"And in their days, even of those kings, the God of heaven shall set up A KINGDOM which shall never perish, and A DOMINION that shall not be left to another people. It shall grind to powder and bring to an end all these kingdoms, and itself shall stand for ever."—DANIEL.

"And in their days, even of those kings, the God of heaven shall set up A KINGDOM which shall never perish, and A DOMINION that shall not be left to another people. It shall grind to powder and bring to an end all these kingdoms, and itself shall stand for ever."—DANIEL.

JOHN THOMAS, Editor. NEW YORK, January, 1855—

Volume 5—No. 1

John Russell, Lord President of the British Council, remarked to the Corporation and Magistracy of Bristol, that—"With very few exceptions, there does not exist the man who is not convinced that there never was a more righteous cause than that on which we have embarked, and that we should prosecute the war so as to secure a peace that is just and honourable, and based on a lasting foundation. If such a misfortune should happen as that Russia should triumph, the present war would be followed by one far more dire, and Europe would be brought under Cossack dominion. The people of England naturally dread the ruler of millions half civilised, half barbarous—a ruler who has proclaimed opinions utterly inconsistent with the independence of any government. My Lords and gentlemen, it is of no use at present speaking of peace till in the course of the war the means shall arise for securing a peace which shall be lasting and secure."

As to the righteousness of the cause embraced by the Anglo-French alliance—an alliance of effete Protestantism with murder, adultery, and hypocrisy, incarnate in Louis Napoleon, in defence of the barbarian and fanatical waster of the Holy Land—we would remark that no cause is a righteous on e that undertakes in effect to circumvent the written judgment of Almighty God. The Anglo-French power characterises its enterprise as righteous, because it is professedly defending the weak against the strong, and endeavouring to subvert the ambitious projects of the Czar, which it deems dangerous to liberty and independence. Turkey is weak and Russia is strong; but Turkey, though weak, is an oppressor and a desolator; and in regard to God’s land and people a far greater criminal than Russia has yet proved itself to be. The defence of such a power in the day of its judgment, which is now, instead of being a righteous cause, is nothing short of a participation of its guilt. If righteousness had any thing to do with such powers, the Czar’s enterprise is a much more righteous one than the Anglo-French. The Czar’s co-religionists have for the past four hundred years, to say nothing of their sufferings before the capture of Constantinople, suffered immensely from the Ottoman savages, who have oppressed them, fiercer and more bloody than our wildest Indians. They have improved and ameliorated nothing; but blasted and destroyed every thing they have acquired. During all these four centuries, England and France have viewed Turkish barbarities without emotion. In 1827, they tardily combined with Russia to return the scimitar of the Turk bathed in Grecian blood to its scabbard, and to set up a little despotism in Attica; but with this exception, Grecian humanity has received neither succour nor sympathy from them. But now that a Greek power capable of defending and avenging the Greeks has arisen, and has avowed its purpose of executing judgment upon their oppressor in abolishing his power, these hypocritical French and English governments profess to be zealously affected for the rights of the weak, and the independence and liberty of nations!! As far as the Greeks are concerned, I have no more sympathy for them than for the Turks. Turkish despotism has been a plague upon them for their crimes against heaven fully matured before the capture of Constantinople; I only adduce their case as illustrative of the essential in humanity and hypocrisy of the Anglo-French power, which is a SIN-POWER, and therefore as mean and despicable in its policy as any other, and all the powers of the world. There is no righteousness in its enterprises, nor honesty in its principles. Jealousy and cupidity are the things that vitalise its policy, and give energy to its gigantic efforts in defence of the Barbarian of the Bosphorus. It is jealous of the Head of the Greek Church attaining to sovereignty over the Greeks as their Imperial Chief in the capital of their fathers. With the Sultan Dynasty they can do as they please; but with the Czar in Constantinople they would have to do with a man that has a will of his own, and power to sustain it. Its cupidity is as intense as its jealousy. The Turk is a free trader, and a good customer in the markets of the daughter of Tyre. If the Czar had been a free trader instead of the Turk, and had taken of British manufacturers a million or two sterling more than he, with the prospect of trade increasing when the Sultan should be superseded by the Autocrat, the world would have heard nothing of Britain’s power being pledged to maintain "the integrity and independence of the Ottoman Empire." It might then have been an Anglo-Russian alliance against France and Turkey; but it is the till, not chivalry, that animates the sordid souls of a generation universally addicted to the worship of a golden calf.

The idea of the Anglo-French power combating for the liberty and independence of nations is self-evidently absurd. Only think of Louis Napoleon contending for such a result, who surrounds the Papal throne with ten thousand bayonets to maintain it against the will of an oppressed and indignant people—a man who threatens to cut the throats of the entire population, if they attempt to supersede the debasing and hateful tyranny of sacerdotal hypocrisy and corruption by a system of things that shall proclaim civil and religious liberty, and the free circulation of the scriptures among all classes, as the order of the day. Louis Napoleon, not the chief of the state, but the state itself, the champion of the liberty and independence of nations—the man who has chained the press, cut out the tongue of La Belle France, exiled hundreds of her citizens to Cayenne without trial, and shot them down in the streets as things of no account! Then look at the British government, his knight-companion-in-arms. Though a Protestant power, it tacitly acquiesced in the assassination of Italian liberty by the French Republic, and the restoration of the Pope, the enemy of every thing holy, just, and good. It permitted Poland, Hungary, Sicily, &c., to shed their blood in torrents for deliverance from foreign tyranny, and to endure hideous torments by their destroyers, without firing a gun in vindication of the claims of outraged humanity! Even now it beholds the jails of Naples, Rome, Austria, and France, crowded with victims of Satanic hate whose only crime is speaking truth and reading the word of God, yet it lifts no voice in their behalf; but, though by a little exercise of its power it could so terrify the Italian powers as to cause them to set at liberty all that are unjustly bound, like the priest and the Levite in the parable, it passes by on the other side, leaving the unfortunate to perish among the thieves who have spoiled them of every thing but life! It is obvious, then, that neither of these powers care any thing about "the liberty and independence of nations." In the mouths of John Russell, Aberdeen, Louis Napoleon, and others of their class, it is merely a catch-phrase with which they embellish their speeches when they seek to conceal their real purposes and to lead captive at their will the silly, unthinking multitudes who pay the cost of their inhuman, hypocritical, and murderous policy. The true import of the phrase is "the liberty and independence of governments," which are the oppressors and "destroyers of the earth." The Anglo-French power being constituted of the Napoleon and British sin-powers, partakes of the character of them both. There dwells in it therefore no good thing; and being essentially false, it is not to be believed even when it speaks truth. It must be judged, not by its words, but by its acts. Hence it is not for nations and peoples, but for dynastic interests it is contending. Russia ascendant in Germany would be fatal to Napoleon perpetuity; and enthroned in Constantinople, would be a hindrance to British commercial interests in the East. The Anglo-Napoleonists are therefore straining every nerve to maintain the existing status of the world; not that they love the governments of Europe more than Russia, but that they love themselves better than all. It is for themselves, the rich and privileged classes of France and England, not even for their own masses, they are combating. They care for the unprivileged and labouring classes only so far as they are useful for taxation, production, and warlike purposes. This is manifest from the character of their legislation, and national education. The war is said to be very popular in Britain and France. No doubt it is. Not, however, because the peoples believe that their hypocritical rulers are battling for the liberty and independence of nations; but because of what they hope the war will lead to. They hope that one party or the other will be obliged to evoke to their assistance the smouldering revolution, which, when once again brought fairly into action, will become too strong for either, and become master of the situation. In such an event as this, the John Russells, Napoleons, kings, popes, emperors, and sultans, would have to give respectful attendance in the ante-chamber of DEMOCRACY to learn its will and pleasure. It is the hope of some result like this that makes this war popular in France and Britain. It is also highly popular with all enlightened Christians, not because of their sympathy with Turks, Tartars, democracies, and governments, for with such they have none as opposed to Greeks and Russians; but because they have full assurance of faith that it will lead to the formation of a crisis that will be the ruin of all the Sin-Powers of the world, and the establishment of the kingdom of God in the Holy Land.

I am glad to hear from Lord John Russell as the organ of the British government, that it is the intention of the Anglo-Napoleonists to prosecute the war till they can secure a peace "based on a lasting foundation." I am glad to hear this, because such a peace they can never attain to. The Anglo-Napoleon foundation for peace is "the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire." This is to be acknowledged and guaranteed for ever by Russia, Austria, Prussia, France, and Britain. Upon this condition France and Britain will sheath the sword. Now, I hesitate not to say, that these powers can never be brought to any such unanimity with respect to Turkey. Hear what the St. Petersburgh Court Journal declares with respect to this: "It is the Emperor’s mission to restore Russian preponderance on the Bosphorus, because that it is absolutely necessary for the development of Russia, and the reestablishment of order. . . . It is Russia’s holy duty to establish and consolidate the dominion of Christianity on the Bosphorus. The Emperor, as the strong rock and defender of Europe, has to fulfil the lofty mission of consolidating European conservatism. . . . To attain this object, Russia must carry on an obstinate war, which will break down England’s avarice, and unconditionally terminate Turkish misrule." Now place the Anglo-Napoleon and Russian purposes side by side, and see how under any view of the case they can be united in a peace basis! If the Autocrat effect his mission, as he certainly will, what becomes of the integrity and independence of Turkey? Or, if this be established by the Western Powers what becomes of the Russian preponderance and the established and consolidated dominion of Christianity on the Bosphorus? The independence of Turkey means the anti-Russian preponderance of France and Britain in Turkish councils; while Russian preponderance, and consolidated dominion of Christianity in Constantinople imports, a Russo-Greek dynasty enthroned in that city. These purposes are manifestly hostile and subversive of each other; if one triumphs, the other must be defeated. It is clear, then, that so long as the belligerents adhere to their own programmes peace never can be established on a lasting foundation.

But besides this, the Anglo-Napoleonists proclaim the integrity of the Turkish empire; that is, that none of its existing provinces shall be alienated from the Sultan to any other power than the Ottoman. This is fatal to the hopes of Russia, Austria, Greeks, Jews, and the Saints of the Most High. Russia and Austria must finally abandon their designs on Montenegro, Servia, Moldavia, and Wallachia; the Greeks must give up all hopes of the cross supplanting the crescent on the dome of St. Sophia; the hope of Israel’s independence "as in the days of old" becomes a fiction; the pouring out of that determined upon the desolator of their country reduced to a false prophecy; the promises of Abraham and his Seed caused to fail; and God and all the prophets converted into liars! And all for what? That Anglo-Napoleon Atheism may revel in the luxury of an unbounded wealth and power uncontrolled!

But God hath decreed that the integrity and independence of the Ottoman Empire shall not be maintained indefinitely. In arriving at the knowledge of this the reader will bear in mind the historical relation of the Ottoman Power to the Holy Land. It has been the destroyer and desolator of Jerusalem and that land, and the grievous oppressor of the Jews, for many centuries. As such it is therefore the power against which the threatenings of Israel’s God are to some extent delivered. The following are a few of the declarations recorded in the prophets against the Turk, which the reader is requested to consider attentively.

"Zion says, Jehovah hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me."

Here Zion is the city of David declaring her present condition through the lamentations of the thousands of Jews who eke out an oppressed and precarious existence in the city of their former glory. Jehovah has manifested to Jew and Gentile no remembrance of Jerusalem and Zion since He sent the Romans to destroy His temple there, and burn up the city. So that, judging from appearances, the Jews, Zion’s sons in a political sense, may say with much seeming truth, "Jehovah hath forsaken me, and my Lord hath forgotten me." But hear the response of Jehovah to this complaint:

In this response Jehovah declares that his affection for Zion is stronger than the strongest propensity of human nature. The heart of woman has been steeled against her own offspring; for in the siege of Jerusalem, "the hands of pitiful women have sodden their own children:" but though they might forget to cherish their own flesh, Jehovah can neither finally forget nor forsake Zion, for "they are beloved for the fathers’ sake." "I will not forget thee," are the emphatic words of Zion’s God. But he does not cease with this assurance for he goes on to say, —

This declaration is fatal to the permanent occupation of Jerusalem by the Ottoman or any other Gentile power. All Gentiles are to be expelled from that city; for elsewhere, it is written, —

No testimony can be plainer than the foregoing. It is evident that Jerusalem trodden under foot of the Gentiles—of the barbarian Turk and all the wretched hordes with which she is at present cursed—is the subject of the prophecy. She is still bowed down level with the street as a conquered city, and therefore still holding the cup of trembling in her hand. The prophecy is therefore not yet fulfilled. When the cup of trembling is taken out of her hand there will be no more uncircumcised and unclean Gentiles permitted to come within her walls; and from that time she is to drink of the cup no more again. Now, the Ottoman power is that which afflicts her, and which saith to her soul "Bow down that we may go over"—it is "the uncircumcised and unclean," and Jehovah declares that such shall go forth from her and no more come into her; but shall drink of the dregs of his fury as they have made Jerusalem to drink. Is not this decreeing the expulsion of the Ottoman power from Jerusalem? Is not this declaring against the integrity and independence of Turkey? And does not the execution of this purpose make Jehovah the enemy of all oppressors of Jerusalem, and of all who proclaim the maintenance of the integrity and independence of the oppressor’s dominion? Hear what He saith in regard to the power that oppresses Jerusalem as its lawful spoil:

The last testimony I shall adduce to prove the expulsion of the Turks and all other Gentile powers from Jerusalem, and the consequent overthrow of Ottoman integrity and independence, and failure of the Westerns, is this from Zephaniah:

In regard to the Holy Land itself Moses declared to Israel before they obtained possession of it, that because of their violation of the divine law concerning it, "Your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste. Then shall the land enjoy her sabbaths as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies’ lands then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths. As long as it lieth desolate it shall rest; because it did not rest in your sabbaths, when ye dwelt upon it."

This is the reason of its long desolation for the past 1290 years, and why God has permitted the Mohammedan power, or "abomination of desolation," to perpetuate itself there till this present. Its policy until within a very recent period has been to discourage and prevent the cultivation of the land, not to fulfil the decree of heaven, but for the gratification of its own barbarian impulses. In sating these it has unwittingly accomplished Jehovah’s decree, as recorded by Moses, who furthermore declared that the desolation and sabbatism of the soil should not be perpetual. For he says to his people by the command of Jehovah concerning the generation of the nation contemporary with the termination of the land’s rest from cultivation, —

In the time of this remembrance of the land after so long a period of desolation Jehovah saith by Zechariah, "I will cause the unclean spirit to pass out of the land." This unclean spirit is the Gentile power that treads it under foot. It is therefore to be expelled; for it is written, "It shall come to pass in that day that Jehovah shall beat off from the channel of the river (Euphrates) unto the stream of Egypt (the Nile), and ye shall be gathered one by one, O ye children of Israel."

This beating off will be fatal to the integrity and independence of the power expelled. It is nothing less than the forcible dismemberment of the Ottoman empire, by which all the land promised to Abraham and his seed, from the Nile to the Euphrates, is detached from the dominion of Constantinople. Where will be the Anglo-Napoleon basis of a lasting peace then? The alliance, peace, and basis will all have vanished: and the facts expressed in the words following be patent to all the world:

We see, then, that there is a limit set to Gentile sovereignty over Palestine; and that consequently Ottoman supremacy cannot be perpetuated there indefinitely. It is to perish out of the Lord’s land. This event being ascertained as one of the certainties of the future, it is interesting to know if this crisis be near or afar off. Respecting this there can be no doubt in the minds of those who understand the testimony of God.

In Daniel it is testified that the desolation of the land was to continue until a consummation indicated by the pouring out of that determined upon the desolator. The Ottoman is the desolating power, which was to prevail uninterruptedly till the end of 1290 years; for that was the period assigned to the "abomination that maketh desolate" anterior to the pouring out of that determined upon the desolator. Now, without seeking for a date from which to originate a calculation, the question is, has the desolator been subject to any judicial outpouring? It is obvious to all the world that he has; and it is equally obvious that in the ratio of the continuance of that outpouring, the fortunes of the Holy Land are rising and brightening. The Ottoman power is "drying up," and Palestine is going ahead like one of the Western States of America. This is too notorious longer to be denied. The conclusion is therefore manifest, that the consummation of desolation is passed; and that the Land of Israel has entered upon a new era; in other words that Jehovah is remembering his covenant and his land. Hence also the 1290 years are passed, and have been succeeded by the judicial outpouring upon the desolator. And when did this predetermined pouring out begin? In 1820, the epoch of the beginning of Turkey’s calamities which have continued with but little interruption until the present hour. Her doom is recorded in the following words by the apostle John:

The sixth vial poured out is the "that determined," which Daniel was informed was to be "poured out upon the desolator." This desolator in the apocalyptic oracle is styled "the Great River Euphrates," because, in relation to Palestine, it originated from the Euphratean country; and because that river rises in and flows along the border of its dominion. In the days of Isaiah, the Assyrian power, which afterwards established itself in the Holy Land, was styled the Euphrates, and all the glory of that power, "the waters of the river." An invasion also of the country by the Assyrian is termed a "coming up over all his channels and going over all his banks;" so that when he came to stretch out the wings of his army over the breadth of Palestine, and to encompass the walls of Jerusalem, as in the days of Sennacherib, he is said by the prophet to "overflow and go over and to reach even to the neck." The passage is a beautiful and appropriate illustration of the scripture style in treating of powers and their invasions. It reads connectedly as follows:

Now, to "dry up the water of this river" was to cause the evacuation of the Holy Land by the power that desolated it; so that it should again be confined by the Euphrates which was the frontier of its dominion. The transfer of this mode of speech from Isaiah to the Apocalypse does not at all alter its signification. The Euphrates there represents the power that fills the breadth of Immanuel’s land contemporary with the outpouring of the sixth vial; and "the water thereof," all the glory of that power, and the "drying up" of that water the freeing the land from its accursed presence. Hence, John’s prediction translated into unfigurative speech runs thus—

No prediction can be plainer than this; and it is one that every one who has any respectable acquaintance with the history of Turkey’s last thirty-four years, is fully assured is being fulfilled. Compare what Turkey was in power thirty years ago with what she is now in the Holy Land. Then its power was cruelly despotic and repressant; but now it exists there but as a shadow of its former self, mild and promotive of all internal improvements. What a change is this! Still John’s prediction is not fully accomplished. He saw it "dried up;" as yet we see it drying up. An American now in Palestine says, "It is the decrepit and defenceless state of the peoples here that keeps them as peaceable as they are, rather than fear of the government. They literally have little government to fear. All of government there is (and by this, I mean, that force is all the government that is of any use in the Turkish empire) is on the northern frontiers. This state of things throws open the way for all so disposed to make such depredations on whoever they may fall in with as they see fit. It is this, and nothing but this, that has put a stop to travel in this part of the country. There is no one to call the Bedouin to account for his depredations on foreigners that may be passing through his neighbourhood."

Having then full assurance that the power of the existing Euphratean desolator is drying up, we might with propriety inquire, when will the process be complete? In answer to this question it may be said that the day and hour of his expulsion from the Holy Land, if fixed in the counsels of God, are not revealed. He is to alienate the land for a price or pecuniary consideration to a power from beyond the Euphrates and Tigris capable of protecting, or shadowing it with its wings, while it is growing into "a land of unwalled villages," rich in cattle and goods. When this alienation is accomplished, the Ottoman power in Palestine will be gone; and this will be the precursor to its overthrow in Europe and Constantinople. It falls there to make way for the Russo-Greek, which is the last dynasty of the Little Horn of the Goat that will be permitted to reign there; and it is dried up in Palestine, for the preadventual amelioration of the country under as potent a maritime and enlightened Gentile power, as a preparation for the crisis introductory to the Kingdom of God. The present war is preparing these results; but the hour, day, month, or year, of their manifestation, I do not find noted in the scriptures of truth. The time of the overthrow of the Russo-Greek post-Ottomanian dynasty is not so indefinite. About a dozen years will terminate the ambition of this power, which will come to its end subsequently to the resurrection of the dead saints. The career of Turkey, however, will be accomplished some years short of this; but how soon can be determined only by the event.

Now, from what I have adduced in this article it must be evident to all not judicially blinded that Jehovah’s decrees are against the integrity and independence of the Ottoman empire; and that consequently the cause in which the Anglo-Napoleon power is embarked is not only not a righteous one, but hostile to God, and subversive of his purpose. Hence the scriptural and logical conclusion is, that the enterprise of the Western Powers to confirm and perpetuate entire the Sultan’s dominion must of necessity signally fail. They may, or may not take Sevastopol; expel the Russians from the Crimea; raze Odessa to the ground; and colonise the peninsula with a million of Turks: their efforts will be in vain, and their policy become foolishness. The Ottoman power must vanish; and all the world cannot prevent it.

However severely beaten in battles and sieges, the failure of the Western powers in preserving Turkey is Russia’s triumph. They have found among "the powers that be" one that may be compared to a man of snow in a melting condition, whom they have undertaken to defend with fire and sword. They have kindled an enormous conflagration in his behalf, burning and slaying right valiantly those who seek his destruction. Still he continues thawing and evaporating under the intensity of the occasion; and before they have finished their work he will have thawed out of being, leaving two rivals, who have pledged themselves not to annex foreign territory to their dominions, in possessions of his estates. Will they, as dogs in the manger, prosecute eternal war to exclude Russia and Austria from a country they refuse to occupy themselves? This would exhaust both their power and their wealth, and they would have to give in at last; and when they retired Russia and its allies would walk in, of course. Fail they will, from the inherent perishability of the power they have undertaken to preserve; death-stricken of God, it must pass away, and all their sacrifices will be lost. This inevitable consummation Lord John Russell terms "a misfortune;" and predicts that, if Russia should triumph by whatever means, that triumph over their Ottoman enterprise would be followed by a war far more dire than the present one, and as the result of it, "Europe would be brought under Cossack dominion," or as I have expressed it in the title of ANATOLIA, "Europe" would be "chained."

The chaining of Europe to the imperial car of Russia is "the lofty mission" of the Emperor, who styles it "consolidating European conservatism." He says, he is "the strong rock and defender of Europe;" by which he means, not of the liberty of the peoples, but of the dynasties that destroy them. His avowed purpose is the consolidation of these dynasties by throwing over them the aegis of his protection against the revolutionary element that pervades all their dominions. The dynasties understand this; and hence the want of success experienced by the Anglo-Napoleonists in their endeavours to persuade a single government to join them in their Quixotic enterprise of crippling Russia and consolidating the Turk. The thrones look to Russia as the strong rock and defender of Absolutism, against which the roaring waters of revolution may dash with impotent recoil. The campaign of 1854 has strengthened their confidence in the Czar; for, after all the boasted successes of the allies, we find Austria, Prussia, and Germany, resolving upon a policy that shall give no offence to Nicholas. On the other hand, they despise the Turk, distrust the French, and hate the English; and with their friend, the Czar, regard the trio as an incarnation of avarice, communism, and paganism. There is not one of them, perhaps, but would heartily subscribe to the following sentiments of the Autocrat’s Court Journal, which says, —

"The existence of the Ottoman rule is an anomaly, a thing deprived of vitality. England was in her heart convinced of the rights and justice of the Emperor, but concealed her own grasping intentions in order to convert them at the proper moment to her own special advantage. Did not England fear the power and unbending character of the Emperor, the world would never have witnessed a union between France and England. England looked about for an ally which after the object was attained might be more easily thrown overboard than Russia. Russia’s mission is certainly great. She is called upon to set limits to the materialism of England. France holds a secondary position. She is a mere bubbling political whirlpool; not a durable and generally destructive inundation. We must fight England, because she alone, and not France, is the focus and support of all revolutionary principles. No matter how the causes of the war may be regarded, that between Russia and Turkey is founded on religious grounds. Through the policy of the Western Powers the war has, however, assumed the character of a struggle between Conservatism and Communist Revolution. Only one path is opened to the Emperor—that of right and honour. He will adhere to his word not to make conquests, but at the same time it is his mission to restore Russian preponderance on the Bosphorus, because that is absolutely requisite for the development of Russia and the reestablishment of order."

Lord John Russell and the Czar are agreed in this, that the Russian consolidation of Europe will be the result of a dire and obstinate war, and that the principals in that war will be, as I have proved from the scriptures many years ago, the Russian Gog and the British Lion of Tarshish. "We must fight England," says the Czar’s Journal, "because she alone, and not France, is the focus and support of all revolutionary principles. And to attain the consolidation of European Conservatism Russia must carry on an obstinate war, which will break down England’s avarice, and unconditionally terminate Turkish misrule." This Lord John styles bringing Europe under Cossack dominion. And doubtless it is; and God speed the day, for come it must! The bubbling political whirlpool must be assuaged; Turkish misrule unconditionally terminated; Communism extinguished for ever; and Europe consolidated under the banners of Gog, preparatory to the last Gentile conflict on the plains of Palestine, and the solution of the great Eastern Question in the scattering and destruction of all the powers who burden themselves with Jerusalem and the Holy Land.

December 1^st, 1854 EDITOR.

* * *