calf. I have heard thrift urged as if it were the virtue of virtues, as if the sole duty of man to God and his fellow man was to save money. But is not the preaching of thrift to the poor—I mean even the thrift which is a virtue-a nockery? Among the rich some are prodigal, some generous, some thrifty, and some miserly, and the miserly endure privation to heap up riches they can never spend. Among the working classes also there are the prodigal, generous, thrifty, and miserly. Most miserable misers have been found in slums; a bedless man, clad in rags, and with body attenuated from lack of food, leaves behind him a sum of money. But true thrift is not the self-denial of necessaries or even of reasonable comforts. The thrifty rich man, or the thrifty workman, saves out of his abundance, or by denying himself some luxury. What is the use of exhorting those who are moaning for necessaries to be thrifty? Anyhow, the talk about thrift has not helped Lazarus, who still abides in dire distress.

[ocr errors]

Yet, oh, Philanthropist, oh, Christian, your talk about thrift indicates some perception of the fact that the poor have bodies as well as souls, and that the body should be cared for as well as the soul. Itake it to be your main mis⚫take, oh Christian philanthropist, that your treatment of the poor seems to be based on the assumption that so far as the poor are concerned, the physical condition betwixt the cradle and the grave is unimportant. Perhaps the rich man of the parable had a dim vision of immortality, and when he thought of Lazarus, said: Poor Lazarus! Death will end his bodily sufferings, and therefore let him be patient, and do what he can to prepare his soul for the world to come!" But we are not to presume that he knew the creed that you profess and solemnly recite, that he knew about the redemption of man, of the whole man, not of the soul only, but of the body also. And do you not sometimes act, I mean as regards the poor, as if you did not believe that the body and soul of man must both be redeemed, if one is to be redeemed? I suppose it is hard to conceive a more hellish suggestion than that referred to by the Apostle, that Christians should

[ocr errors]

There is


sin that grace might abound. an unfathomable depth of devilry in that proposition. Well, there is a vast difference in degree, but some similarity in kind to say, Oh, let the poor suffer their dire distress, let us urge the immediate redeeming and happiness of their souls, but let the redeeming and happiness of their bodies be altogether postponed until the resurrection.' you, oh wealthy Christian, suppose that your brother Lazarus, living in putrid, festering, leprous squalor, is in the condition favorable to redemption? I do not insinuate that he is not redeemed. God forbid. With God all things are possible, and even as a rich man may enter Heaven, though it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, so Lazarus by the Almighty mercy, may be redeemed, despite the putrid, festering, and leprous condition of his life on earth. But the matter that concerns you, my golden brother, is your treatment of Lazarus, for if it is cruel, iniquitously cruel, your iniquity is not the less deadly and accursed to you because God is merciful to the victim of your iniquitous treatment. Therefore, I ask you have you tried, have you done what you could to redeem Lazarus from mortal misery? You have no objection to his having the crumbs that fall from your table, provided they are bestowed in accord with the rules of your political economy, so that he will not be encouraged to ask for more and more, that he is not, as you put it, pauperized. Also you are very busy about his soul. But you let him abide in dire distress, in a putrid, festering, and leprous condition. You profess and call yourself a Christian. You believe in the redemption or otherwise of the whole man, not of the soul without the body, nor of the body without the soul, but of soul and body, of both or neither. Yet your brother Lazarus abides in dire, debasing, destroying distress. You a Christian! Was Dives a Christian ? Art thou Dives? As a Christian you should follow, as far as you can, the way of Christ. fed the hungry, and healed the sick. Also in the parable of the Judgment Day the righteous are not commended for any so-called spiritual labor; for preaching or praying, but solely for


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

deeds done for the good of the body. For I was an hungered and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty and ye gave me drink I was a stranger and ye took me in; naked and ye clothed me; I was sick and ye visited me; I was in prison and ye came unto me. Pray and preach, but also be zealous about the bodily welfare, for that is not less Godly work, and is your most bounden Christian duty. I have a message to you from Lazarus. He says: Give me for my body's sake, and for my soul's sake, and for your soul's sake give me what God has provided for me, give me a living share of the necessaries and comforts of life." I know not what you can do till you have tried, but I know you ought to try to do what you can for him. For the sake of Lazarus, body and soul, and for your own sake also body and soul.

[ocr errors]

Mark, I do not suggest that you should give all your goods to the poor. Without charity that would profit you nothing, without the charity of the heart, that is love. Moreover, I do not think that giving all your goods to the poor would be a remedy for poverty.


[ocr errors]

Mark, my wealthy brother, I do not mean that in my opinion you may cling to all the goods you have and deny Lazarus, your brother Lazarus, when by giving, that is by sharing, you can remedy, or even alleviate, his distress. To do so is a flagrant violation of the Law of Christ. Thou shalt love thy neigh bor as thyself." Lazarus, your brother, is also your neighbor. If you loved him as your self, could you rest a moment before making an utmost effort to redeem him from putrid, festering and leprous distress? Would you not hasten to him and say Oh, Lazarus, oh, my brother, cast off those filthy rags, and put on these clean and seemly garments that I have brought?" And when you say, that is say in very deed, in inmost thought, "I am very anxious about the soul of Lazarus, but in this mortal life he must abide in distress, be shivering in filthy rags," you are juggling with your conscience, grossly violating the Law of Christ. Oh, Lazarus, oh, my brother, I love you as my self, and I am so anxious about your soul, but I will not part with a part of my wealth to redeem you from present

misery." Oh, my wealthy brother, if devils can laugh, how they must laugh when you say that, not with your lips, but say it in very deed and in inmost thought.

Yet I repeat that it would not profit you to give all your goods to the poor, unless heart charity prompted the deed, and further I do not think the deed would be a remedy for poverty. It appears to me that even as it is good that there should be rivers and lakes, and wells and springs, stores of water, so it is good that there should be stores of wealth. And I would remind my brother Socialist, for the Socialist is my brother, even as Lazarus is my brother, and as you, Golden Gentleman, are my brother, I would remind him that there being stores of wealth does not necessarily involve inequality of enjoyment of the fulness of the provision that the Creator has provided for His creatures.

How much substantial equality there is by the Divine Law? A third of man's life on earth is passed in sleep, and in sleep there is a perfect equality. The rich as well as the poor suffer from sickness, have to endure the heart sickness of bereavement, and have to pass through the Valley of the Shadow. The rich man can consume no more food and clothing, no more of the actual necessaries and comforts of life, than the man of moderate means. On the vast estates of the great landowner, food enough to feed a hundred thousand mouths may be produced, but the great landowner cannot consume it all, nay, he can only consume one man's share. The richest man goes out of the world as naked as the poorest man. The beggar with a penny in his pocket is richer in this world's goods than the dead millionnaire. Such is the equality of condition by the Divine Law.

My brother Lazarus, I am not mocking at your misery. I know the dire distress from which you suffer. I know the terrible inequality of condition which afflicts you, and I will deliver your message to Dives. Well, that is to the rich man whom you call Dives, and who can wonder that you being as you are, regard the rich man as a Dives! Yet it is needful to be very mindful of what God has done in His Almighty Wisdom to limit the effects of selfish

[blocks in formation]

can confer no benefit whatever for a third of life, the portion of life passed in sleep, though wealth does not prevent sickness, bereavement, and death, though wealth does not even confer a greater capacity for the consumption of the necessaries and comforts of mortal life, and the wealthy man, like the poor man has to go naked out of the world, still man strives for the possession of wealth. The rich man after all is only the steward of his wealth. And if he is a faithful steward he does a good work. There is the instinct, the passion, for accumulation, and also the Divine Law limitation of the selfishness of the accumulator, so that though he may be an unwise and even an unjust steward, he can only be a steward. Therefore, it seems to me that it is not a violation of the Divine Law, but in accord with the Divine Law, that there should be stores of wealth, just as there are stores of water, and it would be as disastrous to destroy property as it would be to destroy the rivers, and lakes, and wells and springs. I agree with my brother Socialist that the dire distress of Lazarus ought to be relieved, but I disagree with him that the remedy is to deprive the rich man of his property and to distribute it. Such a theory seems to me not to be in accord, but fundamentally antagonistic to the law of Providence.

There are Socialists who do not propose the getting rid of stores of wealth, but the transference of wealth to the trusteeship or stewardship of the State. Their plan is to abolish every form and degree of inheritance, so that whatever a man is possessed of at the time of his death shall be the property of the State, and by that means, in the course of a few years, all property will become the property of the State. In this connection the State is the Government, and the Government are a number of men who in some way or other acquire place and power. Would they be better stewards than private owners? All history testifies to the contrary, and if the scheme were practicable it would be fraught with disastrous results to the welfare of the people.

The Anarchists are destructionists,

and contend that destruction must precede reconstruction. But surely the destruction of wealth cannot enrich any class. The claimant cannot gain by destroying the goods of which he claims a share.

There are many sects of Socialists, and some very widely differing from the others, but they have this in common, that the creed of all Socialism is a dream of Millennium. Often a mistaken and sometimes a distorted vision, but, my Christian brother, what is there wicked in the vision of perfect fraternity, of the world becoming a Church, every member loving every other member as he loves himself, and every one having all that he needs from the plenteous store held in common. Instead of denouncing the Socialist as a wicked foe of humanity, it would be juster and wiser to reason with him. Ask him why he assumes that in a state of Millennium there will not be stores of wealth under the stewardship of the few? It is, I hold, the best system now, and it is a system that seems to me to be compatible with a perfect, that is a Millennium, state of humanity. If there is to be equality of right, as set forth and proclaimed in Christianity, and if there can be an equality of happiness that all are equally happy, what signifies other inequalities? So, if the pint measure is full and the quart measure is full, the pint measure is none the worse off because the quart measure holds more, and the full quart measure is none the worse off because the pint measure is also full to the utmost of its capacity. If the shrub has all the nourishment it needs, why should it envy the tree because the tree needs more nourishment, and also has all that it needs? One star differeth from another in magnitude, but if both are full of glory of what has the lesser to complain? As I have pointed out, there is, by the Divine Law, by the wisdom of God, a notable equality in the capacity of men to enjoy and consume the necessaries and comforts of life, and, therefore, however rich a man may be, and however selfish he may be, he cannot consume as much of the necessaries and comforts of life as would suffice for a thousand men; nay, he can only consume as much as if he were in the con

dition of having neither riches nor property. When I consider the instinct or passion for acquisition, and the limitation of consumption, I seem to have evidence that the system of stores of wealth under the stewardship of individuals, that is the system of property, is in accord with the will of Providence. But the system of property being righteous cannot involve the cruel wrong of Lazarus being in putrid, festering, and leprous distress. But do you marvel that the Socialist, seeing the luxury of the rich and the misery of the poor, deems the system of property not righteous but iniquitous! I do not, yet I hold my Socialist brother to be mistaken. So, my wealthy brethren, ye stewards of the abundance provided by Our Father in Heaven for His children on earth, for Lazarus as well as for you, do not refuse the Socialist a hearing, but hear him, and reason with him, and say to him :-" Let us consider how we may so reform our plan, amend the human laws that regulate the relations of man to man, that every man may have the opportunity of obtaining by fair labor a fair share of the necessaries and comforts of life provided by Providence for all men."

I do not agree with the policy of Socialism, and I am opposed to the views and methods of the Anarchists. But, my wealthy brother, Socialism is a considerable and rapidly-growing power, and the Anarchists' League against property is not a fiction, but a fact-a disturbing and even menacing fact.

There is Lazarus of the slum. Also Lazarus partially employed, about whose door the wolf prowls at the best times, and ever and anon crosses the threshold, tears and rends the said Lazarus and his wife and his children. Lazarus and Lazarus, both million-headed and million-handed.

Beside the million-headed and millionhanded Lazarus is the average conditioned million-headed and million-handed Workman, and he is not contented with the reward he gets for his toil, and he deeply sympathizes with Lazarus because he sees, and now and then in a degree feels, the dire distress of Lazarus. He is somewhat inclined to make common cause with Lazarus, and of late he has become more and more

Socialistic. The Workman and Lazarus, the million-headed and millionhanded sections allied would be a formidable force.

My wealthy brother, it is a wise saw that Knowledge is Power. You have given up a monopoly of the keys of knowledge, and now the Workman has knowledge, nay, Lazarus has knowledge. You were told that education would make the Million peaceful. Perhaps so, if it shows them cause for peace. Assuredly not, if it suggests cause for discontent. My wealthy brother, there has been much befooling about educating the Million. It is done, and it cannot be undone, and I am not sorry it has been done. Yet I repeat that there has been much befooling about the spreading of education. It was to make the poor more contented -or shall I say less discontented ?— with their lot in life. Such contentment used to be-in some quarters still is-preached as a religious duty, though it is based upon the anti-Christian assumption, that whereas it would be fearful and fatal for the poor man to neglect

that is, to postpone-the redeeming of his soul, he need not in this world trouble himself about the welfare of his body, and so, whatever his condition, even if it is a slum condition, a condition of putrid, festering, and leprous distress, he is to be content with his lot. I suppose that, to a certain extent, the preaching has been effective, but how can any one imagine that education will produce such contentment? Does not mental improvement make the contrast of bodily debasement the more conspicuous and painful? Put it the other way. How a person would be derided for asserting that the richer a man becomes, the greater the comfort and physical refinement of his condition, the less he cares for education. The effect is the reverse, and mental progress has been concurrent with physical progress. With mental improvement there is also a yearning for deliverance from physical degradation. Lazarus being educated is more discontented with his lot. Also he is more powerful. Yes, Knowledge is Power, and physical power, too. What a mass of human misery there is between two main arteries of London, the rich Strand

and rich Oxford Street. Only the distance of a stone's throw between the thousands who abide in putrid, festering, and leprous poverty and enormous riches. Yet the thousands never make a raid into the Strand or into Oxford Street. The still greater mass of Eastend misery and West-end wealth is only separated by a walking distance, yet Lazarus of the East-end does not disturb the repose of the West-end. Lazarus is as honest as Dives, as he calls the rich, but it is not his honesty that prevents him from raiding and looting, for he thinks he has a right to a share of the wealth. No, it is physical force that restrains him. Not the physical force of superior numbers, but the physical force of the organization and discipline that makes the few stronger than the many.

But the million-headed and million-handed Lazarus of the slum, and the million-headed and millionhanded Lazarus of the partially employed class, and the million-headed and the million-handed Workman have received the keys of knowledge, and they are beginning to learn that Knowledge is Power, ay, physical power, when it is used for organization and discipline. I am amazed at the progress that the Million have made in organization and discipline. Every man of the Million seems to have an assigned place and to know it. Moreover, he appears to obey the directions of his leader as a soldier does his military commander. The discipline is as yet in the elementary stage, it lacks the celerity combined with steadiness which cannot be acquired without drill, but there is the instinct of discipline, the determination to obey, to give up individuality when the cause needs such tribute of loyalty, to become the machine, the puppet of the leader. The demagogue, that is the leader of the Million, says Brothers, union is strength. By discipline the people have been conquered, and only by discipline can the people overcome their enemy. Let us organize. Let the people be an army. Let our watchword be union

and discipline.'

[ocr errors]

I am merely a mouthpiece. I bring a message from Lazarus to Dives, to the rich he calls Dives, from the dweller in the slum to Society. I am not joining in the cry of "To arms." I do not

wave the Red flag. I am for reform, not for revolution. Therefore, I have become the mouthpiece of Lazarus, and deliver his message that you may be taught or reminded, and so warned that there is a peril of revolution, and that unless there is reform Society will have a terrible conflict, and the triumph of Society is not certain. You smile, my rich brother. Probably, the golden gentlemen of Rome smiled if any one suggested that ultimately the barbarian hordes would trample on Roman civilization and destroy the Roman Empire. When Lot warned his son-in-law about the coming destruction of the cities of the plain, he seemed to them as one that mocked." It is a common weakness of man to hold that what is shall continue to be. But, my rich brother, see, and hear and consider the position. There are the Million, and the Million, and the Million. They are muttering menaces against Society. Your discipline is still superior, is still a dominating force, but the Million, and the Million, and the Million are not now an altogether undisciplined mob. You have given them the keys of knowledge, and that is a gift that you could give, but you cannot take it back. Knowledge is Power, and the Million, and the Million, and the Million have learned the alphabet of organization, and the elements of the art of war, the conquering art of discipline. Day by day they are becoming more instructed, and if the contest goes on some day your discipline may be confronted by discipline, and the somewhat inferior discipline of the Million, and the Million, and the Million may prevail, being allied to an enormous numerical superiority. Anyhow, it would be a terrible conflict. You smile, my rich brother. But the Million is ceasing to be a mob. Thanks to you, it has the keys of knowledge, and Knowledge is Power, and it has learned the alphabet of organization and the elements of the art of war, of the conquering art of discipline. Pardon the repetition, but I am anxious to impress upon you, my rich brother, the momentous fact that the Million which was only a mob is becoming an organized and disciplined force.

It is late, very late, but not too late for reform that will eradicate the germs

« VorigeDoorgaan »