their duty." Yes, and that is a very important point. It makes a fifth step in this story of reform work in improving the character of one's country.

And when all this has been done, could one stop one's efforts once for all? "No, not quite." And why not? "As to that, reform work may not last long; the improvement may be only temporary."

It means, does it, that for those who are true citizens, it is one constant effort all their lives to try to improve the welfare of the state to which they belong. But what if they do try it? Suppose a great many citizens are in earnest in regard to the matter, will the improvement come rapidly, do you assume? "Not as rapidly as one could desire," you admit.

And why not? Could it not come as quickly as it might come with an individual person who had determined to improve or reform himself? “Oh no! the state is something larger than the individual; it takes time and a great deal more time."

Then improvement or reform in the state must come slowly and the people who make an effort in that direction must have a great deal of patience, you think, do you? Yes, surely you are right, and it is because people do not appreciate this fact that so few are ready to take hold and work. They become disappointed over the results and often stop just when real work is being accomplished.

But there is one point on this subject we have not yet touched upon. It has all been rather vague so far. We talk about improving the country, having good laws passed or choosing good officers. Does this mean the laws for the whole nation, passed by a Congress or a Parliament? Is it only with the national legislation or the national officers we are concerned, in this effort for reformation?

"No, it applies to every situation where the state

comes in." Do you mean to suggest, for instance, that if the police force in one of our large towns or cities did not do its duty, we should have to go to work to improve conditions there? This would be a rather trifling feature in the life of the state.

"Oh, yes," you assert, "but it would be very important, nevertheless. The policeman is an officer of the government in one sense, just as much as a member of Congress or a member of Parliament."

Where else, then, must we work for improvement. besides on national legislation or for national officers? "Why, in town or cities; in the management of public schools or school boards; in the measures passed by City Councils; in the choice of officers for a town or city, as well as for the whole state."

You assume, do you, that if one is to try to improve the moral character of his country, the work must begin pretty near home? This is a fact which is often overlooked, and many persons will try to stir up public sentiment about evil conditions in the character of the whole nation, about corruption in national politics, and yet be very indifferent to the starting point of it all in the local politics right around them.

It looks, then, does it, as if improving the character of a nation would imply beginning an improvement in the political conditions of our own towns or cities?

What is it after all, then, that every citizen must be all his life, if he is a true citizen in his duty toward the state or country to which he belongs? I am thinking of a big word beginning with capital R. Suppose we write it down letter for letter and look at it: R-e-f-o-r-m-e-r. There it stands. We will not speak out the word, but only repeat it quietly to ourselves.

We have said that the man who will not apply this to himself is not a true citizen and that he is not doing his full duty as a citizen.

Points of the Lesson.

I. That states do not improve or grow better just of themselves.

II. That states or governments, like people, will tend to grow worse unless there is a constant effort to make them improve.

III. That improvement in the character of a state or goverument first usually comes from the efforts of a few individuals, and that a reform first starts as a sense of shame over the condition of one's country.

IV. That the next step has to be an agitation on the part of the few who feel this sense of shame, in working up public sentiment for a reform.

V. That states improve so slowly because many citizens would rather put up with a bad government than trouble themselves to try to improve it.

VI. That the few who begin the work of reform must expect to be unpopular and not to meet at first with sympathy or approval.

VII. That improvement or reform in the character of states needs to begin right at home in the community of city where the citizen resides.

VIII. That those who work for the improvement of their country are serving future generations as well as those who are alive to-day.

Duties.

I. Every citizen ought to work for the improvement of his country.

II. Every citizen ought to try to encourage others to work for the improvement of their country.

Poem.

"Let it idly droop or sway
To the wind's light will;
Furl its stars, or float in day;
Flutter, or be still:

It has held its colors bright,

Through the war smoke dun;

Spotless emblem of the right,
Whence success was won.

"Let it droop, but not too long!
On the eager wind

Bid it wave, to shame the wrong;
To inspire mankind

With a larger human love,

With a truth as true

As the heaven that broods above

Its deep field of blue."

-LUCY LARCOM.

Story: Life of William Wilberforce.

In telling you how it is that states or governments are changed for the better in one way or another, I am reminded of the life of a man whose name has become celebrated all over the world because of the effort he made along one special line to achieve a reform for his own home and country, over in England. It takes us back to the days of the Revolutionary War, upwards of a hundred and twenty-five years ago. Old England has advanced a great deal since that time. It has taken the lead in many ways in the onward march of civilization. The world has reason to be proud of what has been done there by brave citizens who have labored in the interests of their country in order that such an advance might come about. The people there have always been brave and determined in fighting for their own liberties. But it was another step for them when at last they awoke to the importance of battling for the liberties of others.

The story I have to tell you about is the struggle that was made in order to do away with slavery in the British Empire. For hundreds of years, as we know, Great Britain has had colonies in various parts of the world. And there was not the same freedom in those colonies, that prevailed at home in the mother country. In the year 1772, not long before the Declaration of Independence in this country, it had been decided over in Great Britain that there could be no such thing as a slave on the soil of that country. When a man once set foot there from any part of the world, he was a free man. But on the other hand, a vast traffic in slaves was going on in various parts of the world. Thousands of men and women and children were being seized or kidnapped, carried off from their homes, thrown on board ships, carried across the seas and sold in the markets like cattle. It makes one shudder even to think of it. And alas! it was known that a good deal of this traffic was being carried on with English vessels, by citizens of Great Britain. They were amassing wealth in the traffic in human flesh. The slavery which could not exist in England did prevail in her colonies. Thousands of human creatures were stolen, carried off from the shores of Africa, and brought over here to the West

Indies. Many of these poor creatures died on the voyage. Their bodies were thrown overboard as of no account.

What could the English people say in defence of this, even if no slavery was possible at home? And the story I have to tell you concerns the life of one great man who became aware of these tragedies and made up his mind that he would fight this evil, until the Parliament of his country had put an end to the traffic in slaves so far as Great Britain or the British Empire was concerned. The man I am speaking of was William Wilberforce. What led him to do this we cannot explain. He just felt that he had to do it. He had nothing to make out of it himself. He might have gone on all his days in a life of ease and leisure, for he had wealth in abundance. He was born on August 24th, 1759. He had everything in the way of education that England could offer. He might have squandered his life to no purpose. It was not required of him that he should work for his living. But in the year 1780, when he was only about twenty-one years of age, he was elected as a member of Parliament. And after a few years, while serving there, his attention was called to the slave trade which was being carried on by the citizens of his own country. And then in the quiet of his own thought he made up his mind that he would devote his best energies until this should be abolished.

But it was one thing for him to have resolved upon this in his own mind; it was another thing for him to have the courage and persistence required to carry it through. We must remember that there was wealth in this slave trade, and that the men who shared in it had vast influence. What could this one man achieve all by himself? Yet he felt that it was a blot on the good name of his country. It was for him, though he stood alone, to work night and day to accomplish this reform in the British Empire. It had to be done by him as a citizen through the great Parliament of which he was a member. Two or three able men joined with him and they began the agitation. On May 12th, 1789, he opened the attack against the slave traffic by a speech in Parliament and then he introduced a bill there which should abolish this traffic in slaves in the whole Empire. One might have supposed that then the work was done. On the contrary, this was only the beginning. The measure was turned down at first by an overwhelming majority. How dared a citizen of that country make such an attack upon the free rights of a British citizen to amass wealth in any way one pleased? was asked. Yet the first step had been taken. He succeeded at length in having a commission appointed which should gather information on this traffic. In this way facts were piled up in great numbers until they could be presented to all the people of that country. Once more, then, he brings up the measure in Parliament. Three times, indeed, over a series of years, he got the measure actually passed through the