Other pedestrians on plainly charges them inflight fire nose right it was thirty shekels of silver. supposing that Jephthah, at the time of making the vow, had no distinct recollection or knowledge of this law; supposing even that the vow, as it emanated from his lips, partook more of the character of the 'herem than the neder; yet is it conceivable, that when the execution of it was postponed for two months, and the affair had become notorious throughout the nation, and was the subject of general discussion and great lamentation, there was no person all who once thought of this law? Would not the agonized father, besides devoting to it his own intensest study, consult the priests on the subject? And would not the priests acquaint him with the provisions of the law reference to a case of casuistry like the present? And what would naturally be the result? Could he fail to come to the conclusion, that such a sacrifice as he first intended was not only unlawful, but the face of the numerous pointed prohibitions against it would amount to nothing short of downright murder? Would he not learn, that as offering was its own nature incompatible with a 'herem and that the law having made no provision for the latter being substituted for the former, he was even, according to the very terms of his vow, rightly understood, not only released, but prohibited from performing it? Under these circumstances, would he, could he persevere his original intention? Is it not more probable, that after deep deliberation concert with the authorised expounders of the law, he yielded to the conviction, that although his solemn pledge did not originally contemplate any such alternative, yet it might be embraced the provisions now alluded to-that it might come under the class of redeemable vows? He would be more encouraged to avail himself of this dispensation, on the of the darkness of his mind at the time of coming under the engagement. It was not act of wilful disregard of the divine statutes relative to this point, but one rather of misapprehension and infirmity, though from its rash and reckless character by no means innocent. He was still, we suppose, ready to humble himself before God view of his precipitancy, and while he paid the ransom price that delivered his daughter from death, piously resolved, by way of punishing himself for his rashness, to fulfil his vow her civil excision from among the living. He accordingly, we conceive, consigned her henceforth to a state of perpetual seclusion and celibacy-of living consecration to God-and this manner ‘did unto her his vow,' though a mode of execution, which did not, the first instance, enter into his thoughts. Thus, on the whole, after weighing all the circumstances and arguments bearing upon the case, we are led to decide upon the much disputed point, whether Jephthah really sacrificed his daughter. To our mind the evidence for the negative clearly preponderates. At the same time, we do not, as be seen, deduce it from the terms of the vow, or any fancied contingency of purpose Jephthah's mind at the time of making it. We believe that it was made under the prevailing impression that a human sacrifice would be the result; but that, although his conduct was contrary to the Scriptural precept forbidding men ‘after vows to make inquiry,' he became subsequently more enlightened, and by a careful study of the law, aided by its proper ministers, he ascertained the possibility of being released from the dilemma which he had thoughtlessly ensnared himself. Perhaps the most valid objection to the view given above, is that which would assume the form of the question, Why, if such were the fact, is the narrative constructed as to give rise almost inevitably to the impression, that the literal immolation of Jephthah's daughter actually took place? Without allowing that inability to answer this question satisfactorily ought to be considered as essentially weakening the force of the arguments adduced above, we suggest reply, that the Spirit of inspiration have framed the record as it now stands, marked by a somewhat ambiguous asspect, order to guard against a light estimate of the obligation of vows. We do not affirm this to have been the design, but it is certainly conceivable that if it had been expressly stated that the vow its literal sense had not been performed, it might have gone to relax somewhat of the apprehended sacredness of all such votive engagements, and led men to think that God himself might easily dispense with them. Whereas, as it is now worded, and would be perhaps most naturally understood, it would inspire far other sentiments, and lead men at once to be very cautious making, and very punctilious performing their vows. And it was a custom Heb. ותהי חק בישראל vattehi 'hok be-yisraël. The phraseology of the original is peculiar, the verb being of the fem., the noun of the masc. gender. The literal rendering we take to be, ‘and she became ordinance i. e. her case became a precedent; it gave rise to established custom But what particular custom is alluded to, whether