respect of manners and morals, has with apparently cool and deliberate resolve given itself to the project of forcing itself into notoriety by a variety of sensational devices, and pre-eminently by dragging before the public scandalous rumors and more scandalous transactions, as well as by grossly assailing the characters of public men, and following them and their friends with persistent slander.

The influence of a newspaper cannot but be demoralizing, however able its correspondence, or prompt and trustworthy its news, if the presiding genius of its editorial sanctum be a grinning, sneering Mephistopheles, and the tone of the articles composed under this inspiration be that of persistent banter of everything which honest men reverence and brave men are ready to die for; the audacious drollery of which moves the whole community to laughter, even when it moves honest men to virtuous wrath. A Harlequin may be allowed in his place, but we cannot welcome him in our churches or our oratories, to sneer when we desire to worship; or find him congenial to those sober moments when life at least is real and earnest, even if conscience and God are not.

Seventh, that some newspapers conspicuously rejoice in bad examples of English style need hardly be added. This might be inferred if it were not so notorious. Where there is insincerity, untruth and defect of principle there must be more or less of bad English. While a few are models of clear, unpretending, direct and nervous English, not a few are representatives of every description of excess and over-doing, of carelessness and pretension, of extravagance and "blatherskite," which are an offence to the lovers of a pure and simple diction.

From these facts, the following may be derived as rules in respect to the use of newspapers.

First. It is worse than unwise to allow newspapers to be one's sole reading. The temptation to do this is very

strong, and many yield to it. Men immersed in business. seem often shut up to this by necessity. Even professional men who read or consult not a few books in the way of duty allow the newspapers to take the place of other reading. The merchant reads the money articles of the newspaper, but rarely if ever a book upon banking or political econo

my. The farmer reads his agricultural journal, but never a treatise. As to the politicians, both small and great, it is enough for them to consult the current histories of domestic campaigns and foreign entanglements which the papers furnish, without looking into books for the history of the remoter past which has prepared the way for the present and alone can explain it. Even if the leader is more instructive and more to the point than any book could be, the book may be better because it opens a wider range of considerations and so tends to enlarge the mind. The newspaper is written more in the spirit of an advocate than even a very one-sided book. The writer for the newspaper usually dogmatizes more and is more positive than the author. The standard of manners and of temper is usually far lower in the one than in the other. The style of the book is ordinarily better. The best newspaper style suffers under the necessity of compression or it abuses the liberty of indefinite expansion and verbiage. The newspaper deals with the present, and is hurried, narrow, confident and bustling. The book has to do with all times—the past, the present and the future, and is in so far more calm, elevated and sagacious. For these and other reasons it is observed that the reader of newspapers only is more usually positive, conceited and flippant than the man who is also a reader of books.

Second. One should read good newspapers in preference. We mean not only those which are able in thought and pure in style, but those whose principles are pronounced and whose manners are elevating. Many say and think: “It is only a newspaper; of what consequence is it? We only

glance at it for a moment or run through it for an hour and then lay it aside. If its bad logic its unsound doctrines its vile insinuations and its profane banter were in a book we would not tolerate the book for a moment, but I and my children know, it is only the so or so, and we let its unwisdom and its foulness pass for what they are worth." Mr. A. would not tolerate slander or mean personalities for a moment in conversation at his table, and yet Mr. A. takes a paper for himself and his children which distribute both as freely and as maliciously as an audacious villain ejects vitriol into the eyes or upon the apparel of passers by. He would not allow his family to read a book that should gravely attack or sneeringly scoff at his faith lest it should leave some unfavorable impressions, but he allows the daily slime of an insinuating newspaper to hold their thoughts and to possess their imagination by a daily lesson and for a much longer time than the lessons of Scriptures which are allotted to the morning and evening devotions of his household.

Third. One should use the newspaper as a servant and not as a master. Many confiding souls believe all that the newspaper tells them and think it their duty to justify and defend all its statements, because forsooth it is the paper which they subscribe for or which is the organ of their party. In like manner some go so far as to feel bound to read every paper through. Neither is wise nor even safe. No obligation rests upon any man to read or to believe the whole of what any, even the best of newspapers may contain. The haste with which its news is gathered and its opinions are expressed, the very great extent to which the most honest and best qualified managers are dependent upon the fidelity of others, to say nothing of the force of the passions and prejudices of the hour and the demands of the party or the public whose good will the paper is desirous to secure, all these constitute it an unsafe guide to

be implicitly believed or followed. If it is often wise to regard our books with a kind of suspicion and to guard against their excessive influence, much more should we do the same with respect to our newspapers, even if they are the best.

We have questioned whether the saying were altogether true that, "No man is the wiser for his books until he is above them." We cannot question that it is true of newspapers.

Fourth. Every one should remember that he is to some degree responsible for the character of the issues from the newspaper press. The newspapers of a country it should never be forgotten are no worse or better than the people would have them to be. They are a reflex of the knowledge and tastes of the majority of their readers. We cannot resist this inference however humiliating at times it may be. More than one intelligent defender of our country in Europe has been arrested and disturbed in his argument by the question, "How do you explain the fact that such and such a newspaper has so extensive a circulation among your people?" It would be well if every man who buys or reads a newspaper would think of this question and of the lessons of duty and honor which it suggests.

READERS of books desire to become the owners of books. The pleasure and advantage which are derived from the use of a volume, prompt to the wish that it may be constantly within reach. Hence, books like everything else which is desirable come to be sought for and valued as property. The child is not satisfied with using a picture-book, he must call the book his own. The persistent littérateur aud the veteran scholar value no purchase or gift so highly as a rare or elegant volume. The enthusiastic and devoted reader, if he has the means and the spirit of independence, usually becomes the buyer and owner of books. Every reader gathers about himself something of a library. Every community so soon as it rises above the most pressing and immediate wants, feels the need of a collection of books which may supply its higher necessities. We cannot therefore properly dismiss our theme of Books and Reading without also considering The Library.

We begin with the personal or private Library. The thought which first suggests itself is the very obvious one, that the size of a library when collected by a single person for his private use depends on his means, his liberality, his feeling of independence, his duties and relations to others, and the comparative estimate which he places upon books; not upon any one of these, but upon all united. A man comparatively poor, may contrive to acquire a larger collection of books than a man who is rich, simply because he cares more for them, and in order that he may possess them is