call them to life and make them die over again? According to the theory under consideration, there is no place for the resurrection of the "unjust." It answers no good purpose; it leads to an undeserved punishment, another death. And hence, the "Bible versus Tradition," which is more logical than some other works on the same subject, fails to affirm the resurrection of the wicked, and, in the face of the positive declarations of Scripture, leaves an impression on the reader that the author does not believe in it.

We do not pretend to have exhausted this subject. Our aim has been to show the unsoundness of the central dogma, by exposing the absurdities to which it leads. If the results be monstrous and unscriptural, the cause is equally so, "for the tree is known by its fruit." We have examined some of the passages of Scripture which may be considered ruling texts. But the number has not been multiplied, lest our readers should be exhausted, and lest they should suppose there were no other proof-texts, and so lose the combined force of the whole Scriptures on the subject. If we should find one wearying himself in contemplating the stars through a telescope, that he might obtain an adequate idea of the glory of the firmament, we would not discourage this kind of critical examination, but we should say to him, at length, lift up your eyes to heaven, let in the light VOL. VIII.-40

of a thousand stars, sparkling in the broad heavens, at once!

So we say of the Scriptures; whether we have failed to apprehend the force of this text or that, there is a manifest drift in the whole Bible, which the reader of the common English version cannot fail to apprehend, and which indicates the line of interpretation for all its parts. And if it be not the drift and import of the original, that the righteous are to reign in glory forever, and the wicked suffer eternally in hell, the judgment of the thousands of daily readers of that blessed book, would be, that there is a more imperative demand and greater reason for a new translation than has ever yet been urged.

If the argument for annihilation have been presented to any persons in a specious and pleasant light, and they have fancied that it relieves the current theology of some severe features, and is a very slight departure from what they have always believed, let them remember that if they swallow the "gnat," they must inevitably swallow the "camel." And this oriental figure of our Saviour aptly illustrates the history of error, because it is often harder to master the first apparent departure from past belief, than all the erroneous conclusions to which it leads, however extravagant or numerous they may be. As in vice, so in error, "it is the first step that costs;" or like "strife," which "is as the letting out of waters," when they first begin to overflow the full dike, the hand or the foot can stay their progress; but neglect it, and the little stream becomes a raving flood, bearing away all embankments before it, and carrying destruction on its waves. If we take the first step out of the beaten way of truth, we know not how fast or far we may wander.

ARTICLE V.

THE INSURRECTION OF THE PAXTON BOYS.*

It was during the Indian war of 1763-4, that the curious and interesting affair of "the Paxton Boys" occurred. We present an Article on this subject, not only for its specific Pennsylvanian and Presbyterian interest, but because it furnishes the occasion for some peculiar sketches of character. We may remark, that while no country affords more remarkable specimens of idiosyncrasy of races, continuing persistently for generations, than Pennsylvania, in no country, perhaps, has there been less effort to preserve these traits in history and literature.+

Whatever stress we may lay upon the influence of circumstance and culture, it is yet true that we make small progress in the knowledge of human nature, unless we take large account of race. We have in Amer

*This paper was read before the Pennsylvania Historical Society, on Monday evening, April 2, 1860.

The sources of this Article are Mr. Parkman's History of the Conspiracy of Pontiac; The Colonial Records and Archives of Pennsylvania, prepared by Samuel Hazard, Esq., under authority of the Legislature of Pennsylvania; Mr. Rupp's Histories of Lancaster and York counties, and Mr. Day's Historical Collections of Pennsylvania. We ought also to mention the letters of Mr. Redmund Conyngham, published at Lancaster, the substance of which Mr. Parkman and others have extracted. The history of the latter gentleman is very valuable, and we desire to acknowledge here fully our obligations to it. Mr. Hazard has some pamphlets on the subject which he obligingly. offered for our use. There are also about twenty pamphlets in the Philadelphia Library relating to this matter. They are on both sides. of the controversy. Besides all these, we have carefully sought information from a variety of sources. To some of them reference is made on subsequent pages.

ica, face to face, representatives of the three sons of Noah-the white Japhethian, the black son of Ham, the red descendant of Shem. What earthly power can make them alike?

The white races in Pennsylvania are remarkably unmixed. They retain their original character beyond those of almost any State in our Union. Omitting any consideration of the comparatively few Swedes, Dutch, Welsh, and men of other nationalities, there are four distinctly marked races.

In Philadelphia, and the eastern counties, are the descendants of the English people, who came with William Penn, or who followed him at different intervals. Settled wherever the soil is rich, and the climate kindly, particularly in the broad valley which begins at Easton on the Delaware, and sweeps in a grand circle to the Susquehanna, and beyond it, and in Lancaster and York counties, are to be found our German population, who are especially of the Lutheran and Reformed, and a comparatively few of the Moravian faith, a people that emphatically mind their own business, and make, with industry that never flags, continual accessions to the wealth of the State. In the northern tier of counties lies the overflow of New York and New England, a people bearing the characteristics which forever re-appear where that remarkable race find a foothold.

But it is with the fourth of these races that we are more immediately concerned. A very remarkable country is Scotland, and wonderful, considering its size, the men it has produced, and the influence it has exerted upon mankind. It is not the Celtic race of which we speak, the Highlanders, of whom Scott has made heroes and Macaulay wild beasts-the truth no doubt lying between them. These are not the Scottishmen of his

tory, but a comparatively alien race, which has been slowly and reluctantly subdued to civilization. Without losing ourselves in the mists of antiquity, we may say with certainty, that, if not the very first, the Celts were the first people known to history, who, coming from the original seats of the human race, settled in Britain. They are still there in the shape of the Welsh, a part of the Irish, and of the inhabitants of Cornwall, and the Scottish Highlanders.

The races that succeeded the Celts in Scotland were mainly the Norman and Saxon, with an infusion, also, of the Danes who remained in the North of England after their invasion. There was, of course, a mixture of the old Celts with these races, but the Celts, as such, remained in the mass distinct from the Scottish people, as did the Welsh in England from the English. Macaulay, who will not be accused of any undue partiality for the land he has so remorselessly vilified, yet says: "The population of Scotland, with the exception of the Celtic tribes, which were thinly scattered over the Hebrides, and over the mountainous parts of the northern shires, was of the same blood with the population of England, and spoke a tongue which did not differ from the purest English, more than the dialects of Somersetshire and Lancashire differed from each other. In Ireland, on the contrary, the population, with the exception of the small English colony near the coast, was Celtic, and still kept the Celtic speech and manners." We cannot, therefore, understand Scotland without discharging from our mind, at once and forever, the idea that its type is that of the Highland Celts. The Lowlands of Scotland, separated by an imaginary line from England, were settled by the same people, who are called by the Highlanders, Southrons or Sassenach.

Yet it would be a grave error to suppose that the