Los Angeles herald., 1892-05-29
PuFFs.
A. the Weed-Pips and Reed P1pe-By
Th0OphrastuG.

At the Weed Pips and Reed P1pe-By
TheOphrastus.
world Of changing smiles and tears.
AZ ontnng down the tide OF years
And any man who cracks joke
That may laugh or smile provoke,
Kindly and light as curling smoke,
Deserves thank or 80.
Or, any man who sings q song
That cheers US as we foat along
Adown the rapid tide,
An anthem old or carol new
He doth kindness to the crew,
he - benefactOr, too;
We like him at our sides.
Or, any man who tells tale,
That lights our spirits as we sail,
OF love In cot or hall, -
Of besuteous maid and gallant knight.
re-. praise the tale and crown the wight
@ But he who climbs the mizzen mast,
Wnen skies are clear, or overcast
With clouds of blackest hue,
Who reefs the sails or minds the wheel
And pilots off the shoals the keel
he 10 the heart of oak we feel,
The etalWart man and true.
Dear voyagers on high emprise,
An0at meath dark or sunny skies,
with treasure freighted argosies,
Or but q lifeboat lone,
Steer out into the open sea,
Floating the flag OF charity
Embrace In your fraternity
All tempest-tossed humanity,
Ana make their cause your own. .
~
II take it," said the professor, "that
p happy fool is as happy as 9 happy
philosopher; and there is little doubt
that young man, possessed OF health
and thoughtless vivacity, is as happy
being as Newton, embracing the uni
verse in his sublime conception"
(Which reminds me" suggested, "of
the old controversy: Which has the
more enviable lot, q contented pig or o
discontented Socrates ?"
There is no such thing, Theophras-
tue, as discontented Socrates. a true
philosopher does not propose happiness
as the ultimate or immediate object of
human pursuit. If he had not learned
the vanity and utility of that object
from Solomon, king of the Jews, he
would have learned it from the study of
nature"
"Is not nature happy. professor?
mo; she 10 always in labor. Look at
the physical world. II we attribute its
existence to the creative edict Of Deity,
the creator must have had some design
In it, Creation. And if man 10 the
greatest of all Gods creatures the world
must have been made for him. If the
world was made for man it should be
adapted to his uses, and certainly not
the least important Of these must be to
aid him in the solution of what he was
created for, since that is the first and
most insistent question. Man, says
Schopenhauer, is . restless, cause-seek
ing animal. Now. if this world was
intended az pleasure house for man it
should be adapted to that end. But
how is it? Why is large
portion of the earth uninhabitable, as,
for instance, the regions of the poles and
under the equator? Why do great
oceans divide land from land? Why is
one-haH the year winter and sterility,
6gatnnt which season man must 1nhnri-.
ouely provide in the summer? Why
does disease In its myriad forms visit
the children of men, which science can
not cure and scarcely knows how to
palliate? tell you, If God intended
this world as q paradise for man, it is q
failurey You tell me the next world
will make it all right, On what anal
ogy? II this world ID failure, what
assurance have we that the next will
not be also? God made them BOTH"
''NeveYthelees, y said /, 'sit is written:
God saw everything that he had made,
and behold it was very good.
II have no doubt of that, Theophras-
tus, but not for happiness"
For what, then?"
ITO be continued in our next.]
What is protectionism It is the
most unscientiic of systems. It is the
most inequitable of tax infictions. It
is the most absurd of appellatives. It
is the most mendacious of misnomers.
Is there any protection against the win
ter's cold in McKinleyism? How grim
the irony Does it not tax blankets
and fannels to almost the prohibitive
point? Does il not tax the poor more
than the rich? Is there any protection
against trusts in McKinleyism? It is
the foster father and alma mater of the
whole tribe of combines. Is there any
protection to labor? No; there are
4O00 articles on the tariff schedules, but
foreign labor is on the free list.
~
The late James Parton, biographer,
said of the Democratic party: ut is
composed of the many who suffer and
the few who think"
This epigrammatic characterization is
singularly profound and true. The un-
to hand struggled for existence, turn
with instructive confidence to the great
philosophical thinkers and statesmen
who are too deeply interested in the
welfare of the masses, too strongly inn
hrrod nth o1k~x1 - faskh sv1 ~ a houirpv.
government of, by and for the people, to
join with the interests that have the
whip hand Of the people-the party Of
organized greed--in the spoliation Of
the many for the benefit Of the few.
Thus, indeed, we have party composed
Of the many who suffer and the few who