As there is deformity in the world, and as it must hare a mental and moral, as well as a physical cause, or there must, be injustice to some one, so it is but proper to recognize that imperfections in the physical and mental life are illustrations of moral propositions and are portions of the great equity of existence; then, too, in reconciling the relations of kings who wish to be peasants and peasants who wish they were kings, every one has an opportunity of trying both. No one at the end of all these different experiences can say that any line of expression or experience has been denied. All must know what it is to be Blares, as all have a natural tendency to be tyrants, all must know by the knowledge of possession what are the responsibilities, trials, and temptations, as well as the redeeming and excusing features in each expression. So he who labors for his daily bread is made to do double labor by the deflections of the millionaire, and he may be unreconciled to this; he who subsists by honest toil most be obliged to change places with the man whom he envies; when he experiences the poverty of riches he is glad enough then to return to the more humble and noble position. In fact, whatever men covet they will have an opportunity of trying. Whatever they do not care for in worldly possessions they have experienced and outgrown.

When we consider the moral world, as the intellectual is very much more complicated than the physical struggle, how much more intricate become the moral problems 1 The moment the spirit begins to assert itself the battle begins. It is not a battle between the intellectual nature and material life, when the intellect becomes, unqualifiedly, the victor; but here is the battle of ages; between the voice that finally works its way through from the Soul into outward expression, and man's unconquered, selfish, nature; here is the conflict and the battle ground; here it is that the Titans wage war; here it is that all final victories are won. The other struggles, for physical or intellectual supremacy, are merely different states of selfishness; but the first time man knows that he must forfeit self, or that there is a stage wherein he must vanquish selfish desires, the battle begins; that is the moral starting point The intellectual nature, and even the physical life, asserts man's supremacy; but what he can win by conquering self he learns for the first time in his moral nature, he has it in the voice of the Soul, which tells him he has no right to any possession merely because he can win it. As a giant would not be excused for treading down children in the street, as a man of intellect should not be excused for de-frauding those who are ignorant, so man's moral nature begins, by slow degrees, to make him aware that his intellect and that bis physical life do not justify their full assertion; that he has no moral right, even though he has the physical power, to win supremacy and hold it; and the real law of life is, when possessing strength not to use it against others, but for others.

The subtle difference between the man who cannot kill and the one who is a murderer, is the difference in conquest over self. He who says he can slay if he choose, does violence to either his moral or intellectual nature; for the choice depends upon the growth, upon the degree of conquest. There have been conditions of human civilization when it was a virtue to kill. There are states of society, even today, under the law of what is denominated self-defense, wherein it would be considered a virtue to kill. Between the man who slays for gold and the man who slays to protect gold, do you suppose there is any great moral difference? The conquest is to win a victory over self, not over another. And that which is denominated virtue in one state of growth, becomes impossible in another. A primal virtue in the ages of physical supremacy is conquest, slaughter for individual or national empire. Second only to this in lack of moral or spiritual perception is the sacrifice of life in what is commonly called "self-defense." One can not slay, one can not do violence to another, one can not betray in any manner, one can not degenerate to any vice, one can not censure, if one has outgrown or overcome the state indicated. Neither angel nor demon can tempt the man who is above temptation.

It is in this moral battle ground that the wonderful equity of this divine system is more and more manifested. This is not only the reconciliation of the world, it is the hope of the world. There are those in the world today, illustrating the states devoid of all moral impulse, without power to overcome any passion, absolutely a prey to all the conflicting elements within and around them. There are other natures in whom saint-like qualities preponderate, who do not experience an unworthy thought. Where is the law of science or the scheme of any theology, other than we are announcing, that can explain the discrepance between these two states? what opportunity is given, in time or eternity, by any other system than this, to reconcile one man's goodness, that seems to be born in him, and the infamy of another, that seems to be bom in him, with the Infinite love and goodness? "Accounting the state of purity and perfection in expression as something man has won from within the Soul, the moral excellence as a height that the others will win, that all others will have opportunity to attain just as great a height, just as absolute a victory, the present seeming inequalities in moral states are no longer hopeless. If we did not know that the child would grow to become a man, how helpless and devoid of hope would infancy seem I When we declare, therefore, that every step of expression in life is a step toward victory, does it not teach that those who condemn and censure, in an individual sense, have not outgrown the condition which they condemn and censure? If one sees a man who is a murderer or a criminal of any kind, one may pity the state of the criminal, one may say he has not outgrown hatred, malice, and revenge, but unless one has hatred, malice, and revenge, one can by no means wish to visit upon him that which he has visited upon others.