The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

H.433. .114 «an!!! .01 ‘ [‘3' Secondly, it must be remembered ill“ than is no diflorence between At the outset of the discussion on Liturgies, it is important to bear in mind what is the real question at issue. Reader has endeavored, wil- fully or ignorantly to rnistify it by confusing things which are essenti- ally different and to which the same arguments will not apply. I shall try to state clearly for what Presby- terians contend. They do not assert the absolute unlawfulness of all forms. But they believe that their habitual use is attended with so many serious disadvantages, as to render iree or unrestricted prayer an infinitely better mode of public de. votion. They also object to prescrib- ed prayers on the very ground that they are prescribed. They hold that no man, or body of men. no king, no convocation. no parliament has a right to frame the petitions and con- fessions of Christian people and to proclaim that in the exact words which they have decreed, and in them. alone, are they to worship their Mak- er. They ask, as they have a right to ask. whence did any man or church get this authority and who gave this authority ? Reader in several of his letters has prosed considerably on the lawfulness. and the beauty and the , excellence and the propriety of the , Forms of the Book of Common Pray- er but he has not once attempted to explain how the Church or parlia- ment acquired the right to bind down 1 these particular forms on the con- ' sciences of God’s freemen. A vin- ] dication of the impositiongof these set 1 forms by human authority would ‘ be much more to the point. In order therefore to have the real point at issue preperly before us it is necessary to clear away some of the confusions into which Reader has fallen in his letter. First it may be noticed that the question is altogeth- er one pertaining to the public, as distinct from the private worship of Christian people. Reader hmsef} i distinctly states this in opening the discussion. His words are, “ The Holy Scriptures Sanction the use of Liturgies in Public Worship, and they sanction no other mode of Pub- lie Worship.” The truth of this I deny and its incorrectnese I hope fully to establish. But here I introduce it duply to place the question squarely before us. I shall be compelled to flow at the proper time that Reader use than once conveniently forgets 3e. Anything connected with the - " ‘ te worship mast theretetesec- i i 1 i l i 1 l I t f l l t i t I I I yond the ” lrothy conjectures” ol the "popular furnishing treatises ” which he has been consulting before it will be necessary to call in the aiol of that profound learning to which Buckle in his famous Hist. of Civiliâ€" zation. Vol. I p. 613, refers in these eloquent words: “ The most profound thinkers have been on the Calvinistic side; and it is interesting to observe that this superiority of thought on the part of the Calvinists existed lrom the beginning ” In his letter of Aug. let, Reader broadly hints that A. B. has been consulting the “Toronto Professor ” and securing his assistance in the preparation of these letters. Let me assure Reader that he is entirely mistaken in his surmise. Up to this point. A. B. has not found it necessary to use any authority other than that lounu in books. Not presuming. however, that he “ Knows it all ” like Reader, he would not hesitate to do so were it necessary. But Reader’s letters have been so “dead easy ”;‘ their errors. their absurdities, their} sophistries have been so manifestly‘ on the surface that, far from being an honor, it wetealmOSt an indignity for an, one pretending any literary; ability or historical knowledge to notice them at all. No, Reader will have to go deeper, he must get be»! yontl the ‘lrothy conjectures” of the ' popular furnishing treatises ” which he has been consulting before! it will be necessary to call in the aid] First, let me compliment Reader for his calmer consideration of this question than of some of the others discussed. and further upon the plausible case he has been able to make out of the materials that lay to his hand. PLAUSIBLE, I must say it is. for when carefully examined all its pretensions to validity or stability vanish into thin air. Those mater- ials from Scripture are confessedly scanty, but if Reader had more space (though he was not limited) he would doubtiess have given more from the works of Lightfoot, Prideaux, Hall and Boyd upon the same subject, where I find everything adduced by Reader and very much more of the same specious reasoning set forth in‘ order. I had expected if this ques- tion were uiscussed at all, that some- i thing new would have been said upon‘ it but 1 am disappointed. It is thei same old story that has been repeated and rehashed for centuries and will probably again be brought into red quisition as long and as often as men 2 want to justify a practice which tends .‘ to ” ease and sloth,” but for which- there is absolutely no Scriptural ;. warrant. A. I. OH LITUBGICAL WORSHIP. Dun Emmyâ€"In my lut letter, I imtlmnted my intention of discus- eing the question of Liturgiee in the Public Worship of Christina people and I on pleeoed thnt Render hu given me n lager text to work upon. Hod he lelt me with only the opinions of Sir Snnlord Fleming and o! thnt other pervert whom he mentioned (Aug. 21), I should hove been con- etrnined to touch the queetion hut lightly. Now. however. I hove em. ple scape and I thunk Bender for the opportunity of eteting the queetion} from the Preebyteriun stnndpoint “1 name length and with some degree of’ minuteness, Reply to leader’s Letter of Aug. 28 In this connection, it is worth noticing that though the Continental and Scottish Reformed Churches had liturgies, the Ministers were free to use them or not at their pleasure. No Minister was bound to adhere to them. “There was this important diflerence ” says McCrie, "between the two: in the Englishsthe Minister is restricted to the repetition of the very words of the prayersâ€"in the Scottish (first used by the English Church at Geneva, and called the Book of Common Order). he is left at liberty to vary from them. and sub- stitute prayers of his own in their room.” This can be further verified from Knox’s Liturgy p. 8o Edin. 1611. In these Liturgies, the forms were prescribed for use. as Calvin distinctly says, “ to provide for the ignorance and unskilfulness of some” and “ to counteract the levity of others ” That is, he thought themi advisable at that time when ignorant and corrupt ministers abounded in the church. This implies that when such an era passed away, the pre- scribed forms should pass away‘ with it. He further exhorts them “to seek out fit and able preachers ” so that all ad'sh helps could he discon- tmed. It would spree: after all t intheoplllon o ,rvin. the groa’tepfi W0. Whi’lfl. ‘. Prayer Book and “none other except I so far as shall be ordered by lawful ; authority.” No quibbling can evade l . this and no sophistry can destroy the Canon law of the Church which is as binding on the clergy as the l l Statute law itselfâ€"(See Judge Hard- l wicke in More v. More 2, Atkins '; Reps. lbsâ€"and Lord Holt in :2 Atkins ' 630.3). Now, while a church or body j of Christians might allow themselves ' ' to agree on set forms of prayer. and thus use a liturgy, that would be a ! totally different thing from being i compelled to read prescribed prayers l imposed by parliament or by any ex- ! ternal human authority whatsoever. ;1n the Established Church of Eng- 'land this state of afiairs must cont l tinue while the church remains a ’ national or state church. The only cure is disestablishme'nt and possibly disendowment and to that end all the forces in England, with the exception of that exerted by the privileged clergy are evidently hastening. Then the church would be free from parlia- mentary control as its branches ;(sects) are in Ireland. France. Can- l‘d“ and the United States. It must not however be thought that even then the extreme rigidity of this law is fully relaxed. It is only about 30 years since a sentence of suspension and subsequently of degradation was passed by an ecclesiastical court in : the diocese of Illinois. upon Rev. Charles E. Cheney of Chicago. for the omission of the word “ regener- 1 ate ” in the baptismal oflice. ' There is another confusion that .‘ must be removed before the questioni '1s fairly before us. It is this. - the Established Church of Englanldtjl it must be remembered that the Book of Common Prayer 18 part of the I Act of Uniformity of 1662 and there- fore it is unlawful for any clergyman to vary as much as one word from its prescribed formsâ€"“without di- minishing in regard of preaching, or in any other respect. or adding any- thing in the matter or form thereof" (Canon 14). If a Clergyman does so he violates the law and moreover violates his Declaration of Office (Canon 36) to use the forms of the Ll Bender and myself, and therefore no room for discussion on the question [of Set forms for Praise. or for the singing of the congregation in the r, public worship of God. Both Angli- [- cans and Presbyterian agree and be- .e lieve that it is right and proper to e have books of Praiseâ€"to have set .s ' forms of Psalm, paraphrase or hymn l. l for praise in the Sanctuary. In dis- a cussing the question of Liturgies, .t therefore, this must be excluded as :1 one upon which there is agreement .- and therefore does not properly enter t into the present discussion. Reader, -'however. would have us infer from, 3 Sir Sandford Fleming’s address (Aug ‘ I 21) that he can see no reason “ if we t! have set forms of Sacred verse in i Psalms, paraphrases and hymns, why lshould we not have set forms of _. prayer ” It may be so, but it does , not follow that even if both Reader , and Sir Sanford can see no reason in , 3 it, that there is none or that others ,j cannot. On the contrary, it seems to ,3 me that there are few persons of or- , * dinary intelligence who, if not biassed ' :by prejudice or swayed by personal, } leaning, cannot easily discern the} . wide diflerence between them. It is! ‘ but necessary to reflect that the , A Psalms were dictated by the Spirit of! iGod. They were given by inspire-l l tion. Is this’ the case with the lit-i , urgy? Are its prayers given by inog :spiration? Reader will not say they l l g are. Again. the Psalms were ex-i pressely designed by God to be sung, and were sung, in time past, in pub-i *. lic worship. Can Reader plead a; ; similar prescription for his prayers?,: - He cannot truthfully do so. Theref ; is no command of God to read prayersf : in the ordinary public worchip of? l God’s people. Forms of prayer are} ‘different from forms of singing and; it is but a misuse of language to con-i {use them. Any argument for set? forms of prayer based on set forms of? verse for singing, even if these. Psalms are themselves prayers, is g ; . utterly without weight and entirely i; ’untenable. There is all the difi'er-; 'ence in the world between singing,r :1 psalms and hymns inepired by God’s 1 Holy Spirit and prescribed by Him‘ 1 for His worship and reading human ‘j prayers prescribed by human author- . i ity. and ordered to be used exclusiv. ‘ t 91y in the public worship of God. It ‘1 strikes me that even a child, who has l bewn properly trained to reverence x the sacred things of God, can see the g \'~.‘orhl-witle difference. 1 “ Song of Miriam ” after the passage of the Red Sea. From what I have already said, this argument will have no weight whatever. It makes nothing in favor of precomposed prayers imposed by authority. It was a " Sacred Song” and since Pres- byterians as well as Anglicans be- lieve in set forms of verse for sing. ing it does not come under set forms of prayer about which only there can be any dispute or discussion. Read- er probably expected that this would favor a liturgy, but Presbyteriane . use such singing and yet do not use E9, liturgy, hence the argument fails in 'its purpose. As to what Keble says, ‘ it counts for very 'little indeed. Keble was one of the Romanising Oxford Stars already referred to and his testimony on any rite or cere- mony of this kind must be taken with a good deal of .. reserve and econ. omy.” Even if this song were re- tained from the Jewish Serviceâ€"and that is only “ Supposed ”â€"it would give no sanction to introduce it as a fixed piece in the public service of the Christian Church, much less in the pravers thereof. The same re- marks will apply to Reader’s refer- ence to the Song of Moses below and to Bishop Patrick’s observations thereon. -The Song of Moses was sung not read, hence we could all join in “with one voice and with one accord.” - I shall now examine Reader’s argu- ments seriatim to see what is in them. The fixst he adduces is the , and directions, there can be no doubt that they would be regarded as Scrip‘ ture, no matter how Specific and em. .iphatic any declarations he might 'j make that they were not binding on , the church in other ages and places. If therefore the Holy Ghost prohib- iited the Apostles from writing out ‘liturgies for the churches, how can any man that calls himself a Chris- :tian attempt to justify their intro- ;duction into and contmued use in the iChurch in after ages! The thing is lincomprehensible to most men who ilook at the question fairly. The iArchbishop again says (ibid p. 243'), 5 "It might seem at first that the lapostolical precedents were literally } binding on all ages; but this cannot have been intended ; and {or this; reason, that the greater portion of the l apostolical practices have been trans- mitted to us. not on apostolical auth- ority, but on the authority of the un- inepired church: which has handed them down with an uncertain mix- ture of its own appointments.” I am fully persuaded that Liturgies had their origin in this " uncertain mixture ” of the appointments of the early church after it had fallen into corruption and error. To this a _ learned and pious writer (not a Pres- byterian) bears witness in the follow- ing words: “0! this we may be sure. that forms of prayer were not imposed in public worship until flesh- ly wisdom came to have rule in eccles- iastical affairs, nor until the church had, to a lamentable degree, lost ‘the spirit of grace and supplications,’ and her ministers ceased to be will- ing to pray extempore." Reader’s next paragraph, dealing. I It may be well alsoto remember i the eXtrems importance of the 0m 5 BIO)! from the Sacred Books of the . New Testament. of many things I which humanly speaking we would expect to find there. If Liturgies ! were desirable or would be a benefit to the-Christian Church we can hard- ly conceive it possible that all men- tion of them should be omitted by I the .‘Sacred writers. Archbishop ' Whately distinctly points out (On the Kingdom of Christ p.93) that the * New Testament does not " supply us ' with a Liturgy for ordinary Public Worship, or with forms for adminis- tering the Sacrements. or for confer- ring Holy Orders ; nor do they give I us any precise directions as to these land other ecclesiastical matters:â€" I I D t D anything that at all corresponds to a ; Rubric or set of Canons.” And from . 4 these omissions he argues that wei l have a “ complete moral demonstra- I : tion that the Apostles and their {01- l llowers must have been supernatur-l t ally withheld from recording great! 3 part of the institutions, instructional land regulations wnich must in point i :of fact have proceeded from them ;â€" ’ 1' withheld on purpose that other; jchurches. in other Ages and Regions; imight not be led to consider their.-3 selves bound to adhere to several‘ iformularies. customs and rules, that 3 g were of local and temporary appoint-g tment; but might be left to their own ? :discretion in which it seemed best to’ Divine Wisdom that they should be: ' so left.” This is an eminently sen-j tsible view of the matter, and coming; 3 from a most scholarly Anglican Arch-, bishop who was very desirous (as; other parts of his writings prove)t gof obtaining evidences to support the’ l use of a Liturgy from the Scriptures, ,' it should have due Weight in expos- ing the fallacy of Reader’s claim, that the Scriptures sanction the use of Lit-_ urgiesin Pu blicWorship and no otl er. In other words, the Archbishop canv. not conceive the omission of such on any other ground than that the ‘ Apostles and their followers were re- ‘ Strained by the Holy b‘pirit from com- , l tnitting to writing,r full directions as to the manner in which Public Wor- ship should be conducted ~~â€"the things for example that Paul was to "set in order ” when he visited the churches. (I Cor. 1] : :38). if an, Apostle had written out such rules flab-A‘- I was not. far wrong when I acid that liturgies tree for '" simple honest folk ” in out of the way communities without. us yet, the services of a. regular pastor. The settled convic- tions of Capellus (an eminent author- ity) Dr. Urwick, Dr. John Owen and others could also be cited to prove so fares their opinion could do so, the same point but want of space com- pols me to omit these for the present. A FULL LINE OF GROCERIES AT LOWEST PRICES. CUSTOM Wool Wanted. The next two paragraphs of Reader’s letter referring to the passages in Dent. 21 : 7-8 and 26 : 1-11, are unfortunately for him nothing to the purpose. They were not intend- ed to be used in the public devotions The next passage from Num. 6: -(3, contains the form of benediction j which the priest was commanded by : God to pronounce over His people .Israel. But what. has this to do with i the queStion? Reader must know i that Presbyterians regularly use a QScriptural lorm of benediction in f their public worship. Can he {all to lsee that the fact of God’s appointing l a benediction robe used OVer Ancient 'Israel will never warrant a body of fallible men now in prescribing all. the prayers of the Christian Church 1 and in determining that in these only ‘ and unvaryingly shall her members at . all times publicly worship God. Thel truth is that even the Scripture hen-i edictions, dictated and prescribed as; they were by God Himself, are notI always expressed in the one way. In the New Testament they are difier- ently worded in different places. And of this latitude, Presbyteriansl avail themselves. But the Anglican prayers are fixedâ€"in sentiment and phraseology alike changdess and un-l altering. In no point of view there- fore can any precedent for them be obtained from the forms of benedic- tion recorded in Scripture. l 5).) ~- no more foundation than the ordin- ary street gossip of a few royStering tapsters. This I shall show later, on the evidence of Prideaux himself and I am sure Reader will not desyise his authority. '. with the Scape-goat (Lev. 16 : 21) re- ; veals his old tactics of Aug. 14th . thatI got tired of exposing in my .-reply. I pass over the substitution of "lives " for “ sins " in the Sacred text as an error of inadvertence or of the typo., but the concluding part of the sentence must be more seriously considered. First. he says. “ the form to be used by the High Priest was exactly prescribed and the peo- ple fell down upon their faces,” etc. How does he know? It is not so written here. Beyond the exactness recorded in this verse, the Word written. gives no information. All; else is simply conjecture yet Readeri boldly declares it as a fact. Will he! say that the Confessions, etc., used‘ by the High Priest were written out and that he read them from a book over the head of the Scape-goat? Yet he brings this verse as a “proof” for a liturgyâ€"for stated pre-compos- ed forms of prayer to be used in Pub- lic Worship. Bis logical acumen .. may be imagined. It cannot be do. scribed. I wish the honest reader to note too, the quotation which closes g the paragraph. Following so closely 3 upon the heels of a Scripture quota- ‘ tion one would think it too was‘ iScripture and doubtless Reader in- ! tended it should be so taken. For ; what purpose is it introduced? Is it 1 not to make it appear that the maple; had a set form, a liturgy. from which i they would respond: " Blessed be] the Lord, let the Glory of His King l dom be forever.” I would ask the. searcher after truth to read the| whole chapter (Lev. 10°) or the whole Bible through if he likes and he willl nowhere find any such formula, orl sanction of a liturgy in public wor~| ship in connection with this cere-l mony. The act specified was not public worship at all, it was a special, act or symbolical putting away of sml and as such special instructions were! given reSpecting it. The very fact.E that these Special instructions werei given would go to Show that it wasé not the ordinary public worship for {j which already full provisions had i been made. Reader’s brilliant ln1°f j aginatiou has flashed forth this gei'ni (it is a gem though not Scripture) or‘ he has quoted it from some old Jew-J ish tale for which there is probably run. u-‘xra-n 1' ,, 1 THOUSAND. of 1 as though they have forged their m expoet: re to contagim Th‘! feel they are m The Vim, Vigor, “d you nervous and des; to force yous-seat thro bition and cue: ? Innken, dep a: brain f god 7 have; “it!“ 7 posit in turn on hand. WE KEEP AS USUAL a large Tweeds. Worsteds ma monun. I“ .IILBY . STREET. are or 1!. Pay. 25 Your. in Dun-on. Bunk Iowa-o of quarksâ€"Comm old ennui-had, icing. Cancun-clan Free. Book. for Question Blank for Home Treatment. Highest Price i1 any quantity of wool. Ready-Made SUITS always t notice. l-nuuawni of men are prisoners of disease as securely as though they were confined behind the bars. Many have forged their own chains by the vices of early youth, exposure to contagious disease, or the excesses of manhood. gihley feel they are not the men they ought to be or used to be. ARDXNG and Spinning promptly attended to l j The Story of Morning Tiredness §Is told by impure blood, poor diges-' :tion, sluggish liver and tired nerves. i It is a warning of verv serious trouble , ‘ahead, and should prompt sensible; people to take a bracing tonic like; Ferrozone. an energetic invigorant; 'and rebuilder. Ferrozone will givel you a sharp appetite, promote good5 digestion and sound sleep; it will ,feed and energize the enfeebled or- !gans. strengthen the nerve and vital forces and regulate the heart. Ferr- . A it’s the best tonic made. Price 50c? per box. or 6 boxes for $2.50. at l Druggists, or N. C. Polson 00., Kingston, Ont. ' And now. Mr. Editor, since I do not wish to be given an involuntary dip into the Lethean waters of Mo- Kechnie's Melancholy Mileond, I shall stop here and endeavor to com- plete my reply to Reader's arguments in favor of liturgies in my next letter. With thanks for space, I am again, They were not prescribed for the Jews in their ordinary public wor- ship, and therefore they make noth- ing to his Argument. Truly the cause of Liturgies is lamentably weak when recourse is bad to such passages as these in their support. C. SMITH 8: SONS Built in 6, 8, 9 and 12 foot lengths, with many real good improvements. Full particulars will be given, so don’t hesitate to inquire. For Summer Fallows or Fall wheat ground or on Stubble fields. The most perfect implement for working Sod, Fell Plowing or Prairie. Cell end see the Disk Hex-rows end Steel Rollers mede by T. E. Bieeell, of Elore. Out. We hendle them. Boar for Ser Vice\ Imam Kimmie? m To”; STEEL ROLLER S. SCOTT. DISK HA RROW Faithfully Yours.. h IICI. Pumps from $2 upward. SHOP open every afternoon. All REPAIRING promptly and prOP‘ orly, attended to. Pumps of all Kinds. Galvanized and Iron Pi ing; Brass, Brass Lu: and Iron Cylinders. August 19th. 12. W. D. CONNOR THE UNDERSIGNED OFF} R5 for sale the water power 1n. -.»n a .l for sale the “I”; paler lum " Hayward’s l‘nlls,” Gleuelg. NEIL MCKECHNIE, Durban July 10th. 1901. HOUSE AND, LOI‘ ON 01'an Street, then property of Mrs. J. 1“ Browxge. The house conning l2 r009“: oovemently managed: and_ gait? new. ‘3': --LA ‘_- - viva-m “u“ q“ mnkvo'zn” excallent bonding house if); puticuhrs apply to April 14th. 1‘ 12 to 20 months old. ‘ Two reds and two runs choioely bred. FOUR YOUNG BULLS PRO” 12 to 20 month: “Id. 'I‘wn rad! mi Oct. 2nd. -â€"‘ a bargain: -1“. (â€"1-; Enamel: blft'iédiar, or terms of ale call or write to l. as the " cRae Faru1,"siiuated in the north end 0 the Township of (.ilenelx. There are about ll acres cleared and suita- ble for running machinery on. The bal- ance is hardwood bush and supposed to contain over '1!” cords of cordwood “Md fume house and cedar poet ham on it. The farm is situated about six miles from Berke- ley end ten miles from Durham. This farm W11! be sold durjng the next fiO days. and It Jan. [l chase desirable building do well to take a look at Jul!“ Elan of sub-division at I’ark ‘ ‘our, north of Chester stroct. ernmeut Survey, of the Town Plan can be seen at the oftive ( ford. Durham, or at the ofiico 0 signed. For turther particula Water Power For Sale. .1) Durham Road. Tqu 50 acres under good cum a neat brick house. I'm! well and pump, small orch. to school, church and . price and further particula I hum also a promising pair “1‘ old Downy Qolts. sued by ‘reeun Apply for particulars to W. A. LIVINGSTLLV Oct. 8. 19m. 4nd. Three Shorthorn Bull Calves. b to imported stock. A nqmber of Ram and Ewe La. Shearhng Rams. bred from prer Young Pi s. Dams bred by 15 and got bx oweror. the Sweep“ nt Toronto ml . Above stock all eligible wiil be sold right. 01' nt this oflice. July 1, 1532. I 0 Fame Mm “X“ 0!] SUJuG ‘ Sign. another frame barn ”3x50. {0011! hearing orchard of nearly 1003mme sold reasonable and on easy terms. For puticulnrs :pply to the owner, GEORGE LAMB, Or ‘t this Omce. “after. Mm Short Horn Bulls for Sale. Soot. 23rd. NY PERSON WISHING BREEDING STUCK FUR SM EING LOT {)3 mtb. lyrâ€"pd Building lots for Sale. MRS. MARY M or to D. MCCORMICK. JOHN MCARTHL‘R. 200 ACRE FARM. KNOWN Manufacturer 0‘.‘ And Dealer in ~â€" Building lots to! Sale. Farm for Sale. Farm for Sale Farm for Sale ARCHIBALD DAVIDSON Clerk Divxsiuu L‘ For Sale. H. PAfRKER. Durhnm t .W. 0. CONNOR. J. L. BROWNE. tf. Photograph"- W. CALDER. Durham 1' IC( wnshi DURHAM. 0x1~ If al' tf. RI 'atic; am incd “"00. all Tel! 'Kem Is; ,, . “i 7| M in the sume wt V I I... “um-prises. A l I w mold be receive'l. n a. .oIOI invested in the I . d implements. but also 1 a ad ctr” of manageme: . (“at should by a simple book-keeping, keep a caref lull uooipts and expendiu to blow exnctly which b1 in; Operations are yivldl profit. which are condmm ”a Which tre calming him “mark time.” A 11m“ “ii sort may reveal to h u of little leaks whim alzu aptibly drnin away MW {1 should reward his 1m», y, (by! of fierce comgm ;' A :1 by kupipg down (in; «wt Maul or local failuxe crop in due to the purclm 0' inferior grade of ' .064 in usuallv badly _‘ 'min needs. so that (H “um. ovor-run with w i" ’Ifl only repluce useful hull: vuc umoum of a“ Th0 division at I or irregular fieldd uumaroun bleedinl II sh fence corner-1 a“ bid preventing alll firming an be made 'hifih will rendily suggesd M of system. (hmq M‘ on muny {arms is w find energy because. 11 wt il not curied out oxlq man. A study of an .wtful business will ‘ W ht! been largely with“ uni systema don‘things. Systemma mfu'lo u to becomv Mind, but as a general “any 06 said that altvr M pltn of action has M on it should be rigi at. Al more knowledfl at now ideal acquiree. it t my to mnke changes in 1 but no 0113039 should he I Improper Feeding uz' occur. maxium prelim r x that. stock should be 1m 1 for the object in \'w\\' Chould be carefully com order to secure a pmprr of clbumiuoids. mm an- or u it in called a pinpv “‘50. Animals show ‘0!’ only mat l!‘1'\..‘l‘l { h. ready {or murkm at A! “0 name: maturit)~ m. .- “O greater wCUlHP‘ Mth. Again moum (“flux to pzovidv gxml (Coding dating Build“ 3 «1 Wm. to uni. count“ my 0-083 me ghen “if we to ecuâ€"a pram Vandal, but injurioas V a. In“. w- A good system (I. feeding of stock at ouch day. “'heu FIOt “$8er tt regular 11mg «untamed to the I‘vgl ilg, and thrive mar}; '04 it diflereut Luuz's medium day. C‘l'e 0| lll'lpirnn-h’s. men source of 1“.“ neglect of expensiw {:1 “d $0018. 'l‘ilPN‘ ... the fields Wherv tiny : CHbjGCB to all the flu Ee weather. w hich an m then actual use. .\ frequently lost. and mute rust or rot. 'J a piece on every farm mean any be kept u: none should be left on in use. A workshop provided in connect in: hence. no that during other sleek periods. n be painted and mac nude. Much time is during busy seasons 5' byte; and harvest, Lr 00-. other small paw “d t trip to black foundery is necessary Thil waste of valuable prevented by a little enminetion of the im it we. required for ceeel implements :4 “‘61! the farmer (will out. Keeping Unnecessary .~ 5. another frequent causv lf‘rmor h“ more hum.- required to carry on the ‘ farm. he should sen m not need. if a figure at 4;! “I be obtained. TM: 40.. not yield enough KUL 00 pay : good profit u Ghould be disposed of. ax fill-d by unother.â€"»~a flew 0‘ Ch. mics and Bubcav‘a usually furnish some >‘1 “In in this direction. out due deliberatiun. “Gila be carefully plan: moo and all tools and i “tun reudy so that then: My when Operations :u m. U” of Time '1‘ ab.les gland on the fax m should “nod duties to pet form 51 (in. may be used to the t Wuto of Mauuw. ll “‘1“ 901110115 0‘ Llama. m or mtiuceuance o{ s ‘0 drondy nu importm. n0. hoit‘nblc so It then I Dunn nude on the furl “find. and aim} in the h condition. without 105.» {u Musing.£tc. I. ado} to any. farmin Interim Seed ShO